Project Reality Forums

Jamaican wrote:Should remove cache markers altogether. Intel should come from team comms, like enemy movements or spotted cache weapons

You sir just won the jackpot!

What if ins dont even go close to the "known" cache, then its just like hunting for unknowns. Might want to actually read what people suggest and compare to your own suggestion before you agree with everything.

I still maintain that insurgency should be tweaked so that there are never 2 unknowns at any time.

Example: If in a round at one point there is 1 known and 1 unknown, if the known goes down then no new cache spawns until the other unknown cache becomes known. There could still be 2 known caches at a time this way, and the only time there is only 1 cache on the map is when the blufor has no knowns. Once they have earned the intelligence points to make that single cache known visible on the map then they are rewarded with the knowledge that an unknown has spawned as well. "Hunting" for the unknowns can still be a part of the game, but to have that second unknown cache around for Blufor to hunt they have to first earn intelligence points by engaging insurgents.

Jamaican wrote:Should remove cache markers altogether. Intel should come from team comms, like enemy movements or spotted cache weapons

Dought anybody would go for this but I love the idea.It would promote a game of cat and mouse better and insurgents could actually mess with blu by furiously defending a useless point on the map like it should be with unknowns now.

Still wont help with the ghosting problem mind you.

Also the game mode altogether has got way out of balance ( know is spose to be),I mean what happened to insurgents being a highly mobile defensive force with advantage of the land and blu having all high tech gear to assault and also dig in with?
Now blu are the highly mobile force wile insurgents are a static force without the tools to be static like blu has and blu is still high tech......its stupid to take away the only advantage insurgents had,Speed and mobility while giving blu more mobility and technology.

Anderson29 wrote: this would cause blufor to do patrols or what we use to call when i was in iraq..."ied finding missions" then report a tic (troops in contact) and bring the reinforcements. it could work.

that would be awesome

Insurgency has never been alright. I really hope it gets fixed sometime.

well insurgency has had many changes... i remember when all caches spawned at the beginning of the round and insurgents had about 10-15 different spawn points (permanent rallies) spread out through the map not counting the cache spawn points and when these spawn points would get knifed they would come back 15 minutes later so you were always having to re-clear land you had cleared previously or risk 1 of those permanent rallies coming back up and getting shot in the back. and yes insurgents use to win those rounds to sometimes.

so insurgency has come a long way since then, and for the better i would say. mumble in my opinion is making far better games as far as teamwork is concerned compared to the past and i've been here since the beginning.

and to be honest i dont know if there is much else that can be drastically changed. if there is just 1 cache at a time it will be a meat-grinder of a round with people's k/d's looking similar to vanilla and that's not what we want.

if the "no 2 unknowns on map at a time" idea can be implemented that would be great to test and see how it goes....same thing goes for having "no intel marks at all" and just having blufor collect their own intel and prosecute their own missions based on that intel gotten by reporting tic's (troops in contact) to the rest of the team and by observations of enemy movements by recon teams and uav....that's how its done in real life. and of course harsh interrogation techniques such as "punch civi in face with flex cuffs"

Opfor forces could benefit from some map asset and balance tweaking that were mentioned on the first page but other than that i dont know much else that the dev team could do.... i pray they dont go back to the old rally system especially if more larger number player servers are in the near future. but its up to the devs to decide. i hear that on organized matches where teamwork is taken to the max that opfor win more than the blufor do in insurgency and if this is true and the above changes were implemented then that would just make it even more difficult for blufor in organized play.

Truism wrote:Insurgency has never been alright. I really hope it gets fixed sometime.

The mode in its entirety is so unrealistic and flawed that it's beyond fixing. It's been 3 versions of arduous repetitive combat that constantly favors one team: either the caches are impenetrable or effortlessly easy no matter how skilled the Insurgents.

I just loathe every time it's played, it baffles me why people like to play it when AAS is so much more tactical, realistic, fair and more importantly, fun.

Anderson29 wrote:well insurgency has had many changes... i remember when all caches spawned at the beginning of the round and insurgents had about 10-15 different spawn points (permanent rallies) spread out through the map not counting the cache spawn points and when these spawn points would get knifed they would come back 15 minutes later so you were always having to re-clear land you had cleared previously or risk 1 of those permanent rallies coming back up and getting shot in the back. and yes insurgents use to win those rounds to sometimes..

Advantage of insurgents, mobility and the ability to attack from any angle.Bluefor advantage? massive guns and more organized squads..Insurgents could rearm from any vehicle than also and had weapons hidden throughout the map not just caches.

I like to think of that as the golden age of the game mode.Maybe wasn't the most realistic (it never will be) but it was a lot more fun than now.

dtacs wrote:The mode in its entirety is so unrealistic and flawed that it's beyond fixing. It's been 3 versions of arduous repetitive combat that constantly favors one team: either the caches are impenetrable or effortlessly easy no matter how skilled the Insurgents.

I just loathe every time it's played, it baffles me why people like to play it when AAS is so much more tactical, realistic, fair and more importantly, fun.

I couldn't agree more. AAS is a much better gamemode, insurgency is nothing but a systematic hunt for unknown caches now. I personally have almost all the locations ingame memorized. And if the unknown is too hard to find, a C4 guy can easily take out the known. The only map where the gamemode seems to work is Korengal, and that is because the terrain is so tough to traverse for both sides with vehicles and the caves offer the defender a massive advantage. Otherwise, it is a stacked battle against the insurgent/taliban forces. I find now that even Lashkar is incredibly easy. Truthfully it has all become quite boring, and I find myself leaving to play other games instead of PR because insurgency is overplayed and overly easy. Insurgency needs a strong workover to be even slightly playable.

dtacs wrote:The mode in its entirety is so unrealistic and flawed that it's beyond fixing. It's been 3 versions of arduous repetitive combat that constantly favors one team: either the caches are impenetrable or effortlessly easy no matter how skilled the Insurgents.

I just loathe every time it's played, it baffles me why people like to play it when AAS is so much more tactical, realistic, fair and more importantly, fun.

You got that idea probably yesterday from the watertower cache in Ramiel (*nWa*) where my team had techies covering the open ground and people doing patrolls. After defending for an hour you said that INS was nonsense or something.

But that about AAS, the idea is that INS is asymetrical warfare and that can't be in the AAS gamemode I think.

But what are my idea's? I was thinking of one cache area, but way bigger than the current marks. In this area there should be 5 caches and everytime on gets destroyed the area marker gets smaller. There are no unknowns or something, just this area. When it gets destroyed the insurgents will get a mark where the next cache area will be, and these spawn when it gets known for them, so the BLUFOR still have that time buffer or whatever they have.

What also would be great is that the insurgents have an objective like a certain VCP which would give them extra techies or something for the insurgents or the BLUFOR a ticket boost if the amount of tickets get decreased (!) by 100 or more. This might split up the teames, but this is so the cache area gets less meat grindy. And also to learn people that defending and attacking is nessacery in one team.

Sorry for my English.

B.Pronk(NL) wrote:Dude if you compare it in reality, why would the BLUFOR attack without any intel? When they attack compounds or locations in real life they do it because they have intel.

Well irl the insurgents still guard their hideouts and weapon caches even if the blueforce does not have intel.

What Jamaican said BUT.... Only squad leaders and should have the known cache locations in their maps... Nobody else, that would make it more squad based playable imo.

Cassius wrote:Well irl the insurgents still guard their hideouts and weapon caches even if the blueforce does not have intel.

But the BLUFOR won't attack it without intel....I smell some treasure hunter blood here.

B.Pronk(NL) wrote:You got that idea probably yesterday from the watertower cache in Ramiel (*nWa*) where my team had techies covering the open ground and people doing patrolls. After defending for an hour you said that INS was nonsense or something.

My thoughts were prior to that game. And prior to this version, and the version after that, and...you get the point.

dtacs wrote:The mode in its entirety is so unrealistic and flawed that it's beyond fixing. It's been 3 versions of arduous repetitive combat that constantly favors one team: either the caches are impenetrable or effortlessly easy no matter how skilled the Insurgents.

I just loathe every time it's played, it baffles me why people like to play it when AAS is so much more tactical, realistic, fair and more importantly, fun.

YES

=HCM= Shwedor wrote:I couldn't agree more. AAS is a much better gamemode, insurgency is nothing but a systematic hunt for unknown caches now. I personally have almost all the locations ingame memorized. And if the unknown is too hard to find, a C4 guy can easily take out the known. The only map where the gamemode seems to work is Korengal, and that is because the terrain is so tough to traverse for both sides with vehicles and the caves offer the defender a massive advantage. Otherwise, it is a stacked battle against the insurgent/taliban forces. I find now that even Lashkar is incredibly easy. Truthfully it has all become quite boring, and I find myself leaving to play other games instead of PR because insurgency is overplayed and overly easy. Insurgency needs a strong workover to be even slightly playable.

and YES

Although sometimes there are a few games where it is a struggle for both sides and those are good matches.

But for AAS its the opposite. You quite often have good rounds and rarely have bad ones.

AAS is good on the good maps, and not on some maps where half the teams crashes to desktop or where you walk trough a russian forest just to get killed by falling of a 1ft. high cliff. (Kozelsk for example I REALLY hate that map). And since the derp community increased from 5% to 20%, the chances are odd that you find a team without teamwork. But c'mon, we can all start screaming to get back to AAS, but what we need is a proper INS mode, or something that makes sure the asymetrical warfare is possible. Because what I think is so attractive about INS, is that with some wooden rifles from WWII you can still beat up some German ******** in Lashkar. And you can still bomb car tanks and shit, that is what we need to keep. And not delete INS so we can all get hard d*cks from AAS, although it is a good game mode, but only for teams with balanced assets.

i think this is a good thing, now that blufor players have learned to focus on seqarching for the unknown, this will force some players to stop ridiculing anyone who spawns on the unknown. There is a stigma about spawning there and it needs to go away.

The second cache has a real presence now and that's a good thing. This will force opfor players to divide and properly defend both caches instead of simply neglecting it because of the risk that defense might give it away. It may be true that stupid actions will give away the cache location, but that is how it is. instead of ignoring the unknown, how about learning how to play smart?

B.Pronk(NL) wrote:But the BLUFOR won't attack it without intel....I smell some treasure hunter blood here.

no they wont "attack" a place, but they do patrol and search buildings regularly and they find what they find. You don't need intel to patrol and search buildings IRL, intel just helps us narrow down the search

Bringerof_D wrote:i think this is a good thing, now that blufor players have learned to focus on seqarching for the unknown, this will force some players to stop ridiculing anyone who spawns on the unknown. There is a stigma about spawning there and it needs to go away.

The second cache has a real presence now and that's a good thing. This will force opfor players to divide and properly defend both caches instead of simply neglecting it because of the risk that defense might give it away. It may be true that stupid actions will give away the cache location, but that is how it is. instead of ignoring the unknown, how about learning how to play smart?

You can't properly defense 2 caches with teams of 32 people, while the BLUFOR has so much firepower and the opportunity to attack. And with 16 people at each cache or less it is even easier to start C4 Bitching for the BLUFOR. Maybe it is something to make the server having a standard of 50vs50? Or what about giving the INS a bigger diversity of weapons to compensate the fact that we have to defend 2 caches with each having numerous holes in the defensive lines.

if you ask me you only need to remove Iraqi Insurgents and make them all , Taliban, Hamas, Militia instead of Iraqi insurgents with no kits to request...

then you guys gonna stay the Insurgents are gonna be 2 powerfull.... well you can give the Bluefor some extra or better vehicles...

it could fix the boring insurgency rounds...

for a sample.. Fallujah is a nice map... but would it not be better with bigger firefights and bigger guns... for both sides ? especialy for the Iraqi insurgents..