Project Reality Forums

I'm so sick of telling people not to spawn at unknown that I don't bother any more. In the worse servers, usually it's clan-squads that I don't recognise that like to camp an unknown (for some reason).

It's like when you get that one guy who says 'ok guize ive mined the cache make sure u crawl MIENS ON CACHE' .. Unfortunately it's so inevitable I just give in - As insurgency side it's an option whether you play as part of the team or just basically troll for the whole game. A few trolls can ruin a good game.

I'd be happy for Unknown to be unspawnable, if it means I can get back into believing in my team as Ins. I love Insurgency but nowadays see my job as an experienced player as to reduce the enemies IP and tickets faster than my teams trolls can give them away. Rather than just doing it to win the game I feel that I counterbalance the lazy players for the good of everyone.

lucky.BOY wrote:Yes, i like this SUGGESTION.

EnermaX wrote:I absolutely agree with this suggestion.

I didn't put it in the suggestions section because I wanted to get a discussion going on ways to prevent giving away unknowns. And to see if the rest of community feels this is a problem that needs to be fixed.

Also, since it's related to a recent change (spawnable caches) I figured it would be considered feedback. But, if a MOD or DEV thinks otherwise, feel free to move the thread, and punish me accordingly.

Yes devs, we really should think about that.

If you guys wish to turn this into a formal suggestion, I propose you to rewrite the important points, summing up everything that has been discussed in these 3 pages into bullet points.

A good-looking suggestion is a succesful suggestion.

So, whoever knows this suggestion and discussion best - in other words, the OP (Original Poster) -, try simplifying this suggestion in a single post, using bullet points.

You should:

Create an Introduction:
Explain what this suggestion is all about, and why does it exist. Link up this thread so as to have this as a reference.

Then, using bullet-points, explain what is really suggested:

• What needs to be changed?
• How?
• Why?

After that, put some of the feedback in this page - the most useful ones. Argument the points in favor and against your suggestion.

Do this, and we ought to have an interesting suggestion and discussion following it.

Good luck!

Simply put the unknown on the ins. map with it never really spawned ingame! A 150 meter diameter from original shield is where it WILL spawn!
Keep it unspawnable and INVISIBLE until its known, just give insurgents a general area of it!!! (large area)

Its not just the "1-man-unknown-spawners" that ruins the game, its the teamswitchers!!!!!!
Insurgent squads will have to build hideouts without knowing the excact location of cache and use vehicles to get to the general area....
Cause killing undefended caches cannot be the intention of the game?

I think that in addition to removing the ability to spawn on unknown caches, pickup kits should not be available at a cache until the cache is known. With no spawning and no RPG's available, short of reloading there is absolutely no reason to be anywhere near the unknown unless a player is actively doing something constructive towards defense of the cache. Once the cache goes known for the insurgent team, spawn the kits then. This gives the insurgents more than enough time to pick those kits up and position them for cache defense.

I have watched players time and time again run into a cache building with a rifle and run out with an RPG. As BluFor, I love to see this, because it is like a big neon sign saying, "CACHE HERE!"

I absolutely agree with the no spawning on non revealed caches ! This is easy to implement but it would change a lot.

I don't think removing the spawn is the way to go. If the cache is there you should be able to spawn there. I think the bigger problems are players' awareness -or the lack of it- of them exposing the unknown cache and the cache locations' predictability.

as a frequent INS player people spawning on unknowns is 1/2 the battle, as 2-3 caches per game are killed by super 1337 players who have memorized EVERY cache spawn. if unspawnable unkowns and more possible cache locations were added ins would become a lot more balanced

This is a pet hate of mine and would welcome any change to the current system where only a couple of nufties ruin gameplay for the majority on the server.

The difficulty with Psyrus' original suggestion on the bigD forums is that it would be (imo) too hard on the admins to act with any consistency which I think ultimately meant it was a server rule which couldn't be implemented

splatters wrote:I don't think removing the spawn is the way to go. If the cache is there you should be able to spawn there. I think the bigger problems are players' awareness -or the lack of it- of them exposing the unknown cache and the cache locations' predictability.

Exactly. Even if we have to deal with noobs or selfish players, the unknown cache locations are easy to figure out. So if we make the unknown unspawnable on the other side of the map with barely any trans, it's quite a stepback. If we do allow to continue the way it is now, it will be revealed by mostly newbies (as I'm pretty sure they represent the most part). Adding more cache locations is an option but not one that doesn't fight the "logical" aspect that if x was destroyed in this region, then y will spawn in the opposite pole of the map.

The latter is hard to fight against since we don't want caches to spawn close to each other. But what if this is exactly what we need?

This idea was probably presented in the past but here it goes: at every spawn there will be 2 caches like now, the difference being that they're close to each other around 100/150 meters. The objective for Blufor is to destroy those 2 caches that represent one group, then another group of 2 caches are spawned - it can be up to out of 4 or 5 groups for Blufor to be victorious. When Blufor gets enough intel points, the group is revealed to them - in this case, those 2 caches turn blue at the same time.
INS don't give intel points to Blufor when they spawn on the group of caches with the "unknown" status - after all it's the only one in the map. Otherwise it would be idiotic.

This would also allow for INS to focus all their team into one region and we can all have that massive and intense battle we so much drool for. Most importantly, Blufor would have to work together massively in order to achieve this purpose, rather than recon teams being able to pull it off for their side because they know where the unknown caches are by logic/intuition. Also, no more **** about "ghosting".

I don't think getting rid of spawning at unknowns is the right thing to do, or reducing the amount of caches spawned to one either.

People spawn on caches and give them away because they pick up the weapons available there!

so......

Option 1

Stoickk wrote:I think that in addition to removing the ability to spawn on unknown caches, pickup kits should not be available at a cache until the cache is known. With no spawning and no RPG's available, short of reloading there is absolutely no reason to be anywhere near the unknown unless a player is actively doing something constructive towards defense of the cache. Once the cache goes known for the insurgent team, spawn the kits then. This gives the insurgents more than enough time to pick those kits up and position them for cache defense.

I love the bolded section of Stoickk suggestion. This means that non of the special kits will give away cache locations and the enemy could just be random people gone for a walk!

or .......

Option 2

I think I like this idea better.

There is a set number of RPG's and other special weapons available at caches. I suggest that you remove all weapons from caches. Make the same amount of weapons available but only if the player requests it from the main or an ammo crate/techie. Then the special weapons could potentially be from anywhere and thus would not give away the position of the cache.

Just my thoughts!

Coxy

I know some people know a lot of the possible cache locations. But, that still doesn't seem like a valid reason to keep unknown cache spawnable. Most players don't dedicate their game to secretly defending an unknown cache, so weather it's spawnable or not, if a blufor knows the locations and checks them, they're still going to find it.

Also, I believe from what I've read on these forums, that the DEVs are working on improving the cache locations for the next patch, and hopfully they're including more possible locations. Both things will help to minimize the problem of blufor players knowing all the spawn locations.

Another thing that was mentioned, is that the problem is caused by players not being aware of their surroundings. People not having good 'situational awareness', which is somewhat true. Except there is no possible way to be aware of the situation at an unknown cache before spawning there. And once you're there, you can't go back.

Talk about limiting the weapons on the unknown is pointless in my opinion. If people can still spawn with a rifle in their hands, they can still give away a cache.

I see it happen in every game I play. Squads using an unknown cache as a spawn point, rather than setting up badly needed hideouts. And the worst, people spawning on unknowns and firing RPGs from the window.

unknowns are problems for the following reasons.

1. blufor tactics. build all 6 fobs on possible cache locations. chances are one of the fobs will be overrun by newbs spawning at unknown. now 80% chance there is a cache there.

2. the defense is already split because you want to have a defense force and a fob killing force. if you defend unknown you are splitting the defense even more.

3. if your unknown gets overun and then turns known it will stay unspawnable till the enemy finds it.



I think the solution is to make only 1 cache spawn. implement the old system of the marker represents the general area. it will be good because:

1. then the enemy wouldn't mortar the cache building constantly just because there is a blue diamond on the map. this just gets annoying.

2. searching for it is fun.

3. it will make the surrounding area of the intel like an "unknown". which SL's can stage a bait and lure defense tactic acting like its a cache building. it would also be a step up if the enemys intel marker was known to the insurgents alongside the real one.

4. its ok to have only 1 cache because there are SO MANY WAYS to kill a cache LONG RANGE. (tow/hat/CAS/.50/c4/tank rounds etc.) unless they stop that next patch.

The defense marker for the insurgents is accurate. The Blue diamond for the BLUFOR is accurate up to 75 (I think?) meters. So it's not the building the blue diamond is on, but somewhere within 75 meters there.

^^ But when the blue diamond is not in a city area it's fairly obvious to pinpoint the exact location.

Even in the city though, it brings you to within a blocks radius of the cache and then you have Insurgents/Taliban all over the cache and it gets very obvious exactly where its at.

Yeah, very few people even attempt to hide the known cache locations anymore, because the marker is so close to it. If you've played the map before, chances are you know exactly where it'll be, based only on the marker.

I think the marker radius should go back up to what it used to be (150m iirc) mainly because of the addition of mortars. Currently, the coalition doesn't even require eyes on the cache location before they begin to spam it with mortars. And, it was fun for both teams when the coalition actually had to search an area for it.

I think it's less than 75m atm.

Totally agree badmojo, I think the known marker radius should increase, back to the original 150m or like 100m if a compromise has to be reached. Currently it isn't so much intel on the cache area, but intel on virtually the cache's exact location.