Skip to content

Squad is again way too infantry-based, almost all AAS/RAAS layers lack light AT-vehicles

Dani3lDani3l Germany/NetherlandsMember Posts: 36

After the very highly critized removal of light AT-vehicles (https://forums.joinsquad.com/discussion/114/owi-please-release-a-statement-on-the-drastic-reduction-of-tow-mraps-on-so-many-layers), Squad basically has turned back into an infantry-simulation with only light IFVs again, as most AAS/RAAS layers either only have light APCs (Stryker) or 2 tanks + 1 IFV. Again, now the only way to destroy heavy armor is by either HAT, stationary TOW or AT-mines/C4 (combat engineer), or heavy armor itself... Which again drastically restricts gameplay variability, massively decreasing the overall gameplay experience and makes it heavy armor a lot more survivable. (I negatively rated Squad on Steam with that reason given in the review, amongst other reasons that I stated there.)

Comments

  • ChrisJChrisJ Member Posts: 25 ★★

    Perhaps you expect something from the game that is not intended to be. When I look at the store page/website it's very obviously an infantry based game. The impression I get is that infantry combat comes first and foremost; vehicle combat is obviously involved but it is done so in a way that does not take too much away from the infantry(AKA the majority) of players.

    Putting that aside, heavy armor should be harder to kill. Very often they have delayed respawns coupled with a relatively high ticket cost. Frankly I don't think it is at all difficult to kill heavy armor. One well placed mine or rocket to the tracks can leave them stranded in place and entirely vulnerable to HATs or other vehicles capable of killing them. Light AT vehicles cost much less, can be one manned, and have much faster respawn times.

  • GeebusGeebus Member Posts: 43 ★★

    All the ATGM vehicles were way too cheesy. I hated the meta that surrounded them. They required almost zero teamwork to make use of. 9 times out of 10, something like a Konkurs BRDM-2 is operated by a single guy. That single guy could easily take on supposedly "better" vehicles that require at least two or three to even be competitive. Because of this, it really didn't mesh well with everything that this game is supposed to be about.

    Besides that, "too infantry focused"? That was always the point as far as I understood. I don't think vehicles were ever supposed to be on the same level of importance that infantry is.

    Honestly OP, I'm getting more of an impression that your issue isn't with whatever perceived changes in the flow of armor you might have but rather with the frustrations that rise from you not being able to one-man a Spandrel like you might have used to.

  • XXPX1XXPX1 Member Posts: 45 ★★

    That is quite the statement.

    You cite your own thread and the posts in that thread are not even critical of those vehicles be removed.


    Regarding the rest of this new thread, I don't think I could say it better than Chris:

    Perhaps you expect something from the game that is not intended to be.

    I will say that vehicles like the Spandrel and TOW M-ATV may have a better place in Squad when/if attack helicopters are introduced. Their light armor and inflexible armament would make them particularly prone to aerial threats.


    But I'm not upset that I don't see them on maps currently...

  • Dani3lDani3l Germany/NetherlandsMember Posts: 36

    When I look at the store page/website it's very obviously an infantry based game.

    Incorrect. From Steam page, in description:

    "vehicle-based combined arms gameplay"

    same page:

    "It bridges the large gap between arcade shooter and military simulation with 100 player battles, combined arms combat, base building, and a great integrated VoIP system"

    In that sentence no mention of infantry-based, instead, combined arms combat is mentioned...

  • Dani3lDani3l Germany/NetherlandsMember Posts: 36

    9 times out of 10, something like a Konkurs BRDM-2 is operated by a single guy. That single guy could easily take on supposedly "better" vehicles that require at least two or three to even be competitive. Because of this, it really didn't mesh well with everything that this game is supposed to be about.

    that's the big issue then! OWI should make it impossible to one-man ATGM-vehicles! That's the 100x better solution than the lawsuit-risking act of literally removing game-content...

    HUH, I just checked Squad EULA, no mention there of OWI reserving the right to remove game-content at any time... O_O = lawsuit-risk: Increased by factor of at least 2x ? O.O

    Besides that, "too infantry focused"? That was always the point as far as I understood. I don't think vehicles were ever supposed to be on the same level of importance that infantry is.

    negative, on their website, OWI declared (and declares) Squad as the successor to PR...: "we are seeking to make Squad the spiritual successor to PR in everything but name."

  • Dani3lDani3l Germany/NetherlandsMember Posts: 36

    Example to a case where a developer was sued about removing content: https://attackofthefanboy.com/news/roblox-is-being-sued-over-alleged-robux-scams/

  • GeebusGeebus Member Posts: 43 ★★

    The developers aren't risking lawsuit by removing/changing content. . . If you are going to start pulling up examples to try to back up what you are saying, you might want to actually find something that is within the same vein. That Roblox example has nothing to do with this.

    Exaggeration doesn't help anything that you are saying. Once again I'll point to what I said earlier:

    Honestly OP, I'm getting more of an impression that your issue isn't with whatever perceived changes in the flow of armor you might have but rather with the frustrations that rise from you not being able to one-man a Spandrel like you might have used to.


  • Dani3lDani3l Germany/NetherlandsMember Posts: 36

    It's both, one-manning TOW MRAP was a very uncomplicated act as you didn't have to find some player in teamchat to join your TOW-squad ("need 1 player in TOW squad" for example and then NOTHING happened...), and also TOW MRAP adds good variation to the gameplay.

  • XXPX1XXPX1 Member Posts: 45 ★★
    edited June 9

    This thread has just become silly.


    HUH, I just checked Squad EULA, no mention there of OWI reserving the right to remove game-content at any time...

    An End User License Agreement wouldn't need to specify that. "A EULA specifies in detail the rights and restrictions which apply to the use of the software.", and it does contractually obligate the software developer to maintain or provide features in the software to end users.

    What you're probably thinking of is a "Terms of Sale" or "Purchase Agreement", which you agreed to if you purchased the game through Steam. This agreement would be with Valve, not OWI.

    Now, if you purchased Squad and Valve revoked access to the software, outside the agreement, you'd be able to litigate.

    Alternatively, if you purchased the TOW MRAP as DLC, you may have a case however Squad hasn't removed the asset(s) from the game so you'd have a pretty tough case because OWI could argue that the asset is still available for custom maps and training.

    one-manning TOW MRAP was a very uncomplicated act as you didn't have to find some player in teamchat to join your TOW-squad

    Right.

    This game is about working as a team and finding others to help you.

    This sums up why the vehicle was removed and why no one misses it (besides you).

Sign In or Register to comment.