Jump to content

May Community Feedback Roundtable

Recommended Posts

Hey Squaddies!


The text you’re about to read is the minutes of a meeting hosted by Offworld Industries to gather community feedback. Roundtable topics are based on the most recent recap or patch; in this case, we focused on the changes in Alpha 11.


You can review the audio of the event here: 



Please note that the text represents a dialogue between the community and developers, not a planning document.


OWI Attendees included Axton, StrangeZak, Fuzzhead, Gatzby, Nordic, and Merlin. (Apologies if I missed anyone! Thank you for coming!)


Note: Text in Italics represents responses from OWI members or general overview text sourced from OWI. Attempts to preserve the discussion as it happened between topics and questions have been made, but may be edited for readability.






Armor system

Longer, more intense. Maybe too long in some cases, especially if teams stalemate.

Fuzzhead: Vehicle interiors are worth doing, it impacts all vehicles. Turning out is almost like adding another weapon/ability to vehicles.

Virus: Tons of little bugs, very annoying.


Royvas: More intense.


StrangeZak: Internally, we're pretty happy with patch, best we've shipped in a while. But that’s not saying much as we haven’t patched very much lately. =)


Wicks: People can still play fast; speed is now a tactical choice, not the default. People are more willing to move tactically, set up ambushes. Choice, not a sprint up the map.


Fuzz: Could have spent another two weeks polishing, but we wanted to get this out. There were no major, major things, but a hotfix should come out to polish things.


AAS/Bleed changes


Virus.exe: My clan is not very happy. The game became more interesting in tactical ways, can make comebacks, especially after just entering server. However, on public games, it makes game boring - no incentive to attack flags. “Sit, superfob, and that’s it.” Currently lacking a strategic reward.


Vehicle costs are comparable to the gain of a successful capture. If you lose BTR, all profit is lost. Vehicle cost should be lowered. Maybe standardize vehicle cost by vehicle class.


Fuzz: AAS, based on conquest was intended to concentrate the fighting, but it’s ultimately flawed. It’s solid, it works, but it is limited. We’re actively working diligently on game mode to supplement AAS with more strategic depth and meta. We want a game mode that has more strategy, not as simple as things currently are.


Fuzzhead has been thinking about Total War and they way they introduce non-binary win/loss conditions. A more nuanced approach would allow terrific victories, terrific defeats, draws, and less wins. Players want to be entertained and immersed with good game flow regardless of winning or losing.


Territory Control is going to be where the strategy lies. Squad currently has three resources: spawns, construction, and ammunition. Hoping to introduce vehicle supply points, lifting the burden of balancing ticket amounts. Some of the team would like to see a system to request vehicles rather than having a map shit them out, but there has to be a reason not to choose the tank every time. Giving nuances for each vehicle and giving players more choice on that front. Tickets would be strictly for player spawns. “The more we **** with the tickets, the more we take it off the flags...the more an individual death means little to nothing.”


Merlin: What are your thoughts on the solution of increasing ticket gain/loss on captures?


Fuzzhead: The values that are set right now are initial values. That impacts the way players are going to think of value and spawning.


Wicks: The weight of a heavy asset is its use, divorce tickets and vehicles. If you assign everything a ticket value, you run the risk of turning the game into a spreadsheet. Making the tickets tied to spawns only makes giving up a bigger risk.


Steez: I agree with virus.exe. It’s stopped the need to suicidally rush at the middle of the flag if it’s not good for that faction. Games are running a little long. Ideal round time should be about an hour, or just under. Currently, games are running over an hour, which would be okay if the gameplay remained dynamic -- otherwise it just becomes a slog. Regardless of map size, with some leeway. More incentive to push is something salt. Feels strongly about. It’s generally hard to attack and not strongly incentivized, especially in public play where it’s much more difficult to play as an entire team.

SWC is working on a mod to experiment with features such as increasing swing tickets incrementally and more tickets as you keep attacking.


Fuzzhead: A big part of v12 UI is getting squads to work together more easily.


Doc: Changes are great. Opens up more versatility out of the gate. Spawn mechanics could make life feel more valuable. I agree with lowering vehicle ticket values, but I’m not sure about eliminating them entirely. I think your incentive to attack is clear: being low on tickets forces attacking. TOWs are a good change; vehicle play is fun and versatile with the AAS bleed changes. You guys should look to PR a lot; it’s been around for years. V11 allows slower/more methodical play. 60-70 min games feels good, like an invasion, allows some sense of scale, moments of peace and violence, not just constant shooting, go go go. Slight adjustments to starting tickets (-40) could be good.


Fuzzhead: We need to define layers for people who love long rounds versus layers for people who want to play for 30 minutes. Sometimes you’re in the mood for one, sometimes you’re in the mood for another.


Vehicle and Armor


Virus: Vehicles feel fantastic. Armor system feels great. Vehicles costs need to be lower. Standarding vehicles costs by vehicle class would be helpful. Some issues with people understanding where a vehicle can be hit for damage, as they were not consistent with Jensen’s Range. (“Can Bradley be damaged with x…”) TOWs “right what was needed to limit vehicle free-action on the map.” Scopes getting unzoomed constantly. Russian unlimited TOW bug.


Soulzz: The Bradley is very loud.


Pea$e: Vehicles are good. Will vehicle penetration happen? Will the Warrior take damage from the front?


Nordic: Warrior front being very resilient is intention -- it’s got thick armor.

Fuzz: The angle also matters, but it’s hard to illustrate in Jensen’s. Richochets. The sloped front armor of the Warrior is, by design, to increase survivability. The idea that vehicles aren’t just a box is new to the player base as well.

Axton: People are going to learn what penetrates what, so the knowledge will trickle out to the community. We’d also like to update some of the old tutorials.

Wicks: I like that people haven’t figured out the penetration values to the nth degree. Adds a little unknown into the simulation, not perfect every time. I like that it can’t be perfect every time. (truthrealm agrees)


Aragorn: Love the changes. Make me think more. First and only problem, Bradley can shoot a very, very long distance. 3+k seems too strong, especially with optics and there isn’t a RUS counterpart. (TOW feedback seemed okay after Nordic explained.) TOW activation on Bradley seems fast, don’t need to be stationary. After a certain distance, you could introduce some delay/feedback into the controls.


Nordic: TOW is 1500 m limit, after that it disappears. Playtest had 4km, was reduced.

Fuzz: I would like to see the TOW carry over “some spiral” from PR which added a skillcap, something that varied by ATGMs. Shrinking the TOW range is still possible. Would like to get the Bradley to be stationary while firing TOW. Unlimited TOW exploit will be fixed and change prevalence on maps, of course.


Merlin: It does raise the question if the Bradley should have that high powered of an optic in the TOW.


Doc Hammer: I think TOWs are a good change for vehicles, since you can’t just run free now. Same with LATs. TOWs feel a little spammy, like on Kohat. Increasing the cost of the ammo they use would cause people to rely on logi more. Perhaps increasing the build cost would help limit spamming. Infantry has not necessarily seen the importance of taking out a TOW fob, so it could get better naturally.


Axton/fuzz: Ammo bags for things like mortars and TOWs, rather than just relying on FOB, to create a supply chain could be possible, a la PR. Hopefully we can put that as a priority at some point, making ammo and logistics a little less abstract.


Merlin: Fun fact: One of my first coding tasks on PR was doing ammo bag runs.

Virus: Will vehicles get the ability to zero their weapons?


Fuzzhead: We have an early prototype of a stabilized targeting system which only certain vehicles would have it. Not necessarily going to happen, but it would be great to have working sights.

Nordic: Ranging is planned, but unknown status.

Merlin: Nothing specific right now.




This was one of the largest changes to layers we’ve done. There were new layers introduced, something like 40+ layers were adjusted. Hang in there, we’re working as hard as we can.


CCFN Tillomaticus: Thanks for changes to conquest. My biggest concerns from my clan reps: imbalance of factions, especially on Kamdesh (competitive viewpoint) isn’t great from a competitive viewpoint. It can be an extreme blow to morale, even if they know they’re switching next round. City fighting like Basra works well for INS. Brits or US going to be 2-3:1 kill ratio, which is a morale killer for the other team. 4 warriors isn’t that fun.


Fuzz: More tickets just means dying more, not that you’re making the game more fun. One solution would be to not include INS on asymmetric layers. For invasion, especially a map like Kamdesh where there’s nowhere to hide, where they have no optics could limit them too much. But it is early. The idea behind some of the changes was to get people playing in parts of old maps they’ve never been in before.


Axton: We already have plans to make Kamdesh less monotone and more INS friendly. The bug with beards showing through the fog will be fixed as well. (Edit: Fix has been merged.)


Delta: 4 warriors is imbalanced. V3 layer. Finding problems like these on layers before going live would be nice.


Fuzz: Maaaybe a bug. I should delete one warrior. Good feedback. There were a lot of layers, but it could use some more oversight. Did some changes before the warrior was working. Hotfix’ll fix.


DocHammer: Biggest imbalance in layers is INS vs USA/GB factions. Not fun to play. INS need “special ability” like placing a FOB without supplies. (Hideouts.) Something to balance out optics. You can’t engage and you end up getting outshot constantly. “Militia with worse weapons.” Too much firing over long distance and unable to fire back effectively. More armor technicals? Basra runs great with GB versus INS, well designed. Keep changes small; don’t overcompensate.


Fuzz: Looking at giving INS different tools. If it’s going to be asymmetric, there needs to be asymmetric tools. Hoping with Kohat (or similar) that we can dial the tickets in so there can be a planned retreat. As it is, you can be dying a lot, still winning, and it feels spammy.


Wicks: Can’t have INS on maps that don’t make sense. INS wouldn’t pick fights in that terrain without some sort of change to the meta. e.g. Maybe some asymmetric spawning. Watching the RUS steamroller approach is tedious. Bombcars would allow INS to cover more open ground that isn’t normally accessible. VBIEDs are huge for instilling some doubt, offering more options, and they require the enemy to pay attention and use caution when moving into new areas.


Fuzz: If the development cost as low, we can look at adding more civilian cars to help them stay mobile. That was the idea behind all the bikes.


DocHammer: More layers that don’t make sense would be okay. I.e., INS/MIL, GB v. US. It is just a game.


Axton: Did that a little with GB/USA on Kamdesh. Fun layer. I do believe we have a bigger selection of IEDs/tools for INS to use should help already planned.


Fuzz: If that was well received, hell yeah. My point of view is to do more layers like that.


Virus: Logar ins, RUS/INS. Kokan RUS/INS. POV: worked very well. Russians don’t feel OP, especially with optics, because RUS relies on vehicle, INS great against vehicle.

Steez: Agree. Apart from imbalances, one really good thing is that all layers that were unbalanced because of timing at rollout are fixed. Better as a whole.


Fuzz: Messing with bleed had that as a major consideration.

Wicks: don’t mind massively stacked layers, conditions set for a struggle. Some hugely adverse maps. “Up against it a touch.” INS should be that way once in awhile. Invasion: haven’t played it enough. Maps with multiple flags, objective based. E.g. flags you take on an island control your assets. Take airfield, get helo spawns. Flags that are radar towers, which might spot anything in radius. Something to fight for even if you can’t take all the flags.


Nordic: Invasion is cool, because even if you lose, you can still measure progress. Cache game mode by Virus.exe is a good example of incremental progress as a team.


Weapon Changes


DocHammer: Good changes. Step in the right direction. Issues: INS still feel really bad. Recoil on SL rifles prevents keeping eye on target. Can’t engage at long distance. Sway is still high for stamina cost required to run across map. Handling is fantastic. Like reduced sway. Recoil RNG side to side should be reduced. Wants players to be able to learn their weapon. Sometimes feels like fighting the game. Sway for brits seems increased.


Nordic: I have told Ross the SL assault is so bad. He said both guns fire 7.62, reducing it more would make it a 5.56 rifle with more damage. Some stuff in the works for that. INS aren’t necessarily supposed to be the best shooters, though. We hear you, but there wasn’t a perfect solution for v11.


Virus.exe: Not everyone is happy that regular rifle and medic get obzer on RUS. Many love ironsights instead. The choice would be nice.


Wicks: Liking it. Not 100%. Happy medium; v9 was too easy. British FOV: SUSAT as a beautiful rendition of how shit it was, but I like it. It added flavor. Would like to see more differences in factions.


Nordic: Removing SUSAT was a balance decision. Everyone had a scope. Balance is going to continue to change


AK w/ scope still feels wonky. 545. Classic Russian one. Feels worse than v10, flies up, is floaty. Feels like the gun is coming apart. Feels like it doesn’t respond to mouse movements like any other game.

Wicks: It feels loose. Feels rattly/lose. Maybe a frame pacing issue with recoil. Jerks and stutters, pulls up.


Assi: Feels like you don’t have it shouldered properly.


Nordic: US ACOG horizontal recoil reduced.


Pea$e: Why was AT grenade removed?


Nordic: because it wasn’t replicating. (It didn’t work.) Still needs work, works badly in different ways each patch. Motherdear may have fixed it, may be coming in 11.x Not gone, just broken af.


Steez: I agree with AK finicky. Optic seems to compound it. AK optic does unused. Everything about way is better. Sideways recoil needs reduced more. It just doesn’t feel good and takes away from the tightness; not fun. Not tight. All movement/sway animations feel a little fast and exaggerated atm. Doesn’t have the weighted smoothness. Love the new linearity to the scale of the zoom sensitivity, but feels broken. Used British Acog, but then US was insane.

DocHammer: Biggest thing is what is the reason for weapon sway. To extend firefights? Lower skillgap? Maybe look at spawn mechanics instead. Weapon play is on a good track.


Truthrealm: One big difference between recoil and other parameters. Recoil is a cause and effect, player intuition plays into it. If I fire my weapon once, it’s understood that recoil is low. Side sway feels like fighting a game. “Why the hell can’t my character hold a gun and why can’t I do anything about it?”




[D-K] Delta | Alex-T: 3D UI: I want the damn Squad Leader Number out of my face. I don't need to be reminded who and where my SL is. At least make it optional. (boolean value and we are all happy.) The missing tag names are horrible on public but ppl get used to it and i like it acutally. BUT I want to see the name of my mates if I'm close to it. I can't even talk to them because I can't see their name

Minimap Hover on vehicles and such is awesome, finally I can see who is in the vehicle. But it's missing for emplacements. Please add this as well


[prog] Virus.exe

Adding to 3D UI topic: may be add option to disable nametag text and leave role icon for players out of ur squad. Like, I want to be able to identify which squad mate i'm looking at 200m out when enemy sneaking up on him, but i have no use in blueberry nametag cluttering my screen in same situation, leave only role icon for em.




And we're done! Please feel free to let me know if there are any corrections needed. A huge thank you to everyone that attended, shared feedback, or otherwise listened along. You help make Squad great. =)

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great read!!! Thank you for writing this down!

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now