Suggestions to improve Insurgency.

[Bunnyman]

I like the limits on the drop kit/civilian kit thing, although I'd add it so that once you have dropped kit you can't pick up another during that life. I still think they should be allowed to drive cars though since that is realistic, although naturally in such a case they are still aiding and abetting and are within ROE.
Another seat in a suicide vehicle is realistic and allows the added ability to drop of another player on route to an attack which seems reasonable to me. I also don't have a problem with them being able to set mines etc since this is the biggest killer in the Ghan, and again is quite realistic and gives the faction an actual 'point'. I mean after all they are really hampered by their load out choices otherwise (majority of weapons are unscoped) and no tanks or aircraft.
I suppose it is a personal thing though, you do have some good points generally though but I'd be aware of realism and balancing tbh

[Wh33lman]

1. no. its overly harsh to be kicked/banned from a server for killing a civi.

2. maybe. medics are limited to 1 per squad, it would make sense to limit civilians.

3 and 4. no. theres already a system in place that if your in a vehicle, any vehicle, you can be killed without penelty. if you suicide in a vehicle(i.e. a bomb car) you recieve the penelty and blufor recieves the intel.

5. who cares. a bomb vehicle make for impractical transportation anyway.

6. sapper kit is limited.

7. caches were strengthened with the last release. you used to be able to drop a couple grenades on them and they would explode. 3 incindarys or 1 C4 makes them much harder to destroy. incindaries dont have a big damage radius, so you have to drop them directly on the cache. you also have to protect your engineer all the way to the cache if you want to use C4.

8. no. the logistics system is already in place. if you have mortars, your going to have someone running ammo, and changing anything wouldnt make a difference.

[Total_Overkill]

Vehemently disagree with everything you suggested Dv8. I know you hate civy's but this is ridiculous man

[USMCMIDN]

Collaborate | Define Collaborate at Dictionary.com

This definition above will be the basic meaning of these first few suggestions. Please take note in the definition that a Collaborator does not FIGHT for an enemy nation but supports it. Also take note of the synonyms. PLEASE read the entire suggestion first before responding back.

WARNING: There is a lot of information you are about to read.

Right now in Project Reality the BLUFOR can kill a Collaborator and lose all of his/her points and earn -100 teamwork points. An attitude has arisen out of these small penalties to where no BLUFOR player will respect Collaborators and some will shoot them on site. I have figured out a way for this to be stopped even though some may not like this idea.

1. First, when a BLUFOR player kills a Collaborator outside of ROE, he/she will receive a private message warning him/her of not to kill Collaborators outside of ROE and to arrest them with either restrainers or a shotgun. When a BLUFOR player kills two Collaborators outside of the ROE, he/she will be auto-kicked from the server. If he/she rejoins and kills another Collaborator, he/she will be auto-banned for the duration of the round. Yes, this suggestion sounds harsh, but it will help curb people?s attitudes toward Collaborators.

Now some of you are thinking that a lot of people would go for the Collaborator kit now. This is where my second suggestion comes into play.

2. Collaborators should be limited to one per squad. This is a valuable kit and it serves the purpose of the medic for the Insurgent faction. Therefore, it should be treated like such as in one per squad.

Again, some of you are thinking that any player would then drop his/her kit and become a Collaborator by being unarmed. Again this next suggestion should help curb this play-style.

3. After dropping your kit and becoming unarmed for sixty seconds, unarmed kits lose the ability to wield handheld, vehicle, and deployable weapons. This would be enforced by the screen going black and the player given a warning of not being able to use weapons for the Insurgency. This same principle would apply to Collaborators in how they would not be allowed to use handheld, vehicle, or deployable weapons. Also take note of what is in an unarmed kit's arsenal. If you become a Collaborator through dropping your kit, all you have is your fists, unarmed, and a cell-phone. This means this kit will be severely handicapped compared to the regular Collaborator kit.

So if my definition states that Collaborators do not fight but support an enemy nation, then Collaborators need to be limited from using weapons.

4. Collaborators are not allowed to use any suicide vehicles. This includes bomb cars, 'Big Reds', or 'Garys.' Also Collaborators would not be allowed to use the .50 caliber machine gun or the RPK on any technical. Last, Collaborators would not be allowed to use any mortar position or SPG-9 position. If a Collaborator got into any of these vehicles/positions, he/she would have his/her screen go black and receive a warning of not being allowed to use these types of vehicles/positions as he/she is a Collaborator and not an Insurgent.

These next few suggestions have to deal with other elements of Insurgency game-play that need to be improved upon.

5. If a vehicle has been deemed a suicide vehicle, why does it need more than one seat? There is no logical sense for a second seat for a suicide vehicle that will be blown up a few minutes later. Therefore, this second seat should be removed from the suicide vehicle as it might give the wrong impersonation to newer players who might use it for transportation.

Right now in Insurgency, as the Insurgent faction every player can become a Sapper. This means that 32 players can set up to 960 mines, 160 pipe-bombs and 128 grenade traps. Now that's a whole lot of explosives for one team in one map. This needs to be improved upon greatly.

6. The Sapper kit needs to become a limited kit. This kit needs to become limited to one Sapper per squad. Instead of having the amount of explosives I mentioned earlier, the maximum is now 270 mines, 45 pipe-bombs, and 36 grenade traps. I?m pretty sure that not every Insurgent is informed in how to properly set mines, pipe-bombs, and grenade traps. Therefore, this suggestion makes much more sense than it does now. If this change were to be implemented, this would open up the ability for Sappers to be able to set more mine markers whenever they set down explosives.

Also, I have noticed lately squads rushing up to caches and throwing C-4 down and driving away and blowing it up. This seems like a vanilla player?s tactic and should be changed.

7. Right now, caches can be blown up with one C-4, three incendiaries, .50 caliber bullets, APC's main cannon, tank's main cannon, etc. Caches need to be strengthened a little more too where they can not be took down by hit and run tactics. Therefore, to combat this certain play-style, caches need to be edited to be stronger where they can be taken down by 2 C-4s, 4 incendiaries, etc. This means that BLUFOR has secured the area and seized the cache.

Last, in Insurgency, deployables do not require any source of supplies to place. Any Insurgency faction can basically place these deployables any where on the map and attack from that location.

8. My final suggestion is to edit Insurgency deployables to require supplies just like the BLUFOR. This would apply in how Hideouts would require one ammunition box just like the BLUFOR Forward Operation?s Base. The other part is how the Mortars or Anti-Tank deployable would require two ammunition boxes equivalent to their BLUFOR counterparts. Therefore, this change would require more teamwork for Logistics on the Insurgent/Taliban/Hamas factions.

Thank you for reading this suggestion and please respond back with constructive criticism.

hell no to #1... What if a tank shoots inside a cashe building and kills several civis there goes the tanks gunner essentially leaving the tank defensiveness many examples can occur like this ... I see it all the time... If anything the ROEs should be loosened. If a civi is within a certain range of a bad guy then free fire or something... It is fine the way it is now i guess,

[Bunnyman]

I can see there being a point to harsher rules against killing civies I mean if PR is about realism- in the armed forces you get immediately arrested for doing that. TBH I've done it myself regularly, I drive up to an enemy position spot an insurgent he quickly turns himself into supercivvie and raises his hands. He wants me to go in and arrest him when I know he's using me as bait for his matesa round the corner. So I shoot him in the head and carry on with an assault taking the initiative from them. It isn't really realistic since the ROE aren't going to make me think twice

[killonsight95]

maybe not 3 civi kills for temp ban maybe 4 or 5 to make way for like someone suggested above that there being a lot of civies in the building when fired, however a tank shouldn't just randomly fire into city buildings. Not many poeple take civi now anyway maybe limit them to 12 civis to the team to make them more numerable and to have mroe thna one in a Squad, this is because irl colaborators will usualy act in groups as they feel safer this way.

Civi = colaborator.

[Wh33lman]

Please carefully re-read my first suggestion. I designed it to have warnings before kick/ban. Also, a kick should act as a warning to not do it again without any long-term consequences. Last, the ban would only be for that round. This system is based off of the team-killing system with three punishes.

never going to happen. nobodys going to play insurgency if theyre going to get banned from a server. no server would ban for killing a civi. if they did, no server would run insurgency because everyone would get banned.

Yes, you are correct; however, in my definition a Collaborator does not fight but assists the Insurgency. This definition, Collaborate | Define Collaborate at Dictionary.com, backs up my claim for Collaborators should not be able to use weapons but provide other services to the Insurgency.

so reviving, healing, and providing intel for the team isnt helping the insurgency at all. guess all the civis are just off doing theyre own thing.

Re-read my suggestion again please. I have seen players use hit-and-run tactics and drive up and throw a C-4 onto a wall next to the cache and drive off and blow it up.

that tactic is frowned up, but should be handled server-side

yeah, im flaming, but these sugestions are stupid. insurgency if fine the way it is. if the Devs thought it needed tweaking, they would tweak it.

[doop-de-doo]

What about the team losing tickets? Would that just cause more problems? It would certainly reduce the desire to kill civvies on sight.

[splatters]

The strenghtening of caches (against C4 at least) is the only thing I can agree with you here. I'm too delirious right now to go into details but I just can't see how these suggestions could work.

The Collaborators are a bit of an issue but the system is currently balanced enough, maybe a ticket loss wouldn't hurt. Kicking or banning is to be left for the server administrators to decide upon, it's more of a question of rules than of gameplay as is the 3 punished teamkills automatic ban.

[USMCMIDN]

I don't hate Collaborators. I hate BLUFOR's attitude in their treatment of Collaborators. I respect Collaborators unlike many individuals who play Project Reality.



USMCMIDN, you are looking at my suggestions and you are taking them out of context. You are just looking at that suggestion alone and you fear what will happen but you don't take account of what else I've said. Suggestion two comes into play here and limits the amount of Collaborators per squad. Suggestion three limits people from exploiting the unarmed kit to get BLUFOR players kicked/banned for Suggestion one. If you guys would stop looking at my ideas in a provincial way and open your minds, you would realize these suggestions in conjunction would greatly improve Insurgency.

The ONLY reason I even spent my time writing these down and typing them up was to change the Insurgents from a vanilla tactic team to an actual high quality Project Reality faction.

Same rule goes for the sniper kits and marksman kits but I have seen squads with 2 snipers, 2 marksman all the time... All they have to do is go in separate squads and request the kits... Then work together as a civi squad and block the cashe. I do not like getting kicked/banned from the server or killed cause I killed a civi. It is very easy to accidentally kill a civi in this game. IRL if you killed a civi the punishments happen after not during... Your FTL, SL PC etc... would not pull his rifle on you and kill u... Getting killed and banned or kicked is way to much. It is fine the way it is now... it is even to strict.

[Rissien]

killed three civis on bashra the other day, ddnt even know they were there. Was pinning down insurgents inside a building that a known cache was in. Saw fired in a window and killed a civi. All that would do with the autokick your suggesting is people would go civi, get themselves shot outside of the roe and screw over the Blufor.

Theres a reason mosr Blufor dont give a **** about killing civis. One thing is because civis have a throwaway attitude with their lives as well, they will purposely go out to get killed. And then you got the nuicence ones. Like the other day, had one who just barely escaped arrest getting on a roof, then just started throwing rocks at us. I wasnt going to just have him throw rocks at us till we left or died, so i shot him and was punished for it.

You cant base the changes just on one sides perspective, has to be with from the insurgent sides as well.

[killonsight95]

The kick/ban is a bit to harsh now that i think about it more, however the loss of say 5 - 10 tickets per civi killed would do the trick, people shouldn't carlessly throw bullets down range in this gamemode, however i think that if a player kills more than 3 civi's within 5 mins he should auto just die on the spot, i think it used to be like this at one point.