Bumfluff

Squad

Recommended Posts

Also just reinstalled as I found out about that map, should be interesting to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, AbsoluteVirtue said:

I might reinstall this now, since it has a proper map with several elevation levels, and not just a big flat area with a bunch of trees. do US troops have actual body armor? meaning, does it take more bullets to the chest to kill them, than it does to kill insurgents? also, is it possible to drop your weapons as the insurgent and give up (with severe penalties for the US side for killing unarmed insurgents)?

Not as far as I've seen. There's also no surrender option. Maybe that might come, I'm not sure. The biggest difference between the factions at the moment is the amount of specialized weaponry they have, as well as the type of vehicles they have available to them. US and RU have more armoured vehicles, insurgents mainly have technicals with various armaments like SPG9's, DSHK's and rocket artillery. There is also a difference in cost for building items, so insurgent factions can build more for cheap and be kind of all over the place. Still lots to come though, like IED's. That will switch the power dynamic up a little bit, because in the more open maps US and RU can dominate the insurgent factions if they don't understand their role on the battlefield too well. 

At the moment there are four factions, US, RU, Eastern-European rebels and Middle-Eastern insurgents. Last friday I played as a squadleader on Chora valley, as RU up against the US. I condensed the video a bit to the most interesting parts and still show the regular sort of flow of a round :)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SiC-Disaster said:

Not as far as I've seen. There's also no surrender option.

that's too bad, surrendering was one of the signature features in Project Reality. it was a great way to confuse NATO forces, pretend to be surrendering but in actuality try to gather intel on enemy fortifications and spawn points' positions. I hope they're planning on eventually adding this kind of stuff to Squad.

currently Squad just looks like playing AAS in Arma 2

Share this post


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

that's too bad, surrendering was one of the signature features in Project Reality. it was a great way to confuse NATO forces, pretend to be surrendering but in actuality try to gather intel on enemy fortifications and spawn points' positions. I hope they're planning on eventually adding this kind of stuff to Squad.

currently Squad just looks like playing AAS in Arma 2

It was also fun throwing rocks at soldiers and leading them on a wild goose chase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It might come back. I think they are focusing on new animations, free-look, vaulting, and adding more important things like heli's and mortars at some point first. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/10/2017 at 10:37 PM, 213 said:

they should focus on giving the characters non midget bodies.

That's the least of their concerns. Almost every game still turns into a ######ty pixel hunt, especially on the large open Afghan maps. Out past 500m its really bad. You think you saw something, you're not sure, but you might have. That's the reaction every time. The the blurry pixelated characters on the opposing team, even at medium distances, merge back into the terrain like they melted into it. The rampant server latency at said distances doesn't help either and given the UE hard-coded limitations at present, likely never will. The engine choice just doesn't support those engagement ranges and is a bit like A3, only worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12-4-2017 at 6:11 AM, DetCord said:

That's the least of their concerns. Almost every game still turns into a ######ty pixel hunt, especially on the large open Afghan maps. Out past 500m its really bad. You think you saw something, you're not sure, but you might have. That's the reaction every time. The the blurry pixelated characters on the opposing team, even at medium distances, merge back into the terrain like they melted into it. The rampant server latency at said distances doesn't help either and given the UE hard-coded limitations at present, likely never will. The engine choice just doesn't support those engagement ranges and is a bit like A3, only worse.

The pixel hunt is sort of the point though, I think. It lends importance to things like binoculars and calling out targets. More importantly, it leads to firefights where people don't just shoot to kill but to suppress. There is firing and manoeuvering, and that is something you rarely, if ever see in games. Even in ArmA.  It's also why, for example, I think Red Orchestra: Ostfront was better than Heroes of Stalingrad, because HOS had a zoom function when in ironsights. It didn't make the pixelhunt better, it made it worse, and it made firefights worse too.   As for engine choice, I don't know if there's been an engine that wasn't limited in some way, shape or form. I'm quite enjoying Squad, at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree with Sic-Disaster. It makes for a different style of game play because you need to suppress and then close the gap to a range which is suited to engaging.

And it definitely takes time to learn it - the first hours I played I couldn't even see the enemy, then as I got some more experience they started to appear and the use of cover, defilade becomes so important to close distance without being detected.

Having said that, I'm ###### at this game lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, SiC-Disaster said:

The pixel hunt is sort of the point though, I think. It lends importance to things like binoculars and calling out targets. More importantly, it leads to firefights where people don't just shoot to kill but to suppress. There is firing and manoeuvering, and that is something you rarely, if ever see in games. Even in ArmA.  It's also why, for example, I think Red Orchestra: Ostfront was better than Heroes of Stalingrad, because HOS had a zoom function when in ironsights. It didn't make the pixelhunt better, it made it worse, and it made firefights worse too.   As for engine choice, I don't know if there's been an engine that wasn't limited in some way, shape or form. I'm quite enjoying Squad, at least.

Now this is funny! Even at modicum distances, thanks to engine limitations, the inability to see a player somehow or its offshoot makes the game better? It's just utterly ridiculous to read or hear things like that IMHO. The engine is incapable of rendering players outside a certain distance that even the Human eye can distinguish. But no, that's not a fault or concern for improvement, its somehow a huge advantageous and or component of the existing gameplay.

How's the Koolaid down there, good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol. I will caveat what I said with the fact that it's the only pvp I've played in about 10 years.

I know what you're saying Det but I enjoyed Squad for a while and didnt find this pixelation to be a huge issue as it is the same issue for everyone I guess.

No game is perfect. But doesn't mean they can't be enjoyable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand both points.
It is indeed very effective in demanding a certain behavior from the players. Concealment get´s more important, the binocs are mandatory to use regularly, squads should employ an element to overwatch when constructing an FOB, because with the graphics being what they are (it still looks great) you just can´t reliably spot approaching enemies "on the fly" while doing something different.

That said, I highly doubt this was a conscious decision by the devs to facilitate a more thoughtful gameplay (at first, they sure know it now).
And it looks weird, even somehow stressing to the eye.
A problem I generally have with sticking to engine limitations would be that I fear it might mark a dead end.
Good for the devs, I guess, but they are likely less inclined to do it properly.

Also: There are some options to specifically improve the blurryness, but they are said to be very demanding in the options.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm curious to hear what you guys think is the problem with spotting enemies? My problem isn't so much spotting them as hitting them at any sort of distance. Seems like on the firing range I can hit to pretty good distances, but in real play this hardly ever works the same. I'm assuming because of network latency issues meaning I'm not seeing the target or leading them properly, but it is super frustrating.

 

But actually seeing enemies? you mean at super long distances? Well, ok, which games DO work at super long distances, because its likely you can configure UE to render in a way that matches that game (assuming its not just the deferred renderer making that impossible that is). UE4 has HUGE configuration options, beyond the things you see in a game's options menu. Open the console and type "r." and see all the config variables for a start! Those can all be set in .ini files etc.

UE4 is a complete basked case of settings that intertwine and corrupt each other. Switching one thing on can switch two other things off, silently. So yeah, bit of a minefield, but it CAN be setup to render amazing visuals. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for me the biggest problem is the fact that anti-aliasing doesn't seen to work at long distances. in real life it's very easy to discern a standing person from a bush at up to 1000 meters with a naked eye, but in a game it's nigh impossible, because character models lose shape and become a pile of pixels at longer distances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14-4-2017 at 1:46 AM, DetCord said:

Now this is funny! Even at modicum distances, thanks to engine limitations, the inability to see a player somehow or its offshoot makes the game better? It's just utterly ridiculous to read or hear things like that IMHO. The engine is incapable of rendering players outside a certain distance that even the Human eye can distinguish. But no, that's not a fault or concern for improvement, its somehow a huge advantageous and or component of the existing gameplay.

How's the Koolaid down there, good?

No need to be so agressive mate.

I've not experienced the thing you seem to be experiencing. The way you say it you make it sound like you'll be attacked by invisible enemies. That's never happened to me. Sometimes they are very hard to spot at a distance, but in what game is that not true?  The game could do with being a bit more crisp at long distances but I've honestly not been having huge problems finding enemies or killing them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not as far as I'm aware. Still plenty of stuff left to add. 

My first experience of being under artillery fire. It's kind of awesome.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These SL videos are a little longer because I want to show more than just the action highlights but the general flow of battle, situational information and decision making and cooperation with other squads. This video is a nice example of that I think.

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