Project Reality Forums

Orford, how can you claim that a gamemode where Blufor can win without taking out a single known cache isn't broken?

insurgency needs a change of something, that is for certain.

i'd take the simple 1 cache idea with the known marker not representing its exact location. make it so it can spawn 25 meters away from last spawn.

civi martyr being stronger would be nice too. seems like its too easy to hurt your team as civi in comparison to the little you could help... ppl dont shoot civis nearly as often anymore.

people will still know where to search, but it will matter less. it will also make it easier to stage fake caches.

My idea would be to remove unknowns (or rather 'the second cache') at all, giving a slightly longer delay until BLUFOR sees it (once it's been compromised). So basically a single cache on a map at any given time.
That'd also make possible to revert the map marker accuracy to the used-to-be 75m radius.
Plus experimenting a bit with intel points:

-removing them completely - it'd lead to blufor almost always waiting in safety until cache is visible on a map - unless having solid intel on the newly appeared, not yet visible cache. That would also require reworking the penalty system for killing unarmed combatants (ticket penalty? 5 min spawn? lightning from heavens?)
-tweaking the number of kills/arrests required. (at the moment I've just had a thought of making it random - like all between 5-50, emulating the fact that a single guy can provide a solid info on cache's location)

Still in my opinion a bit of fresh air is required. With the cache spawn algorithm unknown's location can be easily anticipated. Let alone some maps like Archer and Iron Ridge suffer greatly from the fact that a lot o players know possible cache locations by heart leading to quickly destroying any unknowns in desolate buidings. Let alone ghosting...

As Dtacs already mentioned is Insurgency disrupted by major flaws. One being the lack of objectives for the Insurgents team, leading to boredom and lack of overall teamwork, the other being the bad cache spawnsystem (which is not the DEVs fault but rather the limited points of interests on the map).

The engine and the playerbase limit this gamemode in its functionality and I yet have to understand how anyone can enjoy this. Sure its fun to play INS to shoot a bit around or blow stuff up but thats not the true nature of PR. Blufor does it better, as team cohesion often leads to success, although C4 ninjas have a much bigger impact.

TL;DR Insurgency leads to lone wolfing and promotes dubious tactics. I'd rather see an overhauled version of the "Rescue the VIP" gamemode back than any kind of Insurgency.

Addition: WebCole's idea could iron out the current flaws and make Insurgency an enjoyable gamemode.

I just want to see Insurgents attacking BLUFOR objectives, as it is in real life. Insurgents defending from onslaughts of tanks and helicopters is retarded.

The term "ghosting" is so ironically accurate, as we cannot prove ghosts exist. We have documentation of many strange occurrences that Occam's Razor would call ghosts, but still nothing beyond a connection of the dots.

@Dtacs Korengal on =H= is pretty much a nonstop assault on a Blufor objective, turns out to be a spamfest of massive proportions and is very aggravating for Blufor thanks to the INS team having no ticket value for deaths.

Korengal is an utterly unique example due to the terrain and GPO's. On every other map its the total opposite.

all i got from this thread was that virgins like to correct grammar on the internet






and that Mace the Orginal Poster is saying that having 2 caches on the map is still too many, it used to be 3 caches on the map at once in the old versions.


So basically if you lower it to 1 cache , it will mean longer rounds and dragged out battles over 1 single cache

what if

insurgency had no unknowns

problem solved

I was getting the debate going. As for something being broken, first it has to work for it to break. All the replies I've read don't point out anything that wasn't there from the start except C4 due limiting what kits can be picked up. (tarra you cannot fix C4 to you're own humvee)

All that's happened is ins mode has been played that much players have squeezed every last ounce of tactical advantage they can get so the rounds either become a stale mate or a C4 ninja squads wet dream.

We tried to stop spawning on unknowns on our server to stop giving away the cache, players adapted and started searching for unknowns. So we now allow spawning on unknowns as they would get found soon enough any way.

I still don't think its broken as in some one broke it. I just think we all have evolved the way we play ins mode to the point that the flaws of ins mode are now bigger than its challenges.

Dose ins mode need to evolve to give players more challenges to stop us moaning about its faults, then yes I'd agree, broken I still say no.

If we could hardcoded some things into cacha.e, there could be solution against ghosting!
1 -if we could, we need to hardcoded it, that every cache must be build like fob before it can be destroyed, afcourse with penalty for insurgent if they will not build cache in around 5 min(losing 10 points or 1 cache, and same for kolaition if they didnt destroy it ina a time around 30 min)

2 - next solution is that unknown caches couldnt be destroyed, until at least 1 insurgent stay close (25 meters)to it for about i dont know 15 second, that should be enought to pass by with techi, or until it become reviled!

That just my opinion maded in 5 minutes

I think that building cashes is a good idea. I think, that insurgency commander should be able to set cache location, so it will be harder to predict there it is.

Moszeusz6Pl's idea is really good I think. If you were to allow the commander to designate where the caches are set up then it would be as random as a human can possibly be, although being truly random is impossible due to the nature of humans.

In essence a cache is a firebase in real life in that insurgents would draw their supplies and weapons from the site and frequent it or even live in it in the case of a cave or other such dwelling.

Hmm there has to be a way that would make it easier to hide the caches.... give me a few and I'll see if I can come up with something...

EDIT: I've thought of something. Maybe this will ease the problem of ghosting.

Scenario: Fallujah 64 INS (Known cache is located somewhere on the map. Unknown cache is located in the city)

What I propose... is a possible countdown on the UNKNOWN cache only. Whereas every "X" amount of time the cache switches spots. For purpose of concept we will say every 10 minutes.

Every 10 minutes the UNKNOWN cache switches spots (I.E spawns at a different location and destroying the previous cache location)

Rules of rotation: Cannot spawn within 200 m of previous cache location, MUST spawn at least 100 m away from enemy soldiers or vehicles (numbers subject to change)

Once enough intel is gathered to reveal the location of the unknown cache, then the previously unknown cache (now known) stops rotating positions and becomes stable.

------------------------------------------

I think the rotating unknown cache would stop the possibility of ghosting and or accidentally stumbling upon the unknown cache (if not fully stopping these things then surely it would make them harder and less frequent)

Now one might bring up the issue of spamming kits everywhere. What if we could possibly link the kits of the unknown, rotating cache.

Example: Someone picks up and RPG at unknown, cache 10 minutes later switches spots.
Because the RPG was picked up by someone and is currently in use, the newly located cache doesn't have that kit in the spawn-able queue. therefore spawning only the kits that weren't picked up or in use.


Ideas, comments, improvements

I sincerely doubt that a rotating unknown will protect the unknown at all. It would make it more unpredictable, but unknowns go down for 3 reasons:
1) Ghosting - Unaffected as it takes far less than 10 minutes to get across all current insurgency maps and kill a cache.
2) BLUFOR search random compounds until they find it - Almost the same as above. Every time I've stumbled upon a random unknown, It's gone down within a minute or two, tops.
3) BLUFOR calculate cache spawn locations based on previous caches - This would become slightly more annoying, as you would have to constantly recheck areas, but there would still be a limited number of locations the caches could spawn. A well coordinated team could circumvent the rotation.

I like the idea of having the caches being built like a FOB. Perhaps insurgency could be rebuilt as something like CnC. The insurgents would get to pick where they wanted their caches, and they would simply have a ticket bleed with one the caches down. BLUFOR would also have a "main" FOB, for which they would also have a bleed if it was down. This would mean that the insurgents would have some incentive to actually take the offensive against the BLUFOR, while simultaneously giving the insurgents the ability to control their own caches.

The above idea would probably be rather difficult to implement, but I think it would improve insurgency.

Nice idea with forced BLUFOR to have FOB. This will encourage to make some attacks at checkpoint and stop BLUFOR from waiting at main.

*NwA*Orford wrote:(tarra you cannot fix C4 to you're own humvee)

Yeah you can. Did it some time ago on NwA. Boomb cache down.

@ExNusquam As I mentioned 10 minutes was just a place holder. The times and such could be worked around. Would be interesting if someone with some Python coding knowledge could run a closed test of the work around.

Only problem I see with FOB caches is that, it'll be harder for the US to actually get to the caches. Seeing as they could be placed in glitches/small easily defendable location. Also, who would have the authority to place caches?

I think, that commander should be able to give cache build order, and then squad leaders will be able to build it like hideout, within 50 meters.

*NwA*Orford wrote:paper, pen. Draw a square. Mark cache locations as they would be using the key pad grid reff. Once you have destroyed 2 caches and have intel for the next 2. Look at your paper look at your map. Disregard water, main bases, open terrain with no structures. That leaves the other 3 caches easy to predict where the will spawn. Go build fobs in these areas, FOB becomes unspawnable or destroyed = cache nearby.

oh and play ins mode on them maps for three years, you'll get used to it.

ghosting is very hard to call.

Though that's not always the case Orford. Most of the times that works but I've seen caches spawn on the most unpredictable locations, quite often in fact. For example, a couple of days ago, 3 caches in row spawned on the island of Basrah in a triangular pattern. But still, yes caches are easy to predict in most cases and ghosters are hard to catch - but don't tell them that ^^