Insurgency Game Mode is Still More Fun as Blufor

[007.SirBond]

I was hoping insurgency would get a overhaul in 1.0
This game mode is a drag to play as insurgents. The problem is having two caches at different locations. Having one entire team attacking a cache while the other defending team is forced to split into two groups is unbalanced. Its also very boring to be a insurgent waiting at a cache and the Blufor not attacking your cache but the other cache.

Please make dbmod the official insurgency game mode with only one cache.

Please do not remove the civilian class, but change the penalty of killing insurgents to blufor losing tickets and a ingame message broadcasted to all blufor players showing the blufor player's name who killed the civilian.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who felt dbmod was a major improvement to insurgency.

[Viperelite]

I was hoping insurgency would get a overhaul in 1.0
This game mode is a drag to play as insurgents. The problem is having two caches at different locations. Having one entire team attacking a cache while the other defending team is forced to split into two groups is unbalanced. Its also very boring to be a insurgent waiting at a cache and the Blufor not attacking your cache but the other cache.

Please make dbmod the official insurgency game mode with only one cache.

Please do not remove the civilian class, but change the penalty of killing insurgents to blufor losing tickets and a ingame message broadcasted to all blufor players showing the blufor player's name who killed the civilian.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who felt dbmod was a major improvement to insurgency.

Well even with 2 cache's ill admit i prefer playing as insurgent/militia. But i really, really do agree about only having 1 cache at a time. The game play was better for both sides IMO. But i would say if some servers did start running 1 cache only there should only be like 3 or 4 because they will take longer to clear and destroy.

[Tennessee88]

I am going to go ahead and disagree. With the exception of one wondeful round of Ramiel two nights ago (which was sadly ended by a server crash, still one of the best rounds I have had) I have not seen the U.S. win or even make much progress. Blufor has always had to coordinate better than the defenders, and that is especially true now with 100 players and the fact that to destroy the cache you have to get either your specialist or combat engi on site. No more running in as a medic and dropping all your incendiaries. Also, with the changes to fobs and rallies, it is way to easy for INS to reinforce the cache.

Now imagine having to attack that cache being defended by close to 50 INS players. Unless the entire blufor team acts with true military precision or gets really lucky, you will constantly have rounds where its 6 caches left.

The only way we made progress on the round I am referring to is the entire team moved against the cache using true fire and manuever tactics. The amount of rounds we had the throw down range to keep the ARF supressed so we could move men in were sick (and that was awesome, I credit that to new deviation). I was a saw gunner, and we had a spare 240, plus a .50 on our vehicle... we chewed through almost all our ammo in just 7 or less minutes of contact. If we didn't ARF could look up to shoot, and unlike .98, if you are running in an open field, deviation isn't going to save you.

Plus, I genuinely enjoy playing as ARF. I get to be a bit reckless, and it is much easier to keep a cache covered from all angles.

Well done Devs.

[40mmrain]

We could experiment with imposing a relevant time limit to the game. Often BLUFOR will just drag their heels attacking, and you can be left at either cache for ~20 minutes with no action. It's a tad boring.

That, or upping needed intel count. Even now knowns come up practically instantly due to the 100p servers

[007.SirBond]

I am going to go ahead and disagree. With the exception of one wondeful round of Ramiel two nights ago (which was sadly ended by a server crash, still one of the best rounds I have had) I have not seen the U.S. win or even make much progress. Blufor has always had to coordinate better than the defenders, and that is especially true now with 100 players and the fact that to destroy the cache you have to get either your specialist or combat engi on site. No more running in as a medic and dropping all your incendiaries. Also, with the changes to fobs and rallies, it is way to easy for INS to reinforce the cache.

Now imagine having to attack that cache being defended by close to 50 INS players. Unless the entire blufor team acts with true military precision or gets really lucky, you will constantly have rounds where its 6 caches left.

The only way we made progress on the round I am referring to is the entire team moved against the cache using true fire and manuever tactics. The amount of rounds we had the throw down range to keep the ARF supressed so we could move men in were sick (and that was awesome, I credit that to new deviation). I was a saw gunner, and we had a spare 240, plus a .50 on our vehicle... we chewed through almost all our ammo in just 7 or less minutes of contact. If we didn't ARF could look up to shoot, and unlike .98, if you are running in an open field, deviation isn't going to save you.

Plus, I genuinely enjoy playing as ARF. I get to be a bit reckless, and it is much easier to keep a cache covered from all angles.

Well done Devs.

INS don't get rallies on Ramiel anymore. And everytime I've played as US on ramiel, we always dominate winning the game with over 200 tickets. The main issue I dislike about Insurgency is defending as Insurgents where you sit for a good 30 mins with no action because the US is attacking the other cache and not yours. Matter of fact, I notice many insurgents leaving the cache because they get bored of waiting. Having one cache doesn't make it any harder for Blufor, Blufor still have armor and CAS, I don't find it hard to play as Blufor at all attacking only the known cache, there are only 5 caches now, just like there was in DBmod.

I just don't think its very fun gameplay to play as a blufor squad searching for unknown caches, destroying static objects without encountering enemies. Nor do I think it's fun to defend a cache as a insurgent with no one attacking it.

[z0MbA]

i completely forgot about dbmod, indeed it was a huge improvement

[Viperelite]

I'm not saying every INS layer should have this. But if there was just like an alternate insurgency layer that had only 3 or 4 total cache's but only 1 cache spawned at a time so the other team cant just destroy unknowns.

Or even just having a new game mode where there is only 1 cache but it spawns in a really good location and you only ever have 1 cache that round and it has to be defended at all costs. All most like a Hold Position game mode but for insurgents.

Really any kind of INS layer that forces everyone to one cache at a time makes for some really interesting rounds of INS.

[Hurricane]

I always liked Insurgency and still do, and I think it's a fun game mode to play on both sides.
For an asymetrical game mode it actually is well balanced on most maps. I don't believe reducing the amount of active caches to one is going to improve it in any way. Sometimes it is pretty much impossible to destroy a well-defended cache until another one gets revealed, forcing irregular faction to pull off forces and have them defend the new known cache.
It has always been about managing your human resources to prevent the enemy from getting to the objective.

The kind of Insurgency overhaul I'd like to see is new/more cache locations on old maps primarily. Thinking of Basrah, I remember rounds where an experienced british mechanized infantry squad would just steamroll the insurgents with the Warrior IFV and Scimitar, checking all possible cache locations one after another and destroying 3 or 4 unknowns within 20 minutes. New cache locations would make it much harder for Blufor to just check every possible cache spawn and make the game more interesting again.

[piepieonline]

Unknown caches no longer spawn, so the problems with unknown caches being destroyed should be resolved.

[PR0_SNIPE]

I always try to play as insurgent because I think its more fun to be on that side.

Now about the one-cache idea, I agree it would be better for the INS team because they all will be defending it instead of being split up between two caches. The cache number would have to be lowered because it will probably take longer to destroy it. I agree that it should be an option but not a default for insurgency. The two-cache insurgency still has its plus's.

[007.SirBond]

I forgot to mention, the lack of available IED's for insurgents was lacking in 1.0

I think the Opfor insurgents should have a remote cell phone detonator as opposed to a timed charge. It is well documented that insurgents utilize more IED's and explosive attacks than any other form of combat during their battles against conventional forces. I felt 0.98 did a really good job of that giving the sapper role on the kit selection screen.

I've noticed more insurgent grenadiers on the field than actual sappers during insurgency gameplay on Ramiel. In real life, I think insurgents would use more IEDs than actual 40mm grenades, plus I doubt they would be able to get their hands on those 40mm rounds as often as they have them in game right now.
Perhaps swap the grenadier kit with a sapper role for insurgents?

[ComedyInK]

Unknown caches no longer spawn, so the problems with unknown caches being destroyed should be resolved.

Funny thing happend with this today. We knew where both caches were, we knew where one was for like 40 minutes because they kept spawning on it, we even saw them spawning on while we killed them, but we couldn't kill it because we didn't have enough intel points to turn the cache from unknown to known. So we played that game for near 3 hours. My squad got exactly 11,111 Squad total points in the end, and Kawlc, with his own squad, got 4866 points.

[MADsqirrel]

I forgot to mention, the lack of available IED's for insurgents was lacking in 1.0

I think the Opfor insurgents should have a remote cell phone detonator as opposed to a timed charge. It is well documented that insurgents utilize more IED's and explosive attacks than any other form of combat during their battles against conventional forces. I felt 0.98 did a really good job of that giving the sapper role on the kit selection screen.

I've noticed more insurgent grenadiers on the field than actual sappers during insurgency gameplay on Ramiel. In real life, I think insurgents would use more IEDs than actual 40mm grenades, plus I doubt they would be able to get their hands on those 40mm rounds as often as they have them in game right now.
Perhaps swap the grenadier kit with a sapper role for insurgents?

I think there will be a difference in ARF equipment and Iraqi INS or Taliban equipment.
While it is true that INS and Taliban using IEDs alot IRL, in Africa they are not used that much. The problem is that Ramiel is basicly the Battle of Mogadischu (Black Hawk down).
But that was 1993(?).
And if the movie was somewhat correct (I have no idea) then the ARF has a realistc weapon and vehicle loadout.

[Filamu]

Unknown caches no longer spawn, so the problems with unknown caches being destroyed should be resolved.

Which gives us the problem with the insurgents just hiding somewhere, the blufor doesn't get intel, and the insurgents can win by time if they want.

[Psyrus]

Which gives us the problem with the insurgents just hiding somewhere, the blufor doesn't get intel, and the insurgents can win by time if they want.

50 players... "just hiding somewhere"? Really?