Jump to content
BANGHART

Squad has become too "gamey" and meta.

Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, DualFlameBane said:

Well, no.

The obvious counterargument is a squad with a Styker, it's two crewmen, and seven dismounts.  Ideally the SL would be among the dismounts.  So, someone in the vehicle needs to be FTL to mark since he is fighting the vehicle and needs to communicate with the driver at the very least.  

This is even more important in for instance an armor squad of more than one vehicle.

Could just only allow those marks if in vehicles; to represent vehicle-based battle management systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/01/2020 at 4:43 PM, Nightingale87 said:

I´m sorry but I don´t agree.

 

I understand what you say, but Squad has been around for some time now, and people tend to play the best they can. So the fact that it has drifted to a much more frequent use of the respawn than the staying together and reviving is, for me, evidence that this is effective not because everyone does it, but that everyone does it because it´s effective

 

What´s more, in previous versions (ab)use of respawn was less common than now. When rallies weren´t permanent and the last spawn on the rally was teken and there was a medic around, everybody waited because otherwise it meant respawning back at main or a far fob.

 

I even remember very clearly developing that kind of gameplay. After v13 I found that most of the time  it wasn´t worth  the waiting for somebody to pick me up because of the time wasted. 

 

I´m sorry but the idea that "Respawners" will run low on tickets doesn´t add up. The way I see it, the best way to keep an attack going is having people respawn as quickly as posible. and keep the pressure until objective falls.

 

And then finally, another point you make takes us to another VERY RELATED topic. You argue that respawners will come to combat one by one not as a part of a squad but as an individual player. Well, in that case I also think that is not necessarily less effective. 

In the most competitive Squad being a part of a squad only means OCASSIONALLY closing in to the SL´ or another membe´s position to perform a specific task such as drop a rally, ask a fireman for ammo, or get some healing, and then setting off again to do their own thing. So the best squads in SQUAD are a low cohesion low dependency kind of organism. Whereas in PR the squad is a HIGH cohesion High dependency organism. 

 

Why do the most competitive players play like this? Well, because different environments recreate different conditions and people have to develop different skills and ways to adapt the best posible way.

Agree.

 

I used to think in the line of "for this kind of game, 1. it is the veteran community servers that will make or break the game, and 2. therefore people having bad matches is more of the fault of the community and not the developers per se".

 

I still think the former is true. But as far as I can tell, since v7, the game has never become more authentic and hardcore, but always more casual and accessible. Also, even in the best of the public servers, I still see the most newbie mistakes made with general cohesion and usage of vehicles. 

 

Now I have a new mindset where I think the veteran community cannot keep the game flow authentic when game keeps being casualised. It is up to developers to somehow solve the game's problems. Or not. Maybe it is just financially not sustainable. But I think the game should go back to slower pace, and make shooting harder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know guys why COD is too gamey? It's cuz veteran communities don't teach people to teamwork!
All you need to do is go and start from yourself, teach a couple of COD noobs to teamwork and it will be perfect teamoriented game.
/sarcasm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, pigsoup said:

Now I have a new mindset where I think the veteran community cannot keep the game flow authentic when game keeps being casualised. It is up to developers to somehow solve the game's problems. Or not. Maybe it is just financially not sustainable. But I think the game should go back to slower pace, and make shooting harder.

The veteran community is divided in two.

 

One part (smaller) that left because this game isnt what it used to be, nor what it was promised.

 

And another that enjoy it and keep playing it competitively. 

 

Within the second part, not everybody is ready to teach new people, or to get involved in public matches in any way. 

 

These are reasons Why some parts of the veteran community have strong negative feelings about squad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just my personal background, where I'm coming from game-wise - I've read through the past 4 pages of the thread, and have been playing squad since before they added vehicles (Forgot the specific update), mainly as a medic and LAT, currently resting at ~300 hours. Prior to Squad, I played Arma 3 with a milsim group, but couldn't remain with them due to the effort and timing it took to schedule a game (Getting everyone together, zeus up, etc). After discovering Squad (one or 2 updates before vehicles), I found it the perfect balance between milsim and being able to join a game at any time or experience level, which is where Squad's niche lies in my opinion (Easily accessible "milsim" gameplay).

 

My opinion(s) on the vehicle ticket cost situation is below

 

On Vehicles - The ticket cost should be increased back to the original values. Right now, vehicles are being used too freely, without much care for their loss. Squad, as an infantry oriented game, has vehicles in it to support the infantry. Reducing the vehicle ticket cost has brought vehicles closer to the psychological and ticket cost of infantry. Where before vehicles supported infantry, now they are as freely used as infantrymen, and can afford to operate completely independently of infantry, turning squad from a vehicle-supported infantry game to a infantry and vehicle combat game, with many vehicles operating without communication with or regard to the boots on the ground. In other words, vehicles don't need to communicate any more with infantry for their own safety, and the status of vehicles has decreased in the eyes of infantry because they are so cheap.

 

How increasing the ticket cost of vehicles would combat this issue - Increasing vehicle cost would increase the psychological value placed on vehicles. Vehicles would have to communicate with infantry to better obtain intel on enemy vehicles and infantry, as gaining an edge for a more favorable engagement would become more important, and more caution would need to be taken to avoid unwanted contact with enemy infantry (LATs). 

 

A potential counter argument to increasing ticket costs - "If vehicles were made more expensive, tickets would be lost too quickly  games would be decided by vehicles (Or the losses thereof)/poor vehicle usage by few would have a disproportionate effect on the rest of the team".

A response - This situation is already present in the current game - possibly even magnified due to the lower regard and freer usage of vehicles. Increasing vehicle costs back to their original values would re-introduce the level of caution and value that vehicles are regarded with, forcing players to be more careful. The effect of one squad having a disproportionate effect on the rest of the team vehicle-loss wise could potentially be limited through the (re?)introduction of vehicle ticket loss limits, ie. blocking squads who have recently lost "x" amount of vehicle tickets / "x" period of time from taking a vehicle until their vehicle ticket loss/time has decreased past a certain amount.

 

Feel free to respond/criticize/tear this apart, I just typed this out from memory and recent experience, and am willing to discuss this further and change my opinion/perception on things if I'm getting something wrong.

Edited by TheChemistAstronaut
Discussion, contd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From a completely neutral standpoint and without having the time to read all of this:

 

I played Project Reality (predecessor of Squad) for several years when it was active and this is just a experience I've learned to deal with. Games like this, especially the ones who get updated and bigger will change over time. Enjoy your experience right now because in 2 years (if the development keeps going) will definitely be different than it is now. 

 

Have fun & Cheers

 

 

Edited by Scheintot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, it has become too gamey you say?

 

Those small changes that most of the community could "live with", as they made the game more accessible and drew a larger playerbase, are now so many that they can't be ignored?

 

The fast pace, everyone can revive, and infinite rally has turned the game into a lone wolf CoD vs BF simulator?

 

Wow... who could possibly have seen this coming? It's not like this has ever happened to an early access shooter before... right?

Edited by PuddleMurda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, PuddleMurda said:

Oh, it has become too gamey you say?

 

Those small changes that most of the community could "live with", as they made the game more accessible and drew a larger playerbase, are now so many that they can't be ignored?

 

The fast pace, everyone can revive, and infinite rally has turned the game into a lone wolf CoD vs BF simulator?

 

Wow... who could possibly have seen this coming? It's not like this has ever happened to an early access shooter before... right?

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3.2.2020 at 5:49 PM, TheChemistAstronaut said:

My opinion(s) on the vehicle ticket cost situation is below

 

On Vehicles - The ticket cost should be increased back to the original values. Right now, vehicles are being used too freely, without much care for their loss. Squad, as an infantry oriented game, has vehicles in it to support the infantry. Reducing the vehicle ticket cost has brought vehicles closer to the psychological and ticket cost of infantry. Where before vehicles supported infantry, now they are as freely used as infantrymen, and can afford to operate completely independently of infantry, turning squad from a vehicle-supported infantry game to a infantry and vehicle combat game, with many vehicles operating without communication with or regard to the boots on the ground. In other words, vehicles don't need to communicate any more with infantry for their own safety, and the status of vehicles has decreased in the eyes of infantry because they are so cheap.

 

How increasing the ticket cost of vehicles would combat this issue - Increasing vehicle cost would increase the psychological value placed on vehicles. Vehicles would have to communicate with infantry to better obtain intel on enemy vehicles and infantry, as gaining an edge for a more favorable engagement would become more important, and more caution would need to be taken to avoid unwanted contact with enemy infantry (LATs). 

I have to disagree. You dont win the game by draining those tickets of the enemy vehicles you win it by draining their firepower. You are right that vehicle and infantry gameplay feel like 2 seperate layers of gameplay. especially in the beginning. i just dont think they really are. Its just in the nature of itself that your primary focus is the most dangerous threat. its tank vs tank. then tank vs ifv then vs apc and last but not least vs infantry. if you win the tank fight apcs actually can start to support infantry without fear of heavier assets. its all about unbalancing firepower and overwhelm the enemies. The problem if you start to support especially your infantry too soon with the vehicles the enemy will gain good intel on yourself and therfore has the first shot and advantage on your tank.

 This means vehicles still rely on intel presented to them. if it comes from infantry squadleaders, scout cars, lonewolfing snipers or helicopters. especially the helicopter is a powerfull tool in providing this intel to your heavy assets. and normaly intel wins the fight given you have somehow 2 equal tank crews fighting each other.

Raising ticket costs would in my opinion only shorten the gametime round and might end up too easy in a steamroll. The psychological effect you are talking about is a false one. Your mindset as Crewman shouldnt be too much about the tickets but much more should your primary resource and mindset be about the actual firepower and its impact on the battlefield. Therefore respawn timers actually weighs more heavy than tickets.

 

to your counter argument:

yes tickets would drain probably just too fast but winning the vehicle match already now wins the game if played correctly by the infantry (team). and i think this is actually how it should be.

 

 

Edited by gshAT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, PuddleMurda said:

Oh, it has become too gamey you say?

 

Those small changes that most of the community could "live with", as they made the game more accessible and drew a larger playerbase, are now so many that they can't be ignored?

 

The fast pace, everyone can revive, and infinite rally has turned the game into a lone wolf CoD vs BF simulator?

 

Wow... who could possibly have seen this coming? It's not like this has ever happened to an early access shooter before... right?

"But it's just one little change"
"Stop being paranoid"
"But...but it's still alpha"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, gshAT said:

you win it by draining their firepower

good points around this

 

solving problems to win...the major steps are all there and just need team cooperation and a bit of skill vs skill to win:

  1. keep what you have. don't lose flags and assets with poor communication and planning.
  2. prepare for success and failure. bring supplies and assets forward but don't commit without knowledge.
  3. reduce enemy assets such as vics preventing free movement.
  4. locate spawn points and attack these first
  5. consolidate and push

all of this is usually obvious on the map, basic coms fill most gaps

 

individual skill and experience of squad members make a difference in 3, 4 and 5 but 1 and 2 are mostly down to cooperation between SLs and sensible predictions.

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

×