About insurgents and fox holes

[fabioxxxx]

Hello people

I only want to discuss about this, it was already suggested in 2009 .

playing in the insurgent team sometimes the cache spawn in the open, or a place with little cover ...when it gets revealed you need to stay close to it, but then the enemy start a mortar strike ... result the team protecting the cache gets reaped

If the cache is revealed and it's on a open space, the insurgents need the fox hole for protection against mortars.. it's not rocket science for the insurgents.

(caches on the streets, caches inside tents, caches inside bushes = nightmare )

the only thing left to do it's spawn as collaborator and try to mitigate the damage.

A lot has changed since the suggestion was made .
-2009 the revealed cache mark wasn't so precise
-2009 no mortars
https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f18-pr ... les-3.html

not for purple caches...we are not even allowed to stay close to then.

give your thoughts.

[Mikemonster]

Hmm, if it existed I could simply see an APC/HAT destroying them unless they were in a city or otherwise defensible terrain.. So it defeats the point a bit.

That said, i'm in favour of obstacles being available for Ins SL's so they can close off roads, etc. But appreciate this is the wrong place.

[PLODDITHANLEY]

Or report any easily visible caches?

[fabioxxxx]

i am only speaking about the fox holes... its something that's already in game. and use it only in caches already revealed... someone need to be really dumb to make a fox hole close to a purple cache...we are not even allowed to stay close to then.

the main pourpose of the fox hole is protection against mortars

of course the fox hole can be destroyed apc/hat but what else you can do ?

1.stay still and let the mortar hit you in the face
2.run and stay in place safe but far from the cache.
3.use the collaborator (if the faction has)

[Spec]

This is still a suggestion. I'll be nice and approve of it though and thus move it here. It's already been suggested as you said, but I see new discussion material due to the mortars.

[Rhino]

For future ref, the correct thing for you guys to do instead of making a new topic, especially one that is outside of the suggestions forum, is to bump the old topic with your new points.

[Wakain]

That said, i'm in favour of obstacles being available for Ins SL's so they can close off roads, etc.

you mean a sort of non-conventional-specific barricade deployable, giving cover as well as disabling movement?

I do like the idea of that

edit:

but appreciate this is the wrong place.

sorry, focused on the first part of this sentence

[Xander[nl]]

Or report any easily visible caches?

There's a ton of caches that are very hard for the INS to defend. Think desert caches on Basrah or Karbala. The INS can hold out for a while but once the armor support pulls up, the party is over and BLUFOR will get the cache within five minutes.

Foxholes could really improve the defence for these caches.

Maybe even a 'reinforced hideout' of some kind that can withstand mortars and vehicle fire. With a limit of 1 and having a much larger spawn radius than the normal hideout (like 100m instead of 5m) this.. bunker, could be used to much greater effect on bare landscape which is normally very prone to armor.

In fact, the barricades suggestion also sounds really good.

IMO the Insurgent build system could use a nice overhaul.

[qs-racer]

It migth be more interresting to dig trench, like there is a lot on project normandy.
Trench won't offer possibility to be destroy by ennmy rocket

I don't know if it is possible to have asset under the ground level.

[killonsight95]

new abracades could be made easily (I think) by using barbed wire as option 1 (like the static one used for bases) and as option 2 you could use two cars static cars with those red tank traps from operation baracuda on each side.
option 1 hurts infantry but jeeps etc. can drive through it, option 2 stops vehicles (requires 2 or 3 incendaries to destroy) but inf can climb over it.

As for foxholes, they'd be easy to make, as you can use the blufor ones but with a few bit of rubbish on the outside, however I think they'd need protection against vehicle sheels like 2 tank shells to take one down (unless the current requires more).
Either way i support the idea of the insuregents having something to protect more open caches.

Also it is not possible to have an asset below ground level :/

[velocity]

While a foxhole would be a little too obvious, they dont provide very good protection as it against anything other than bullets.

Although I am in support of a type of barricade, perhaps made of rubbish and tires like in Ramiel, only not on fire.

[Fox_J21]

Insurgents need special "roadblocks" (Mounds of dirt, junk, etc.) That can prevent armor. Make C4 be the only thing that can destroy them.


Have deployment based on the variable fob (200m range) being a revealed cache. Maybe even just an ordinary hideout. Possibly introduce INS supply crates for the building of assets? (I think that's actually a great idea. No Hideout needed, just a stack of building supplies.)

[fabioxxxx]

While a foxhole would be a little too obvious, they dont provide very good protection as it against anything other than bullets.

Although I am in support of a type of barricade, perhaps made of rubbish and tires like in Ramiel, only not on fire.

people are not reading the post ... the fox hole purpose it's to help defend a revealed cache that appears in places with little o no cover (streets,bushes,tents etc)... when a mortar strike start the only thing you can do it's to hide in a fox hole, or try to run like crazy (not very effective)

the revealed cache mark is so precise that does not matter if someone can spot the fox hole...

[DenvH]

I understand the need for foxholes as Insurgents near a cache and I support that idea. As a model you could take the Ins mortar-pit, remove the mortar stuff from it and possibly edit it's shape a bit to be more "foxhole like".

As for people saying these easy to take out caches should be removed. I disagree as it's already hard, if not near impossible to take on caches in the city on maps like Karbala. This has been the case in decent pub games (mumble forced) and in the last PRT where the Ins won every Insurgency map.. A well defended cache in the city is an absolute death trap for Blufor.

[fabioxxxx]

Hi maybe the devs can find love in their hearts to give insurgents fox holes in 1.0 XP, defending open caches under fire of mortars is terrible ...if you are taliban mortars are ticket machines. there are no collaborators to counter the mortars.

Now playing Dien Duong on Insurgency mode is great , as the cache is revealed we build fox holes and hold the defensive positions , not needing to stray far from the cache.

[Mikemonster]

Drop your kit as Taliban then wait two minutes. Taliban do have collaborators but not as a requestable kit.

[Brainlaag]

Drop your kit as Taliban then wait two minutes. Taliban do have collaborators but not as a requestable kit.

No Talibans don't, only Hamas have the "civi"-kit outside the main selection menu as feature. If you drop your kit as Taliban and run around, even after 5 minutes there won't be a penalty for the enemy.

[Mikemonster]

.. Really? I thought they were like Hamas. I have no idea then.

I don't practise what I just preached either way, long ago stopped martyring my fun by going civi when I could fire a gun anyway.

[pedrooo14]

1- Its not reallistic that INS/Taliban have foxholes because they dont use them, they not build estatic defences around an estrategic point, they fight guerrilla war.

2- Rhino say sometime ago something about it was too difficult to create them because the terrain and the graphic engine.

[Pronck]

1- Its not reallistic that INS/Taliban have foxholes because they dont use them, they not build estatic defences around an estrategic point, they fight guerrilla war.

2- Rhino say sometime ago something about it was too difficult to create them because the terrain and the graphic engine.

Remember, in Iraq cities like Fallujah, Tal-Afar and many other cities got turned into fortresses. They made holes and tunnels to shoot out, trenches and so on. The only thing you need is basically a shovel.

In Afghanistan, Taliban strongholds have a lot of "hidden" defenses. For example irrigation ditches, "mouse holes" that are holes in the wall to move quickly from one place to another", and some kind of foxholes dug in the ground to find cover in fields for example.

We don't necessarily need foxholes like conventional armies have, but at least some kind of roadblock, or things that can provide more cover and can be used to get a cache better protected than as it is now.

That they fight a guerrilla war doesn't mean that they don't have any defenses, and the maps Iraqi maps are mostly uprising maps as I call them, based on uprisings against coalition forces in the previous decade. These uprisings were far from guerrilla warfare kind of battles in my opinion.