Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Dufflespud

How Armored Combat Feels

Recommended Posts

I think armored combat is actually very well balanced right now. I lead tank/IFV squads very often, and I find that almost all of my deaths are my own fault. I can only think of a couple of instances that sheer bad luck or "unfairness" caused me to lose a tank or another armored asset.

Most of the time I lose an asset because I get too aggressive and get surrounded by enemy infantry, either that or we just lose a head-to-head MBT gunfight. ATGM missiles taking out my tank are almost always the same problem, getting too aggressive and pushing the tank into the line of sight of a Spandrel, TOW emplacement etc. There are too many things in game right now that can kill your vehicle to play fast and loose... Which is amazing! There is this constant fear that if you mess up, you will lose a valuable asset and put the enemy team at an advantage, which makes using armor much more thrilling than infantry combat at the moment. This also means that in order to use armor effectively, you must coordinate with your team.

I think armor is balanced because there are plenty of options to help a team deal with it, but superior intel and coordination always wins the day. Two days ago on Tallil Outskirts I was commanding a Challenger II against the Russians. We destroyed 4 T-72s, 2 BMP-2s and over a dozen light vehicles without ever losing our tank. It was the best round I ever played in armor because I had a good crew and a good stream of intel. We kept good positioning and played it safe the entire round. We didn't push past the frontline, we were the frontline. I had constant updates from other SL/Commander and good FOBs with repair stations. I presume that the other team wasn't doing half as much in terms of communication and teamwork.

That's what Squad is all about. Communication and teamwork. Coming together with 40-50 other people and proving you can coordinate better than the other team. Skillful shooting, driving, etc. are all only parts of the bigger whole, and I feel that the state of armored combat is currently where these aspects shine the most.

 

I'd like to hear what other people think about armored combat vs. infantry combat in V17 as well as any fun/interesting stories from matches playing in a tank/armor squad. Also feel free to refute any points I've made or elaborate on them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/6/2019 at 6:26 PM, virusman said:

yes but the driver view is just total garbage.

they should implement PR driver view

Adding the ability to turn out would be a game changer

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/6/2019 at 4:26 PM, virusman said:

yes but the driver view is just total garbage.

they should implement PR driver view

All of the driver and gunner views are  heavily restricted in a tunnel vision keyhole fashion that seems confining and unrealistic. Your first person FOV should take up at least 100% of the width of your screen with two dark bands above and below in a letterbox fashion in my opinion. Plus, I never understood what's the deal with a bunch of the gunner views already having magnification on the normal view. Seems quite silly to not be 1x in normal view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/6/2019 at 4:26 PM, virusman said:

yes but the driver view is just total garbage.

they should implement PR driver view

This is because in PR there was no commander-driver distinction. They were compressed into one slot in the vehicle. I personally think that this was for the better. In Squad is that if you want to have control of a vehicle you can NOT do it from the driver's seat, otherwise your situational awareness will simply be far too poor to do any kind of meaningful decision making. 

 

This does reflect real vehicles, of course the man in control of the vehicle should be in the commander's seat, which is not the driver's. But.. the problem with this is that a commander, no matter how good he is, is limited severely by both how good and how compliant his driver is. Driving is a complex skill, you need to receive the orders of the commander and translate them into real maneuver that accomplishes his goal. This is not the task for a robot, it requires you to have a sort of critical relationship with his orders, as you will need to fill in blanks, and make your own decisions on the fly that might be required to keep the vehicle alive.

 

If you're the driver, and commander says "move forward into cover behind that building" you need to do as he says, but the actual angle, and exact positioning you choose is yours. The commander may also be busy with other tasks, when there is imminent danger, and as the driver you need to have a sense to recognize this and move the vehicle away from it. 

 

I could go on, but the point is that being a good driver requires a lot. But again the driver cannot be the leader in Squad, because he has very poor situational awareness. The commander MUST be in control, he has the vision, and the freedom of cognitive capacity to make long-term strategic decisions, and can coordinate long-range engagements. 

 

Where the crux of the problem is, is that no matter how good the commander is, he will ALWAYS be sabotaged by a crappy driver. No matter how good his strategy is, and how good his commands are, if the driver cannot quickly and intelligently translate them into effective movement and positioning of the vehicle, the operation is doomed. Worse, if the driver is simply bad, and makes unilateral decisions. The opposite side of the coin is true as well, no matter how good a driver is, if he has a bad commander, he simply won't have the situational awareness required being fed to him to make good decisions.

 

I believe the solution to this is to allow our Commander to be able to override the driver's controls at will, just as he can designate the turret to where he pleases. This would mean that a low-skill driver would still be valuable as someone who can take the role during non-critical times, and when necessary the commander can take it up.

 

I think this is a better solution than simply combining the two roles, because if the commander has to do all the commander work (including the remote MG) as well as driving, all the time, he would be overworked, and the vehicle would be incredibly inefficient. Trust me, I 2-man tanks and IFVs from time to time, and it feels like we're playing with a serious handicap. In PR, these two roles could be compressed with less problems, because there was no remote MG, and armour was considerably simplified (damage model, ballistics, turret speed, and vehicle handling were all easier in that game).

 

Also where the hell are thermals in Squad? And actually effective HE shells? Should be in the game now that AT is actually strong..

Edited by 40mmrain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/8/2019 at 6:34 PM, 40mmrain said:

This is because in PR there was no commander-driver distinction. They were compressed into one slot in the vehicle. I personally think that this was for the better. In Squad is that if you want to have control of a vehicle you can NOT do it from the driver's seat, otherwise your situational awareness will simply be far too poor to do any kind of meaningful decision making. 

 

This does reflect real vehicles, of course the man in control of the vehicle should be in the commander's seat, which is not the driver's. But.. the problem with this is that a commander, no matter how good he is, is limited severely by both how good and how compliant his driver is. Driving is a complex skill, you need to receive the orders of the commander and translate them into real maneuver that accomplishes his goal. This is not the task for a robot, it requires you to have a sort of critical relationship with his orders, as you will need to fill in blanks, and make your own decisions on the fly that might be required to keep the vehicle alive.

 

If you're the driver, and commander says "move forward into cover behind that building" you need to do as he says, but the actual angle, and exact positioning you choose is yours. The commander may also be busy with other tasks, when there is imminent danger, and as the driver you need to have a sense to recognize this and move the vehicle away from it. 

 

I could go on, but the point is that being a good driver requires a lot. But again the driver cannot be the leader in Squad, because he has very poor situational awareness. The commander MUST be in control, he has the vision, and the freedom of cognitive capacity to make long-term strategic decisions, and can coordinate long-range engagements. 

 

Where the crux of the problem is, is that no matter how good the commander is, he will ALWAYS be sabotaged by a crappy driver. No matter how good his strategy is, and how good his commands are, if the driver cannot quickly and intelligently translate them into effective movement and positioning of the vehicle, the operation is doomed. Worse, if the driver is simply bad, and makes unilateral decisions. The opposite side of the coin is true as well, no matter how good a driver is, if he has a bad commander, he simply won't have the situational awareness required being fed to him to make good decisions.

 

I believe the solution to this is to allow our Commander to be able to override the driver's controls at will, just as he can designate the turret to where he pleases. This would mean that a low-skill driver would still be valuable as someone who can take the role during non-critical times, and when necessary the commander can take it up.

 

I think this is a better solution than simply combining the two roles, because if the commander has to do all the commander work (including the remote MG) as well as driving, all the time, he would be overworked, and the vehicle would be incredibly inefficient. Trust me, I 2-man tanks and IFVs from time to time, and it feels like we're playing with a serious handicap. In PR, these two roles could be compressed with less problems, because there was no remote MG, and armour was considerably simplified (damage model, ballistics, turret speed, and vehicle handling were all easier in that game).

 

Also where the hell are thermals in Squad? And actually effective HE shells? Should be in the game now that AT is actually strong..

yes yes but this is a video game.

and as much i was enjoying to be driver in pr.

in squad is just a total bammer.

so maybe its not 100% real > its more fun to have the PR view

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@40mmrain Oh baby I agree with you so hard. Just about every point you made is exactly how I feel. Spot on. I usually add good crewman on Steam because it makes such a glaring difference when you have someone driving that knows what he's doing.

15 hours ago, 40mmrain said:

I believe the solution to this is to allow our Commander to be able to override the driver's controls at will, just as he can designate the turret to where he pleases. This would mean that a low-skill driver would still be valuable as someone who can take the role during non-critical times, and when necessary the commander can take it up.

Hmmmmmmm I'm not sure about this. I think that would just negate the need for a driver entirely. I think the current model works, but it's difficult to get a 3-man crew on servers right now. Maybe once we get 100-player servers it will be easier to get the manpower needed. I'd rather see some kind of party system implemented into the game that lets us queue up with friends so it's easier to get onto the same team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/9/2019 at 10:33 AM, Dufflespud said:

@40mmrain Oh baby I agree with you so hard. Just about every point you made is exactly how I feel. Spot on. I usually add good crewman on Steam because it makes such a glaring difference when you have someone driving that knows what he's doing.

Hmmmmmmm I'm not sure about this. I think that would just negate the need for a driver entirely. I think the current model works, but it's difficult to get a 3-man crew on servers right now. Maybe once we get 100-player servers it will be easier to get the manpower needed. I'd rather see some kind of party system implemented into the game that lets us queue up with friends so it's easier to get onto the same team.

Trust me, this wouldn't make the driver irrelevant. A tank squad leader can be responsible for communication and coordination between the team, his squad, his own tank, and spotting/shooting with his remote MG. Driving on top of all of that renders him woefully overworked.

 

IMO it's just too much of a burden to ask players to have a group of people to queue with, just so that they can get a decent experience in armour. Right now, playing any other role is fine if you play alone, armour not so much. 

 

I think this is a pretty good solution that is also realistic, I think pretty much all tanks have this capability (Commander overriding driving controls).

Edited by 40mmrain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 40mmrain said:

Driving on top of all of that renders him woefully overworked.

This is what I'm worried about. But now that I think about it, it would be less of a burden if able to override driver controls from the command seat, as opposed to switching back and forth. You've convinced me.

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
Sign in to follow this  

×