Jump to content
Zimtstern

Making Squad tactical realistic. The overhaul.

Recommended Posts

Currently, Squad lacks tactical depth and is very individual focused. I  tried to get it away from that and bring it closer to reality by letting real world combat tactics work and add simulated psychological strains facilitating staying in teams. For that I looked at existing strategy games which are designed around real world tactics. By notably increasing weapon inaccuracy, adding substantial suppression mechanics and other minor things I think I achieved the tactical component while by punishing being alone with longer action times and noise creation and by adding game play mechanics shifting focus to the teamplay aspect I think I achieved the other. For more detail grab some popcorn and start reading.

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Squad has currently low tactical depth, consisting barely of something other than "defeat in detail" finding that gap and push in it and "movement speed" rushing in reinforcements or to the next objective making it more of a meat grider than a tactical experience. It's also very individual focused. If two squads simply stay together and fight each other under similar conditions the one with the better individuals fighting skill wins and there is not much do about it. Not the squad working better together. Moving in a pack is often enough even a disadvantage for example when sniping or hunting tanks or FOBs only facilitating lone wolfing even more.

I don't think this is what Squad wants to be nor what I want so here is my opinion how to change that resulting in a complete overhaul. Since it's a realistic shooter I want to try to make the well-known manual combat tactics work giving squad its tactical depth and shift focus to the team were the individual satisfaction is created by being a good team member.


Fortunately there are strategy games out there which where purposely designed around this. The core problem is the lack of real fear or pain and by pushing its limits the individual can have significant effect. If we look at named strategy games we can pretty quickly see how our goal is achieved. Main factor: inaccuracy. While a team running in the open is quickly slaughter by a unbothered enemy team, two well covered teams bearly hit each other. I suggest a weapon spray of a chest width on 150m. (Open to discussion.) Now the side which masses more well-aimed fire on the enemy got the upper hand and not the side with the better individual shooters taking better snapshots. Now taking cover before returning accurate fire makes sence. It also lengthens out the firefights so if two squads meet each other there is not 75% on one and 100% on the other side casualties in the first few seconds giving us now the time to let tactical stuff happen. Also within a relative short range a straight firefight becomes very indecisive taking very long and consuming a lot of ammunition giving back maneuvering closer, on a flank or assaulting it's decisiveness back. We actually should all know this situation from wide maps were the extreme ranges have the same effect but there maneuvering takes forever.  Also the tracer ammo of the mg would make sence now as it helps getting that fire volume quicker on target which can be decisive.
To not let this be a full auto festival with insane ammo consumptions I think there is a need for a barrel heat concept increasing inaccuracy. Now realistic means of fire control with deliberate or rapid rate make sence adding to the tactical depth while keeping ammo consumption reasonable.

Personally I would also suggest adding way more at least knee-high but spare grass. It makes spotting laying down players way harder while the grass is not so thick that laying in it completely takes away your view. Now laying down makes sence contrary to now were losing that mobility by laying down is seldom worth it. Combined with forced shadows this is a step further to a more realistic concealment experience.
Since fights now take longer we also need to change the respawn system so the time we created can be used without having to face constant reinforcements which would just revive the meat grinder system. A longer respawn time and/or way to move plus not being able to just get single shot sniped by a lone wolfer from 200m also increases the respect for someones virtual life while preventing extraordinary frustration when moving together with the team.
In our calculation we also have to include vehicles and indirect fire. Making them similar inaccurate plus limiting ammunition is not only more realistic but gives us enough means of balance to make having a supporting vehicle or indirect fire an advantage without overpowering them.

To make the all to often preached 4 F's working we also need suppression as we can also see in the strategy games. A short field of depth flash when having a round flying very close by and a long term suppression effect taking time to build up should do the trick. It will plug some logical holes with fire & maneuver and making assaults much more successful if the position is well suppressed. 
By this we have achieved a way higher tactical depth than previously inspired by real world tactics. But lone wolfing could still makes sence. So whats holding of a real regular from the line to go tackle problems all by himself if it can have such a big impact? Simply he is scared alone so let's implement this working as a lone wolf fail save. If only one other mate close slightly and if alone heavily following effects should take place: suppression is stronger, reload time takes longer and if suppressed or out of ammo he starts to scream in fear. That would announce if he's alone, suppressed and/or dry speeding up his defeat and lessening his impact as an individual even more. Two man AT or sniper teams are still reasonable as they have special tasks and only suffer slightly under it while punishing it to use them as a regular combat elements or even lone wolf.


There are a lot of interlocking influences you still have to consider like blowing up a FOB can still be a one man job as you can't defend everywhere with our limited numbers on such big maps or now that we are in a way more realistic fighting scenario it become much more likely that the attacker will be in need of a traditional force advantage of 2 or 3 to 1 but the above should be enough basic shaping to provide what I wanted to achieve and the rest can be worked up gradually.
To make this game more fun I would heavily invest in working out specialised classes all designed in support of each other but not to make them effective but to make them more effective. For example not a all round ammo carrier which is currently the rifleman but designated one for the MG, for the AT and for the rest. It gives the individuals the challenge to think how they can improve the squad performance with their special ability (without making it necessary mastering it to give the squad reasonable combat effectiveness. To not blow the game for the unexperienced while rewarding commitment) shifting the fun factor to caring about the team and its success.
Personally I would also implement more means for an After Action Debrief. First way more time before the next round starts, maybe a option to write feedback to leaders in that round which they can read afterwards, a map everyone can see were leaders can draw on (commander would take the role of a moderator) and more in-depth statistic while maybe removing the individual K:D further shifting focus to the team. This would help indendify mistakes so all can grow as a whole and showing everyone what they have achived as a team.
All this changes might looks extreme but I honestly can't think of an other way to get Squad away from his flaws and just gradually experimenting with slight changes can't work neither in my opinions since you always have to have in mind what all changes besides the only thing you actually wanted to influence. So you just make the game more broken than before.
Simply because the current player main base would hate such a radical shift away from the individual to the tactical team play experience I'm sadly convinced that never something like that would be done (Regardless if my opinion would be the solution or not). In the end the game has to sell but this didn't keep me from dreaming around and now share it do discuss a bit about it. Maybe a little something  can make it in the game.^^

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Summary:

 

*) Significant increase weapon inaccuracy

-> Side massing more and faster accurate fire volume will have the upper hand

-> Taking cover before returning accurate fire makes way more sence 

-> If right balanced, teams can deny the enemy free movement while firefights with good cover takes it time being rather indecisive

-> With that time tactical things can happen, movement gets its decisiveness back

 

*) Implement a weapon heat model increasing inaccuracy

-> Fire control with sustained and rapid rates make sence

-> Keeps ammo consumption in check

 

*) Adjust the respawn system (easiest by spawntime)

-> Giving tactical stuff time to haven without constantly running into dripping in reenforcement

-> Increases respect for someones virtual life

 

*) Add strong suppression mechanics ( I suggest minor short time visual suppression effects and strong long-term effects)

-> Will plug some logic holes with fire & maneuver so we can most of the time cover a moving team by holding fire superiority

-> Makes assaults way more successful if the position is well suppressed

 

*) Adding a concept of fear of being alone.  

If only one other mate close slightly and if alone heavily: suppression works stronger, reload takes longer and if suppressed or out of ammo screams in fear

-> Easily suppressed with a direct indication to the enemy he's alone

-> Announces if mag is empty plus takes way longer to reload makes it easy to quickly push him at the right time

-> Two man teams are still reasonable by not suffering as much under punishment making them suitable for special tasks like AT or observation/sniping.

-> With all above points should make lone wolfing pointless giving him no chance to take any effect on the battlefield and drain satisfaction from it

 

*) Work out much more class specialisation

-> By giving every soldier a unique aspect to improve his teams combat performance the focus shifts more to caring about the team

 

*)Implement more means for a After Action Debrief. Suggestion:

First add way more time before a new round starts

Ability to write feedback to your leaders which they can read afterwards

A AAR Map everyone of the team can see were leaders can draw on

More in-depth statistics like rounds fired and hit

Shift statistics on teamplay. Example: A unit cohesion score instead of a K:D

-> Would help find and learn from mistakes so the team can grow on it

-> Make it visual what the team actually achieved

 

-> In general implementig this I would forsee a drastic shift in the community boring away casual satisfaction seekers creating a much more professional community. This would overcome the current issue that none wants to lead such a pack resulting in squads opend in frustration with no actual leader.

 

If you have just glanced over the summary and now want to reply to it I ask you to first think if it might have mentioned/answered in the whole text and of course maybe somewhere else in the thread. Doing so will keep this thread more streamlined and more enjoyable to read for others. Thanks.

Edited by Zimtstern

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/1/2020 at 1:57 PM, Zimtstern said:

 I honestly can't think of an other way to get Squad away from his flaws ...

I´m sorry. But those aren´t "flaws".

 

They are intended to be there. Squad has long abandoned the path of a tactical/teamwork/realistic gameplay, giving in to a more casual/arcade oriented mass of buyers (money...you know) 

 

Closed version is almost finished, if they had wanted to make it more "realistic" they would have done it a LONG time ago. A game that counted with all the support of a community willing to migrate into this game, a base of loyal players from PR community, and ALL of PR development/gameplay experience...

 

if they didn´t hear, its because the didnt want to....

 

Now. I appreciate your energy and effort you put into this post. But I´d suggest you adres this energy and enthusiasm in what is left fot players interested in the same "tactical" gameplay. And that is the new and DISSAPOINTING HardcoreMOD, and community made mods and its support. 

 

Because they will never listen to you if you suggest and overhaul change to vanilla Squad, whereas your suggestions can be welcomed and useful in other channels.

 

OR....just go play PR....lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Il touch on the one part you mentioned about weapon accuracy and how engagements end quickly before any tactics come into play, iv felt this as well, if weapons hand more spray/sway and a little bit more inaccuracy, combat situations would be more drawn out requiring fire and maneuver tactics, as it is right now there is some of this, but usually people are getting dropped within the first 2 minutes and the firefight is done, and everyone is spawning back at the nearest rally or HAB spawn bunker. 

 

It would be interesting for them to test nerfing the accuracy and see how the gameplay shifts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed 100% guns in game are lasers. Suppressive fire means nothing because it's better to let the enemy stick his head up so you can just one taps him. I had alot more fun games with more weapon deviation. Communicating with teammates, focusing fire while we send some guys around the flanks. Not a multi player game but,The brothers in arms games do firefights really well. Guns are unrealistically in acurit, but I've never played a sigle player fps. That made ai so much fun to play agenst. It seems like every game now a days has to cadre to the competitive gamer crowd. Where everything has to be a test of the individuals skill. I don't care about showing how skilled I am at a game. I play squad of the semi realistic combat experience and communication. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

accuracy deviation is a dangerous setting to mess with in online FPS which is this competitive.

 

people who feel their twitch skills are being nerfed will walk away and the player numbers will plummet.

 

not to say it cant be made to benefit more tactical play, just that it is really hard to make it satisfying and fun by rewarding skill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, suds said:

accuracy deviation is a dangerous setting to mess with in online FPS which is this competitive.

 

people who feel their twitch skills are being nerfed will walk away and the player numbers will plummet.

 

not to say it cant be made to benefit more tactical play, just that it is really hard to make it satisfying and fun by rewarding skill.

I get what you're saying. My personal opinion, I'd rather have quality players over quantity. But I understand that a company needs to make the most money they can over all else. But at the same time, look at tarkov, they've stayed true to their hardcore vision so far. And look at how that game has exploded, because of it. I wish squad would stay true to the original idea. The game is called SQUAD after all. Not individual solder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, suds said:

accuracy deviation is a dangerous setting to mess with in online FPS which is this competitive.

 

people who feel their twitch skills are being nerfed will walk away and the player numbers will plummet.

 

not to say it cant be made to benefit more tactical play, just that it is really hard to make it satisfying and fun by rewarding skill.

They just better hope that the ultra competitive crowd will stick around, because the hardcore sim guys may not, and alot have already stopped playing squad, its either hope the ultra competitive crowd sticks around by catering to them, along with some of the sim crowd, or, cater to the smaller portion but actual hardcore sim guys that will stay and care about the games longevity and how it plays in terms of a military sim, not just a quick competitive shooter people hop onto to brag about their score after, which is a large portion of this games playerbase right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, you ok said:

They just better hope that the ultra competitive crowd will stick around, because the hardcore sim guys may not, and alot have already stopped playing squad, its either hope the ultra competitive crowd sticks around by catering to them, along with some of the sim crowd, or, cater to the smaller portion but actual hardcore sim guys that will stay and care about the games longevity and how it plays in terms of a military sim, not just a quick competitive shooter people hop onto to brag about their score after, which is a large portion of this games playerbase right now.

If the community is really that divided that you cant find a middleground everyone can enjoy then I wouldnt mind having traditional servers and true squad servers so everyone can choose to his liking. If I think about it this might be even the better option in general. It allows people to chose a true squad experience and when they lose patient over time they dont poision a team with a egotrip after beeing disappointed from the previous round as you can often see today and instead switch to the traditional server were everyone is like that so none cares.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suppression can even be copy/pasted from Post Scriptum.

Weapons can be made more inaccurate as 4.5moa is the norms for rack-grade rifles.

On 1/28/2020 at 7:17 AM, suds said:

accuracy deviation is a dangerous setting to mess with in online FPS which is this competitive.

 

people who feel their twitch skills are being nerfed will walk away and the player numbers will plummet.

 

not to say it cant be made to benefit more tactical play, just that it is really hard to make it satisfying and fun by rewarding skill.

They can go back to CoD.

If someone has good twitch skills(generally more useful at closer ranges where less accuracy on weapons won't do much) then none of that will matter; unless he's hacking with autoaim in which case this would be even better for gameplay as it's less likely to let hacker to one-tap someone at long range.

Plus, you don't need good twitch skills in Squad due to all the bad netcode/hitreg...etc.  Just camp in a bush slightly off the most direct route between two objectives, and switch a bush every 1-2 kills.
(used Russian HAT for this one; 1 badley 2 stryker 1 matv kills because abrahams got pwned by Kornet)
JoGgvQd.png
These are just average games because marksman kit is gay.

Edited by EcchiRevenge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I know what you mean. Its part of the reason why I started his thread.

 

Back when I was playing Squad a lot it turned out for me for regularly over average kills I just had to grab a machinegun and grab a keyhole position flanking the straight enemy aproach route from their spawn. Ideally I would look at an thin strip of open terrain and just give any enemy passing a crisp insta deadly burst. After I killed a couple I had to expect some lone guy hunting me down (often straight line from their spawn location) but if it was a decent enough keyhole position I was surrounded by close terrain (and/or obstacles) from almost any other direction so I would hear them pushing me and just quick scope them. I know silence mg postions like that are a real thing but lets be true. Tactical team experience: none.

 

Actually I tried to make this tactic work with a small 4 man team providing the mg with ammunition, security and the team with a medic. And it worked out. Unfortunately 3 guys are now relative passive so that while the mg collected a over average amount of kills the rest wouldnt have much if any at all. If these guys could inflict a decent amount of kills playing traditionally the kill boost by this tactic nullifys plus none of us was there to hold an objective. What I also want to mention is that all the few times I tried that it was extremly cumbersome to constantly bark at my team to stay/come back and that we are only protecting (and supporting) the mg and stay hidden. The standard guy you get is just so blood thirsty its just exhausing to implement anything more difficult than "lets set a rally and push straight in". I mean I tried but if squad doesnt change probably not again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel the reason gunfights don't last is because of the proximity of engagements. Most engagements happen within 50 yards. If you're a vet or been to a range, you know how close that is for a rifle. It looks far in-game but irl it is not. That and the inability to simulate stress and fatigue on the shooters result in super soldiers that can insta tap anyone peeking a corner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/30/2020 at 3:51 PM, Zimtstern said:

Actually I tried to make this tactic work with a small 4 man team providing the mg with ammunition, security and the team with a medic. And it worked out. Unfortunately 3 guys are now relative passive so that while the mg collected a over average amount of kills the rest wouldnt have much if any at all. If these guys could inflict a decent amount of kills playing traditionally the kill boost by this tactic nullifys plus none of us was there to hold an objective. What I also want to mention is that all the few times I tried that it was extremly cumbersome to constantly bark at my team to stay/come back and that we are only protecting (and supporting) the mg and stay hidden. The standard guy you get is just so blood thirsty its just exhausing to implement anything more difficult than "lets set a rally and push straight in". I mean I tried but if squad doesnt change probably not again.

That's not a wrong tactic to use in Post Scriptum. ;)

10 hours ago, Player 1 said:

I feel the reason gunfights don't last is because of the proximity of engagements. Most engagements happen within 50 yards. If you're a vet or been to a range, you know how close that is for a rifle. It looks far in-game but irl it is not. That and the inability to simulate stress and fatigue on the shooters result in super soldiers that can insta tap anyone peeking a corner.

This.

Weapons have no weight beyond arbitrary ads-speed.

We can start to correct all the mistakes with a stamina-drain while ADS(and if there is one, I haven't noticed).

Edited by EcchiRevenge

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from memory, ArmA3 had great fatigue and injury mechanics, even though they were highly annoying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/3/2020 at 9:49 PM, LaughingJack said:

from memory, ArmA3 had great fatigue and injury mechanics, even though they were highly annoying.

That's why most "milsim" communities were not using it all.

 

The initial sentence of OP kind of made me laugh a lot because it could not be more wrong.

Quote

Currently, Squad lacks tactical depth and is very individual focused

This game is much more tactical. I guess what the vocal group of players like OP want is tacticool. If you play Squad a lot, you realize that so called "individual skill" is not that important outside of squad leading and current meta-important roles like CE. I dont get why the "realism" crowd cant just play other games. They sound like somebody who is obsessed with an previous relationship that has outlived them in some sense. If you want Squad to be ArmA 3 Milsim, just play ArmA 3. And I say that as a player who has played Milsim since ArmA 2 and has +5K hours of ArmA 3. 

 

To me right now, Squad is in the best shape and state it ever was. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Squad Leading is the very opposite of individual skill. Squads must work together to succeed. Unless you only see SL as nothing more than a spawn point placer, which in that case is still false because that part of SLing takes no skill

 

Mass respawns are not teamwork. Individual skill x 100 is still individual skill. Battlefield isn't tactical.

Edited by Good-Try Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Good-Try Greg said:

Squad Leading is the very opposite of individual skill. Squads must work together to succeed. Unless you only see SL as nothing more than a spawn point placer, which in that case is still false because that part of SLing takes no skill

 

Mass respawns are not teamwork. Individual skill x 100 is still individual skill. Battlefield isn't tactical.


If you have no individual skill as SL, than how do you even know, what is working together?
Why no requiring skill spawn point is almost never present for public SL?


even though I agree mass respawns are not teamwork, your reasoning to come to such statement is BS
everything is individual skill and there's no another type of skill, player is the only place where skill exists. But combining individual skill gives you a system which properties are higher than sum of its parts. It's a neural network model of interaction.

I'm pretty sure many things of what you do in the game, I would barely call teamwork/skill/tactical.
So before playing with words, at least tell us what do you even mean by them

Edited by paragonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, MeFirst said:

That's why most "milsim" communities were not using it all.

 

The initial sentence of OP kind of made me laugh a lot because it could not be more wrong.

This game is much more tactical. I guess what the vocal group of players like OP want is tacticool. If you play Squad a lot, you realize that so called "individual skill" is not that important outside of squad leading and current meta-important roles like CE. I dont get why the "realism" crowd cant just play other games. They sound like somebody who is obsessed with an previous relationship that has outlived them in some sense. If you want Squad to be ArmA 3 Milsim, just play ArmA 3. And I say that as a player who has played Milsim since ArmA 2 and has +5K hours of ArmA 3. 

 

To me right now, Squad is in the best shape and state it ever was. 

When he says the game lacks tactics, he means, "the kind of tactics you would expect in a military shooter".

 

There are tactics in NBA 2k series. There are tactics in WORMS. There are tactics in fornite. Still, not the tactics you would expect in a game like SQUAD.

 

4 hours ago, paragonid said:

everything is individual skill and there's no another type of skill, player is the only place where skill exists. 

This is a very interesting statement. 

 

Anyway, even if that is true, it was quite obvious what the other poster meant. He is calling "individual skill" to something like, reflexes or accuracy, while he is infering the existance of a set of skills that are "group/colective" skills, such as coordination and communication.

 

One could argue that the group cannot give the individual what he doesnt have. And the opposite as well. It´s an interesting issue. Still, what the other poster meant is clear to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming we call reflexes, accuracy, ability to move, ability to read the map "individual skill"
Then we call "teamwork oriented skills": ability to stay beside the group, Ability to speak (make proper call outs etc), Ability to take the ammo bag and resupply the needed, etc
They all based on "individual skill" and with lack of "individual skill" there's no point in having "teamwork oriented skills", as you don't know where to go, how to hit shit, where to shoot at all

There's no match you can win without "individual skill". And any competitive scene (i.e. "aiming to archive the win") will always focus on having "individual skill" as a base for anything in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, paragonid said:

Assuming we call reflexes, accuracy, ability to move, ability to read the map "individual skill"
Then we call "teamwork oriented skills": ability to stay beside the group, Ability to speak (make proper call outs etc), Ability to take the ammo bag and resupply the needed, etc
They all based on "individual skill" and with lack of "individual skill" there's no point in having "teamwork oriented skills", as you don't know where to go, how to hit shit, where to shoot at all

There's no match you can win without "individual skill". And any competitive scene (i.e. "aiming to archive the win") will always focus on having "individual skill" as a base for anything in the game.

And this is even more interesting.

 

There are games in which some set of skills are more important than accuracy.

 

For example, PR.  Positioning and fire discipline where more important. 

 

In PR you can have a team full of grunts, basic "individual skills", basic reflexes, but always ready to follow orders, inteprreting them propperly, and as long as they were led by good sls and commanders, it could beat (more often it was like that) a team of individual "quick reflexes" "one shot headshot" hotshots that were arguing their sls.

 

One would argue that profesional armies form and shape their soldiers so that their most important "Individual skill" is know how to follow orders. And the rest is secondary. As long as they are wll led, accuracy and reflexes stay in a second place.

 

Now, that is NOT squad.

A team full of people that are good at shooting and have reflexes only VAGUELY need to do a very limited number of things at the beginning of the round,...and then it´s just pew-pew-pew your way to victory. 

 

Don´t you agree?

Edited by Nightingale87

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I played BF2:PR for years. Positioning and fire discipline are "individual skills". One doesn't need a squad or a team for it.
 

Higher cost of movement and death, higher TTK, slower moving and action speed of BF2:PR shift the balance of where "individual skill" is not dominating. But It's still impossible to have any significant teamwork without "individual skill" either way. If you don't argue with your SL, but have no idea how efficiently do something in the game, you lack "individual skill" and nobody cares how well you listen.

Professional armies have nothing to do with video games unless they win some tournaments (they won't)

And I never argued that Squad has preference for "
individual skill" over "teamwork oriented skills", but rather that one is based on another and inseparable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, paragonid said:

I played BF2:PR for years. Positioning and fire discipline are "individual skills". One doesn't need a squad or a team for it.
 

Higher cost of movement and death, higher TTK, slower moving and action speed of BF2:PR shift the balance of where "individual skill" is not dominating. But It's still impossible to have any significant teamwork without "individual skill" either way. If you don't argue with your SL, but have no idea how efficiently do something in the game, you lack "individual skill" and nobody cares how well you listen.

Professional armies have nothing to do with video games unless they win some tournaments (they won't)

And I never argued that Squad has preference for "
individual skill" over "teamwork oriented skills", but rather that one is based on another and inseparable

If you read my post again you will see that I agree with you. 

Group skills require/include individual skills.

 

I pose another quesiton. It being from that individual set of skills, which ones do you think are more relevant to squad and which ones to PR?

 

For example, take A) positioning and B) reflexes.

 

Which one is more prominent in which?

If you have played PR then I guess your answer might be something like this:

 

"Although both of them are relevant in both games, I firmly believe that A is more important in PR and B is more important in Squad. That is caused by the lack of posibility to mod the original system and weapon Sway/kicking, therefore making players  wait and pause when they encountered enemy. Furthermore, in PR that generated a funny result, and that is that when encountering enemies all of a sudden, only a squad that was moving together and shooting at the same time had great chances of taking the target down (Something like 18th/19th century logic warfate in which the weapons were so imprecise that in order to actually kill something you had to mass shooters),...

 

Whereas in SQUAD, a single player with decent reflexes is capable of dealing with any sudden threat. All this (and other factors) might lead to completely different gameplay."

 

Btw. Im not arguing for PR´s mechanic (that was flawed, but the best with what they had)

Edited by Nightingale87

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Although PR has workable model, it's not the only one possible.
I would say that intentionally or unintentionally squad analogue model of encouraging staying together as a squad is "trading". Being able to kill opponent after he already shot/killed you is a decent way to archive similar result, but still lacking in the current implementation.

For me much stronger factor is rather the expense of being dead, i.e. slower movement pace, higher respawn time, need to return to the combat from further away and taking longer time to do so. It is much higher in BF2:PR. Although it is indeed a rather painful moment in the same time, to have to wait/travel for a long time, and I agree with Squad's spoken idea that player should be given a meaningful occupation in such case, imo body cams on your squad mates is a decent start.

Edited by paragonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, paragonid said:

For me much stronger factor is rather the expense of being dead, i.e. slower movement pace, higher respawn time, need to return to the combat from further away and taking longer time to do so. It is much higher in BF2:PR. Although it is indeed a rather painful moment in the same time, to have to wait/travel for a long time, and I agree with Squad's spoken idea that player should be given a meaningful occupation in such case, imo body cams on your squad mates is a decent start.

The way downtime works in both games is fundamentally different. Spawning really far away from your squad and trying to catch up to them is more of a Squad thing than a PR thing. Travel is usually done in squads in PR, which is exciting, and builds tension. It's clear from the differences in how the spawns work.

 

Rallies in Squad are permanent and usually far away from your squad. Don't forget the dumb wave timer too. You're pretty much never going to spawn together in Squad, whereas that's the default behavior in PR.

 

FOBs, trickling is a huge issue. It's complicated. I think it starts with there being too few infantry squads, scrambling over too many objectives to handle in any sort of tactical manner. So, FOBs were brought up in power basically to fill in the gaps. Big mistake. They're so powerful they supersede squad spawns, draining the manpower of squads even further. Even if the rally wasn't a mess, (reverted to v9 rules or whatever) it wouldn't fix much because the pressure the FOB brings with mass respawns is so undeniable. PR's FOBs were starting points for squad tactics. Squad's FOBs are the antithesis of squad cohesion because without blueberries, they're useless.

 

Any case where people decide to spawn so far away from their squad should be considered a failure of the game design. It shouldn't be that hard to get players together. Games do it all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Good-Try Greg said:

Any case where people decide to spawn so far away from their squad should be considered a failure of the game design. It shouldn't be that hard to get players together. Games do it all the time.

Give me examples and I show you the difference why is it working there and not working in Squad.

In BF2:PR it's a thing as well, staying alive after rest of the squad is dead and being left over due to the need of SL/important kit to relocate to completely another location.
Just being away from each other is not a problem by itself. The problem is that staying together isn't that much of a benefit

But then again, I'm talking different levels now. We should look at the best and see how much they use staying together as a tool, not at the worst. And then if it's a problem of worst and not best, find ways how to teach the worst. If player doesn't want to play the game the way which leads to winning (implying staying together does, which is still needs to be proven), then changing game mechanics not going to fix such attitude... unless it's some kind of persuasive teaching mechanics

Edited by paragonid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, paragonid said:

Give me examples and I show you the difference why is it working there and not working in Squad.

it doesn't sound like you're disagreeing with my point so why?> I'm not trying to say that every game is PR, or that Squad should copy fortnite or whatever

47 minutes ago, paragonid said:

In BF2:PR it's a thing as well, staying alive after rest of the squad is dead and being left over due to the need of SL/important kit to relocate to completely another location.

These kinds of stragglers are not a major issue unless it's just the SL who gets permakilled while the rest of the squad stays alive, (which is a legitimate issue, but rare). Once respawned at a FOB, the SL can steadily bring the squad back full strength with rallies.

50 minutes ago, paragonid said:

Just being away from each other is not a problem by itself. The problem is that staying together isn't that much of a benefit

Numbers are always a benefit, but it's more powerful to use those numbers outside of squads. Squads are often a very inefficient use of manpower. Any squad that messes around and go on nature hikes and big flanks can be a significant drain your team. That stuff is fun though. I think each squad should be a smaller proportion of the team's manpower to allow for more tactics without hindering the team, but it can't happen while FOBs exist as a more efficient use of manpower. Yes squad cohesion isn't entirely about spawns but it is a major part of it. Actively spawning away from your squad because other spawns are preferable is a real problem.

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

×