Devs letting this game stagnate? When it could be the best milsim FPS ever.

[Risotto]

Bf2042 playerbase dropped, and people are going to be hungry for something else.

The devs could really have a winner here, but the lack of real updates is going to kill it.

[Monkey89brains]

People hate 2042 for many reasons. One of those reasons is giant maps where you can run for some time without seeing another player or even firing your gun.

This game has a lot of that.

Squad is not the battlefield experience, neither is battlefield the squad experience. If you have the itch for one, the other does not scratch that, imo.

[Jason]

the problem with squad is not the lack of updates but what they choose to update. its amazing how every change they have made has been bland or a step backwards. squad is now tedious to play.

[Onimaho]

swatbot26님이 먼저 게시:

Monkey is right. The people abandoning BF2042 aren't looking for a "milsim" experience. They wanna play Battlefield

it was all crap after bf2142...

[Radegast]

We need superior Battlefield to take most playerbase from Squad and Post Scriptum. Players inability to use the brain brought me to stop playing both games for more over month so far.

[Geebus]

Radegast님이 먼저 게시:

We need superior Battlefield to take most playerbase from Squad and Post Scriptum. Players inability to use the brain brought me to stop playing both games for more over month so far.

Nah, we just need to double down on policing our own. Those folks that have come in from other games, or in this case the Battlefield refugees, are here to stay. They might have shown up as someone looking for a replacement for the last game they played but now they have stuck around because they enjoy the game. I really don't see this game that everyone wishes for coming down the road and sucking away all the bad players.

Again, if you wanna fix the player base you've gotta figure out how to better keep players in check. We used to have this back when the player base was smaller but now we've gotta rebuild it. The only way you get a better player base is if you encourage an environment that has certain expectations and consequences for not meeting them. You've gotta build a dedicated SL base that enforces teamwork and communication. Even just a couple of SL's per team on the populated servers is more than enough to get the ball rolling.

[smsKONG]

As with all these things - be the change you want to see.

If you want a BF experience in Squad then go to the Epic store and download the editor.

Make a Mod with adjusted mechanics and convert layers of the current maps to work with it.

If enough players want this then it should be no problem getting enough bodies together to provide for and populate one or more servers..

(obviously you may as well wait till they've rebuilt the engine at this point or have to rework your mod once they're done tinkering - which makes any ideas of OWI capitalising on the downfall of 2042 kind of redundant, seeing as they are rather busy plugging the holes already here)

[Risotto]

smsKONG님이 먼저 게시:

As with all these things - be the change you want to see.

If you want a BF experience in Squad then go to the Epic store and download the editor.

Make a Mod with adjusted mechanics and convert layers of the current maps to work with it.

If enough players want this then it should be no problem getting enough bodies together to provide for and populate one or more servers..

(obviously you may as well wait till they've rebuilt the engine at this point or have to rework your mod once they're done tinkering - which makes any ideas of OWI capitalising on the downfall of 2042 kind of redundant, seeing as they are rather busy plugging the holes already here)

What are you even talking about..?

[RackEmUp187]

This game was never meant to be a milsim and the devs stated that here many times. You can play mods or Arma if you want milsim

[RackEmUp187]

Onimaho님이 먼저 게시:

swatbot26님이 먼저 게시:

Monkey is right. The people abandoning BF2042 aren't looking for a "milsim" experience. They wanna play Battlefield

it was all crap after bf2142...

Battlefield 1*

[Geebus]

Holden님이 먼저 게시:

RackEmUp187님이 먼저 게시:

This game was never meant to be a milsim and the devs stated that here many times. You can play mods or Arma if you want milsim

But it never meant to go towards arcade mechanics either

Lets be honest though. "Arcade" has just become a buzzword at this point for things you don't like.

[Geebus]

Holden님이 먼저 게시:

Geebus님이 먼저 게시:

Lets be honest though. "Arcade" has just become a buzzword at this point for things you don't like.

and you have to question every aspect of it. i said few times to you why this game become arcade - but you dont listen. You are, seem to defend some sorts of idea that is literally in middle without actual evidence WHY this game is NOT an arcade game. Give me example please? we are talking in comparison to old style of squad(which you couldn't see or play) and it's newer version Arcade 2022 game style


you seems like defending buzzer here - just to be heard without value. And it's not my fault that we are calling something to what it is - it's not my problem that you cannot understand others ppl views based on actual gameplay back then and now (which again - you dont have)

Sounds like I hit the nail right on the head with that response.

I've been playing Squad since July of 2017 (late v9). Squad might be less hardcore in some aspects but it certainly isn't an arcade shooter. Again, that is just a buzzword that you paste on everything you don't like. Hell, that's almost like calling everyone richer than a homeless person a millionaire.

Changing dead-dead did not make Squad an arcade shooter. Making it so everyone could revive one another did not make Squad an arcade shooter. Adding the buddy rally didn't either. Neither did changing the run speed. All these things might have changed certain incentives but they did not make the game an arcade shooter. Again, arcade is a buzzword for things you don't like.

[Geebus]

Holden님이 먼저 게시:

It's just a little bit hard to believe considering the fact of your 1000h in SQUAD since 2017
(either you had banhammer on you or ?)

What exactly is hard to believe? You expecting that someone from back then has to have 3k hours? I put in maybe a hundred hours during that time, took a break, then came back an update or so later, took another break, then really got into the game and put the other 6-700 hours in. Ain't never had no issues with admins in this game because I don't start no issues. Check the community ban list. Nothing. Only time I've ever been kicked was for arty TK's. I got with an admin, cleared that up and was back the next game.

Holden님이 먼저 게시:

The fact that adding more and more speed to everything and matches that were taking about 1.5h /match now are down to 30-45 min game (in 2h slot) - doesn't it indicate that the game hasn't turned in the slightest to more arcade gamestyle??
Ofc it's community fault for not defending or planning and majority of players are playing this game just rushing points with helis etc

I don't find that to be an issue. Yes the game got faster. No I don't find that to be a problem. I used to kinda subscribe to the idea that faster gameplay stopped players from having the time to come up with strategies and such but then I just learned to play fast. I stopped thinking of it as faster gameplay and changed my outlook to it being more aggressive gameplay. I adapted to it and enjoy it.

On the game time side of it, I am glad we aren't having 1.5 hour matches anymore. 45 mins to an hour is plenty time for a match. I've seen a lot when playing invasion that you still get those long matches and it results in a bleed on players, especially in the SL department. That bleed and that burnout isn't a good thing, you want players that stay the length. I will agree though that a 30 minute match isn't what we are looking for but that really goes to that last point about crap players being crap.

Holden님이 먼저 게시:

And why they can? - more vehicles and too short respawning time, nearly every layer has a heli or 2 - and blocking other's team early points shouldn't be that easy and should only work in maybe 10% of the time not like now - about 50-70% (at least my games)

The respawn times are plenty long enough. We are talking about 5-10 minutes which isn't that insignificant when put in the context of a 45 minute match. And you've got a little bit of a point about helicopter rushes for early points but I don't see that being as much a problem with the helicopters themselves but rather an issue with crappy layers. Add more varied first points and that goes away. That said, I don't see it as much as you do at all. Rushing midpoints I see all the time but going for the enemy's first caps I don't. Even then it isn't too successful if you learn how to stealthcap. Even if they rush your cap, as long as you have a body on it you win.

Holden님이 먼저 게시:

Fob spam meta - why do we have too many fobs on the map? To destroy a fob these days is so easy. Owi tried to mitigate this effect by doing a radio bleed out timer which was a good move IMO but at the same time, we have a commander who can take it down in a matter of seconds or simply no one is defending it - why? because it's not worth it to defend it in first place - why? it's too hard for average player - once you have few enemies watching FOB or (again) a vehicle that cannot be tackled down - which by the way is nearly impossible to do since you spawn on the fob and can't even get out from it to shoot it. You need armour support (this again ppl fault) - you cant hold of them in command chat because there is always too much going on in command chat (why?) - because there are too many ppl in-game and we ended up having 10+squads in-game (why? because they can - too many vehicles).
Now everyone will think - so easy to take it down? - let's create a lot of them hoping the enemy won't have time to take all of them down. Sounds familiar?

As long as FOB's are semi permanent spawns that can move entire teams, the effects will be the same. I am genuinely surprised that FOB spam took so long to manifest itself. It should have been the meta ever since FOB's have been a thing but wasn't probably from a mixture of old habits and ticket incentive changes.

And lets be honest here. How much do we actually see FOB after FOB encircling an objective? It fairly rare. 9 times out of 10 its 1-2 attack/defense FOB's per point just like it has always been.

I think its a good thing that FOB's are as vulnerable as they are now. Proxy was a great addition. Less meat grindering as a result. Same with the commander strikes. I even like the bleed out system since it was annoying when you'd have a radio almost magically "poof" away. Superfob is dead and I am glad of it. Again, I like this more aggressive gameplay and am happy to see that players actually have to work for their wins rather than just sitting and letting the ticket bleed do all the work.

As to increased vehicles and players I don't mind. Yeah sometimes it can get annoying on comms when there is a ton of people but you simply tell them to be quiet. Most folks are more than willing to quiet down, they don't know no better.

Holden님이 먼저 게시:

Why no one is listening or talk in this game tell me? there is no chance to "break the ice" in squad anymore (no time for it) - you need to have some element of being bored during early gameplay so ppl can finally open their mouths, why players can't learn new things (they dont talk - therefore can't learn). Players will always try to find workarounds if they CAN - and they are not going to look for answers on forums/yt or whatever to find why this game is so hard and "how can I improve my game style". Hard games spark curiosity and trigger self-awareness

That just simply isn't true. I can get people talking in most every match I SL and I am going at the speed of light. All it takes is a couple of people to serve as examples and the expectation of communication and you are pretty much there. Sure you get some matches where it doesn't happen but that is down to failures to upkeep expectations. That isn't the result of the speed of the game.

Holden님이 먼저 게시:

Command chat is another problem - to put you into perspective -lets say everyone is talking in your squad (that 8 ppl) - then you have command chat (14 ppl without direct comms which is another issue here). That is at least 22 players on active comms(in 50 team and I'm not even including local VOIP) all the time for each of 14 SLs - do the math how many comms we would have to use - too much noise man and players like me, for example, are tired after a few games to stay focused on TALKING - and most of the time SLs are like "btr on my pos" wtf? Now let us take that and ask the question(one of many) - why SLs are not reacting faster - well SL has to make choice here:
1)Either focus on squad gameplay (results in not communicating with other SLs and no map planning and achieving basic objectivities dev/flank/attack in right moment)
2)Or focus on SL command chat(ignore other squad members and no ability to help and guide squad members resulting in lone wolfing, no comms etc.)
Both options have big flaws and negative effects on "teamwork" - and funny enough even when you somehow force ppl to talk more and put pressure on ppl so they will talk this will result in worse communication either between SL and command chat or SL and his own squad - that's why ppl are not talking.

Again that just isn't true. That just isn't my experience. Comms are usually perfectly manageable. If one channel or the other gets a little too loud then I simply ask them to quiet down and keep it relevant and that solves the issue. You are acting as if the worst case scenario is the average match. It just isn't.

Holden님이 먼저 게시:

rest of the post

It is almost all on the players to fix. Sure the devs sold a bunch of copies of their game. What did you expect? That they would stop putting it on sale? The effects of massive demographic change weren't intended, they were unforeseen.

You want people to start talking more? Expect them to talk more. Want them to stick with the squad? Expect them to. Pressure works when you can build it, its what kept the game going in the early days. How you build that momentum I don't know. How do you encourage a wide enough group of people to matter? I don't know. But even if I don't know I don't succumb to the doom and gloom, "we can't change anything!" mentality. It works on a squad level. It scales up to a team level. I assume it works up to a server level. Find a way to get more groups of dedicated players putting in good work on servers and you start to really make a difference. It already happens to some extent but it needs to be expanded.

[LoRd_D]

RackEmUp187님이 먼저 게시:

This game was never meant to be a milsim and the devs stated that here many times. You can play mods or Arma if you want milsim

The devs stated plenty of times they took inspiration from project reality the problem is the original dev team is no longer working for this company so now we have second hand devs that have no clear vision on what this game should be.

[RackEmUp187]

LoRd_D님이 먼저 게시:

RackEmUp187님이 먼저 게시:

This game was never meant to be a milsim and the devs stated that here many times. You can play mods or Arma if you want milsim

The devs stated plenty of times they took inspiration from project reality the problem is the original dev team is no longer working for this company so now we have second hand devs that have no clear vision on what this game should be.

Yes, they've stated that this game took inspiration from Project Reality but the OG devs said it wasn't supposed to be a milsim game.

[LoRd_D]

RackEmUp187님이 먼저 게시:

LoRd_D님이 먼저 게시:

The devs stated plenty of times they took inspiration from project reality the problem is the original dev team is no longer working for this company so now we have second hand devs that have no clear vision on what this game should be.

Yes, they've stated that this game took inspiration from Project Reality but the OG devs said it wasn't supposed to be a milsim game.

I never said it was a milsim I said it was supposed to be like project reality and the current dev team doesnt know what they want this game to be. You cant base a game on pr then make it causal for people who don't want to use teamwork and mics and expect your product to do well. When majority of the original player base has left now due to the direction of the game. But I also know devs can't do much to fix a community issue cause you cant force people to use teamwork or mics and sure as hell cant fix stupid. My main issue with the game is people dont communicate or use teamwork anymore and just run around like its cod/bf only caring about kills and ignoring the objectives. Just left a match where we took all the points within the first 30 to 40 mins of the game and won. Doesn't make for a fun game when people are just wondering around the maps nowhere near the objectives. And I've been on both sides of it where we steam roll and where we get steam rolled cause your team just does nothing. Its not a game dev issue its an community issue I don't see will ever getting fixed.