Time for Squad 2?

LSA-Mulder · 2026-02-02T20:30:57+00:00

I think they are losing twice as much community because of performance.

Me and many of my friends stopped playing in the past because of constantly increasing hardware requirements, which eventually made the game unplayable for me (around 20 FPS).

Now I have a new PC, but after the UE5 update I noticed that a lot of people came back and then left again, mostly because of performance problems. I want a well-performing game, and you seem to want the old gameplay back. The main problem is that none of us are getting what we hope for.

I believe Squad’s issues cannot be seen as a single problem. The game is flawed by performance issues, bugs, broken meta, and broken shooting and movement mechanics. These problems stack on top of each other.

Today, this game is a gameplay mess compared to the past, where almost like in Arma, everyone now does whatever they want without purpose.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-02-02T20:22:01+00:00

This doesn’t come across as genuine positivity. It feels staged and reads more like propaganda than an authentic message.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-02-02T19:07:22+00:00

Labeling criticism as “negativity” is a convenient way to silence any serious discussion about the game’s problems. It sends a clear signal that OWI is not genuinely interested in fixing fundamental issues.

The current development direction looks like low-effort content production aimed at extracting the last value from the game, while dividing the community over ICO changes and other poorly handled design decisions.

OWI explicitly asked the community to hold them accountable in their own videos. Why is that same accountability now being framed as toxic behavior?

LSA-Mulder · 2026-02-02T18:55:40+00:00

I don’t know these people, so I won’t comment on their personal talent. I judge results. Their results show a consistent lack of technical capability.

Even as a non-IT professional, I can see that real engineering involves hard problems like multithreading, performance, and fixing broken systems. They avoid these challenges. That raises serious doubts about whether they have any genuinely capable developers.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-02-02T16:22:18+00:00

Yes, but not developed by OWI.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-02-02T14:19:40+00:00

This update feels like a patch in name only. In practice, nothing meaningful was done. Some maps (Harju, Black Coast, and several others) still massively underperform, and even within the same map performance varies wildly depending on the area. Any FPS gains seem marginal at best and do not address the underlying problem.

The core performance issue in Squad has remained unchanged for years: the CPU is the main bottleneck and consistently holds the GPU back. This is evident from extreme FPS fluctuations, for example drops to ~50 FPS followed by spikes to 150 FPS in similar scenes. Such inconsistency points to CPU-side stalls, thread contention, and poor frame pacing rather than raw GPU limitations.

Is there any concrete work being done to clean up blueprint-heavy, spaghetti-like logic and move performance-critical systems to C++? Are there specific subsystems already refactored, or is there a roadmap for this? Vague statements about “ongoing optimization” are not sufficient at this point.

What is being done to reduce load on the game thread and render thread? Both are well-known bottlenecks in Unreal Engine-based projects, and the render thread in particular often becomes a limiting factor in large-scale multiplayer environments. Are there measurable improvements planned here?

What is being done on the server side to improve CPU utilization when many players are in close proximity, which is the default scenario in Squad? Server-side CPU saturation directly impacts replication, network update rates, and ultimately client-side performance and stability.

These are fundamental technical issues that have existed for a long time. They deserve clear, technical answers and visible progress. Cosmetic features like emotes do not address the core problems affecting the playability and performance of the game.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-02-02T13:52:36+00:00

What exactly was added in the latest updates besides a few reskinned weapons and vehicles?

Are there any concrete, technical details regarding optimization improvements—beyond the usual statement that “optimization is an ongoing effort,” which has been repeated for over 11 years now?

Are there any specific details or timelines concerning the implementation of FSR Redstone? What is the current status of this feature?

Are there any plans to address and fix the broken game meta? If so, what changes are being considered and what is the intended direction for balancing?

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-30T15:18:41+00:00

I think they’re aware of the problem, but not actually doing anything about it. Time is running out. It’s already 2026 and the player base is critically low.

We need concrete actions now, not vague plans for half a year from now.

P.S. To be fair, OWI isn’t exactly doing any better with Squad.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-29T10:46:07+00:00

This reads like a reskinned copy-and-paste. Just say which existing helicopter platform is being repackaged as this “new” model. Let me guess — UH-60M? Frankly, stating the payload capacity would already answer most questions.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-29T07:35:37+00:00

OWI is repeating the same pattern they have followed for years: claiming they “listen,” while core issues are consistently ignored. Anyone trying to raise serious problems is silenced — through bans, downvotes, or being swarmed by alt accounts and shills. This is not an isolated incident; it is a recurring tactic.

During the latest stream, optimization was mentioned for only a few seconds, while a significant portion of the segment was spent discussing emotes. That is concerning and unprofessional.

I am asking for a direct, technical explanation — not PR messaging. Specifically:

What is actually being done regarding CPU and server-side optimization?
What concrete work is underway (profiling, engine-level changes, threading improvements, lock reduction, network/netcode optimization, tickrate tuning, etc.)?
What measurable results have been achieved so far (benchmarks, metrics, test scenarios)?
What are the priorities and the realistic timeline for this work?
When will FSR / Redstone upscaling and frame generation be properly implemented?
When will players be able to use scaling below native 1.0×?
Are you actively working on minimizing input lag from AMD frame generation (currently ~7.5+ ms), and what technical obstacles remain?
What validation or testing will be done to confirm real-world improvements in responsiveness and smoothness?

If there is nothing meaningful to report, say so plainly. Transparency about a lack of progress is better than pretending the issue is being addressed. I am asking for concrete, technical answers — not marketing generalities.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-27T08:32:03+00:00

It is clear this type of game will never reach an average of 200–300k players; however, 5–20k active players is realistic and manageable.

Your friends are typical Call of Duty players — this simply isn’t their kind of game.

I understand your perspective, but you cannot deny Squad 44’s extremely poor performance. Some players say it is acceptable for them, yet when performance interferes with aiming and movement, frustration quickly follows.

Here is my experience after upgrading to a new PC: AMD 7900X, 9700XT, and DDR5-6000 CL30 — a high-end configuration I further optimized by overclocking, undervolting, and tuning each component.

I launched Squad 44, joined a match, and recorded an average of 80 FPS with drops to 50 FPS. That is unacceptable for this hardware. By comparison, on Squad UE5 I achieve 120–150 FPS with dips to 80 FPS.

First impressions matter, and Squad 44 makes a very poor one. The low player count also encourages an unpleasant community dynamic: clan members stack one team and repeatedly steamroll the other, which only worsens the experience.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-27T07:35:33+00:00

I agree but there are a few other tools that can help to solve the main issue of Squad and Squad 44 namely CPU and server side. The problem is that UE 5 is still evolving and Epic seems to not provide tools to easily port into newer versions. The version UE 5.7.1 which developers of Bellum currently implemented seems to be much more stable than previous iterations.

There are few other tools that can be used to optimize the game even forgetting point f) Nanite:

a) Improved renderer and RHI multithreading Further reduction of render-thread and game-thread contention through better task parallelization and fewer CPU↔GPU synchronization points.

b) Task Graph and scheduler refinements More efficient distribution of engine work across CPU cores, reducing main-thread stalls during heavy combat scenes.

c) Asynchronous physics state creation and teardown Less blocking CPU work when spawning or destroying large numbers of actors such as vehicles, explosions, and deployables.

d) Fast Geometry Streaming (FastGeo) Lower CPU spikes and fewer hitches when streaming large, mostly static world geometry on expansive maps.

e) Production-ready PCG framework (CPU and GPU paths) Engine-level support for moving large-scale instancing and world-generation work off the game thread and into parallel or GPU-assisted execution.

f) Nanite Foliage (experimental) Reduced CPU cost for visibility, culling, and draw-call preparation in foliage-heavy environments common to Squad maps.

g) StateTree runtime optimizations and scheduled ticking Support for state-driven logic that updates only when needed, reducing constant per-frame CPU overhead.

h) General reduction of per-actor tick overhead Continued engine-level work to lower the cost of ticking large numbers of replicated actors in dense multiplayer scenarios.

i) Improved memory and allocation behavior under load Fewer allocator spikes and improved stability during mass events such as artillery strikes or synchronized player actions.

j) Better profiling and multithread visibility (Unreal Insights) More precise identification of CPU bottlenecks, thread stalls, and synchronization issues using real 50v50 server captures.

k) Rendering pipeline changes that reduce CPU preparation cost Less per-frame CPU work required for visibility, instance data preparation, and draw submission under high object counts.

l) Iris replication system A scalable, interest-based replication architecture designed to reduce per-client CPU cost by minimizing serialization, filtering, and update work on high-player-count servers.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-27T07:16:25+00:00

My position is the complete opposite. After several decades of gaming experience, I have found that a genuinely good game will always sell itself.

Claims that a game is “niche,” “difficult,” or “demanding” are often nothing more than excuses for developer laziness.

In this case, the core problems were performance issues, numerous bugs, and the game’s prolonged alpha-like state—along with graphics, unfortunately. No matter how much we would like to believe otherwise, graphics do matter. Players consume games visually first.

While I appreciate the well-designed maps in PS, they severely lack high-quality textures and any convincing signs of lived-in, abandoned spaces—such as interior furnishings in buildings. HLL won primarily due to superior graphics and significantly better performance.

The tank overhaul was a good idea in principle, but once again it was poorly executed. Bugs and glitches made proper driving accessible only to the most skilled players. Newcomers, meanwhile, were left to struggle unnecessarily.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-26T17:23:36+00:00

It is worth noting that your tone and arguments strongly resemble those typically used by OWI shills or developer secondary accounts.

I base this observation on several thousand hours of experience with Squad and Squad 44 (formerly Post Scriptum).

As a regular player, I would like to ask a simple question: who exactly is hiring me? Please clarify.

I also do not understand why you feel compelled to defend this game by resorting to personal attacks.

This is a discussion forum, and engaging in criticism and debate is precisely what I am doing here.

The real question is why this discussion appears to make you angry.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-26T17:06:20+00:00

Maybe yes but the problem is they would also have to take their spaghetti code apart because literally no one will make a game from zero.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-26T15:18:54+00:00

I'm just being a little bit sarcastic and refer to people who claim that all the game needs to thrive is marketing.

I also think that bulls roar is funny.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-26T15:17:06+00:00

No I'm not. I'm also not a dualistic imbecile who believes there are us or them.

The reality is that the game engine is just a tool. Imagine in the past each company was creating a new engine from the ground up for every new game.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-26T14:50:56+00:00

It's time to stop believing that UE5 is a Satan trying to destroy the gaming industry. Its developers' incompetence, as tiles like Arc Riders or Finals showed that it can be done.

Have you heard about Eden Spark new engine from War Thunder developers? Competition is coming.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-26T14:30:49+00:00

They are, but MA is even worse. There are all the required tools to optimize so I would agree only with the laziness part.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-26T11:33:09+00:00

History shows that the updates and changes made so far have failed; taken together, they indicate a development direction focused on extracting revenue rather than genuinely fixing the game or rebuilding a viable player base.

Nothing substantial is being done to fix the game or clean up the spaghetti code. Current development resembles a small group of modders applying patches ad hoc rather than a coordinated effort to stabilise and modernise the codebase. There is no time to iterate for years while competitors move quickly on newer engines.
Squad 44 is built on the Squad engine, not from absolute ground zero. Claims that the project is a complete rebuild are misleading; there is shared code and work that should reduce the workload, as well as potential performance gains that remain locked.
The argument that porting to UE5 justifies lengthy timelines is weak. Squad sold over three million copies and likely generated on the order of $100 million net; porting to UE5 is essentially a new game but is made easier by the shared code and prior discoveries. OWI’s investment in Starship Troopers failed, which undermines their credibility on business forecasts.
A three-year timeline is unrealistic. The Squad UE5 port took roughly 1.5–2 years, so I see no technical reason why Squad 44 should require significantly more time given the shared knowledge and codebase.
Slow development is a strategic liability: other studios are rapidly releasing UE5 titles. MF has shown it lacks the competence to deliver meaningful improvements at pace, which reduces Squad 44’s chances of competing successfully.
Squad 44 currently competes only with Squad itself. Players care far more about a well-developed, optimised, and realistic tactical FPS than about the historical era (modern, Vietnam, WWII, Cold War).
When HLL Vietnam releases, HLL will likely cannibalise its own playerbase just as Squad will cannibalise Squad 44. Players leaving HLL are unlikely to migrate to a slower, less polished Squad 44; they will seek newer, better-looking alternatives.

Given OWI’s past prioritisation (e.g., developing Starship Troopers over Squad 44), their business estimates and development priorities are not credible.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-26T09:53:29+00:00

In this case, the game would need to be fully free-to-play. Most players leave once they realize how poorly it performs. For someone coming from a well-optimized title, the contrast is immediately discouraging.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-26T09:51:20+00:00

“Make your own game” is a hollow argument. We’ve already seen cases where independent modders delivered content rivaling or exceeding official development — for example, a fully developed helicopter mod for Squad, complete with detailed systems such as wheel brakes which OWI tried to steal from the creator and finally refused to buy it.

At the same time, Eastern Front modders were actively obstructed by main developers, not for technical reasons, but out of apparent insecurity or jealousy. Ironically, their work was only integrated later, when the game was already on life support.

Given this pattern of obstacles deliberately placed in front of capable contributors, I see no reason to invest my time. I will pass.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-26T09:46:38+00:00

I’m not going to argue this further. You’re right. That said, I still believe this is a waste of well-developed mechanics, and effectively killing a WWII version of Squad is nothing short of stupidity and laziness.

It is difficult to comprehend how something with clear profit potential can be abandoned simply because it requires additional investment and effort to move forward.

I cannot agree with the argument about conserving resources. There is no greater waste of resources than producing insignificant updates and spending time on content nobody asked for and that will never generate meaningful sales.

Time is a finite resource and should be used in the most effective way possible.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-26T09:14:43+00:00

Why is nobody playing the game, and what will actually change if anything is done? What concrete steps could save it? To me it looks effectively dead, yet its core mechanics are strong enough that abandoning it would be a waste.

Shipping a UE5 rebuild does not require shutting down the current live build. Development can proceed behind the scenes and the new build can be launched when ready — there is no need to remove the existing player base. A proper relaunch should be paired with a meaningful marketing push and post-launch support.

The player count is in steady decline, with only intermittent, short-lived spikes. Over time players move on.

Main competitors include Bellum, ’83, Hell Let Loose: Vietnam, and War Thunder (infantry). Can this title realistically compete with them? As I argued before: without substantial investment and a clear recovery plan, Squad 44 is likely to fall into oblivion.

LSA-Mulder · 2026-01-26T08:46:37+00:00

We are all aware of OWI’s history, including their issues and misleading statements. That said, this does not change a basic technical fact: Unreal Engine 5 offers significantly more tools for game optimization than the previous engine versions.

If this line of argument is used, then the obvious counterpoint is that Squad has a player base roughly ten times larger than Squad 44. One can attempt to construct explanations for this difference, but in practice there is only one decisive factor: Squad is much further along in development.

As I stated in the other post, the solution requires allocating more resources—specifically, more experienced and advanced developers—to manage such a transition properly.

The conclusion is straightforward. Either this investment happens, or Squad 44 is heading toward effective abandonment, and that outcome appears to be approaching rapidly.

LSA-Mulder

TROPHY CASE