New ICO Update

[bright thicket]

Anyone here think that OWI overcorrected on the new ICO update? Specifically in regards to weapons stabilization, steadiness of aim and overall lethality?

The original ICO was criticized by some for heavily penalizing the player's ability to run-and-gun in a self-sufficient manner. The 'noodle arms' effect and stamina-induced impacts on weapons stabilization was largely meant to discourage players from solo run-and-gun and sought to increase greater team cohesion. Whether or not that desired outcome was actually achieved is up for debate, but not the focus of my post. Rather, I want to know if the most recent patch undid too much of the original ICO or if the new changes strike the right balance between teamwork and fun gameplay.

[sick holly]

It did not undo the ICO, anyone saying that is frankly an idiot

it's just a minor tuning of the mechanics to address specific issues people brought up

[bright thicket]

IMHO, the changes were far from "minor."

[sick holly]

Then your opinion is misinformed

Because the changes were very minor number tweaks

[bright thicket]

It's my opinion based on my experience playing the new and older version of the game. Therefore, it's not misinformed, but just different from your own.

[sick holly]

Ofc if you watch clickbait youtube videos instead of actually looking at the numerical changes you'll form an opinion based on vibes rather than facts

[bright thicket]

what numerical changes are you referring to? ANd where can i find them? And I havent watched any videos except for MoiDawg's, which was largely praising the update.

[sick holly]

The "ICO update" in 8.2 is just a series of small numerical standardization tweaks/bugfixes more than it is any substantial change

there is precisely one meaningful number change, which is the sway recovery after walking at high stamina. That's it.

99.9% of the original ICO is still in place

[bright thicket]

Buddy, the weapons stabilization and stamina impacts are what I'm referring to. Where are those "numerical" changes quantified?

[sick holly]

It's not in the patch notes but it's in the SDK

[bright thicket]

Do you have some examples of these numerical deltas?

[sick holly]

That's a better question for the SDK divers but you can see the new weapon stats here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Kr1HbYkyl4GYdlvW2UxlMRMa6DTmmVvzTImKpoGTzPY/edit?usp=sharing

I don't have a link to the old (pre 8.2) version right now but iirc the only substantial differences were in the move sway release for most rifles

[bright thicket]

Doesnt really help your argument then that the changes are "minor" in the numerical sense. They certrainly dont feel minor from my own experience.

[sick holly]

The stuff for LMGs and MMGs is honestly more bugfixes than SDK tweaks

Because what they had those platforms behaving like pre 8.2 can only be described as buggy

[sick holly]

What do you feel is different specifically?

[bright thicket]

Its much, much faster and easier to have a stable weapon, which promotes a style of gameplay that is entirely different from what ICO was originally intended.

[sick holly]

Does it? Because I haven't felt or seen any substantial differences to gameplay myself.

Also the intention for ICO was to promote teamwork, and enable suppression as a part of combat, not necessarily to noodle arms everyone after walking 10 ft. So I think you are assuming something that wasn't necessarily a goal in the first place.

[sick holly]

This is only the case in specific circumstances, where you are not suppressed, have a full or nearly full stamina bar, are using the right weapon, and is still vulnurable to all the other drawbacks of the ICO like slow ADS speeds, PiP optics etc. So saying that it "promotes an entirely different style of gameplay" just cannot be correct.

[bright thicket]

Noodle arms was not the intent of ICO, but cohesive teamwork was. Honestly, the difference between pre and post update is so obvious that we shouldnt even have to bring stats into the discussion.

Had you played the game extensively pre the recent patch?

[sick holly]

Yes, I have over 1400 hours in the last year.

[bright thicket]

I dont know how you can say that and claim that the differences in weaopns stabilization are "minor."

[sick holly]

It's a decent size change in terms of how rifles stabilize in the right context, but in terms of the ICO overall it's nothing.

So phrasing it like this one change is overturning the entire ICO is just pure alarmism

[bright thicket]

Weapons stabilization and the ability, or inability, to quickly shoot from unsupported positions (especially with low stamina) was a major cornerstone of the original ICO. Therefore, in the greater context of ICO, the recent changes are anything but minor.

[sick holly]

Even in perfect conditions, weapons still take much longer to stabilize than they did pre-ICO. Again, I think the actual changes in game flow brought on by this tweak are being massively blown up beyond their actual significance.

If this change has totally ruined the ICO for you, the door's over there ---> show yourself out

Otherwise keep playing like many of us did after the ICO launched

[bright thicket]

Im not comparing the current patch to pre-ICO, im comparing to the previous version of ICO.

[sick holly]

The devs were always clear that the ICO was an iterative process and that there would be further tweaks. Well, here are the tweaks. So I guess what you thought the ICO was, wasn't actually the ICO.

[bright thicket]

Correct on the iterative part - but there is such a thing as over-correcting when it comes to iterative updates. Hence why I asked the question.

[sick holly]

Yeah I mean you can search for other posts on the same topic and look how many downvotes they have if you wanna see whether people agree with you that the changes "revert the ICO" or whatever

[rough yarrow]

Just to jump in here real quick king. One of the major problems when you introduce something like ICO-ing the game is balancing the flow of the game. At the end of the day Squads a game where soldiers need to move, you can't win Squad if you don't interact with your keyboard. That's just a known fact which means they have to design a game where moving is still players want to do. ICOs early movesway was pretty punishing and it's all about finding a balancing act between two extremes. Extreme 1 being extremely long stabilization IE 20 seconds to stabilze after moving, obviously no one would ever move since hitting accurate shots while attacking wouldn't be possible, on the flip side your weapon stablizing instantly would remove much of the defenders advantage.

That's why they changed up Movesway release which was honestly a welcome change and furthermore the other systems that punish movement in the game still exist it's just less piling on punishment to the act of movement. In such a low TTK game minor edges make a massive difference so even a 0.5s time needed to stabilize your weapon is huge and still means defenders we'll still possess a real advantage.

[bright thicket]

Squad is a game where players need to shoot, move and communicate - all 3 were very much feasible in the earlier version of ICO, assuming that squad members actually coordinated with one another. It's only when players attempted to run solo that the gameplay truly suffered under the earlier sway and stabilization mechanics.

[tranquil imp]

"Rather, I want to know if the most recent patch undid too much of the original ICO"

This is your own opinion man. No one can give you a correct answer.

[bright thicket]

im asking for others to give their own opinion on the matter.

[tranquil imp]

I think they went further than they needed, and in areas they didn't need to adjust.
So the gunfights feel flatter again in the way that you don't have room for reactive play beyond I-Shoot-Him-He-Shoot-Me at closer ranges like you had before.

[coral tundra]

ico bots complain that now you need a little pie of skill to play

is there 3th or 4th post about "overcorrected ico"?

and all posts from bush blue warriors

[bright thicket]

some really insightful contributions there...comments like these are what make this community so awesome!

[coral tundra]

anything about subject? now you need to DO something to play Instead of bush sitting and you blue bots start complain about this.

coz i play over 1k hours on ico 1.0 and that gameplay was annoying, if you move - You lose, coz you cant shoot back (even if you stop after moving) to bush or window camper. Everyone were running in crouch like idiots from bush to bush to have a chance against players in defense. So dont complain about 8.2 Its patch for players, for people who play the game more than others, who are core community of squad. Not for guys like you, who enjoy beer matches few times for month and complain how bad they are

[bright thicket]

no one gives a crap about how many hours you have. I play with some really competitive groups; movement, maneuver, whatever you want to call it, was perfectly viable when players operated as part of a team.

Anyone who says otherwise wasnt actually playing the game the way it was meant to be played.

[tranquil imp]

Everyone wasn't losing because they moved in the ICO.

[coral tundra]

if you cant read its not my problem

[rough yarrow]

How many ISKT have these competitive groups you're mentioning won?

[coral tundra]

love these milsim guys

[bright thicket]

Aren't all clans in the Squad community considered "milsim" relative to the more casual FPS games out there. I mean, isn't the milsim factor a large reason for why this game is different from the rest?

[tranquil imp]

Losing to guys holding angles was not universal for everyone. Plenty of people managed to miss while static or hit snap shots under the ICO.

If it never worked out that way in your experience, then that was your experience.

[tranquil imp]

No, not all competitive groups are milsim. Most aren't aren't. The term is a catchall to describe people who play the game in particular way. Usually leaning into the military larp with their comms and gameplay choices.

[bright thicket]

Dude, I know what milsim means. I'm just pointing out that this game is already quite milsim compared other FPS games out there. And for someone to use the term in a derogatory fashion is contradictory given how Squad is perceived within the FPS category.

[tranquil imp]

A lot of players reject that characterization of Squad.

[sick holly]

Squad is approximately as much of a milsim as battlefield 2 was a milsim

So, not much

In fact calling this game a milsim in general is a bit of a joke considering how game-ified the gamemodes and ticket system is

[tranquil imp]

For funsies tell them the Bushmaster has a dual feed system but then don't explain what it is when they ask for more AP ammo.

[bright thicket]

The fact that you think just confirms the wide divergence in player mentalities within this community. IMHO, Squad is nothing like battlefield and, in fact, is largely successful because it struck at a niche audience that has always wanted something more immersive and realistic than the average BF/CoD experience.

[sick holly]

What a joke dude, this game is literally based on a battlefield mod

[coral tundra]

niche game

[sick holly]

Go back into your arma hole

[coral tundra]

so difficult to learn squad ohhh

[bright thicket]

A mod that that was specifically developed to be more realistic and team-oriented than the base game itself...are you sure that you're aware of this game's development story?

[sick holly]

Oh yeah, but claiming that even PR is supposed to be a milsim is a stretch. And Squad is very far from PR in terms of full combined arms experience.

[tranquil imp]

I don't think the points of divergence from that mod are accidents.
They were doing things with intent when they did them.

[bright thicket]

This is a typical mentality from casual players - anyone or anything that is "milsim" belongs in Arma. The fact is that milsim is a relative term within a spectrum of game types and styles.

And for the record, I have all of 2 hours game time in Arma...it ain't my cup of tea.

[sick holly]

If you're allowed to say "Bf/CoD gamers" I'm allowed to tell you to go back to ARMA

Don't throw punches if you can't take them

[bright thicket]

I never said you were a BF/CoD gamer. I said that Squad was designed from the ground-up to be a game that offered more realism, immersion and teamwork over BF/CoD. And I merely implied that your approach to this game was more casual than how others approach this game.

Punches are all I've taken on this post. I see 10 thumbs down on a post asking for peoples' opinions - the anti ICO crowd has always been strong on this venue, and its showing here.

[tranquil imp]

He didn't say BF/CoD gamers though.
You're just being sensitive.

[sick holly]

Good lord

Reading comprehension is clearly on a downwards trend

[bright thicket]

Buddy, i never said you played CoD/BF. You getting way too offended in this discussion.

[tranquil imp]

He said the game appealed to people who want something more immersive than a BF/CoD experience.

[sick holly]

Who said I was offended? I'd have to actually have played either of those games in the last 8 years to be offended

I just think the hypocrisy is funny

[tranquil imp]

That is the opposite of calling anyone a BF/CoD gamer.

[tranquil imp]

You didn't say it but you are 100% showing it.

[sick holly]

K I'm not responding to obvious bait, find a better approach

[bright thicket]

That's fine. I think you've said enough in this thread.

[rain wigeon]

You definitely sound mad.

[deft kettle]

Lmao. Loser