Insurgens are allowed to Baseattack - Good or Nasty?
-
Klutz
- Posts: 18
- Joined: 2009-07-30 02:26
Re: Insurgens are allowed to Baseattack - Good or Nasty?
Glad to hear it Orford.
-
Navo
- Posts: 1389
- Joined: 2011-05-22 14:34
Re: Insurgens are allowed to Baseattack - Good or Nasty?
That's really lame in my opinion.dtacs wrote:On NwA attacking the main with vehicles is allowed. Rantbox and I destroyed 2 Kiowa's and a Chinook with the SPG on two separate occasions whilst they were on the pad unmanned.
-
Cassius
- Posts: 3958
- Joined: 2008-04-14 17:37
Re: Insurgens are allowed to Baseattack - Good or Nasty?
Depends, if like 100 players are the norm, its okay I guess. But with 60 players, no thanks. I would be against insurgents allowed to use mortars in any way though. Irl they can only fire what they can haul into the range. In game they just can spam incessantly. I think the only time something like that happened irl was in Khe Shan which was a base in south vietnam all the way to the border with north vietnam, which was at war with the us and south vietnam.
-
CommunistComma
- Posts: 377
- Joined: 2009-12-28 21:52
Re: Insurgens are allowed to Baseattack - Good or Nasty?
I think they're putting mortar barriers on the mains sometime.
Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori


-
saXoni
- Posts: 4180
- Joined: 2010-10-17 21:20
Re: Insurgens are allowed to Baseattack - Good or Nasty?
There are. USMC's main on Muttrah and MEC's main on Burning Sands are two examples.CommunistComma wrote:I think they're putting mortar barriers on the mains sometime.
-
SGT.Ice
- Posts: 985
- Joined: 2010-01-28 02:47
Re: Insurgens are allowed to Baseattack - Good or Nasty?
I liked the old days when insurgents could attack the main base. People get too comfortable and lazy when they're given the easy street.
Thus the current dip in the community.
Thus the current dip in the community.
-
saXoni
- Posts: 4180
- Joined: 2010-10-17 21:20
Re: Insurgens are allowed to Baseattack - Good or Nasty?
So you're saying that the community is worse now, after the Insurgents were denied to fire into Blufor's main base?SGT.Ice wrote:I liked the old days when insurgents could attack the main base. People get too comfortable and lazy when they're given the easy street.
Thus the current dip in the community.
-
Brainlaag
- Posts: 3923
- Joined: 2009-09-20 12:36
Re: Insurgens are allowed to Baseattack - Good or Nasty?
This hasn't anything to do with the playerbase, the community has become worst, independent from the ruleset applied.saXoni wrote:So you're saying that the community is worse now, after the Insurgents were denied to fire into Blufor's main base?
....damn thinking back how much fun Insurgency was in it's early stages without the exaggerated dome of death and bombings of main bases *droll*....just makes me sad.
And the Rescue the VIP mode, damn you time flow!
-
Hitman.2.5
- Posts: 1086
- Joined: 2008-03-21 20:54
Re: Insurgens are allowed to Baseattack - Good or Nasty?
why is every one forgetting operation archer? :S one of the wrost FOB locations ever(along with lash and korengal), in a depression surrounded from 4 sides.
That was fubar, bad placement of an airstrip, plus surrounded from 3 hills around it. even though there were outposts on those hills they were over run and the airstrip turned into the NVA's artillery training grounds. Then there was the french before at Dien Bien Phu, a similar shitty base.
Cassius wrote:I think the only time something like that happened irl was in Khe Shan which was a base in south vietnam all the way to the border with north vietnam, which was at war with the us and south vietnam.
That was fubar, bad placement of an airstrip, plus surrounded from 3 hills around it. even though there were outposts on those hills they were over run and the airstrip turned into the NVA's artillery training grounds. Then there was the french before at Dien Bien Phu, a similar shitty base.
Last edited by Hitman.2.5 on 2012-03-01 00:08, edited 1 time in total.
Derpist
-
Brainlaag
- Posts: 3923
- Joined: 2009-09-20 12:36
Re: Insurgens are allowed to Baseattack - Good or Nasty?
Because Canadian Armor just dominates the open terrain on Archer?
-
Murphy
- Posts: 2339
- Joined: 2010-06-05 21:14
Re: Insurgens are allowed to Baseattack - Good or Nasty?
Until it flips over from a small unseen ridge on the crest of a tiny hill.Brainlaag wrote:Because Canadian Armor just dominates the open terrain on Archer?

-
Brainlaag
- Posts: 3923
- Joined: 2009-09-20 12:36
Re: Insurgens are allowed to Baseattack - Good or Nasty?
Too bad they changed it and made the LAV-3 actually somewhat stable, was always fun to see how noobs flipped them on a almost perfectly flat terrain.Murphy wrote:Until it flips over from a small unseen ridge on the crest of a tiny hill.
-
SGT.Ice
- Posts: 985
- Joined: 2010-01-28 02:47
Re: Insurgens are allowed to Baseattack - Good or Nasty?
My personal opinion is BLUFOR is too laxed and the fact that insurgents can't attack their main is overkill and prevents them from winning some days. The BLUFOR already have the tech/man power to roll insurgents, especially unorganized ones, so attacking main is plausible.saXoni wrote:So you're saying that the community is worse now, after the Insurgents were denied to fire into Blufor's main base?
When you get too comfortable, you get too lazy. Too many rules that make people comfortable causes lethargy.
Brainlaag wrote:This hasn't anything to do with the playerbase, the community has become worst, independent from the ruleset applied.
....damn thinking back how much fun Insurgency was in it's early stages without the exaggerated dome of death and bombings of main bases *droll*....just makes me sad.
And the Rescue the VIP mode, damn you time flow!
I'm not talking just insurgency, i'm talking about all the ridiculous rules that have been put in place to keep people from getting angry that someone out smarted them. People that want to stay in their comfort zone get killed for a reason.
-
Bringerof_D
- Posts: 2142
- Joined: 2007-11-16 04:43
Re: Insurgens are allowed to Baseattack - Good or Nasty?
I'm all for having ins fire into main and allowing blufor to shoot out. That said most mains would then require some sort of garage to protect unused assets.
my favorite for this is Korengal. Playing as US is so much fun when the base is under siege. every inch of ground you step over beyond the hescos was hard earned. if the "FOB" were better constructed it would make for very fun battles where the US are defending the main. the only real issue with the korengal main is the fact that it is "incomplete" with a great lack of usable defensive positions for the US players.
my favorite for this is Korengal. Playing as US is so much fun when the base is under siege. every inch of ground you step over beyond the hescos was hard earned. if the "FOB" were better constructed it would make for very fun battles where the US are defending the main. the only real issue with the korengal main is the fact that it is "incomplete" with a great lack of usable defensive positions for the US players.
Information in the hands of a critical thinker is invaluable, information alone is simply dangerous.
-
SGT.Ice
- Posts: 985
- Joined: 2010-01-28 02:47
Re: Insurgens are allowed to Baseattack - Good or Nasty?
Better designed mains would be awesome indeed. Some of them were pretty inviting to be bomb card honestly, sometimes the rules make sense which is given. but when there's M249s on the wall and sand bags everywhere, why can't we just shoot out. I'm all for a revamp on main bases though. I'd like to be able to fight over a main base.Bringerof_D wrote:I'm all for having ins fire into main and allowing blufor to shoot out. That said most mains would then require some sort of garage to protect unused assets.
my favorite for this is Korengal. Playing as US is so much fun when the base is under siege. every inch of ground you step over beyond the hescos was hard earned. if the "FOB" were better constructed it would make for very fun battles where the US are defending the main. the only real issue with the korengal main is the fact that it is "incomplete" with a great lack of usable defensive positions for the US players.
If not garages then I agree there should be some type of safe guard for the unused vehicles.
