Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Souls Of Mischief · Post by **Souls Of Mischief** » 2013-06-12 17:05

vistamaster01 wrote:What changes can we expect to Insurgency in 1.0?

Perhaps you heard, but a nice change is no more C4 destroying caches through walls, IIRC, though.

Post by **Arab** » 2013-06-14 06:43

Souls Of Mischief wrote:Perhaps you heard, but a nice change is no more C4 destroying caches through walls, IIRC, though.

They had made it harder for the C4 to destroy the cache through the walls. That probably means they reduced the splash area (The area that the explosion affects with damage).

I'll take the Reality Developers advice and test the game out.

Heavy Death · Post by **Heavy Death** » 2013-06-14 08:14

KiloJules wrote:This is so interesting to me...why do people always think that insurgency should/could be played more casually than AAS? I have the exact opposite opinion about it and really wished more people would take it a bit more serious as it is THE thing that sets PR apart from any other "here, have two identical armies facing each other and having a deathmatch" type of games. Mind boggling, really.

Exactly, i dont know what goes on in the heads of other people, but INS is actually more HC than AAS, just everybody on the INS side doesnt give a damn about it.

Darman1138 · Post by **Darman1138** » 2013-06-14 10:39

Heavy Death wrote:Exactly, i dont know what goes on in the heads of other people, but INS is actually more HC than AAS, just everybody on the INS side doesnt give a damn about it.

Whenever I end up on INS, I try to give a damn about it but there are so many other players who don't that it just doesn't matter. If I try to defend the cache all my squad mates are charging towards the enemy instead of letting them come closer and setting up organized ambush points.

Pronck · Post by **Pronck** » 2013-06-14 11:15

You can often see if the insurgents are taking it serious by looking at the hideouts. A good insurgent team often has a good network of hideouts that are not sitting on top of the cache. Good hideouts will allow you to pop up behind the enemy and flank them.

Devs, will the insurgents / taliban get more vehicles than featured in the devcasts / highlights / blogs?

=-=kittykiller · Post by **=-=kittykiller** » 2013-06-14 16:15

KiloJules wrote:This is so interesting to me...why do people always think that insurgency should/could be played more casually than AAS? I have the exact opposite opinion about it and really wished more people would take it a bit more serious as it is THE thing that sets PR apart from any other "here, have two identical armies facing each other and having a deathmatch" type of games. Mind boggling, really.

you shudnt be a beta tester then

back in the good old days "FORCE CENTER FORCE CENTRE GOD DAMN IT!"

Anderson29 · Post by **Anderson29** » 2013-06-14 17:22

The main problem is that it is hard set good ambushes when squads can just rope over, around chokepoints which is why I keep try to convince rhino to make them less common on the battlefield. To defend a cache real well u have to have patience and a good sqd that is just as patient. ..I would argue that it takes more skill to defend a cache as insurgents than it does to take it out as blufor.

Post by **Rhino** » 2013-06-14 17:29

Anderson29 wrote:The main problem is that it is hard set good ambushes when squads can just rope over, around chokepoints which is why I keep try to convince rhino to make them less common on the battlefield. To defend a cache real well u have to have patience and a good sqd that is just as patient. ..I would argue that it takes more skill to defend a cache as insurgents than it does to take it out as blufor.

Convincing me? Can't say I remember that

But the ropes are mainly there to simulate combat ladders which are widly used by all troops.

Although we should probaly make the rope shorter to simulate the ladders length, although some are pretty long but generally they are short ones the troops carrie in with them.

Anderson29 · Post by **Anderson29** » 2013-06-14 20:06

i hate the grappling hook rhino

and here too rhino

and here

and here

doop-de-doo · Post by **doop-de-doo** » 2013-06-14 21:59

Anderson29 wrote:i hate the grappling hook rhino

and here too rhino

and here

and here

Your links look like tired, worn-out old threads.

WarEagle751 · Post by **WarEagle751** » 2013-06-14 23:59

Being able to use Tomahawk Missiles in Commander mode would be epic for Commander Mode like in BF4 multiplayer during E3.

Pronck · Post by **Pronck** » 2013-06-15 00:19

This isn't BF4! This Project Reality! Z0mgZ0rzzZZ

SANGUE-RUIM · Post by **SANGUE-RUIM** » 2013-06-15 00:21

PR 1.0 > BF4
PR 2.0 > BF5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10

SShadowFox · Post by **SShadowFox** » 2013-06-15 01:39

___sangue-ruim___ wrote:PR 1.0 > BF4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10

Fixed it.

Anderson29 · Post by **Anderson29** » 2013-06-15 01:56

doop-de-doo wrote:Your links look like tired, worn-out old threads.

oh they are.....but at least i got 1 thing out of it...

Anderson29; 11-04-2011, 08:24 PM wrote:did i say that didnt exist? i was trying to make a point that they are not as common as they are in game. hell, in some platoons it can be a SOP to have a SL carry a claymore....doesn't mean im gona come and say "hey in my platoon the SL and PL carried claymores." we brought them if they were mission dependent. like setting up a defense or an ambush. same thing would go for ladders i would think. i'd much rather see the AT4 or the 203 on the spawn screen rather than the specialist. those 2 kits are more common than the shotgun/combat ladder kit. right? is that not a valid point?

look i dont mind using it and believe me i take full advantage of it when i do.... i just dont like it because it takes me out of the game from an immersion point of view...just like when i see a blufor guy with insurgent head garb and an ak. you just dont see that stuff.

there are just so many ways to get over obstacles if you think outside the box. like bringing a vehicle next to the wall to jump over or using map placed objects to jump over or using explosives or a vehicle to take out a destructible wall.

according to dev cast #2 anyways..though they didnt remove the specialist...but i call that a win....and yes ill take the credit...lol

SANGUE-RUIM · Post by **SANGUE-RUIM** » 2013-06-15 02:26

SShadowFox wrote:Fixed it.

thx

WarEagle751 · Post by **WarEagle751** » 2013-06-15 02:53

B.Pronk(NL) wrote:This isn't BF4! This Project Reality! Z0mgZ0rzzZZ

I didn't say I wanted PR to be like BF4. I just thought it would be cool to to be able to use Tomahawk Missles in Commander Mode.

PR is way better than BF4!

DigitalRicky · Post by **DigitalRicky** » 2013-06-15 04:59

WarEagle751 wrote:I didn't say I wanted PR to be like BF4. I just thought it would be cool to to be able to use Tomahawk Missles in Commander Mode. PR is way better than BF4!

Not realistic. However of course we can all agree PR with BF4 graphics would be pretty tits.

Post by **camo** » 2013-06-15 06:11

DigitalRicky wrote:Not realistic. However of course we can all agree PR with BF4 graphics would be pretty tits.

hopefully it soon will become tits with pr2 on the cryengine 3

DigitalRicky · Post by **DigitalRicky** » 2013-06-15 06:41

camo_jnr_jnr wrote:hopefully it soon will become tits with pr2 on the cryengine 3

If it only were as easy as renaming pr.exe to pr2_cryengine.exe

Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)

Re: Ask the [Dev]s a (?)