[Commander] Taliban/INS

[MikeDude]

Place a ''false cache marker'' on the map, like its false in-tell.

And add a load time to this as well, like 20 min load time. If you place it somewhere the US will still see the ''new in-tell of an enemy weapons cache has been found'' or something like that. I mean the message they get now.

This will be realistic (False in-tell)
And this can be a very tactical move for the INS team, to get a team into an ambush.


Share your thoughts...

[BlackwaterSaxon]

People have enough problems lately trying to find the weapon caches after receiving intel as it is, then again, this could be quite useful if the INS side is trying to draw the BLUFOR to a particular point on the map for ambushing, I wouldn't mind seeing this added, any thing that can level the playing field is pretty useful.

[ZephyrDark]

Would be pretty useful, might add more caution to the BLUFOR side. I don't know how the coding goes, but would they be able to add a marker that both sides could see?
It'd be nice to see more organized ambushes where the BLUFOR actually come to you without the risk of giving away a real cache location. Right now the current "Hide ammo boxes in a building and hope the enemy think there is a cache there" tactic doesn't really work to often right now, or well to be honest. I have seen it work, but rarely even on an organized server.

EDIT: I also just love how i see this post and another one just below this one that 18 mins previously it was posted.

[centralhigh76]

wow we had the same thought on the same day just 3 hours apart srry if it looked like i copied you. But, Great Idea

[boilerrat]

Im not sure if its the case IRL, but I was watching GreenZone and an Iraqi local ran up to a group of soldiers to give them information about a meeting... which was actually true.

So I'm sure it would be possible to get purposely false information from locals leading you into a trap.

I support this as long as it goes along with reality...

MA's do you have any confirmation of this?

[Scared_420]

i like this idea but as someone mentioned it is hard enough to find the cache with the current 100m radius,, perhaps when the commander places the false intel marker it will show up on the bluefor's map but maybe it could be possible to make it expire after a certain amount of time or if a certain amount of blufor were in the proximitry of the marker (50-100m) then a message that says "intel was not reliable", kinda how it is with waypoints where it says intel reports enemies at waypoint B

[alberto_di_gio]

Actually not a bad idea.

BUT. There is a real big "but" as BlackwaterSaxon said BLUFOR really having problems with finding caches since .09. I see lots of rounds BLUFOR could destroy only 1-2 caches. Of course this is basicly because with the version BLUFOR have to be much more coordinated and much more act as a team. There are some good rounds but only is good servers with experienced players.

So although this may be a good idea right now it won't make good for INS mode.

[Web_cole]

Insurgency is heavily balanced in favour of OPFOR these days, I very rarely see an Insurgent team win, so this could help balance it the other way slightly. And it is kind of an interesting idea.

[snooggums]

The best false cache intel is a hideout away from the action built with an ammo pickup and two guys who brought RPGs from the main. Shoot them from a single location for a little bit, make the BluFor think that there is a cache there and get them to waste some tickets.

[bosco_]

Insurgency is heavily balanced in favour of OPFOR these days, I very rarely see an Insurgent team win.

Contradiction.

But the idea of 'false intel' (apart from the methods snooggums mentioned) is interesting.

[paracowboy]

Im not sure if its the case IRL, but I was watching GreenZone and an Iraqi local ran up to a group of soldiers to give them information about a meeting... which was actually true.

So I'm sure it would be possible to get purposely false information from locals leading you into a trap.

I support this as long as it goes along with reality...

MA's do you have any confirmation of this?

That movie is total fiction, the only way it is "based on the book" is that they both take place in Baghdad, Iraq.

[alberto_di_gio]

Insurgency is heavily balanced in favour of OPFOR these days, I very rarely see an Insurgent team win, .

Are you sure you are playing same PR with us?

[boilerrat]

That movie is total fiction, the only way it is "based on the book" is that they both take place in Baghdad, Iraq.

That does not matter if the movie is fictional, its the part where it is totally possible for locals to give information like that.

[MikeDude]

I think it will be a cool commander function, lead the Americans into an ambush!
Get them to go somewhere, then drop a mortar strike.
Flank their armor.

Lots of things these ''false markers'' could be good for.

[yakuz]

I love it, however to rebalance you could cut down the searchable area per marker. This would more easily allow the blufor to identify an area as 'false intel'. e.g. they did have to search 140m radius with a definite cache location, now they have to search two 70m radius areas one with real intel one false.

[pl0x102]

This sounds like one of those few very good ideas. The blufor would now have to work together in trying to work out whether or not its the real thing.

Only problem, Is it hardcodded?

[MikeDude]

This sounds like one of those few very good ideas. The blufor would now have to work together in trying to work out whether or not its the real thing.

Only problem, Is it hardcodded?

Thanks, Lets hope its not hard codded. Lets wait for a DEV response...

[Trooper909]

I like this idea would add more tactics to the game mode for both teams.
More tactics can never be bad can it?

[Infantry1242]

Yea,the commander could call in a massive bot attack of dropping Gary's!