#More ICO tweaks please

1 messages · Page 3 of 1

polar mica
tranquil basin
#

They don't want people to think outside the box trying new things.

#

They want everyone to play the way they intended the game to be played.

vale elbow
#

hab overrun and ICO are the clearest design examples of wanting to pigeonhole players

tranquil basin
#

You made message 2000

polar mica
#

j*b

vale elbow
#

i'm touching grass real quick

tranquil basin
vale elbow
#

only 11 more days until Broken Arrow is released, then i can spend my time playing that game instead of reading this forsaken thread

tranquil basin
#

I'm waiting for that pirate game

broken socket
#

also lest we forget trying to nerf rushing in a weird way that actually makes rushing more effective if its successful. an OWI classic move. #Jasonbourne meta

vale elbow
#

i remember the original implementation of the combat engineer, watching bill crawl through the fields of chora with c4 in his hand on the twitch VOD. somehow there was no foresight to how one kit alone being capable of assassinating FOBs would be a problem

broken socket
#

The games called Squad except for you Billy for you the game is called Metal Gear Solid, heres a brick of c4 good luck.

#

Anyway boys Mario Kart Worlds done dling. see yall tommorow on the push to 3k responses grind

vale elbow
#

3k is aiming too low, i think we can reach 5k before UE5 causes a storm that buries us

tranquil basin
#

It's kinda funny, first nerf was c4 not being able to fully kill radio. CEs learnt to dig alittle after placing c4. Good CEs would count to 10 before digging to give defenders less time to react.

tranquil basin
vale elbow
#

well those people can now elect to disable PiP and have a black screen instead

tranquil basin
vale elbow
#

PiP just wasn't worth the hassle

#

same shit as forcing distance shadows

tranquil basin
#

Navigating through buildings while ADS is worse with black screen, but you are better off stationary with a scope anyways

vale elbow
#

stick to vehicles, then you don't have to choose between going back in time or losing 50% of your frames when you ADS

tranquil basin
#

Shooting with 140 frames does feel better than shooting with 50 frames

sly crown
#

Jesus H Christ Bill, could you not have summarized?

#

Rushes still happen in modern AAS and Fogless RAAS you goober

#

Why are you describing a match in which your team was pressured to break equilibrium as a counter to my point that RAAS doesn’t pressure either side to break equilibrium?

#

idk bill that rant was a waste of both of our times you completely missed the mark

merry flame
#

Would you say the 30% reduction to inf movement speed, or 20 ticket radios had any influence? Me thinks yea but I could be wrong

broken socket
sly crown
#

Ain’t nobody glazed shit Billy

broken socket
#

Owi bought to set movespeed yo 0.5 ms and ho.ies still gonna b like raas

sly crown
#

Saying RAAS bad sure does not mean Invasion good

#

Wack argument my guy

#

It doesn’t even mean ICO or HAB overrun or radio cost or anything good

#

Turtle meta is both sides doing nothing

#

The scenario you described is one team holding their position as they believe it to be superior and another crashing against that. That’s fine. That’s Squad. It’s a game, and its not supremely fucking boring.

#

Do you disagree that RAAS encourages both sides turtling when even or believe that this is something we should actually desire?

broken socket
#

Nah I'm just saying you glazing all the other factors that contribute turtle Meta being a reality is weird and there's no reason for not fixing em

sly crown
#

That’s not what I’m saying Bill

#

There will always be scenarios where one team will act as a defender. That’s natural when you know you have an advantage whether that be in objectives, tickets, terrain, shooters, or some combination thereof

#

I would absolutely agree with you that there have been changes over time that have made it quite difficult to unseat defenders

#

I don’t think there’s no reason to change that dynamic. I think R/AAS does end up frequently stalemating and would love to see changes to encourage more back and forth with objectives

#

Make sense? Put away the strawmen

#

I just wouldn’t call this “defender meta”. Maybe you do and that’s why you’re confused on my stance

broken socket
#

? What's defender meta there's kill meta and objective meta as the two poles with the meta of the game settling nearer or at one pole at any given time.

sly crown
#

idk bruv but you were just making shit up about what I thought

#

You tell me what dumbass idea got in that noggin

tranquil basin
#

Lets be real, the most immersive mode is neither raas, aas, tc, invasion or conquest it's insurgency. I haven't seen it played since voting were added.

Also everyone knows voting is lame. It's like waiting in line no one likes that.

sly crown
#

Insurgency barely qualifies as a real gamemode in its current state

#

It’s not feasible to do voting for due to factions not being set up to work on it, issues with cache spawning, and lack of mechanics that made it good to begin with

broken socket
#

? This is wut u said tho

#

That's glazing

broken socket
#

also top kek on this self report

broken socket
# sly crown You tell me what dumbass idea got in that noggin

What Paow said is actually correct doe. He says they made the ICO to give more time and that's true. But as we all know there's two eternally warring metas in Squad the Objective meta and the Kill meta. Purity of Objective form is when every waking moment is spent working to capture the objective with 0 time for flanks power. Changes that help players push objectives like lower respawn time, offensive action abilities, and equal footing in engagements help the objective meta be strong. As a result the value of the individual infantryman life is meaningless and only a tool to make the flag turn from white to blue. The sworn enemy kill meta is the polar opposite. All effort taken must be in some way related to eliminating an enemy of some variety. The soldiers life is paramount and only thrown away if something more value can be eliminated with the sacrifice. Kill meta favors the slow drawn out games where objective progress is slow, and chance to farm and rake in kills is high. Ticket bleed must be eliminated as if it's too high people can throw their lives away and win by playing the objective which is a horrid concept. Furthermore offensive actions are to be curtailed as offense = objectives are involved and if offensive infantry is too powerful they might be able to take an objective which is no bueno. In the kill meta Objectives are merely places to centralize the killing and worth losing at any time if the payoff from losing it is high enough. Fog of war is another classic kill meta boon not even knowing where the objectives are for the first few minutes encourages more based killing first strategy. Every change to the game helps one of the two metas and harms the other. Every nerf to offensive infantry IE infantry that by definition needs to move and be active is a benefit for the kill meta. If one wants to achieve Objective Meta nirvana, one can't go in with half measures they gotta commit in all aspects.

#

calling it the defense metas just not really 100% because Defense isn't a requirement it's just something that happens as a result of doing whatever is the best way to get kills.

sly crown
#

This is baby brain stuff here Bill

broken socket
#

"but the turtle meta is quite straightforwardly only a RAAS problem." I just had a big long rant about how this wasn't the case tho

#

you can have a turtle meta AAS layer

#

even in the version that have 4x higher bleed

#

turtle metas just an inherent problem to the AAS design in general with no way to incentize pushing "the next flag" There's no feasible way to tell someone who's already winning to go win more which is where it breaks down

sly crown
#

You just described something that wasn't turtle meta

broken socket
#

?

sly crown
#

Everything you're discussing is situations in which, during ticket equilibrium, one team is incentivized to disturb the balance

#

RAAS has a unique problem where when two teams are at ticket equilibrium and neither team has a distinct advantage that would allow them to steamroll, that neither team is incentivized to make an assault

#

If one team kills a radio and caps up to third flag and one caps up to midcap, the optimal move at this point is to play for attrition until you have that distinct advantage like by wiping out armor

broken socket
#

that's not unique to raas tho like I was sayin Kohat v1 in Alpha Version 9 the version with 4 ticket bleed a second was a pretty infamous Turtle meta layer, large open hills, only APCs with long range .50 cals. And prevalent mortars meant a whole lot of hull down .50s raking exposed INF and very turtly slow strats. The only part of that story was that even though that was the "meta" of the map, objective meta allowed me the player to try a desperate risk to pull out an objective W, because if we got the cap, the bleed would make up for the ticket losses we knew we would incur. The higher success rate strat there was just to get gooder at attrition warfare, but my boyz were terrible at that so I was just working with what I had. If I was followin meta we woulda settled in for a good ol fashioned ass whupping from mumblerines shooters and mortars.

sly crown
#

How do you not understand what I'm saying

#

You're literally arguing my point for me Bill

broken socket
#

you're sayin its a RAAS unique problem but it's an AAS core concept that forces that stuff

sly crown
#

You think you're disagreeing but your argument fundamentally supports mine

broken socket
#

At its most basic in any AAS game mode RAAS or not doesn't matter there's 0 incentive to ever push into anything you are not forced to push into without losing advantage. IE 5 flag layers you're forced to push into those or at least find a way to get to the equilibrium somehow. That's because attacking even in the most favorable of positions attacking will be ticket negative and once you go negative you're the attacker. That's not RAAS specific tho bro

#

That's just how ASS works

#

the only difference worth discussing is the difference in the game between objective meta and kill meta. Objective meta tries to find ways to make attacking worth it anyway even though it's not a winning strategy in the game mode.

#

Kill meta just accepts the primordial truth of defense being superior and leans into it.

#

It's like RAAS is a variant of Kraft Mac and Cheese that adds some spices and seasonings, but it's not those extra spices and seasonings that are raising your blood pressure it's the latent high sodium content in the base mac and cheese that's doin that.

sly crown
#

I don't know how you still don't understand Bill but you keep rambling about nothing that has to do with what I'm telling you

#

your own argument supports mine

broken socket
#

well the only thing wrong with what you're saying is you think it's some intrinsic thing linked to RAAS

#

which is really weird.

#

In what ways does AAS not have the exact same design problems as RAAS

#

is a better way to go about this

sly crown
#

AAS incurs bleed as soon as one team controls any flag on the other's side of the lattice

#

Is this not obvious?

#

Each side has incentives despite the losses to assault

broken socket
#

That doesn't actually encourage attacking though since the safer way to play the game is still to defend. The higher winning % chance is still with the safest option which is defend. The -1 tickets per a flag is a pitifully small amount tbh. Even when it was higher in V9 we still had turtle layers where attacking was too low success rate to be worth the risk.

#

The only thing that encourages attacking as a winning strategy is odd flag layers since it's forced

#

Right say I post my 30 dudes up on my defense flag in AAS, you attack in, all it takes is your first attack failing and you've now thrown the lead and are the attacker for the rest of the game where your chances of winning are sub 50% because we have whats supposed to be symmetrical levels of equipment but i get to defend with mine and you have to attack.

#

Now imagine you've decided to play comp and are winning based on your ticket total, your best option after that failed attack is to go back to your defense flag sit there and hope I give you tickets to even it up, because if you attack again and don't win you've just dug yourself an even bigger hole.

#

Now pause the track again, I've just introduced an update that nerfs attacking infantry and makes your chance of a successful attack even less.

#

AAS is the exact same as RAAS, OWI just gaslights you with -1 tickets a minute that will never be the decider in the match

sly crown
#

are we drinking silly juice this early bill

broken socket
#

?

#

whats up

sly crown
#

I don't know how to explain this to you but you're completely off on your own tangent

broken socket
#

?

#

7 flag standardized raas? IDK i dont play RAAS

#

so we've agreed turtle meta isn't a problem exclusive to RAAS since AAS can do the same things now because -1 bleed ain't shit?

sly crown
#

It's the gentlest of tipped scales, but the scales are still tipped against you in that case

#

doesn't make it the ideal value

broken socket
#

Yeah but again even though to OWIs credit there's more odd flag layers in the AAS archives then i remembered there's some some even flag layers, and there's definitely a few layers in there that are prime for some turtlage.

#

AAS can do it to, just like I said odd flag layers force the aggression since you'd opt into a bad position otherwise.

sly crown
#

and meanwhile raas odd flag layers don't force you

#

if third flag is easier to defend than midcap is to attack, no brainer to turtle on raas

#

-1 bleed is obviously not quite anything but it's still forces equilibrium to be disrupted in this

broken socket
#

well probably because the only thing worse than -1 bleed per second is a flat +20 and a pat on the back

#

If the mid flag on RAAS was +100 there'd probably be a lot more forced

#

that's just a numbers thing champ

sly crown
#

If you're going to ask me whether I want more or less bleed than I think the answer should be obvious

#

No shit?

broken socket
#

point is as were still talking about for some reason you can have a turtle meta on both

sly crown
#

That's been my entire point

broken socket
#

its not RAAS exclusive

#

RAAS is more turtle friendly is its numbers

#

but it's doesnt have a monopoly on slog gameplay

sly crown
#

This is such a goofy pedantic argument, your whole point supports mine

broken socket
#

"but the turtle meta is quite straightforwardly only a RAAS problem. It is not a problem in AAS" But it doesn't tho

sly crown
#

It is

#

This is stupid

broken socket
#

if your sentence has been "The turtle meta is more of a problem in RAAS, and a lesser one in AAS" as one might expect from a man of nuance. I'd totally 100% agree with you.

sly crown
#

-1 bleed exists in AAS, tips the scales one way or another

#

1 hour of -1 bleed is still an additional -60 compared to your opponent

#

equilibrium is not possible

#

think mark think

broken socket
#

depends on how much was costed to gain -1

#

You can throw more than 60 in an attack to gain somethin if you're just full bore tempoing

sly crown
#

No it doesn't

#

If you are in equilibrium you are just down net 60 over an hour game

#

The only cost dependent thing is whether your assault is successful and changes that

#

You are still incentivized to assault overall

broken socket
#

As strat man of FFO I can with 100% assuredness tell you it is 100% possible to gain control of a flag and lose more than 100 tickets in the process.

#

OP FL Whitefox match will forever live in testament to that.

#

The balance lies in how often is your assault successful enough to justify the cost. If that number is over 50% objective meta basedado. If its under 50% you're playing losing strats and are prob gonna fail the tournament.

sly crown
#

Bill

#

everything you are saying

#

is 100% irrelevant

broken socket
#

? nope

sly crown
#

I don't know how to get through to you that you are making an argument that has literally nothing to do with what I am saying

#

zero

#

nada

#

nothing

broken socket
#

If I have a video game where I can attack a point and gain -1 bleed from doing so. But I only emerge in a winning position 25% of the time due to ticket losses incurred in the assault, there is not an incentive to attack.

sly crown
#

And how do you think that math works out without such incentives?

#

This is such an indecipherable conversation Bill

broken socket
#

Here's a great example actually. Starcraft analogy but so so relevant. In Starcraft 2 T v Z . It's commonplace for zergs to occasionally roll 20+ Banelings into a planetary fortress. Now mathematically this will usually cost more resources if rolling into bases with a little bit of defence but it'll still likely kill the pf bare minimum. This gives the zerg a tempo edge, by reducing Terran income, and if they can do this successfully enough, and enough times they can starve the Terran out and overwhelm them. However if they blunder elsewhere and lose too much material and can't close the game out. This expenditure becomes a negative, and they will mine out their finite amount of resources first, and eventually lose a long drawn out cross map position when they run out of money first. Exact same thing happens in Squad. I attack, I gain the flag but I am now locked into holding the flag for long enough to make up the deficit I am now in while assaulting. And it's perfectly possible that over the nature course of attrition that I could potentially come up short before the flag pays off.

#

You say AAS has bleed so is incentivized but in order for the incentive to be incentive it needs to pay off more often than it does not, that's basic ehvynomics my guy. If it doesn't pay off more often attacking is a losing effort.

sly crown
#

You're completely arguing a point besides

#

I'm not oblivious to the fact that assaulting generally comes with a loss

#

That has absolutely nothing to do with the point I'm making

broken socket
#

"You are still incentivized to assault overall"

sly crown
#

Yes, you are.

broken socket
#

You are not incentivized if assaulting leads to a loss more than it does a victory.

sly crown
#

Consistent losses from turtling results in an incentive to assault

broken socket
#

That's really simple idk how to break it down further that that.

#

I play you in a scrimmage 100 times. We play AAS. I attack every time. 30 Times I gain the flag and win due to bleed. 70 Times I do not gain the flag and have a ticket deficit, so you win the game.

#

In this hypothetical I am not incentivized to attack because I now lose more often.

#

The only time I am incentivized to attack is if I win 51 times.

sly crown
#

🤦

#

No shit sherlock

#

Your argument is irrelevant, not hard to understand

broken socket
#

It's not irrelevant tho

#

Because your argument is prediated on the assumption that attacking will lead to victory more often than not, because if it doesn't lead to victory it leads to defeat.

#

And if attacking leads to defeat more often than not, it ain't good

sly crown
#

Yes, it is. You're just assigning arbitrary percentages to the success rate of assaults without even considering the result of not doing so

broken socket
#

and you ain't incentivized to do it.

sly crown
#

This is completely irrelevant

#

You're just arguing past me and I'm still trying to get you to read your map and turn around

#

If your teams are in equilibrium, even a -1 bleed incentivizes attack.

#

Simple as.

broken socket
#

The only time the result of not doing so factors in, is if you know for a fact you'll lose in attrition. This is relevant in practice in games, but not in hypothetical since if you know you will lose in attrition, you're likely a weaker team and are searching for ways to improve your chances of winning ergo, the skill levels are not even so it's not a good place to judge anything.

sly crown
#

This is not a hard concept to grasp, you can do it Bill

#

If your chance of loss with a -1 ticket bleed is 80% and your chance of loss by assaulting is 70% which is more optimal move

#

If you want me to say that incentives should be higher, you'll happily find me agreeing

#

You just aren't understanding my point at all

#

Throwing up strawmen to fill your gaps in understanding

broken socket
#

Well using that logic I'm going to assume the enemy has an equal 70% chance of losing by assaulting which means the optimal move is to defend since I win 70% of the time. Unless you're saying the enemy is better than me in which case I'll probably yolo my guys at Malak Abad like I said.

#

Which is it, does the enemy have a 70% chance to lose by assaulting too? Or am I facing the mumblerines.

sly crown
#

I'm telling you they are in equilibrium

#

Do you understand the word or wha

broken socket
#

So they have a 70% chance to lose assaulting, so I defend.

#

As it wins more.

sly crown
#

You're really dim today Bill

#

Defending is a normal action in Squad. The problem we have is not that people are defending.

#

The problem, that again, is largely specific to RAAS and no other gamemode, is that when the two teams are in equilibrium the winning move for both is to not attack.

#

Even with a piddly -1 AAS bleed, if teams are in equilibrium, you are still incentivized to attack, as you will naturally just lose if all else remains the same and attrition hits both sides roughly equally.

broken socket
#

? Yeah of course if you're losing in AAS you're incentivized to attack of course. Bro I'm talking about even flag layers here which exist in AAS where neither side are incentivized to attack lol.

#

I think you missed that part.

#

It's kinda an important part.

#

Also again even in odd flag layers whether you are incentivized to attack all depends on the tickets expended by the winners and the time duration of the match.

#

In a hypothetical match where you fight over flag 3, and lose it but after the flag swing, you're still up 80 tickets and you don't think the games gonna go 80 minutes, you're not incentivized to attack.

sly crown
#

Again, one side defending is not the problem

broken socket
#

It's all relevant to the numbers in that case.

sly crown
#

If ticket math is working in your favor of course you hold onto that advantage

broken socket
#

and that advantage could include not attacking down a flag

#

it generally doesn't tho since we don't have ghosters or map hacks to tell us but if you had an accountant that added shit up hyper good could be possible

#

maybe you wipe like 6 fobs and know your 100 tickets up

sly crown
#

You're correct that even numbered AAS layers have more of a stalemate situation when both sides own each of their flags on their side of the lattice, but the math is STILL more in your favor to assault than RAAS because there is also ticket bleed on top of the flag cap tickets.

#

RAAS is uniquely bad in this regard

#

And the most popular mode by far, so the most commonly experienced form of this both-sides-turtling

#

Odd flags good, sure

broken socket
#

Yeah but in your favour doesn't mean RAAS is alone in the problem. Of course RAAS where bleed doesn't exist and the benefit for owning mid flag is next to nothing will have more turtling on average. If we compared game count to game count. I've never argued that RAAS isn't more turtle friendly. My only nit pick is that turtling isn't a RAAS exclusive problem and can crop up depending on circumstance elsewhere.

#

Since it's just something thats baked into AAS design.

sly crown
#

I have said it before I'll say it one more time, if ticket math is in your favor obviously you hold onto that advantage and that can mean defending

broken socket
#

In Equilibrium so neither side has an advantage correct?

sly crown
#

Defending is not a problem in squad

#

Yes

#

You are expecting roughly equal tickets and roughly equal attrition from shooters etc

#

Even numbered flag layouts in AAS are worse than Odd, we can agree on this

broken socket
#

If neither side has an advantage, we need to know the answer to the equation average % chance of success for an attack to break equilibrium and average % chance that attack results in a winning position.

sly crown
#

When comparing the same exact odd lane on AAS and RAAS, though, the RAAS layer does provide far more occurrences of this both-sides-defending turtle meta

broken socket
#

If attacking gives a result that is preferable more than 50% of the time it's incentivized.

#

If attacking gives a result that isn't over 50% it isn't.

sly crown
#

If you are suffering equal losses from attrition even a -1 bleed is putting you in the 100% loss territory

broken socket
#

we're at equilibrium no one is bleeding

sly crown
#

Obviously that's hard to account for in game, but conceptually

#

Oh boy.

#

Everything else is in equilibrium, Bill

broken socket
#

so one team owns flag 3 and one does not

sly crown
#

If one side has bleed and no distinct advantage, what do you think their options are?

broken socket
#

One team is bleeding ok then. cool

#

Ticket counts are even

sly crown
#

Holy we've gotten to the very first step of my argument 😭

broken socket
#

that means that Team 1 or whichever team captured the middle flag captured the flag without cost

#

and are in a winning position

sly crown
#

Yes. And the other has taken an equivalent amount of tickets. Let's call it a radio kill

broken socket
#

but thats after they attacked

#

So our question becomes how often does Team 1 succesfully attack

sly crown
#

Team 1: 200 starting +20x4 for neutral caps -20 radio
Team 2: 200 starting +20x3 for neutral caps

broken socket
#

If they only succesfully attack 30% of the time then turtle meta is still preferable.

#

Hey they won an attack and won the match

#

They still have a losing record.

#

I guess that's why your argument is flawed is because it doesn't start from the beginning of the match it assumes something

sly crown
#

In this situation AAS gives a very clear incentive to Team 2 to create an assault

broken socket
#

Yeah we always knew that

sly crown
#

Bill I'm simplifying it for you

broken socket
#

But that's only relevant after the assault has taken place.

sly crown
#

There are a LOT of RAAS games that end up in this position

#

This isn't the only way to get there, just an obvious scenario

broken socket
#

It doesn't matter if team 2 is in a losing position after an assault an is incentivized to attack.

#

The only thing that matters is how often team 2 ends up in that losing position after their initial decision in game.

sly crown
#

Nobody knows the true ticket math so they're going based off of their best accountant guesses that they are in equilibrium

broken socket
#

Because like Team 1 didn't start the game off winning.

sly crown
#

oh boy

broken socket
#

They had to do something to start winning

sly crown
#

we're off the rails already

#

This is enough

broken socket
#

So the question is, that thing they did to start winning the game.

sly crown
#

I'm going to go reclaim my peace

broken socket
#

Do they do it often enough.

#

the initial problem we had is that I assumed equilibrium meant an equal starting position. IE no bleed, roughly same map coverage.

#

Took awhile to get to the part where you mentioned team 1 was winning the game.

cloud bison
#

Basically every single AAS layer in the game will have natural advantages to one side or the other that gives them early midcap control

broken socket
#

true

cloud bison
#

There are no perfectly balanced AAS layers

#

Assuming that one team will capture the midpoint is just normal

broken socket
#

thats fair I was just gettin into the theory of it, the mystical land where a perfectly balanced AAS layer exists

#

in practice yes you are correct

cloud bison
#

Both teams rollout to midcap -> one team wins fight slightly -> caps mid -> ticket bleed ensues

sly crown
#

The point is you don’t need a mythically balanced RAAS lane

#

The conditions for turtling both teams are almost always present

broken socket
sly crown
#

If your ticket math is coming up even, turtle

broken socket
#

since without even flag layers existing nvvy wins the argument

sly crown
#

You are correct that even AAS layers also suffer a similar problem I can agree

broken socket
#

even though yes i know aidan you're gonna be like uhm actually even in even flag layers there is a certain bias towards side 1

sly crown
#

Though even minor amounts of bleed is an improvement over the RAAS version of the problem

cloud bison
#

Well, they don't exist, and even if they did it would just come down to player skill and rng in fights/movement

broken socket
#

alright we made it "RAAS has an exclusive turtle problem" defeated

#

gg

#

back to mario kart

sly crown
#

Regardless the original argument was that this meta is not influenced by ICO so it being another gamemode that suffers from it for same reasons is a win lol

#

We’ve just been on this winding road so long you forgot Bill

cloud bison
#

Yeah I don't know what the point of this is

#

Core game ticket mechanics > ICO influences?

#

Yes- end discussion

sly crown
#

That’s exactly my thinking

#

ICO can still be bad. Gamemode mechanics are worse.

cloud bison
#

You'd have to be an idiot and/or the ICO design team to think otherwise

broken socket
#

Also it is important 2 note on the pub level the meta do be set by average Joe's. So you shunt brave objective fighting Chad's too hard or entice immersionlords with gas station tow fobs on talil, you will get what ya sow.

frosty gull
#

But I think hab proxy helps ameliorate by making it harder to extend fights (and by extension ticket costs) for attackers.

broken socket
# frosty gull But I think hab proxy helps ameliorate by making it harder to extend fights (and...

True but double edged ehvy. More overrun more distance required for safe attack fob less tempi. Certainly once you win the fight and get to the hab the fight ends sooner. The biggest thing would be the increased area defense is required to cover. For defending the hab, but at the same time one could say overrun gives an earlier alarm bell to defenders so it's hard to say one way or the other

frosty gull
#

There are already reasons to defend that wider area already (keeping people from locking down the exits to your hab). Turning off the hab by proximity just means the flow of reinforcements (and associated ticket drain) can't be shut off without having a guy sitting inside shooting people who materialize in front of him, while another guy digs it down. And that defenders can stall inside of an exceptionally complex or hard to attack hab.

sly crown
#

Mechanics already support a spread defense beyond overrun

#

I often play pubs anchoring a fob on midcap. Usually as command around the HAB itself and spreading my 9 man to cover as much ground as possible on the flanks of the blueberry trickle off the HAB.
It’s advantageous because it provides earlier alert allowing the squad to shift to meet them as they enter. This can result in us immediately overrunning attack radios because we had audio on the truck very early.
If the HAB gets overrun and I can’t clear it, I can alamo with any bluebs until my squad can return from the inner fob radius. If they’re cut off from retreat, the rally provides another angle they can enter from.

#

The gameplay you described still works, with some alteration. Alamoing everyone on the HAB building has always been a faux pas.

Changing respawn mechanics the way you suggest only increases the difficulty of clearing the HAB itself, but a competent squad pulling this defense is just stronger

#

So if you want to shake up a defender-sided attrition-based ticket meta then this seems to go against your own goals.

broken socket
#

Wait what chapter are we on now

sly crown
#

Half Blood Prince pt 1

#

I’m just not sure what you think changing overrun improves here. Spread defense is already mechanically superior

broken socket
#

Not a whole lot just extends those firefighter so paow agrees it good 2 v 1 game on

#

But also is just logically consistent, not a fan of a group trying to disable a spawn not being incentivized to directly push it if they don't want to. I like how old meta let defenses hold if attackers didn't man up or attack in force.

#

Some epic hab fight moments on old Squad. Very few in modern Squad

sly crown
#

It doesn’t seem very logically consistent with your other complaints

#

Are you nerfing something to make up for this? Its basically a flat buff to defenders

#

If your position is that the risk of attacking is more often felt than the reward, I’m not sure how making spawns under attack stronger advances your position.

broken socket
#

Well it doesn't coupled with ico but in an ideal world defense buffs come from static less visible positions and numerical advantage like how a defending player in an RTS game has more units in a fight because his reinforcement path is shorter, and not noodle arms and movement related combat nerfs

sly crown
#

RTS unit producing buildings generally only spawn at a fixed rate and don’t have any similar spawn decay mechanic. Nor do I think that translates very well to Squad gameplay from an aesthetic standpoint either.

#

And those are generally the climax of a game, representing a lot of time building units to create enough mass to push through that. You can’t make more soldiers, we have a fixed amount available at any given time

broken socket
#

Hubba wut idk what angle you're going with there but uhhh I build 20 marines you build 20 marines we fight at my ramp it's 17 marines vs my 20 because 3 of yours are still walking across the map lul.

#

Also mans sleeping on chrono out here

#

But yeah that's what people refer to as the defenders advantage in rts. Can include favorable terrain as well but the reinforcement lag is pretty universal

broken socket
#

So a Squad comparison would just be 9 guys attack a fob defended by 9 guys trade out with 3 but they're immersion lords and don't push and 90 seconds later it's 6v9

sly crown
#

but they’re immersion lords and don’t push
Is this even a real problem or another invented delusion?

broken socket
#

Immersion lords getting pinned down? If you haven't heard "Negative ghost rider my boys are pinned down chhh can't comply" you gotta get outta your safety bubble and play some unprotected day Squad

tranquil basin
sly crown
#

Invented, got it

broken socket
#

So called men of nuance when asked to wake up and smell the ashes Mr freeman and emerge from their TT safe space to realize immersion lords came through black mesa and now own Earth

tranquil basin
#

They are a pain to play with, they refuse to move and use all the military lingo you can imagine. I've played rounds where several SLs have screamed at them to get on the flag when they were closest etc.

broken socket
#

Yeah I'm actually kinda surprised nvvys thinking I'm trolling him rn and he's as sheltered as he is. I'd love to be joking about immersion lords but uhh we didn't get ICO for no reason. When ticket bleed was removed on v10 there was more than one goober who thought "Good finally"

tranquil basin
vale elbow
#

he can't be EU

#

what's the topic?

tranquil basin
#

Milsimmers that use military language that gets pinned down and cannot move

vale elbow
#

they're the best

#

they're the target audience of the game now so we're the real losers

tranquil basin
#

If you are one you might not notice their existence right?

true island
#

2318 comments 💀

sly crown
#

yes milsim tards exist. no they are not proxying habs and sitting still.

#

certainly with not any intention, if they're being "pinned down!!!11" they are being killed off proxy

#

like I said, I barely have any real objection to the overrun radius being reduced, 2 @ 20m is the only rule that matters, but the complaint that there is somehow a plague of milsimmers that somehow are getting 9 men 90m of a HAB and then larping that they're "pinned down!!111" is not a real issue

#

this is an invented delusion

#

even if it did exist your spawn mechanics do nothing to fix them larping, they play that way because they're morons not because the game mechanics make it optimal

tranquil basin
#

They are usually the ones closest to the objective and refuse to even try to do something about it due to being pinned. And they'll let everyone in command chat know that they are pinned down. The rounds I've seen it happen we've usually just lost the fob and are actively trying to build a new one. They end up dying anyways and going negative.

sly crown
#

This is the opposite of what has been being expressed

#

Bill has been talking about 9 man larp overrunning HABs at 90m

#

You are talking about a 9 man larp being overrun

tranquil basin
#

He has?

sly crown
#

Yes

tranquil basin
#

@broken socket are the immersion lords actually able to proxy habs?

sly crown
#

only against other immersionlards

tranquil basin
#

They might have evolved I don't really play on NA servers.

sly crown
#

it remains the same. uncoordinated play usually is just two blueberry waves crashing

#

sometimes you have a player that's developed a second braincell and flanks, that person usually threatens the radio

#

because pub larpies despite all their training never maintain a defense

vale elbow
#

9 players within a 90m radius functioning as an off button is not good game design

tranquil basin
sly crown
#

In any competent game, a full 9 man within 100m of your HAB is a threat beyond the overrun mechanic.

vale elbow
#

i don't think i have to post illustrations of the flaws this design has, we all have an imagination. overrun should be something incremental or a function of comparison (like objectives are)

sly crown
#

Well, again, this is just a buff to defenders, in a game I think all of us agree favors defenders already enough

#

You might be right, but still alone it's pushing the game further in a bad direction

vale elbow
#

not that any of this is relevant because OWI appear to want fragile spawns. then you have the issue of ICO fucking up attack/defence balance quite a bit

sly crown
#

re: gamemodes are more impactful and significant when it comes to correcting the attacker/defender balance than ICO is

tranquil basin
sly crown
#

FOBs should be on objectives, this would be a step backwards

#

If anything changes have incentivized this further.

tranquil basin
#

Yeah, but OWI doesn't want that. They wants FOBs to be separate objectives. Multiple devs have stated as such. Even after they increased proxy range.

vale elbow
sly crown
vale elbow
#

there's what OWI say they want and what they actually result in doing with their design, then there's what that design actually does despite the intention often not being that outcome

sly crown
#

They say a bunch of dumb shit that doesn't align with actual gameplay

tranquil basin
sly crown
#

Their changes do not in any way support FOBs off objectives

#

FOBs off objectives are plainly and obviously worse in the current iteration of the meta (and have been for a very, very long time)

#

Radio vulnerability when outdoors is a huge portion of this, as is the radio audio increase

tranquil basin
#

Both sides fight on objective, HABs gets overrun except for the HAB that isn't on the flag.

vale elbow
#

squad is a victim of poor understanding in the departments or positions that matter the most to game design and development priority, a fairly common issue in the games industry. once the game is out and in the players hands it more or less becomes their game, not the developers. players will always outpace the ability to play and perceive the game compared to developers, PT feedback does mitigate some poor decisions but you can only take a horse to water, you cannot make it drink

sly crown
#

PT feedback wasn't handled appropriately during ICO. And the current PT is looking similar with the actual gameplay changes.

tranquil basin
#

There are also players that place their FOBs 300m away from defense cap preventing the rest of the team placing a proper defence FOB due to 400m block radius.

sly crown
#

The actual engine upgrade stuff is going great, but we still haven't heard any designers speak on the logic behind things like the imf changes and player equipped drone

#

Caring about what the team that talked about rewarding players for shooting at a bush for 2 minutes is obviously silly

tranquil basin
#

They want militia to be more russian based with aks and stuff

#

Nato weapons are going over to insurgents.

sly crown
#

Yes. But point is they aren't participating in the discussion or giving any public statements on it

#

A lot of people have raised concerns about player equipped drones

#

regardless this isn't relevant

#

point is, game designers broke

#

ignoring game designers woke

tranquil basin
#

I like that they get the mosin, I just hope they don't take the mosin away from insurgents

vale elbow
#

and player equipped drone

i'll hazard a guess that the logic is the same as the logic they used to validate the point-fire deadzone that robs the player of precise control, it just looks cool

tranquil basin
vale elbow
#

who cares about PU mosin, the PU is a borderline unusable peanut on my monitor

sly crown
#

Eh, point fire deadzone served a point, just like a lot of things: implemented poorly

tranquil basin
#

Another "can I have FTL" role.

sly crown
#

It exists to counter hipfire in a world where you can add external crosshairs

#

It’s just… a weird implementation of deadzoning

tranquil basin
vale elbow
tranquil basin
#

Cinematic

sly crown
#

Again, listening to the design team broke

#

Their communications on gameplay design are complete gobbledygook

vale elbow
#

they also stated that newer players had problems seeing targets in the game, as in Squad has a visability problem. then they go on to note that they have helped these new players who can't see well with DOF suppression. so the logic is that when ereryone is blind it doesn't matter that the foliage/AA options are complete shit

sly crown
#

Whoever was in charge of comms was a LARPlord

#

Even more than the gameplay design team themselves

vale elbow
#

i know exactly where the comms come from

#

i've had plenty of roundtables in the now defunct community feedback discord (last used for beta 18), the line of thought communicated is not new

sly crown
#

Point is it should be willfully disregarded

vale elbow
#

it is

#

maybe rationality will make a return in squad 2

tranquil basin
#

Making mgs inaccurate is very arcadey though. Most arcade shooters they make mgs inaccurate.

vale elbow
#

all of ICO is an increase in the arcade

tranquil basin
#

Yup

#

Alot of the stuff after is very arcadey too. Like suppressor kits etc.

vale elbow
#

10 days until broken arrow.

sly crown
#

I would rather just keep getting free content updates

sly crown
broken socket
sly crown
#

the hypothetical is so far in the realm of bill nye that it surely cannot be reality

broken socket
#

but i mean technically if you do pin down 9 immersion lords in a building 80 metres from the hab and dont kill any of them they do shut off your spawn still

sly crown
#

Yeah

#

I've said it before and I'll say it again

#

I don't think you're wrong

broken socket
#

If you don't think that can happen then you underestimate an immersion lords ability to be immersed.

sly crown
#

The thing I do think is that it is really a defender buff, and while it makes sense in isolation, when looked at holistically it still is going against what you say you want the game to be

#

Paired with some nerf I can see it

broken socket
#

totally is technically a defender buff that said the old system was still losing on attrition for attackers. That's what makes it a viable change because it's not like you can just spawn on your HAB and suffer no consequences if you're experiencing pressure. Like if we had a state of as nvvy would say equilibrium. IE defenders dying at the same rate as attackers, old overrun would eventually have the defenders perish just mathematically.

#

and in an ideal world it gets paired with offensive infantry getting rebuffed and gets overshadowed by that

sly crown
#

Hang on, how can you say that? You just talked about RTS and having closer lines of reinforcement, that's exactly what buffing spawning under siege would do

#

Mathematically it is in favor of defenders, not attackers

broken socket
#

Well it depends how far the attackers have to travel it just becomes a math problem really.

#

It also depends how you attack.

sly crown
#

Any amount of spawns is more than 0 spawns Bill

#

wdym

broken socket
#

yeah but the enemy attacking you could potentially be spawning faster.

sly crown
#

How... bro how can they spawn faster than the HAB they are defending???

#

You just ranted about RTS mechanics giving advantage to the side with closer reinforcements from a base, HAB is literally that reinforcements base

#

I don't understand where this disconnect comes from

broken socket
#

So ancient overrun mechanics as it stood, were essentially every enemy that entered the fun zone would add an increase of 10 i think seconds to the spawn timer it was janky but bumped up defenders spawn timers. So 4 people entering knocked it up 40 seconds. So basically if the spawn you were attacking from was 40 x movespeed away you'd be getting back in the fight at the same speed as defenders.

sly crown
#

Okay, but, Bill come on

#

any spawns are more than 0 spawns

#

By your logic attackers being able to respawn while the HAB cannot would favor attackers

broken socket
#

yeah?

sly crown
#

You're making no sense to say that HABs having more spawns means that attackers spawn faster than defenders, when they're spawning zero

#

I absolutely understand you when you're saying that you want more HAB spawns for more "epic fights" and shit

#

but this part makes no sense to me that you support

broken socket
#

idk what tangent were going on off here

sly crown
#

It's your own topic????

broken socket
#

But like it's just a numbers game when it comes to old overrun which is what i was discussing.

sly crown
#

Is delayed spawns more than zero spawns?

broken socket
#

?

#

idk what angle you're playing here

sly crown
#

Not a hard question

#

Yes or no?

broken socket
#

clarify what exact point you're trying to make

#

idk what to defend since i dont know what ur attacking

sly crown
#

Just answer the question

broken socket
#

1 is greater than zero yes

sly crown
#

Ok

#

We are in reality

#

Is the change you are suggesting to increase the amount of spawns defenders have to above zero favor the defenders or attackers more?

broken socket
#

? I've already said on its own defenders lol

#

where did u read otherwise

sly crown
#

Well you're arguing the math on attacker spawn rate in response to me asking if you have something else to balance this buff to defenders more

#

Are you adjusting attacker spawn rates? How?

broken socket
#

Well i was pointing on how in an old overrun scenario which is what I was talking about. It was possible to reach a state quite easily where Attacker Reinforcement whatever you want to call it, trumped Defender reinforcement time and given equal amounts of deaths attackers would eventually defeat a beseiged spawn via attrition

#

that's all i was talkin about

#

Here I'll give a basic example of what i was saying.

merry flame
#

Attackers meta will be more fun imo

broken socket
#

So in this hypothetical there's a hab under seige with 5 guys a side. 5 Guys enter the penalty box as it were and trigger a +50 spawn increase for the defending hab. The defenders then fight the offenders. 3 people die on each side. The defenders have a well back then what would be an 80 second respawn, and the attackers are spawning on let's just say a rally why not at 45 seconds that is placed say 100m away they're objective meta chads. Old movespeed is an average of 5.25m/s on flat ground we'll say it's chora just to make the math easy. Now the attackers spawn in with essentially a 50 second headstart getting back to the hab. So they run back at 5.25m/s x 50 and are able to cover the 100m to the enemy hab before the defenders have respawned. They then regroup with their squad push in and make it to the hab, ending the scenario.

#

Now more complex scenarios than this happened all the time back in v9 and it established essentially a threshold where attackers would eventually overrun but the best part.

#

Instead of just switching from 100% operational no penalties to 0% hab offline no spawns. It's a gradual downfall.

#

In more granular systems there leaves room for closer outcomes, tigher fights and more potential back and forth.

#

Literally every kill matters and can flip the balance.

#

That's why V9 hab fights were so iconic chaotic and fun.

#

There was one big flaw in the system which could probably be fixed and that was the fact that each respawn penalty tick was visible to the player allowing you to essentially card count the enemies coming in, I believe it also decreased when enemies were killed letting you know when the hab was clear essentially via the UI. I'd probably change it to maybe have the hab enter a seiged state that maybe obfuscated the respawn time to prevent gaming the system?

#

And probably not reversing the penalty if a player died

#

Also we could even go further and set penalty based on how outnumbered the defenders were if we wanted to go deeper.

#

Which i'd prob be down for 2

sly crown
#

Okay, I just, again, don't see what you're compensating for to make this make sense.

broken socket
#

?

#

Compensating for?

sly crown
#

Again, you'd be buffing defenders

broken socket
#

yeah

sly crown
#

Are you compensating for this change by adjusting attackers? If you're giving infantry gameplay buffs it affects both sides equally...

#

Is movespeed the sole lever here?

#

Do you think rally mechanics should change?

#

It's very unclear how you would intend to make this change while also wanting to move away from defender sided metas

broken socket
sly crown
#

🪄

#

k

broken socket
#

I mean buffing offensive infantry ain't rocket appliances.

#

Movesway release was a good start but plenty of add ons one can do

sly crown
#

It just seems pretty handwavey to pretend like defenders aren't also going to be affected by this

broken socket
#

when did i suggest they wouldnt? wut

sly crown
#

The implication is you have a buff that only affects assaulting inf

broken socket
#

?

sly crown
#

All inf are going to be effected equally

broken socket
#

I mean by definition no

sly crown
#

How no? Even movespeed also applies to defenders being able to squash rallies faster

broken socket
#

Move sway Release being a key example of that. That's something that only affects offensive infantry since the defender has the luxury of already being stationary.

sly crown
#

Defenders don't have to be stationary, again the best defense is an active one

#

You're right that ICO favors stationary, but that's still not optimal way to play and you're enabling defenders to be just as dynamic

broken socket
#

You're misunderstanding terms. I'm not talkin about defenders and attackers here. Offensive Infantry = Infantry that is in motion in the act of assaulting, on average more used by an attacking team by virtue of necessity. Must move and expend stamina to cross hazards. Defensive Infantry = Infantry that is not in motion, is posted up in some way ideally in a form of cover. Players naturally swap between the two states but where as a defending team can choose when/if to be more active and be offensive. Attackers do not have the choice of never being offensive, and on average will need to be Offensive more of the time, if for nothing else than they amount of ground they'll have to cover.

sly crown
#

Okay... well then again, you're not addressing what I'm asking you

#

The changes you've suggested to HAB Overrun seem to be an obvious flat buff to defenders

broken socket
#

Well if we have two sides actively attacking each other and being offensive yeah they'll both get the benefits and if the defenders are being just as offensive and beating the attackers, they're just the better team that's going to happen sometimes.

sly crown
#

By your own admittance, defenders are not magically excluded from your proposed infantry buffs, and thus they can also utilize this.

#

Does it make for more dynamic gameplay? Sure I get why you like it

#

Does it shift the balance in favor of attackers? Dubious imo

broken socket
#

The Hab Overrun changes?

#

When did i say old school hab overrun would shift in favour of the attackers lol

sly crown
#

Your proposed changes to remove the disabling of spawn and instead increase respawn

broken socket
#

You're very good at pulling conclusions I didn't make out of the things I said while missing key points of what i have said lol.

sly crown
#

Bill, how many times do I have to repeat myself before you actually read?

#

As I have stated many many times, and I'll try it again

#

I understand why you might like this change in isolation.

#

What I don't understand is that you also seem to hold the position that you don't like the defender sided, stalemate-y gameplay

#

These two ideas seem somewhat in opposition of eachother

#

Do you feel that I am wrong in my assessment of your position regarding defender-side metas, or that these ideas are conflicting?

broken socket
#

I mean that's a pretty base level point. I can be against defender stalemates while also being against a UAV drone that flies around randomly killing a defending player every 30 seconds. That UAV drone is anti-stalemate but not a good addition.

#

Whip out that nuance you love so much my guy.

#

Yes if we change nothing else about the game and throw in old school HAB overrun mechanics that is a net buff for defenders which now have fragile habs. I think everyone here is cognizant enough to see that and doesn't need 3 pages worth digging into it.

#

But we can change more than one thing at a time.

sly crown
#

I'm just trying to understand; so you recognize it as a contradiction but you still want that dynamic feeling HAB assault

#

I get that

#

I've been trying to ask what you would do to compensate for something that does seem to be directly a defender buff, and the answers you've given so far just didn't add up to me

#

I'm happy to understand that you think that maybe in the bigger picture with other changes that we aren't enumerating here could wash it out, but it was just so nonspecific

#

Was hoping maybe you had some concrete thoughts on the matter

#

Instead of just addressing that directly we again have to do this dance of you trying to give me a history lesson

broken socket
#

It's not a contradiction to my overall point if you pair it with other ideas from my position. I'm against binary systems that are either win immediately or lose. Always have been. One hit kill TOWS? Against. One bullet engine kills on Little Bird Against. Habs being immediately shut off against. Right if you nit pick every single idea to say but this doesn't support you're overarching idea of toning this down yeah you'd run into some things that buffed defenders, but when combine with this rest of the stew that overpowering piece of ginger on its own, would mellow into a nice additional flavour note.

#

We're just in basic "Something can be greater than the sum of its parts" territory here.

sly crown
#

That's fair enough. I'm just trying to understand what Bill's ideal version of Squad could be, which for right now is still more broad strokes than anything.

#

An impressionist painting if you will

#

(or it's just v9)

#

(it's probably just v9)

broken socket
#

A good deal from V9 worked, but if I had it my way i'd probably adjust that which didn't work. Like obviously I'm not gonna be sittin here like Put dolphin diving back in or I KMS.

sly crown
#

reasonable

#

thats all I have been trying to get at

#

Just answer me directly 😭 I'm trying to understand you not debate or gotcha you

#

I don't give a fuck about ico wars

#

we're all wrong and should suffer for being as big of nerds about this dumb game as we are

broken socket
#

what would I do to compensate for a defender sided buff. Well I'd probably think about things that affect Attackers more than defenders. A good example of that could be ammo loadout. All soldiers get the same loadout on fresh spawn, but in an attacker/defender scenario. With a nearby hab and a pre set up positions there would probably be more time to get additional ammo boxes set up. I think it'd be a fair assumption to wager that on average defenders will have a closer access point to an ammo source and potentially more of it, if the hab has gotten a few logi runs, than a freshly set up attack fob with one or two ammo boxes to go around potentially not set up in ideal locations. So running off that assumption any buff to total ammo pools, sort of indirectly buffs attackers more than defenders, when they'd get a bit more mileage out of it than the defender camping on an ammo box. The defender could have one rocket but as long as he's closeby to ammo it doesn't affect him as much as the attacker that has to run 150m back in line to resupply. One could say in the same vein that attackers might use transports more to try to find flanks in a defense, and could lose more overall than the defenders if said attack fails. So one could argue removing the ticket cost of transports would be an attacker buff, punishing them less for failed attacks. Plenty of more things one could find but that would be the direction of any changes.

sly crown
#

I love that, thank you for elaborating

#

I think that's very thoughtful and I can find myself agreeing with a lot

vale elbow
#

You've reminded me of the highly neglected state of persistent ammo, fuck you bill

tranquil basin
broken socket
#

Well beause Pilert something you might not know is that you're not actually playing a military game you're actually playing a mod of Planetside 2 and everytime you die that soldier gets spawned from the rebirther matrix with all their knowledge and ammo pool saved.

tranquil basin
broken socket
#

I think it might work if it was a buff instead. Gets two birds stoned at once by buffing low power kits like LAT too. Like you get one LAT default and resupplying ammo takes you up to 2 or 3. Now you can still fight with the kit you selected, but you're leaps more effective with logi backing.

#

idk

sly crown
#

I've been + 2 LAT launchers separately

#

at least for LAWs, RPG28s, RPG7s

broken socket
#

LAWs not getting the benefit of the reason they were invented definitely remains the largest launcher related sin in the game

#

Reality : "The Law was created to be lightweight and easy to carry" OWI : "The Law was created to give us a way to make our 2nd USA Lat kit poopier."

sly crown
#

It would make AT4 distinct as well, assuming it was buffed relative to that

#

The AT4 is just supposed to be a disposable Carl Gustav, so it would make sense to have a higher damage scaling

#

while only getting one at a time, ofc

verbal igloo
#

This post can probably die

thorn haven
#

generally this is a very important topic i think personally keep this open

frosty gull
frosty gull
broken socket
#

Alright folks today's sick topic in our holy ICO tweak thread. APC based finite vehicle spawns, rearmed by visiting a hab. Based or gigantic Based? Should it be limited to mechanized or available for all apcs discuss

smoky shuttle
vale elbow
tranquil basin
#

VDV could have a cmd call in that allows people to spawn from a plane.

vale elbow
#

if the motivation behind the idea is to try and improve the relationship between APCs and infantry better methods exist (lower cost, harder to mobility kill)

#

more APC type vehicles and less IFV or tanks would also help keep APCs relevant in the macro

tranquil basin
#

Apc spawn bunker as hab emplacements

frosty gull
# vale elbow if the motivation behind the idea is to try and improve the relationship between...

Lower cost does little to encourage infantry to use them.
The barrier is more in that:

  1. Creating habs is a core and critical task, and APCs, mostly, can't do that.
  2. Some of them are very effective vehicles in their own right.
  3. Using them with dedicated vehicles squads requires more coordination than just taking a logi/transport truck, and cedes effective control over the squad to whoever is driving.
sly crown
#

I don't think mobile spawns are needed, and I also don't think that the mechanical interaction of Infantry and APCs needs to or even should change. When squads choose to coordinate them, they are very effective.

sly crown
#

I think the bigger problems with the relation between these vehicles and infantry is more to do with the disproportionate number of IFVs compared to APCs and frankly just to vehicles suitable for infantry maneuver in general. There's just not that many actual APCs to go around these days and moving vehicles around the frontline is a significant risk. To an extent this is realistic: infantry dismounting ahead of contact should be the norm. However even if you can make it to your destination safely, if your team hasn't already achieved complete armor superiority, you're still liable to be swarmed by 4 LAVs if you're overextended and spotted or heard at all.

#

For an SL to properly coordinate a transport they need to understand what is an acceptable risk threshold for that vehicle, otherwise they're risking 21 tickets and downtime on the strongest asset on the field to save on some walking. Unfortunately, I think the best case scenario for you seeing this kind of transport is one SL thinking big picture, often but not necessarily the commander, that can come up with an assault plan and get people on board.

#

Other than reducing the number of IFVs and increasing alternate transport vehicle options, I also think that the stamina system punishes movement across large distances as infantry which really amplifies existing problems with R/AAS flags being too distant from one another. I'd really love to see a rework of this to better consider how to allow infantry to cross ground more effectively. Personally, I've been thinking of replacing sprint with a more stamina efficient or neutral jog that's somewhere between current walking and sprinting speed while still lowering your weapon meant for crossing large terrain out of combat, with sprint available on double keypress meant as an in-combat maneuver to dive for cover perhaps with a faster speed than now and harsh stamina drain.

broken socket
#

So basically the idea behind the idea. Is that APCs currently while they do have space to transport dudes, usually do so at the start at which point their drivers, kinda just go do armor things since they got a good enough gun to go around and eat on all lesser fish in the vehicle game sea. So that's where most of their time is spent. Can coordinated teams make good use of them absolutely but the average grug rock banger together is going to very rarely find themselves transported by an APC that their SL didn't claim unless you're dealing with weird APC fetish people that make it their goal to transport infantry. Other light transports like open top MRaps and transports usually end up chillin' at main so it's not too big a hassle for SL to say spawn from main and at the least get going, but a lot of good APCs tend to be in use unless it's a like a shitbox or somethin real undesirable. So the V9 rally inside a BTR idea essentially let's them operate on their own timetable do vehicle things and gives them a limited consistent infantry drop ability. It's definitely "Dumbing down" a little bit of the game, but the alternative for noobs is usually. "Yo Squad 5 can you come pick us up in your APC" Squad 5 is 800m away "Uhhhh yeah sure bro" Squad 5 takes a minute or so getting back, the infantry Squad that asked to be transport finds a way for some of it's members to still be spawning in even though they had ample warning, because pub squaddies find away, and a minute later they're finally rolling to their destination 1km away, and 8 minutes later Squad 5 has successfully transported 7 guys (Since 2 never spawned at the backline hab anyway) who are then killed on dismount. It's not really a consistent spawn, since you gotta drive back to a hab which is what you'd need to do to load more infantry anyway. It just saves you a little bit more tempo than what normally happens.

#

Could go hog wild and impose some PR style restrictions to prevent cheesability if wanted like no spawns within x of friendly fob so they don't get used as backup rallies. Have it use up the ammo in the vehicle, have a stomp radius so everyone has to at least be on the ride for a little bit.

sly crown
#

I don't even know that I'd say that APCs even transport infantry at the start. With how vehicle spawns are structured almost every infantry squad is taking their own transport out of main. I don't think you'd see that consistently unless you put infantry transports on delayed spawns.

vale elbow
#

nothing major is needed

#

reduce the penalty for failure, improve resilience and lower the level of competition so they aren't completely outclassed by the majority of vehicles they'll face

#

failure to have an expedient means of transport is 85% a skill issue

broken socket
#

you're not wrong. I'm just saying in the current meta IMHO. There seems to be very little reason to often wait the extra time needed to call in APC boy for transport, usual move just hop in the transpo with the boys, or an MRAP equivalent if your squads smaller and roll out as Ludacris would say.

vale elbow
#

relying on others is a loss of agency some people don't want, some don't think far enough ahead so the timing of the pickup is a problem they are never going to solve. we could argue about the overall community or even the game design not promoting improvement but that's far too philosophical for a discord thread

sly crown
#

All you need is SL+1 to get transported. You don't need to larp for all of your boys to wake up from the barracks to get in the vehicle

#

I do not think we should be dumbing down the game for pubbies being unable to manage these mechanics

#

If I was forced to find a compromise with you I'd say that I would need it to be based upon the SL's presence, not just on the vehicle. Your method is vulnerable to SL+1s mass spawning on the vehicle and then all dropping rallies. 2 minutes and suddenly 40 people have amassed on your back door.
If the SL had to be present in the vehicle with one squadmate for 60 seconds, and the vehicle had to be stopped for at least 15 seconds before spawning in 60 second waves, maybe this would be viable without being cheesy.

broken socket
#

Yeah just ez fix of claimed by 1 Squad for spawning like vehicle claims

vocal orbit
#

IMO nothing really needs to change with transpo except bring back old logi balance. The human obstacles to teamplay is just part of the jank of squad that makes it fun and any strongarm fix is going to be worse than the problem. If people communicate its fun, if people dont, skill issue

tranquil basin
#

Some of my favorite moments is when my friend who plays commander calls in artillery and asks heli to fly us to attack and we land just as the last shell hits and we win the flag with almost no resistance.

tranquil basin
# vale elbow nothing major is needed

It is mainly a player issue, very few offers to pick up other squads. And alot of squads prefers to get from A to B on their own because it makes less sound and has a lower profile.

frosty gull
broken socket
#

Exactly we've all been burned by Potato Starch hands wasting minutes by leeroying in. But potato starch hands isn't going anywhere. But me personally I'd probably drop in to potato starch hands apc so when we inevitably die at least I didn't waste as much time.

lean fox
#

Heavy flinching should only come from explosive suppression, he rounds/mortars. Rifles, MG's, and coax making you flinch heavily just isn't fun or good for balance. For small arms fire there should only be subtle flinching. 50 cal should make you flinch like 30 cal does rn.salute

lost kindle
#

I love that. That so immersive and fun (especially when you hit enemy before flinch fight but he still kills you by his luck)

lean fox
lost kindle
#

That's named supporting discussion if I'm not wrong (im non-english speaker)

#

When you just continuing thoughts in discussions, keep sharing opinions and points.

#

Idk mb it seems not like irl, coz i write this through the prism of my own view of communication between people

remote osprey
#

Yes pls We need more reduce ICO in squad make it look real and good and make us really love to play the game shooting well good and run for long time a little 🤏more pls

next forum
#

this is a long thread

merry flame
next forum
#

¯_(ツ)_/¯

#

i squad lead and command and drive so i dont have to bother shooting people

#

but teamwork > gunplay

merry flame
#

Its not mutually exclusive

merry flame
#

People are still leaving neg reveiws on steam about it too

#

Not like "all the people who liked ICO left"

People are buying the game, not liking ICO and leaving

#

But id say ICO is the 1 of 3 big reasons people are leaving the game looking at steam neg reviews

#

No 1 is FPS
No 2 is EOS and server browser issues
No 3 is ICO

sturdy hearth
#

Make gunplay great again !!!!!

vocal orbit
royal ivy
burnt flint
#

We had a clan full of players with nearly a decade of squad playtime… had roughly 30 full time players every night of the week lucky if we get 3 now mainly weekends. ICO decimated us.

broken socket
#

30,000 homies used to game here now it's a ghost town

polar mica
trail mesa
sturdy hearth
#

What were the results of the ICO survey?

lost kindle
#

Actually 8.2

gaunt oriole
burnt flint
#

If it was an overwhelming negative don’t be surprised not to hear!

#

Plus they never really asked about ICO just recoil and gunplay. I think stamina usage and amount need addressing too.

lost kindle
#

I thought that you talk about what we get w this ico stuff

gaunt oriole
mighty plank
#

The reason you play this game is cause it's realistic, cause with that logic of "it doesn't need to be realistic" I can download a Minecraft gun mod and say it's literally the best game on this earth

broken socket
mighty plank
#

Yeah you go enlist and say you wanna be a lone wolf to your instructors

#

Make sure to have a bud recording

#

Cause id love to watch you push the earth away from you for a few hours

burnt flint
#

IRL argument 🤦🏼‍♂️

#

Correct me if I’m wrong - barely out your teenage years?

lost kindle
broken socket
lost kindle
tranquil basin
#

Mg and lat should be made good again, it is however kinda nice just walking towards mg full autoing you with a knife and just stabbing them. Sometimes they switch from their non lethal mg to their lethal pistol lol.

lean fox
nova canopy
elfin sinew
broken socket
#

This is how it feels to chew ICO Gum.

#

ICO stimulate the senses.

true island
#

2631 comments, im starting to think this is a controversial topic

fleet mirage
#

But there are 80% of people that agreed that game should get more ICO tweaks

lean fox
#

A 100-player game with up to 30 vehicle crews and over 70% of the people inf need the shooting experience, but now that the main character of the game is actually a vehicle, and vehicle already have a crushing advantage over infantry, the consequences of slowing down the infantry and taking away the shooting experience are:
Team 1 vehicle=lock,Team 2 vehicle=lock.... Team n vehicle=lock ,but inf=0
SQUAD is a game first and foremost, and what kind of game second. When 70% of the people are getting hit with nothing to fight for, the game experience naturally goes down with it. Players are willing to game, but need to be given a basis for gaming by the designers

fleet mirage
#

Personally, I think the main problem is the recoil of the weapons
Handling prevents fast snaps and headshots after run

So recoil and visual recoil should be reworked
Basic recoil should get horizontal aspect tweaks
Visual recoil should not twist the gun in your hands

sturdy hearth
#

2 years and ico is still shit , now with ue5 , veterans are still missing , nobody is coming back.... and with ue5 u kill the next group .

fleet mirage
#

For INS faction we have pretty good real recoil and awful visual recoil for most of weapons

merry flame
nova canopy
#

Yes, if a 10 hr review says that the game is crap and would get a refund if possible, then it must be true. 😄

merry flame
#

Its not false that my experience was bad and I did not enjoy it

nova canopy
#

true, you against 99,99% must mean that the whole restaurant is bad though. 😄

#

but it is also what you expect from the restaurant in question, isnt it... if i go to mcdonalds and wait at the table for a waitress to come by, light me candles and recommend a 50€ wine bottle and then say "this sucks, never going there again" , doesnt mean much

trail mesa
frosty gull
# merry flame New players also don’t like it

New players certainly tolerate it better.
Clogging the queue at 4am LA time on my favorite server. Regulars can't even get seed whitelist, because the server has been continuously popped for weeks.

merry flame
frosty gull
#

GO on battlemetrics, search servers by rank.
That measures how active servers are, pick one geographically close in the top 25 or so and they're probably active at a given time.

#

Most of the top serve niche interests, locations, or linguistic groups because with 1 million US-based R/AAS servers players have options and will just play someone else if they have a bad experience.

broken socket
#

Kinda feel bad for the newbies robbed of an experience they don't even know was stolen from them.

merry flame
#

oh here is better image oopse

#

So half of the top servers have no ICO

broken socket
#

Curious

#

It's almost like ICO did 9/11

frosty gull
trail mesa
nova canopy
broken socket
#

Were it so easy Arnoldio were it so easy

smoky shuttle
pliant forge
#

The bad players couldn't hit anything

broken socket
#

inconvenient truth pilled

#

Zomg it was so much more hardcore duh suppression What actually happened : (Blur made slightly less aids) no other changes

#

my fav was when the PT1 simpers started simping for I think PT3 was it saying it was better when they made suppression less good in PT3 that was a certified gamer moment

burnt flint
sly crown
#

Hence why every example is GE and not some other gunplay-enhancement mod

#

GE might be less popular without the enhancements, but a big draw is going to be the edge and larplords who want Ukraine, Hamas, SOF and Suppressors, Attack Helis etc

#

Hence why the preICO mod lived for all of 3 days popped before being dumpstered

#

and why nobody is running VC despite it's lengthy featureset

broken socket
lost kindle
sly crown
lost kindle
#

Except tiktok newbie who don't understand what happens in game at all, like i said earlier

sly crown
#

Yeah but my point is that gunplay isn’t the sole or even primary motivator

#

Tiktokers or not, the people are drawn to things other than gunplay

#

Gunplay changes will not convince them to play

#

Because these people are looking for a different game to begin with

#

They want a refuge from battlefield

#

And I don’t mean that in a derogatory way but genuinely

#

They simply aren’t that interested in teamplay mechanics in general, far more casual experience on these servers which understandably attracts larger numbers of players compared to a milsimmy strategy niche of vanilla

nova canopy
pliant forge
burnt flint
nova canopy
broken socket
#

Infinity the thing you gotta realize is that while we were playing Squad on steam and some before that, the Arnoldios of the world weren't playing because it was still too Alpha for them. They joined up either around v10 still got trashed and then came back for ICO. Or just didn't play a lot during that era and so they think they played but they were more tourists.

#

One time I got to witness a milsimper Squad crashout in real time and they literally said those exact words before leaving to never be seen again.

#

Shit was legendary

#

Classic [ICON] boys

vale elbow
#

OG squad is walking at each other from main on OPFL. this thread needs to be at 3k messages before the UE5 apocalypse

tranquil basin
#

I member walking for hours, only for someone in my squad to yell "full squad ahead". We would form a firing line and kill all 9 of them with accurate weapons. Then we would proceed to walk to the castle.

vale elbow
#

sounds like tactics and teamplay existed before the great blurring, how can that be possible?

tranquil basin
#

Servers used to have the word teamwork in them.

#

Everyone and their grandma didn't have scopes either. Only medics could revive.

spice summit
burnt flint
#

Plus no name tags u had to use ur map.

#

I miss the early versions.

fleet mirage
#

#️⃣ Fix the MGs

tranquil basin
#

I feel bad for every MG main that got their kit destroyed completely. Maybe in the future they will make the MG lethal again instead of its current state as non lethal.

wicked kayak
#

dead ass game

fleet mirage
#

Reduce the amount of ammo that gunner can carry to 300rnds as the tradeoff for better lethality
And reduce the visual and horizontal recoil
MGs on bipods are kicks only backwards into shoulder and not twisting like in current version of Squad

#

With reduced amount of ammo we will get more teamplaying moments with a rifleman attached as an ammunition carrier

merry flame
#

Instead of making the kit useless nerf them in some other way to reduce the uptime of the kit

nova canopy
fleet mirage
fleet mirage
#

This is the Garand Thumb`s video about the M240

You can clearly see how MGs should work.
Timecodes:

  • 4:25 - Recoil comparison of M240 and M249;
  • 6:53 - M240 burst at a distance of 100m;
  • 9:28 - M240 bursts at a distance of 750m.

To watch this video - delete the space in the "https"
h ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmwyCbYRXZs&t=459s

nova canopy
fleet mirage
#

Let devs just get numbers from SPM for MGs recoil and we will be fine

nova canopy
#

But real life numbers dont make good gameplay... You saw what happened with m249 real life MOA.

But neither do these fantasy numbers make good gameplay.

north cargo
fleet mirage
#

Five to ten meters jumps out of the target in vanilla

#

Feels quite accurate IMO

sturdy hearth
#

Believe it or not , owi will not change this System, just leave the game . Wait for arma or some other shooters out there . It now 2 years with ico . Primetime is over . There was 8 great years but its over , And ue5 will be the final nail in the coffin . Iam sad about it but " life is though , get a helmet "

fleet mirage
#

So maybe devs will hear this idea

#

But anyway Iam waiting for UE5 transition and SPM update (this mod shows how OWI should have done the ICO)

#

The videos above is a direct proof of this

teal hornet
lucid pivot
broken socket
#

boom roasted

lost kindle
fleet mirage
sly crown
frosty gull
#

I'm confused about "wait for Arma" when there are like 3 active Armas out right now.

sly crown
#

Logic isn't needed

#

All that is needed is to inject more copium

lost kindle
sly crown
#

Sounds like a dumb rumor given we know Reforger and 4 are different titles

#

They will probably learn some things from its success?

lost kindle
sly crown
#

I don't think that makes any sense if you are a series veteran

#

Arma 3 players don't want Arma Reforger to be Arma 4

#

It's a gamemode at best

lost kindle
sly crown
#

That doesn't make any sense tbh

lost kindle
sly crown
#

Because Reforger doesn't encompass a vast majority of what the main series' appeal is

lost kindle
#

And it won't split fanbase

sly crown
#

It's a fun gamemode and it's related to A4 sure

#

but it is not even half of what an Arma title is supposed to be

lost kindle
sly crown
#

No

#

I feel like you can only say this not having any idea what people played A3 for

#

Reforger is a smart move and I don't doubt they'll continue to support it

#

and it probably will influence A4, maybe they'll tie them together somehow?

lost kindle
sly crown
#

Yes

#

Scripted missions are a big deal

lost kindle
#

Does reforger make same?

frosty gull
#

Somewhat, but not nearly as much as A3.

lost kindle
#

It have an editor and mod support

frosty gull
#

You just don't have a bunch of the stuff A3 has. Even the modding is more limited in what they do with it.

lost kindle
#

As i understand that completely new engine isn't it?

frosty gull
#

Yes.

lost kindle
#

So they make arma 4 step by step on arma r base

sly crown
#

no

lost kindle
#

To make better arma 3 game in the end

sly crown
#

they're going to be distinct titles

#

this has been known for a long time

#

reforger is built on what they plan to use to build A4 though

lost kindle
lost kindle
#

Don't get it

sly crown
#

We know they plan to create Arma 4 separately

#

They explicitly said so

lost kindle
frosty gull
#

Why would they lie about this?

lost kindle
#

Not an inside

lost kindle
sly crown
#

It will likely expand upon the editor, have a larger map, and be more focused on sandbox/simulation

#

Reforger will remain a more casual title designed for JiP PvP gameplay

lost kindle
#

Mb they just don't talk about that and that's all

frosty gull
#

Tracked vics and fixed wing aircraft as well

sly crown
#

gaming rumors are as valuable as dirt

#

people make shit up constantly

frosty gull
#

Hey guys the new hero class is going to be the Arch-Mage.

sly crown
#

They're going to add drill sgt to squad in 9.0

lost kindle
sly crown
#

I'm aware of the saying, but if that's how you discern truths in this world I fear for you

#

Arma Reforger will almost certainly influence Arma 4 in some ways

#

That's kind of the point

#

it's kind of like early access arma 4

#

a lite version of the editor, a small map, lower number of assets compared to final version, lack of singleplayer content

lost kindle
frosty gull
lost kindle
sly crown
#

I wouldn't say we were saying the same thing...

#

You aren't going to just get Arma 4 as an update to Reforger

#

It's going to be like Arma Reforger 2.0 more than it is like Reforger exiting early access

#

Reforger was their test bed for new engine and editor and an attempt at creating a more casually accessible pvp game

lost kindle
#

So i thought arma 4 can be just client based on arma r and arma r will be closed w that

#

Thats all i think

#

but that's just a guess

frosty gull
lost kindle
#

Isn't that reforger more casual because it add mechanics that allowed only w mods in arma 3?

#

Coz im not arma player, just watching that from afar

frosty gull
#

Simplified control scheme to allow console players.

#

It's still fucking insane with modded stuff though.

#

Like I can toggle the illumination of my red dot to make sure it doesn't washout my red dot. Set like 10 modes on my PEQ. Etc.

lost kindle
#

They literally made track vics based on wheeled vics ...

pliant forge
#

Back in my day the game only had 2 guns

lapis spire
#

please delete the game

tranquil basin
nova canopy
lucid pivot
vocal orbit
lucid pivot
#

The insane difference mortars can make when the rest of the team is just constantly marking positions to mortar is underrated and never visible to the average pub player.
You need - Every SL/FTL on team refreshing markers, the mortar dude refreshing markers, running constant logistics, making sure backline is clear to run logistics.
Very few pub players ever get to see an actual good mortar player in action, because it is very difficult to utilize mortars well without a lot of teamwork.

#

Every half decent competitive comp team run 3-4 man CMD/Mortar squads whose whole purpose is to rain hell on the enemy team, and any half decent mortar player will tell you how frustrating they feel when the team is not updating/calling out markers.

#

The ICO did nothing to change anything wrt teamwork in this game.
Teamwork is a product of people working together. Any kit/role you play in this game will be exponentially more effective if you have the right coordination with the rest of your team. No kit really rewards being solo in this game (unless it is a very specific situation for a very limited period of time)

#

Even the Godamn marksman kit. The issue with the marksman kit is not that it ‘promotes lone wolfing’
It’s that it has practically no advantage over a simple rifleman kit in 99% situations.
Every other kit is supposed to ‘do’ something or provide an important attribute to a squad. The marksman kit fails that test, and since the ICO so do the MG kits.

lost kindle
#

And of course - open-field hab = fired by mortars as soon as mark has appeared

frosty gull
#

One player can't be in enough places to mark everything going on in a match.

#

He might spot one hab, but then he'll be out of position to find any others they might have.

He might see a tracked tank, but then he can't see a chokepoint then enemy infantry is crossing.

lost kindle
frosty gull
#

Boats?

lost kindle
frosty gull
#

there is a mortar request mark...

lost kindle
#

Mb i wrote smth w mistakes on English

#

Don't get your point, anyway

#

What i meant that there's no need to do a lot to play effectively w mortars against avg pub players.

#

If this is a high lvl of teamwork now I'm afraid what we except in future

tranquil basin
sly crown
# frosty gull there is a mortar request mark...

Only SLs can place those. Boats are used for their ability to be placed by any FTL, sometimes by the mortarmen themselves to indicate an incoming fire mission.
Helicopter markers are similarly used to indicate that rounds are in the air and expected to impact immediately

#

Not necessarily relevant for average pub play, but used in scrim/comp a lot and those players will sometimes do so in pubs as well

sly crown
sly crown
lucid pivot
#

Yeah every point is zeroed in that is cool, but to know where you want to drop tubes requires communication with the rest of the team. And the better the communication, the better the execution.

lucid pivot
lost kindle
# lucid pivot The point I’m making is that the ICO doesn’t have any impact on teamwork. That w...

I think it maked teamwork harder to newbies, who came in game after that. Coz they literally fight w their character when they don't even know what to do. In old times there were situations when new player picked sl (coz nobody picks) and ask in cmd chat what fob is and how to make a request but him and his squad still were effective playing if other sls helps w that stuff, they can just kill enemies and capturing points no matter how. Now if sl asking in yellow chat "What the fob is?" It will be 10 0 21 squad running around actual point in 90% chance

lucid pivot
#

My experience suggests that the overall detriment to average player skill is down to a lot of veterans leaving the game. There were a lot of people who really helped new players learn and get better, the ICO drove most of them away. I can’t count how many good communities just died post ICO. Even the people that taught me how to play don’t really play anymore 🥲

#

So indirectly, yes it is a trickle down effect of the ICO but not why you have a lack of teamwork.
Teamwork = working with other people.
Teamwork /= knowing how to play or having good strategy

livid locust
fleet mirage
#

But now we can see up to 20! squads per game and zero communication in SL chat

#

People that played Squad a lot just dont want to feel pain in the ass because your character cant control recoil

#

Suppression and handling are ok
But recoil makes you feel like your character weights 40kilos and have the dystrophy

#

Shooting is the main problem that makes the game repulse you
You don't feel in control of the situation because the guy on the other side is just going to get lucky

#

Or next time you will get lucky

fleet mirage
# livid locust

That's the best representation of lucky shots with ICO recoil

#

If you've ever fired a weapon in your life, you realize that controlling recoil is much easier than aiming at a target quickly

#

So I have no any complaints about sight waving and handling system generally

#

But recoil 100% should be reimplemented

nova canopy
#

+c7 will win this most of the time, although recoil for this calibre seems a bit too much

lost kindle
vale elbow
#

ICO gunplay is intentionally ass, there's no argument against that

#

gunplay has a barely registrable impact on teamplay but ICO has been successful in fostering greater parity between the playerbase but that's how a speed limit works. you have no choice

#

if you're incapable of going beyond what the speed limit is ICO feels fine, if you're easily capable of exceeding the pacing ICO is attempting to enforce it feels like shit

trail mesa
#

We seek to reward the fireteam which spends two minutes shooting at a bush

sly crown
#

ICO rewards positioning

#

Walking in the fucking open towards someone who has cover and sees your dumbass approaching is going to result in them returning fire and you getting aimpunched

#

They have every right to win that fight lmao

vale elbow
#

ICO rewards stagnation, positioning has and always will be the ruling fundamental of FPS

sly crown
#

Saying it rewards stagnation is the dumbest shit

#

The best move in that situation was not to walk straight at the enemy lmao

vale elbow
#

it absolutely rewards the stagnant player by nature of heavily penalising any proactive or moving party

sly crown
#

That might have been the case prior to 8.2

#

poor excuse now

vale elbow
#

your positioning is invalidated the moment suppression is involved, your advantage neutralised almost immediately

#

no it still is the case

sly crown
#

Bro

#

Really defending walking fully standing upright in the open against someone in cover seeing your dumbass approaching is so cringe

#

Yes, if you get shot at you are going to have a bad time

#

Stop taking duels like this isn’t the case and you will die like an idiot less

vale elbow
#

no i'm not talking about that video, i have never said that

sly crown
#

The whole thing I’m talking about is the video.

vale elbow
#

both players in the video have bad everything

#

it is a good example of recoil misalignment and overall sight misalignment defying the laws of physics

#

the video also further enforces the idea that first bullet accuracy is now more important than ever, you have never been more incentivised to win fights with the first shot than with ICO. if you don't then various misalignment penalties will compound on top of one another, suppression will try it's best to rob you of your senses and control actively overriding what should be an exclusive interaction between two parties

pliant forge
tranquil basin
vale elbow
#

iirc recoil misalignment and sight misalignment have a direct relationship with the rate of fire, he's likely maxing out the penalties within 5 shots. how is that reasonable?

tranquil basin
#

Slow fps slow rate of fire

vale elbow
#

ICO is just like when wales trialled lowering the speed limit to 20MPH from 30MPH, it was just shit and the theorised benefits never materialised

#

it just took longer to get to places

vale elbow
tranquil basin
#

Slowing down to a point of not moving gives you perfect aim after 4 seconds of not moving.

tranquil basin
vale elbow
#

classic

tranquil basin
#

Iirc low sway from high fps also got fixed.

#

Have a slow pc get more weapon sway, have a fast pc get less weapon sway.

vale elbow
#

there just isn't a relationship between gunplay and teamplay

#

it's exclusively about skill level and mindset, self-centered players will remain so no matter how blurry or unstable you make the gameplay

broken socket
sly crown
#

Nope

broken socket
sly crown
#

Just not walking in the open like a dumbass

broken socket
#

true going prone in those bushes to his right was prob optimal

sly crown
#

kekw

#

Crouching or proning where he started would literally have been better but still an ass solution to the situation

vale elbow
#

i think the way he approached it was reasonable if the philosophy of OWI wasn't to try and disallow any kind of move-and-shoot solutions. he wants to both take ground to save his FOB and kill the attackers, why is it right that the game should levy penalties when his stamina is full and he's walking while ADS?

#

and how dare he get shot at in a 50v50 PVP FPS, he should expect to be unable to handle his rifle and spasm unpredictably for trying to play the game too much or too fast

next frost
# livid locust

You lost a firefight to a enemy which was showing your his back and was not aware of you because you fired while walking. It would have taken 0.5 seconds to stop and two tab him easily.

sly crown
#

Most importantly

#

He fuckin missed

#

He’s full auto spamming an outline around the guy

#

Even though recoil misalignment is ridiculous, he still failed before it was a factor

next frost
#

recoil is not even the issue imo. the majority of the inaccuracy was caused by movement sway and suppression sway.

#

even at full auto he would have hit the guy if he just had stopped for half a second

vale elbow
#

and you believe that's all reasonable?

sly crown
#

Yes I think the guy in cover deserves to win when you walk in the open and miss

#

You can whine about suppression if you want but what do you think the other guy in that clip was experiencing lol

vale elbow
#

neither are in cover and you believe that because both have the same or similar penalties those penalties are justified?

sly crown
#

More in cover than the OP

vale elbow
#

no he isn't, both have their full bodies exposed

sly crown
#

for a moment as he tried to step out sure

#

then OP missed

#

he’s still in a more advantageous position, he has the ability to return to cover while returning fire

#

OP has no such recourse to being shot at

next frost
#

I believe that the game needs to add artificial increases to TTK to be more authentic and prevent the pre ICO headpop gunplay

The recoil is good, it allows accurate shots in single fire but when the player stupidly spams LMB, he will miss. Therefor accurate shot timing is rewarded and fun.

The ADS movement sway should be improved. It increases over a time of like 7 seconds despite moving at a constant speed. It should be tweaked to reach its max value almost instantly, while allowing the player to hit targets within 25m reliably.

Suppression is a problem at short distances, at medium and long range it works fine. To fix this I would make it scale with range, so for example at 10m there is only a minor suppression effect, which graudarly increases to its current max value at like 75m or so. The blur should be replaced by a tunnel effect.

sly crown
#

Other player was a better shot

vale elbow
#

are the penalties justified?

sly crown
#

Recoil misalignment is a little extreme at times, but also should be expected to be at its worst when walking

#

I might even agree that I would like walking aimsway to be reduced

#

None of that matter when you miss and send wild sprays and stand in the open like you won’t be retaliated on

#

Stop taking aimduels like you aren’t going to be shot at too

#

Especially if your aim is bad

#

Stop moving right before you fire. Not that crazy a concept and one even reflected in CS of all games

#

And before any of that happened, consider your approach better

#

Hop that fence on the right, sprint to the left to get your own cover, something, anything

#

I’m an aggressive player, I’m not in any way suggesting that being stationary is ideal nor do I even like the parts of ICO that benefit that

#

But you’re out of your gourd to suggest that was the only or best option in that scenario

lethal compass
# next frost I believe that the game needs to add artificial increases to TTK to be more auth...

I've noticed an issue with shot timing and ICO is that the suppression rewards spamming as many shots as possible, especially if you have a weaker/less suppression capable weapon (which is counter-intuitive because you'd want to play to the weapons strengths of being more accurate. However by timing your shots you are giving up the advantage of imposing the suppression affect on the enemy.)

vocal orbit
#

recoil, vertical recoil at least, is fine. the sight misalignment is the issue. Not only do you have to manage your aim, but you now have to guess where you are directing the aim to since your sight isnt even visible

sly crown
lethal compass
vocal orbit
#

bros holding the rifle like that one navy admiral

sly crown
#

It is oddly exaggerated. But walking full auto is also going to be literally worst case scenario

vocal orbit
merry flame
next frost
sly crown
#

Brother

#

There are stupid aspects of the ICO that make long distance movement annoying

#

This ain’t that

merry flame
#

The punishment for slow walking while ads is too high

sly crown
#

The boy missed

#

I agree that sway during aimwalk is more than I would like

#

I don’t think it matters when you paint a fucking outline around the guy

next frost
sly crown
#

The better move there was absolutely to get the fuck out of the open

merry flame
#

yes standing still shoot better is logical and i think that makes sense but the amount of punishment is high

sly crown
#

I think the best call in that situation was sprint left unironically

#

But I also play more aggro than many

merry flame
lethal compass
# sly crown This reflects real firefight tactics. Gaining fire superiority is priority, that...

I understand that. It's just that it only comes across like a realistic firefight to the person/people doing the shooting. To the person getting shot it's very jarring, where they can't see and hold their gun properly. It also doesn't stop the person getting shot at from shooting back and then it turns into several blind soldiers trying to out-ICO each other (which is what I've noticed happens most of the time, especially at close range) which isn't good for both parties involved.

sly crown
#

I want to obscure myself behind the car and make up the distance so I can put my reflex sight full auto AK in their mouths

sly crown
#

It’s like wondering why your aim is shit in CS while holding strafe

#

OP would literally have had a better time if he just let go of w as he was about to fire

#

This isn’t some cringelarp explainer this is normal fps shit

#

If you do not have good enough aim to land that first shot moving you should consider putting more mechanics in your favor, point blank

vocal orbit
#

he would have had to take a nap to get fully stable. even then misalignment full auto is just bad. he could have done it in semi but man does it just feel bad

sly crown
#

You would be valid if this was pre8.2

#

It is not

#

Rifles stabilize immediately

next frost
sly crown
#

OP literally held W

#

There is reason to use full auto in more than just buildings

#

But you are literally choosing the worst of everything the way he engaged

#

Walking is not a stable platform to fire from

#

Full auto impacts your aim severely

vocal orbit
#

full auto should be usable up to like 40-50 yards

sly crown
#

This is literally no different to complaining about stutter step in CS

#

your refusal to learn the mechanics at this point is your fault alone

#

Stop holding move keys when shooting unless your barrel is already in their mouth

vocal orbit
#

i dont play cs so thats lost on me. Criticism on how extreme misalignment is isnt like some refusal to learn the mechanics. Ive been masochistically coping through this for 2 years. The game just isnt fun to play unless youre in a vic or doing literally anything but actually fighting

sly crown
#

So basically in CS you have pinpoint accuracy as soon as movement stops

#

Newbies will try to run and gun and get punished for it

#

Pros will stutter step, releasing strafe and even counterstrafing briefly to get accuracy asap

#

This is the same thing

#

OP literally put themselves in mechanically THE WORST position possible

#

And is complaining about losing to someone who had better aim and cover than they did

next frost
#

and try to tab fire single shots if necessary

vocal orbit
#

the point i got from the video is that the situation didnt call for such extreme misalignment, and the mechanics shouldnt have prevented him from hitting the guy. given he had the element hof surprise despite being in a terrible position

sly crown
#

Yes the mechanics he failed to engage with resulted in him having a harder time engaging

#

This is not a secret