Skip to content

List of minor beneficial changes to Squad from my POV. Large Post

Bill NyeBill Nye Member Posts: 7

This is just a quick post outlining a bunch of minor-moderate changes that hopefully wouldn't be too difficult but would help with greater consistency and enjoyability. Going to try to avoid anything that would be too complex and focus on real quick easy changes.


  • Bill NyeBill Nye Member Posts: 7

    Section 1 : Infantry Kit Changes General

    LeadCrewman/Pilot : This kit could be given an entrenching tool without much gameplay alteration. As it stands both kits are not effective Infantry kits and are used to crew vehicles. Due to this they mostly have easy access to ammunition supplies and a way to switch kits. They often do this to help build deployables they place. Giving this kit a shovel would simply remove tedious radial menu clicking. The one potential concern is that this could allow players to create one man fobs, but with the two man radio placement requirement this isn't really an issue. This is an easy quality of life change to save a tiny bit of time for vehicle crews who place support fobs and other assets.

    Medic : Currently Medic has been placed back up on the priority chart due to the annoying dead-dead affect but the kit can get especially tedious with all soldiers requiring heals to full to get back to an effective state. I think a small increase in medic bandaging time, as well as an equal decrease in healing time could be beneficial. Keeping the time to fully revive and heal a friendly the same, but greatly increasing a medics ability to keep his Squadmates at full health.

    Rifleman : Rifleman has 3 choices available to them at the moment, but for the most part it is not usually much of a choice. The benefits a longer range optic provides far outweighs the other two options currently that come with a mere +1 grenade and additional magazine. A few small things to give to the two close range Rifleman kits could be a larger capacity ammo bag, additional magazines, or a faster relative ADS time. These could provide additional utility or larger edges that might make them worth picking in relevant CQB situations.

    Grenadier : While still a useable kit, the blast radius nerf of the grenade launcher really neutered its capabilities, and what it's supposed to be good at. The small blast radius can often fail to clear soldiers occupying the room it lands in. While a return to it's previous radius would probably be too much. A smaller increase to a 4-5m lethal would help the kit in scenarios where a well aimed shot, should be able to clear what it hits. Especially with how powerful fragmentation rockets are, this doesn't seem like an unreasonable change besides making the kit a tad more forgiving.

    Light Anti-Tank : The state of Light Anti-Tank is fairly good, but could be improved. They are extremely useful for tracking important vehicles, but carry such a limited ammo capacity that they aren't even able to destroy a single lightly armored vehicle without a rearm. Cutting the amount of LAT kits down to 1 (except for unconventionals), but greatly increasing the amount of ammunition given, could increase Squad kit diversity while giving LAT a clearly defined role, and the ability to destroy all light armor. 4 HEAT rockets each, would be enough to eliminate all current Light armor in game, and the reduced LAT kits on the field would limit any potential oppressive spam. Insurgents could keep their same dual LAT kits, with 3 HEAT rounds as their faction also relies on the anti-personnel ability of the fragmentation rockets.

    Marksman : I think it's fairly well agreed upon that this kit, and the people who play it usually lack in the teamplay department. I think the best way to go about this would be a sharper team limit on the role and by giving it a more powerful spotting device. In practice something like binoculars that automatically keep a target marked on their team's map as long as light of sight is maintained with a short post LOS break expiry. This wouldn't change too much, players are still able to rapidly place markers on the map, but a tool that makes the spotting process easier would encourage marksmen to use it and be team players. The more accurate spotting would let vehicles crews quickly see the direction of the enemy assets and be able to more accurately position themselves. It doesn't have to be this spotting device idea, just anything that gives marksmen a role they can play with their squads that isn't being a slightly more zoomed in Optic rifleman.

    Combat Engineer : Combat Engineer is an okay kit, but I never enjoyed conventional forces also getting access to mines. Mines can be hidden nearly 100% from sight and aren't a very fun to fight tool, so it fit right in with the insurgents, but in a conventional battle is a bit out of place. Mines aren't placed by conventional forces as much anyway, as they required dedicated transportation trucks which is a larger requirement than a single minsk bike, so removing mines for combat engineer kits would be my only change here.

  • Bill NyeBill Nye Member Posts: 7

    Faction Specific Infantry Changes

    USA : Return of fully automatic fire to M4 weapons. With Canadian Forces existing and full auto existing on some USA weapons. The burst fire gimmick does make the US somewhat unique, but not really unique in an enjoyable way.

    Larger M240b magazine capacity. While the 75 round nutsacks may be true to life it really leaves the US machinegunner kit lacking. It's firing a less damaging round the PKM and it gets 25 less of them making it easily the weakest machinegunner kit in game. Even an extra 25 would go along way to making it a more appealing choice.

    AT4 Damage reduction to parity with other launchers. During its introduction it was stated it was slightly more powerful than a LAT to make up for the USAs lack of a dedicated HAT kit. Now years into the future with a real HAT launcher, AT4 just adds a little bit of confusion to those who don't know about its slightly higher damage.

    BRITS : Ironsighted M249 Equivalent for the Autorifleman role given the 200 round boxes. With 100 rounders and ironsights this kit is very unappealing, however with 200 rounds, the additional rounds could help make up for the lack of accuracy at longer ranges.

    Same complaint as M240b as they share the weapon, made even worse by lack of sight.

    NLAW arming distance is excessive, even though it does have added utility with its firing modes, the arming distance can get oppressive, being standardized to 40m like the rest would probably be a good change.

    RUSSIA : AK-74M and other 5.45 friends upped to 62 damage. As it stands currently the 60 damage of the AK74 only ever comes up rarely and is frustrating as any other main rifle would have killed the enemy. On the flip side the player who survived due to the slightly lower damage very quickly bleedouts making their death more frustrating as well. Standardizing the intermediate rifle rounds to that same damage level leads to more consistent gunplay and less "Oh man I shot him in the thigh so he had 3 seconds to bleedout before he died, damn you AK74!!!"

    MILITIA : Mosin being introduced in some form. It was very odd when the Mosin was introduced but left the Militia behind. While weapon diversity between MIL and INS is important the Mosin seems like something the Militia should have on hand

    TT-33 damage revert to 50. The TT-33 was one of the cool things Militia had going for it, but with pistol damages being made equal it really doesn't cut it anymore with its 3 round magazine. While pistols aren't meant to be legitimate weapons in this game, having the TT-33 being deadly at close range was enjoyable.

    Insurgents : Insurgent Infantry is fairly fun to play as so these are just minor nitpicks.

    G3A3 Fighter kit removed, nearly the same as the FN FAL and G3 is ubiquitous on the MEA so it's not a very popular option. Perhaps replaced with a PPSH fighter kit option.

    If G3A3 replaced with PPSH, INS Raider kit given 2 additional drum magazines to make it more desirable than stock Fighter option. This gives INS Fighter classes a weapon for all scenarios from long range high damage mosin, to the short range PPSH.

    AKMS Fighter kit, given some tangible benefit compared to the standard AKM Fighter kit as it appears to have none.

    Mosin Carbine damage nerf revert. The Sappers primary weapon the mosin carbine is a frustrating weapon with its required headshot kills with a bolt action. If the sapper is meant to be at a disadvantage in general combat a closer range self defence weapon like the Skorpian would fit the bill, but the Mosin carbine in its current form just unnecessary gimps the Sapper class in an unfun way.

    Middle Eastern Coalition : Additional magazine count for all primary combat role G3s. All other factions carry a total of 180-210 on their main rifleman kits, the MEA kits carry between 120-140 and while the round is more powerful, the weakness is felt when ammo gets scarce. The G3s 20 round magazine is already punishment enough.

    Restructuring of the Autorifleman roles to have the non fire support AR slot be filled by the G3 LMG with 50 round drums, while the Fire Support version is given access to an iron sighted, MG3 with 120 round magazines. The Machine Gunner kit while possessing a scope, would also be given larger magazines (+30-+80) To make it a better kit, as most specialist kits are.

    A smaller non-G3 weapon option given to the less combat focused LAT and medic slots, or even as a replacement to the iron sighted G3A3 rifleman kit. A weapon to bring a little bit more variety to the MEA as a whole.

  • Bill NyeBill Nye Member Posts: 7


    USA: Opentop MATV is essentially a relatively strong transport with a gun on top. The fact that it's Opentop means it's not very viable in direct combat, but it still costs the same ticket value as the CROWs variant. This isn't a problem CROWS should be a better combat choice, but something as simple as larger ammunition count for the Opentop variant, could see it be a viable pick as a support vehicle for an infantry squad. This decision could be applied to other opentop variants to see more use for them as well. 

    M1A2 is currently regarded as one if, if not the best tank in the game. The main reasons for that is it has acceptable armour and it's weapon reloads 2 seconds faster than all other tanks. This advantage wouldn't be so unreasonable if the M1A2 had significant weaknesses to compensate for that strength, but it doesn't it's just a fairly solid tank that with good aim, beats all others due to its faster fire rate. The easiest fix would be simply changing the fire rate, but changes could be made to other tanks to give them advantages as well.

    UH-60M This helo is great to fly, fairly low profile, and the lack of supplies makes sense given its size. The one minor complaint that anyone could have with this helo would be its ability to defend itself. The firing arc given to its two guns isn't sufficient to do what they're put there to do. It's probably that way to avoid clipping issues, but even 10-15 degrees more swivel in each direction would be huge. The SA330 has this and is a lot more fun to fly in.

    BRITS : FV107 AKA "Lil Warrior" Due to sharing the Warriors damage modifiers, the FV107 is currently one of the weakest lightly armored vehicles in the game. An additional 250 health and fixing of the HAT damage modifier to similar to other lightly armoured vehicles, would probably be a welcome addition.

    FV432 is a vehicle that is fairly useable and one of the thing that makes the brits fairly unique. The problem with the FV432 isn't the vehicle itself, but what the vehicle tends to be used as. On many British Layers FV432s are used as Stryker/BTR80 analogues, the APCs with .50cals etc... The main problem is that while BTRs and Strykers can contribute to the armour game, the opentop nature of the FV432 means any vehicle on vehicle interaction with the FV432 ends in, the gunner being killed and the aggressor vehicle deciding whether or not to waste a bunch of rounds killing the vehicle. One infamous layer is Fool's Road RAAS v2 where Russia has a sizeable armour advantage due to the weaknesses of the FV432.

    FV4034 (The Challenger) The Challenger is an ok tank, I'm just unsure why it has such a small ammo pool, a few more AP rounds wouldn't go astray. 

    SA330 : The door guns of the SA330 are not symmetrical in their yaw constraints with one gun being able to point further forward earning itself the nickname of "The Pursuit Gun".

    RUSSIA : TIGR-M is too much fun to drive and gun and makes other vehicles feel worse by comparison.

    BTR80&BRDM2 : Both these vehicles use the 14.5mm KPVT as their primary weapon and have been lacking ever since the damage change to this weapon a long time ago. The 50 round belts makes its use as an anti infantry/vehicle weapon a lot weaker. Additionally it has a lower RPM with the only benefit over a .50cal being 10% higher damage, this simply isn't enough. As it stands the 14.5mm is outperformed by all other .50 cals and could use a change. If the damage isn't going to receive an increase, there could also be an increase in overheat dissipation and reload speed increase. This would allow the gun to have a higher uptime and be more competitive with vehicles it should be effective at engaging. 

    T72B3 : The T72B3 is a great tank, the only thing that doesn't really mesh with it is the Refleks rocket. The Refleks gives the T72 a unique ability in that it possesses an ATGM which no other tank has, unfortunately those who know of its capabilities know that it doesn't have many uses. It's penetration is low, and its damage is just shy of being relevant, as a Refleks will still require 3 AP shells following it, to secure a kill. I think a better implementation would be a single-shot round with damage equivalent to a HAT rocket, which would make sense as its a Tandem round. This would give the T72 a potential first shot ambush advantage in Tank battles. A refleks to the side to begin an engagement would heavily favour the T72 giving them counterplay against the Abrams faster reload speed, it would also provide incentive to maneuver as the T72 as its lower penetration wouldn't be useful in a frontal engagement. Finally it'd be easier to understand as currently as nothing else in the game has the stats of the Refleks, while all HAT launchers and ATGMs have consistent damage. 

    Mi8 : Similar to the SA330, the Mi8s doorguns do not have symmetrical yaw constraints and there doesn't seem to be much of a reason for it. 

  • Bill NyeBill Nye Member Posts: 7

    test post

  • Bill NyeBill Nye Member Posts: 7

    spam filter bad

  • Bill NyeBill Nye Member Posts: 7

    MILITA : My main issues with Militia vehicles is that they don't really feel any different than the INS vehicles, a few small tweaks could make them feel a little more unique. Militia vehicles should still feel old, but still have edges that makes them preferable over INS versions, otherwise they really help reinforce the idea of Militia being "**** INS" the faction. 

    UB-32 Technical : An easy change would be to give the Milita rocket techy a side-grade. This variant could fire fewer rounds per magazine, at a slower RPM but with a moderately increased blast radius trading area coverage, for stronger striking individual rounds. They could be called Si8 rockets to differentiate them from the standard rocket technical. 

    MIL Technical : MIL being given their own variant of the armoured technical, with a tad slower speed, but a bit more armour, IE Thicker & (Bulletproof windows) something to give it a bit more staying power over the standard model. 

    Additionally perhaps a technical with a KORD/NSV .50 cal would be neat with the high fire rate of the kord giving Militia an edge in rapidly dealing damage with their technicals. 

    MTLB : Although we don't see many MTLBs on layers these days, adding the small PKT turret, to standard Militia MTLBs as a 2nd gunner slot could help ramp up their capabilities against infantry and make them a more fearsome vehicle.

    BMP-1 SPG-9 : Potentially giving Militia access to a slightly more effective anti vehicle SPG-9/BMP-1 round in small quantity to give them a slightly better chance in vehicle engagements against conventional forces. Apparently a PG-9VNT round exists for the SPG with 150mm more penn, which seems like a potential candidate. 

  • Bill NyeBill Nye Member Posts: 7

    Insurgents : Insurgent vehicles for the most part feel just about as effective as they should be. Only possible change I'd make is changing certain Invasions layers where IFVs go up against the T-62. The T-62 may be a weaker tank, but you really do feel for the attackers on these layers when a good T-62 crew removes all of their armour on the map.

    MEA : MEA has 1 unique vehicle so there's not much to discuss in this one.

    Simir : The Simir is a little bit more durable than one assumes a jeep should be. Should probably have stats set to similar to technies, rather than what it has currently.

    M117 : Same problem as the Mi8 Doorguns, additionally the high rate of fire makes the MG3s fairly rough to use effectively coupled with the fast overheat speed. An increase in overheat dissipation, and a few extra rounds per box magazine also wouldn't go astray.  

    Game Mode Changes

    RAAS/**** Ticket Bleed : Current ticket bleed is largely irrelevant until many flags have been captured. I think a secondary bleed mechanic that adds additional ticket bleed per minute at fairly long intervals would be beneficial in preventing wins by attrition in low activity games. This would add additional ticket bleed to the losing side after a fairly long interval has passed without any flag going neutral. In a close game where flags were being neutralized and or lost in a back and forth, this additional bleed would fail to start. It would only be relevant in stalemate games where one side has a capture point lead, allowing said side to cleanly win if the enemy decided to not attack to break the stalemate. Example +1 ticket/min per 10 minutes no activity, turning a 50 minute long stalemate -50 tickets lost into a more respectable -150 tickets lost.

    RAAS : Fog of War adjustment. Flags disappearing in a double neutral scenario just shouldn't be a thing. Having the following 1-2 capture flags past a contested point visible would still give the game mode some Fog of War without it being unintuitive.  

    Invasion : The current consensus is that many Invasion layers are defender-sided, but at the same time some Attackers win Invasion purely by stacking enough bodies after capturing most of the points. I think both of these should be addressed. First a flat increase in tickets, enough that Attackers cannot win without taking all of the points as they are supposed to do, would be good.

    Secondly the asset loadout of many invasion layers should be changed to give attackers more fire support to capture points. Many Invasion layers feature nearly equally armor loadouts, resulting in roughly equal forces clashing, but one of them has the benefit of being the defender. Invasion layers work best, when Attackers have a material edge, that fortifying a location well and defending properly can potentially overcome.

    Finally the staging phase currently disallows firing and by extension firing of the Shovel and setting up defenses, making the "Prepare Defenses" phase for defenders quite awkward. Nothing can actually be built until the round starts. This isn't a huge deal as most things can usually be built up in time, it's just kind of annoying sitting there as defenders being unable to build things, when the setup blurb is telling you to do exactly that.

    Other Miscellaneous Changes

    Fortifications : Fortifications aren't very useful partly due to how the game plays out, being in a static easily observable position is not usually being beneficial. They also aren't used due to the large waste in construction supplies their high cost requires. While they shouldn't be too cheap to prevent extreme spam and chugging the server, they currently just aren't worth the construction supplies at the moment.

    Commander Squad Renaming : Unsure if this is an easy fix or not but the renaming of the Squad that becomes Commander is a little annoying at times, I understand that players should know who is the command squad, but I believe the yellow text and Star Icon is enough to signify that.

    Slight Melee Range Increase : By all means, melee should not be a viable weapon in a game where everyone has guns, but ideally it also shouldn't be frustrating to use in situations where it could be a viable weapon. Currently it's very easy to miss, strikes that were on target but missed due to the abysmally small range of the knife. The SKS has that slightly longer range and how much it improves the melee experience can't be overstated.

    Deployment Firing Arc Indicator for Deployables Ghost : This one might be a decent amount of work, but could help rookie Squad leaders from placing fairly terrible emplacements.  

    Didn't focus on anything CAF in here as I'm not sure of the exact specifics of them and to maintain Canadian bias.

  • rumhamrumham Member Posts: 1 Civilian

    One thing I think this game could change that would have a huge impact on core gameplay / firefights is the ability to steady aim on ledges / behind cover!! Ive never played PS but I've heard that game as a similar mechanic.

    There's been wayyyy too many times where the cover is too high when crouched but too exposing when standing up. Especially those murder holes in the maps. Most of them you can't even fully take advantage of.

Sign In or Register to comment.