Mechanic changes for Light Infantry and Air Assault

[rustic quartz]

Purpose:
To increase the light infantry and air assault sub-factions’ abilities in order to asymmetrically balance them against sub-factions with a lot of armored vehicles on most maps because, currently, they are only a decent pick on a few maps, like skorpo or lashkar, assuming team skill is about equal on both sides.

These are just some ideas on how they can be improved, but I am open for discussion on how maybe some of these would be too powerful or not powerful enough:
• Add buddy rallies or instead add an MSV, like WPMC
• Reduce build costs for HABs to 300 build
• Reduce build costs for ATGM emplacements to 200 build
• Reduce ammo cost for ATGMs to 200 ammo per missile
• Add a grenadier kit to the “direct combat roles” with irons or red dot for extra anti-infantry firepower
• Increase rifleman ammo bag capacity to 150

And for Air Assault specifically, I was thinking about giving them the ability to see the first 3 caps in RAAS and maybe invasion, which would give them enough time to set up HABs and ATGM emplacements in areas that matter. But, idk maybe it would be too powerful or maybe CAS helis, when added, would make the air assault sub-faction balanced anyways.

[scenic rain]

For Air Assault something instead/additionally of seeing caps there could be a forward deployment mechanic like in WARNO, with a forward spawn with some light vics so that this faction can actually use the advantage of knowing where the caps are.

[rustic quartz]

possibly but the forward deployment may be more advantageous for light inf since they are more reliant on light vics and air assault generally only gets 1 good vehicle at the start, an RWS vehicle.

[ripe rivet]

ATGM build should be 300 and each rocket should cost 350 or 300.
Also a forward spawn would probably be better than see 3 caps in.
Overall I like it.

[versed egret]

I'd be fine with Armored getting the MSV's, something to offset the loss of logistics/mobility that isn't super big
the double ATGM stuff needs to be removed from Airborne and given to Support
I'd love for additional starting tickets or cheaper HABs for Light Inf, Trade the MBT for better kits and ticket budget. I like the idea of additional kits
Rifleman bag buff should be a Support benefit.

Having OWI lean into more division uniqueness, having more passive gains rather than just different vehicles would be lovely, including additions or adjustments to Command Assets

Buddy rally for LI might be neat if done right

or a sorta "Super Mod" buff to rallies

[velvet mulch]

Some of these suggestions are a bit too much in my opinion, but a change like this of some kind is certainly welcome

[orchid sorrel]

see the first 3 caps in RAAS

It would be strange if air assult is stronger in RAAS compared to AAS.

With CAS the natural buff will to only give air assult CAS.

[rustic quartz]

i wouldn't mind removing the double ATGM for Light infantry and giving it to support, since Light Inf has ATGM vehicles, but air assault definitely needs them since their vehicle firepower is even worse than support. And the point of increasing the ammo bag capacity was to counteract the addition of the extra grenadier kit which would take 1 rifleman away from the squad.

[rustic quartz]

I wouldn't say this would be that much stronger in RAAS. This would just make it equally as strong in RAAS as it is in AAS currently. The advantage of air assault is the ability to move the team quickly across the map, but in RAAS you don't really know where to move quickly to, but in AAS you know exactly where to go and start setting up HABs.

[versed egret]

Thematically, giving the ammo to support makes sense
For light inf, it's a trade value just like any other squad composition

As for tows, introduction of cas and even upgrading airborne helis would be a better benefit(50cal door guns)

[finite igloo]

dont forget your past suggestion for light infantry:

• US Army - Burst M4s are replaced with full auto M4A1s and M249s should have a 200-round belt and a foregrip. As for the M72 LAW, I recommend that the M72A7 LAW stays, but serves as a first option and another AT4 kit is added.

• RGF - Half of their kits get the 1P63 sights, specifically the Medic, AT kits, and Grenadiers. In addition, some kits get to use the AKS-74U for CQC purposes.

• PLA - Half of their kits get Holographic sights or YMA600

• TLF - Light Infantry needs a HAT. In addition, the MPT-55 should be added, but only for both Air Assault and Light Infantry with sights. In other units, they are relevant, but most don't have the sights since the MPT-76 is their main.

• ADF - Right now, the ADF only has three units. Should Light Infantry be added, most or all of their kits have a sight, but they have the option to use L1A1 SLRs (Although they're semi-auto only IRL, best to give the option to use full auto for gameplay reasons) and SR-25 (Since it's used in the Australian Army). That way, the ADF have enough infantry firepower.

• All - Some Grenadier kits move to the Direct Combat role

[finite igloo]

as for the baf:

• Give some kits the option to use the L22A2 with or without a scope
• Give MP5s (The Royal Military Police CPU uses them, so technically military), the L85A3 (Since we're going modern), and the M4 MAAWS
• Better scopes (Something that the British use, but is not a 4x scope)

the problem with the brits is they're a bit too indigenous and idk what else to think of

[cedar cypress]

some of those changes for said factions are kinda out of place, the ADF has not used the L1A1 for more than 2 decades now and the MP5 isnt really used by frontline british units.

I'm all for more weapon variety for LI/AA battlegroups but at the very least they should make sense for their respective factions

[austere relic]

Depends a lot on the layer. Some layers already have perfect intel on enemy back caps with just one cap. For example Yeho RAAS v1, Team 2 always has perfect intel on Team 1's 2nd objective. Giving multiple flags at start of game makes this more exploitable across more maps.

With that kind of intel you can drop 3 squads on a back cap and be a serious thorn in their side.

[versed egret]

yeah they really need to fix that with more starting point splits =/

[austere relic]

Wouldn't hold my breath for it, unfortunately

[finite igloo]

aww, i was hoping to have a good reason to use the fn fal

it's just that the ef88 is the only rifle suitable for the adf

the m4 and hk416 are there, but only for the special forces

the l1a1 is used by the federation guard for ceremonial purposes, but i thought it'd be nice to use

[austere relic]

FN FAL already exists for several factions and isn't commonly used by conventional forces today so it wouldn't really add much

• for more AA/LI unique aspects, but most of the suggestions here miss the mark, imo.

From what I understand modern light infantry is generally unsupported and so could perhaps do with removing their tank and instead giving them more access to command units, especially airstrikes

[finite igloo]

i feel like the us army, rgf, and pla getting sights (and the us army getting full auto m4s and a 200-round box) is cuz if the purpose of light infantry is infantry combat, you're better off buffing the infantry

give them a good reason to be used

[austere relic]

eh, light infantry is basically recon infantry

ngl, sights are a pretty dumb thing to use for balance.

[winged valley]

Give light inf functional foregrips, before the ICO they actually gave a small reduction to recoil, now they're purely ornamental.

[austere relic]

They made foregrips functional again in 8.2

But all of this misses the point of what a "Light Infantry" unit is irl. They don't just get sick gear.

They do usually carry larger loads than "heavy infantry" so more ammo kind of makes sense (though tbh I feel like this is the most boring thing to give them)

[austere relic]

but really their primary purpose is to act independently, largely without support from armor, logistics, etc. Often acting as reconnaissance

IMO, removing the tank from these units should be the end goal. Ideally they should be able to sustain on their own without any real armor. 4x HATs helps them better handle armor, light vics with AGLs helps them deal with infantry. We need more especially for armor if they're intended to match up evenly against other units.

More access to commander assets makes the most sense to me right now--more access to airstrikes in particular would help shore up their difficulties dealing with heavy armor

Also the 2x ATGMs they have access to barely matter. The ATGM rework severely hampers their usability, their build and ammo costs have always been prohibitive. You basically need 1 full truckload for just the ATGMs, 500x2 build and 500x2 ammo because they don't even come loaded. Even if you can even manage to find good spots where they overlap and could fire at a single target together, the chances one misses is still fairly high wasting 500 ammo and even if successful cost you 1000 ammo.

Meanwhile, HATs can kill a tank in 3 shots and those shots only cost 240 ammo.

[rustic quartz]

Yeah, that is what I was going for with this suggestion. Lowering the cost of HABs and the ammo and build cost for ATGMs, so that you can get a HAB and a ATGM for the 500 build. And giving them buddy rallies or MSV to make them a little less reliant on HABs.

Maybe all of this is not enough, but I would say it is a move in the right direction. And certainly better than just giving them some suppressed marksmen and ZU23 emplacements. Although OWI's changes for USMC LI are at least more interesting.

[austere relic]

Yeah, I get that, I just don't think that's the best way to get there.

ATGMs just need a cost rebalance, across the board, not just for LI.

Buddy Rallies and MSVs... eh, maybe, but making Ins and WPMC less unique, and tbh doesn't really accomplish the goal of Light Infantry from an authenticity standpoint.

I don't think reducing reliance on HABs is a realistic goal, nor a necessary one. They can definitely benefit from ATGMs, AGLs, etc etc.

[rustic quartz]

maybe MSV wouldn't be a good fit for light infantry, but I would say that buddy rallies are a good fit since the idea of light infantry is not relying on a lot of logistics. and I am not saying that my goal is to heavily reduce HAB usage, just to give them more spawning options depending on the situation.

And other than my suggestion idk what else would help LI. Like your idea of more or better command call-ins is good but also probably not enough

[rustic quartz]

Also a ticket reduction for some of the light vics would help as well, but OWI doesn't seem to ever reduce ticket values unless it was unintended

[austere relic]

Well, I think the main issue for these units is their inability to stand toe to toe with any other unit, right? They don't have any form of IFV to help their infantry fight, and the late spawn tank is shoehorned in to ensure they don't just get dogwalked after the first 10 minutes getting blasted by the enemy CA MBT.

4x HATs help them against the IFVs, ATGMs were supposed to help them against armor but ultimately that fell flat. Increased airstrikes could be one way to help shore up this vulnerability they have.

IRL they'd likely have attack helicopters but obviously a little sketch to bring that into the convo

[rustic quartz]

yeah, i don't think any one change would help them. It would have to be a bunch of small changes added together, like HAB/ATGM cost reduction, increased command call-ins, buddy rallies, improved infantry kits, and light vic ticket reduction.

Like I can think of ways to make them overpowered without adding vehicles and if you can make them overpowered there has to be a balanced middle ground

[austere relic]

I don't think it's one specific change, but just changing a bunch of shit and hoping some of it sticks, while perhaps what we're used to with OWI at times, may not be the best strategy

Like, USMC LI is interesting with the new gear, but they removed the tank and what did you get for it? One TOW MATV

[rustic quartz]

well that is kind of my point and I would say it is a good strategy for balancing LI the fastest. Like if my suggested improvements are too much than just get rid of some after testing it out.

[austere relic]

ig, but we're talking about OWI. 6 months minimum for a minor balance patch.

[rustic quartz]

tbh I would rather have LI be potentially overpowered in between patches because i would guess that people would still vote for the mech, motor, armored, or CA most of the time anyway.

and at least it would encourage more people to vote LI compared to now

[austere relic]

Eh, I'm less concerned with it being OP than half of it or more being nothingburgers or diluting the flavor of the unit and of other factions by just copying existing features from others

[rustic quartz]

I guess we will just agree to disagree. I don't see a problem with other factions getting buddy rallies or MSVs as long as it helps balance them.

[austere relic]

Yes, we can agree to disagree. My point is moreso that just throwing these things at the wall to make them "stronger" on paper doesn't make them compelling or unique to play for me.

Having an MSV is obviously stronger than not having an MSV, but is that really the thing that makes "Light Infantry" light infantry? ...idk about that

[rustic quartz]

Yeah, the suggestions in this thread are more focused on balance. And some of my other suggestions are more focused on making them a little more unique and intriguing (2 examples):
https://discord.com/channels/91294111071469568/1316812048742486086
https://discord.com/channels/91294111071469568/1328504787750223882

[austere relic]

Yaya. We are on the same side here just different opinions on how.

[rustic quartz]

maybe not the current M113 MSV since that is a tracked armored vic, but it could just be a light vic instead or something

[versed egret]

Double hab used to be an insurgent only feature

I think we can incorporate some across divsions

I do 100% agree with the migration away from MBT for every division as the ultra unit

If we buff ATGMs by reducing cost across the board, they need to be more easily destroyed

Too often I've hit an emplacement with HE or a direct sabo and all I did was knock the top off instead of completely removing it

Especially when they tank four, five, , six shots

[austere relic]

Of course, good point--but it doesn't mean we also need to nab buddy rallies, as well as MSV from WPMC.

I'm not saying there's zero room for these things to be reused, but more that I wouldn't want to see them just cannabalized for the sake of making them stronger on paper without any consideration if it actually enhances their "goal" as a unit

[versed egret]

I'm more in favor of giving Armored divisions the MSV, and letting WPMC have it for every division(just like Double hab is for every MEI division even though they have a Support Division)

[austere relic]

MSV M7A3 Bradley 🧠

[versed egret]

I think the power of LI should be better kits, proliferated with LVs, and Rapid disbursement of emplacements(extra TOWs and prob cheaper)

having extra passives as can be a nice thing, Diff command abilities per division would be a nice thing(with standard, faction universals), and I think extra start/cap tickets for them would be neat(one or the other, both seem OP)

[orchid sorrel]

Light infantry carry more out of necessity not that heavy infantry can't carry more. Light probably have to carry sleeping bags and food while heavy leave it in the APC.

Heavy with 20kg equipment probably runs faster than light with 50kg equipment.

[scenic rain]

You dont go into combat with your full equipment. Both would carry a similar weight in combat.

[austere relic]

Yes. I believe they also carry more ammunition for similar reasons.

At least, when appropriate. Like deploying via helicopter in mountainous terrain, where they aren’t able to do the same with light vehicles.

But like I said, kind of a boring buff. Another rally, another 2 standard AT launchers. Useful maybe, but not very exciting.

[pastel tiger]

Maybe airborne can get a flying spawn point like an osprey? Sorta like how the pmcs have the vehicle fob

(Sorry if I’m using wrong terminology)

[rustic quartz]

Then what do you think OWI could added that would be exciting?

[pastel tiger]

POV helicopter flying near mountains (ZSU go brrrrrrrrrt)

(I have 100 hrs in game 75 of which is being a pilot)

I hate zsu with a passion

I love hopping in gunners seat to Swiss cheese them

[scenic rain]

1-2 more LATs could make a difference.

[austere relic]

Enhanced Airstrikes and Artillery is the clearest idea to me. Airstrikes help compensate for the lack of their own armor, artillery compensates for the lack of IFVs. Thematically I believe this also fits with the modern mission of light infantry acting as recon and forward observers.

Technically CAS including attack helicopters would thematically fit as well, though it would be a little odd to steal air assault’s thunder there.

I’ve been trying to think of something to model one of the real world benefits of light infantry, being their low profile compared to mechanized infantry. A good answer for this stumps me as of yet but additional spawn mechanics as you’ve mentioned almost scratch that itch.

[austere relic]

Didn’t say it wouldn’t. It’s just not very big or flashy. As a small change amongst a group, sure.

[rustic quartz]

Yeah, like I said I am not against the idea, but for me it doesn't really bring a lot of excitement either. And again neither does my initial suggestion, this is mainly just trying to find ways to balance LI/AA to make these sub-factions played more often to have more overall variety in the game. And things that would bring me excitement, would be better infantry equipment, like javelins/portable ATGMS that were teased by OWI and just better infantry weapons compared to the other sub-units.

[austere relic]

Better infantry equipment is whatever. Not all LI factions are going to have applicable gear for that. USMC update was fun, down for more examples of that, but that's a specific example of modernized kit being transitioned

More sophisticated heavy AT options is a plus, for sure. Javelins would be interesting to see as a limited asset on LI, though I know balance is one of the things holding that back

[rustic quartz]

well i don't mean just new weapons but different types of weapons and better kit availability

[austere relic]

ATGM emplacements need to be rebalanced across the board, but this will automatically buff LI/AA as any reduction to their cost immediately makes their 2x ATGM per FOB bonus more viable.

[austere relic]

Yeah--I get that, but not every country fields the Mikor MGL, you know?

Heavy Grenadier is a great addition to USMC LI. Similar kits in other factions would be cool, but just slapping the MGL everywhere doesn't make sense either.

[rustic quartz]

i guess i am mainly thinking about my suggestion for anti-structure rockets and stuff like that since every country in-game has that type of weapon. https://discord.com/channels/91294111071469568/1316812048742486086

[austere relic]

Yeah, I don't disagree with that being an option. Though we can't really model their effects well in Squad today.

[rustic quartz]

maybe not the thermobaric to its IRL capability but you could have the damage go through walls, like i suggested in that thread

which don't grad rockets currently do that?

[austere relic]

They might, but it's certainly not very reliable. Yeah, it can definitely be approximated with an explosion on the other side of the surface. I'm unsure how much payoff it would have, rarely do I think I come across opportunities where such a weapon would net me more than a single kill.

At least if destruction was able to be implemented you could be making new holes to fire or enter through regardless of its killing potential. But just as a killing weapon it seems like it would probably not be very strong.

Especially given a grenadier can already do the same thing if a window exists and they get like 10+ of those compared to a LAT carrying one anti-structure round.

[rustic quartz]

obviously depends on the map, but I feel like any time I have RPG frag rounds I am always trying to put that rocket though windows to kill infantry. And with the AS rockets you don't have to worry about missing or needing a window to shoot through

[austere relic]

Sure. But it makes enough sense to carry 2 pencils with you. Makes a bit less sense to carry around multiple AT4 launchers though

I can definitely see it working and being useful! I just think it might also be pretty limited

[rustic quartz]

yeah they could just be like 20 ammo per shot, so you need at least some teamwork with a rifleman or vic to spam shots

[austere relic]

Yeah. Could be it's own kit in the same class as heavy grenadier, not overlapping with LAT requirements. Kind of like how IMF grenadier has an RPG with only frag rounds. They would get launcher(s) with these "Fragmentation Plus" rounds.

Not against it.

[rustic quartz]

yeah exactly and this is part of why I wanted to increase ammo bag capacity because these extra kits will take away from the number of rifleman per squad

so each squad still has a decent amount of ammo

[austere relic]

Ye, not against that one either.

I don't know if it's strictly necessary, you'd just swap like an MG/AR/Marksman/normal grenadier out for this if you're planning to do a lot of urban fighting where something like that would come in handy

As long as the ammo cost isn't prohibitive I think it's fine. Standard grenadier rounds are already only like 10 or less.

[orchid sorrel]

Thats kind of my point light infantry shouldn't have more gear in combat.

[rustic quartz]

yeah 40mm is 7 ammo per shot

[austere relic]

The only thing being suggested was a larger ammo bag for riflemen which I do think is reasonable from an authenticity standpoint. Nobody suggesting they carry more mags, frags, etc.

Yeah, anti-structure rounds being like 10 or something close is fine IMO as they're kind of a side-grade to normal grenadier and you would also have to more frequently retrieve extra rounds from an ammo source whereas grens can just carry a bajillion of them on them.

tbh though enhanced commander assets should be exciting to everyone. It's one of the greatest assets your team has and it's available to every unit. Making it more varied for LI would be super useful and who doesn't love hearing the A10?

It doesn't just have to be a reduced timer either. I'd love to see a general overhaul of cmd assets similar to Sq44s, and one thing we could nab from that is having multiple distinct air assets on their own timer, like 2 seperate A10 call-ins which could be used in conjunction or spread out.

[rustic quartz]

is it cool? yes. But I don't think any one is gonna be screaming "pick top right" for some extra brrts, but maybe i'm wrong.

[austere relic]

It would seriously, seriously impact their viability, imo.

Like, it's the one thing we've discussed this far that would actually make removing the tank from the unit a possibility.

(Pub servers probably don't use commander assets enough. They're stupid powerful and you should make sure every game has a commander just for the assets tbh)

[rustic quartz]

maybe but i also think that would be too cheesy. Like just tracking/immobilizing all their armor and instantly calling in airstrike just feels kind of lame without much counterplay besides just not getting hit in the first place

but i guess that depends on how many more strikes we are talking about

[austere relic]

Well, if you think that, you would think it of how it works currently--but I assure you, it's not a zero counterplay asset.

First, you must consider that immobilization requires ground AT to begin with, thus requiring ✨ teamwork ✨. Second, there's a considerable delay from call-in to strike, and you also have to consider that a lot of the time there is a delay before that as the commander may have to launch UAV to get their own mark or get an SL in position to mark it as well.

[rustic quartz]

yeah i guess, maybe if they made tracking vehicles not as easy as it is right now

[austere relic]

I don't think anything needs to change in that regard.

[rustic quartz]

like making the hitbox the track itself and not like half the side profile

[austere relic]

The hitbox is the track, but it also includes the track beneath the skirt.

You can see it distinctly on squadarmor

[rustic quartz]

i'm talking about all that empty space in between the tracks

[austere relic]

I don't think that would be a very healthy change.

There's no reason to make infantry AT's job even harder!

Airstrikes are not a zero counterplay asset

[rustic quartz]

well i agree that AT's job is hard, I mainly play HAT/LAT, but tracking vehicles is brain dead easy

[austere relic]

Experienced servers know to keep track of their usage and know that getting tracked can put a timer on your head. People will check for UAVs, they will focus on getting their repairs up quickly to move out of strike range including getting another vehicle to drop off a crewman to help them repair.

I don't think that there's any value or realism in making tracking vehicles any harder than it is currently.

Having two airstrikes doesn't even really change this dynamic! It's still going to have the same delays that can allow an experienced and fast reacting crew to get out of danger quickly

The main thing it opens up is the ability to actually use those airstrikes, rather than holding onto them specifically for the enemy tank. This means that in the right situations it might even make sense to airstrike particularly obnoxious IFVs (assuming you get infantry to mobility kill it)

[rustic quartz]

yeah twice as many strikes would probably be fine

and then just keep the cool down of UAVs the same so they can't use it for every strike

[austere relic]

Yeah, absolutely. Still requires teamwork, at the bare minimum an AT on the ground to track, but also could require an SL to send the request

[rustic quartz]

so they need other SLs to have LoS on the target itself for the extra strikes