Insurgency+ numbers

[badmojo420]

I've always liked this idea. It would force the coalition to stick together as a team. Together they're strong. But take a wrong turn, or wonder off alone and you're done for.

[Indium]

you guys keep saying insurgents are under powerd but from my expirience most of the time the insurgents win |:

i think it would be the best to keep it the way it is.

[QCRulzz]

Take korengal valley as an exemple. Often I see the US getting nailed inside their main and cannot move. And it is 32v32.... Imagine 45vs15? MMM some maps would need to be re-tought then... Of a dome of death... Anyways, this would be good, but some more work has to be done...

[Himalde]

Korengal valley is a grate place for ambushes, and insurgents are strong enough to handle a lot. I like the idea of not being able to pick up enemy kits (=instant death), and rather give insurgents more rpgs, combat engineers etc. and let the request them at RPs and/or hideouts. The numbers are fine imo.

[SilentNoobAssasin]

U must be on acid... okay i can support the idea with The Insurgency but Taliban is a bit to dangerous, the games i play when i am Taliban sometimes ends up the Taliban bombing the Americans base with bullets and RPG but the Iraqi Insurgents always getting slaughtered cause they have nothing...

[Zar2Roc]

That would be rather hard to implement, I wonder why 20s ins spawn time was increased to 30s some time ago, shorter spawn time was imo the best idea to represent outnumbering blufor forces.

[IAJTHOMAS]

Iraqi Insurgents always getting slaughtered cause they have nothing...

..apart from an unlimited supply of mines and IEDs, the best CQB weapons in the game, except maybe the ppsh, all the ammo they could want for their RPGs, no tickets etc

Sure they INS die alot more, but that doesn't really mean anything, I still see them winning far more than their fair share of rounds.

The imbalance in numbers would be interesting, but I don't think it practical for general play, especially when it comes to switching between ins and normal maps and switching teams at the end of the round. As has been said, shorter spawns seem to be the best solution to this.

[Trooper909]

What server are you admining AppyUntinx?

this made lol irl I'll say no more

[wookimonsta]

if you were really going to to this, to give the insurgents more people, then the blufor would need more assets, jets bombing things, tanks, helicopters etc
right now, it seems relatively balanced and the insurgents do win alot of rounds.

[Rudd]

I think Blufor lose alot because they misuse all their toys, apart from on OP archer where they get pwned up by technicals in their main every 10mins..which is why they lose there.

Fact is, if blufor do not bring a 50cal or an APC to the fight, they will DIE. if they do not remain in proximity to their 50cal/APC for cover, they will die, well...at least 90% of the time. Because a technical/bombcar will pop around the corner and kill them, or they will run in to an IED and need cover when healing, or they will walk over a grenade trap or whatever. Anyway, the point is that the Blufor have to move forward. They have to litterally come in to the building and search for caches, INS do not, tehy can wait. Bad insurgents are the inpatient insurgents who tard rush everything, bad blufor are teh same. But without Toys blufor wouldn't make headway at all as all the intel will be on the side of INS

I think Each side has been given the tools that reward teamwork in their team, but if INS got lower spawn times, it would obviously affect the difficulty level for Blufor...and thus something would have to change. I would propose that the change be that the INS collaborators lose the ability to revive people, possibly getting field dressings instead of a first aid kit. In a way, I think that would benefit the INS. But at hte same time...it might require a change in spawnpoints, i.e. Rallys being given to INS