Project Reality Forums

right, first things first. i believe INS need more spawns.

now random spawns like old basrah crashed servers (IIRC) so thats out of question. fixed mapper placed spawns are ok but are taken out during the game as everyone knows where they are. so give INS rally points! but with a twist.

when a cell leader places a RP the whole team can spawn on it. increases spawns for team, makes cell leader more important etc etc.

if the above is not possible or wanted, remove or reduce the minimum distance for hideouts. its unneeded and really bad for small maps like fallujah and korengal and basrah



also check out my civi suggestion:

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f18-pr ... tions.html

gazzthompson wrote:remove or reduce the minimum distance for hideouts.

Agree with this. The other suggestion would be spammy as hell.

GoreZiad wrote:Agree with this. The other suggestion would be spammy as hell.

i was thinking of that, and there is a maximum of 9 spawns that can be placed to defend 2 caches, and the chances of 9 squads being made all with cell leader kits?


its more likely there will be about 5 or 6 spawns made to defend 2 caches.

gazzthompson wrote: now random spawns like old basrah crashed servers (IIRC) so thats out of question.

Not really, you could always tweak the code to use less of the RPs at a time, I think it was set so every 1 out of 3 RPs placed on the map would appear in-game.

Also back in 0.7 Basrah and Archer had a lot more destroyable buildings and AFAIK, all player placed stuff like foxholes, AA, fbs... get deleted on map end since 0.8, so random RPs stand a lot more chances now IMO.

I do like your idea to be able to have anyone spawn off SL placed RPs, tbh I'd even go as far as removing the hideouts and just relying on the RPs, because it would simulate the Insurgents/Taliban being able to quickly set up in an area without much logistical hassle and unless Insurgents/Taliban get some sort of deployable roadblocks or sandbags the hideout is just a huge brown blob that usually gives away the cache location, since it's hard to deploy it in cover without having it spawn somewhere completely wrong or turn into skyscraper.

OP is 100% right on. this would give insurgents a "home-field" advantage that they seem to lack.

Great idea

Only iraqi ins? Somalian?
There's something to your suggestion, insurgents should be more 'swarmy' then Taliban. Not less.

Hidout dynamics are also a little broken as it is, it's much better leaving the hidout semi-broken so they can't build a new one close for the next 5 mins then destroying it completely.

Great idea!

M.

Yeah, this is a great idea. I would even say just remove the blufor's ability's to make rally points in insurgent maps. This would be more realistic and better.

Rally points are never realistic anyway.

M.

i have to disagree with the OP. i think it is fine as is and i love playing insurgent more than the blufor but one thing i think is lacking is that insurgents cant build road blocks and stuff.....it would be very helpful and if used right very tactical to have road blocks and force the blufor down to an ambush point......

Anderson29 wrote:i have to disagree with the OP. i think it is fine as is and i love playing insurgent more than the blufor but one thing i think is lacking is that insurgents cant build road blocks and stuff.....it would be very helpful and if used right very tactical to have road blocks and force the blufor down to an ambush point......

i disagree, on my hideout point. a map like fallujah and/or korengal the limit for the caches is FAR to much, almost half the map. not needed and unnecessary

I'd agree, however I think the minimum distance should be reduced rather than removed altogether to prevent spammy gameplay.

On the other hand it would need some sort of compensation for BLUFOR, they already have a hard enough time on the small insurgency maps, in fact I can't remember seeing a BLUFOR team win on Korengal, for example for some time.

true but on small iraq INS map where spawns are VERY limited to the INS, which is strange as they are the "home team" and should be able to come from all angles and seem to have a larger number, the hideout distance should be like 50m. you can only have 4 around 2 caches. not spammy at all.

hmm the issue of blufor rarely winning allways comes up in these type of threads.
in all honesty on paper thay should walk all over insurgants i really cant work out why thay so rarely win maybe its the players?or some realy simple thing like not enough tickets.

but saying blufor dont win much so insurgents cant have no fun stuff is a silly arguement as insurgents you do feel like a gloryfied target dummy but yet we allways win but is it really winning?

thay could impliment blufor winning by the end of each round by defult tbh i would not care either way than maybe we would get stuff.mainly ppl who complain about that kinda thing is ppl who mostly play *** mode and damn right thats about your side winning but this mode is not.

keep an open mind and just play for te lolz and blowing shit up.i defend this game mode so strongly as it was the best thing since sliced bread ones but each patch it gets more and more frustriating to play as insurgents its still good but could be alot better o and i do play blufor as much but theres nothing wrong with them imo.