No announcement yet.

[Poll] Is insurgency (INS) gamemode flawed?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • [Poll] Is insurgency (INS) gamemode flawed?

    Coming from the heels of perhaps the most ridiclous victory of Lashkar Valley where my squad systematically stumbled onto unkown after unknown (stopping on the way to take out 2 known caches) I feel justified to question insurgency as a game mode.

    This thread is for discussion, so please pass out theories, opinions, and more. Just keep it civil please.
    No; people just don't know how to play the mode with proper tactics.
    No; (Explain reason).
    Yes; it does not represent real insurgency well.
    Yes; (explain reason).

    The poll is expired.

  • #2
    Re: [Poll] Is insurgency (INS) gamemode flawed?

    1 always-known-active-cache at the time. (After 3 minutes of round start)
    BluFor intel means another cache spawns (current intel points for knowing the location). More intel means you get a lead about were that second cache is.

    This would possibly extend rounds a lot though, but adjustments could be made so more intel would be given away per kill and whatnot.
    Also, it would force insurgents to play more carefully, which IMHO would be a good thing.
    Another alternative: same as now but you can't destroy the unkown.

    My answer to the question is NO anyway, because I do love insurgency as it is right now and I blame those caches going down on extremely lucky people like you. Also, insurgents CAN defend an unknown by walking around it, but not close enough to give it away, or by misleading BluFor into thinking there are caches somewhere else.

    In-Game: |TG-Irr|Dreves


    • #3
      Re: [Poll] Is insurgency (INS) gamemode flawed?

      Yes. The bf2 engine is simply not capable of simulating real life insurgency, nor would it be fun as a gaming environment even if it could.


      • #4
        Re: [Poll] Is insurgency (INS) gamemode flawed?

        As we discussed during that same round of Lashkar, here are my suggestions for improving Insurgency Gameplay.
        1. Remove Unknown Caches
          • Caches should only spawn once enough Intel has been gathered to reveal them.
          • This prevents BluFor squads from stumbling onto unrevealed caches, winning the game without letting the insurgents actually mount a defence.
          • The insurgents will still have a few minutes to setup a defence before the cache location is actually provided to the BluFor.
          • Since the lack of unrevealed caches could mean fewer locations for insurgents to get kits, perhaps a few pickup kits could be scattered around the maps to balance this out.
          • Barring that, some form of kit request might need to be implimented for insurgent maps.

        2. Add defensive outposts
          • To help balance the engagement, and give the insurgents something to do aside from waiting for the BluFor to attack, every insurgency map should have a BluFor held flag somewhere outside the main.
          • If the insurgents capture the this flag, the BluFor suffer a slow ticket bleed. (Think Kozelsk, like 5-10 tickets per minute)
          • This will force BluFor to commit some forces to defence, and give the Insurgents the option of being pro-active instead of just waiting to be attacked.
          • Conflicts around the Outpost flag will also help generate Intel for the BluFor, and Kills for the Insurgents.

        Also, in direct response to the Poll, I voted 'no'. I do not believe that Insurgency, as it is, is inherently flawed. Merely that there is room for improvement.


        • #5
          Re: [Poll] Is insurgency (INS) gamemode flawed?


          Caches have 3 states according to the game logic:

          Unknown- Unknown caches are not physically present in-game, but are known to the Insurgents and can be spawned on (though you can't request kits off of them until the caches spawn in). They cannot be overrun in this state.

          Suspected- Suspected caches are present in-game, but their locations are not yet revealed to Blufor. A suspected cache operates like CURRENT unknown caches, except that the Insurgent faction will always know that this cache will be the next revealed by Blufor, due to it becoming suspected. There is always one suspected cache in the game world.

          Revealed- When the Blufor faction gets enough intel points, the exact location of the Suspected cache (within 20 meters) will be immediately revealed to them; 3 minutes after the cache is revealed it is no longer directly spawnable by the insurgents. In addition, the Unknown cache currently present in the game world becomes the new Suspected cache.

          -Rule of thumb: there is ALWAYS exactly ONE suspected cache on the map at any given time.

          -If enough intel points are acquired to Reveal a Suspected cache while there is already a Revealed cache present, a third cache (which would normally enter the game world as Unknown when the first Revealed cache is destroyed) will immediately enter the game world as a Suspected cache. This process will repeat as necessary, and will spawn all seven objective caches if the first cache on the map is not destroyed in that space of time.

          -Destruction of a Suspected Cache with no Revealed cache: +50 tickets for the Blufor, Intel reset.
          -Destruction of any cache with at least one cache Revealed: +30/X tickets for Blufor, where X is the number of Revealed caches present in the game world at the time of the cache's destruction. This ticket bonus is rounded up.
          Example: Blufor destroys the only revealed cache at the time (other cache is Suspected), they earn 30 tickets for the 1 revealed cache.
          Example 2: Blufor destroys one of two revealed caches (a third cache is suspected), they earn 15 tickets for there being 2 caches revealed. 10 if there are 3, 8 if there are 4, etc.

          -When a loss of intel points (due to civi killing or otherwise) would cause a negative Intel counter (I.E. 50 intel points required to reveal next cache, a civi is killed outside ROE with the Intel counter at zero), any intel point lost instead becomes a ticket lost for Blufor. This occurrence will be announced by the team HQ system ("Operational support is being reduced due to unacceptable civilian deaths")
          Whether by air or on land
          foes crumble at my command.

          JaFaR Ironclad, at your service.


          • #6
            Re: [Poll] Is insurgency (INS) gamemode flawed?

            Originally posted by Buflak View Post
            Yes. The bf2 engine is simply not capable of simulating real life insurgency, nor would it be fun as a gaming environment even if it could.
            I agree I don't think you would ever want to get "the life of insurgency" right. The horror the Rebel alliance caused to the First Death Star was a tradegy. But, seeing them do it again on the second flagship was unbearable.
            What's weird about a young goats head, smoking a joint, tied with a scarf to a mobile artillery gun? - Jeepo

            Killing threads since 2007

            | |


            • #7
              Re: [Poll] Is insurgency (INS) gamemode flawed?

              Originally posted by McGann View Post
              I agree I don't think you would ever want to get "the life of insurgency" right. The horror the Rebel alliance caused to the First Death Star was a tradegy. But, seeing them do it again on the second flagship was unbearable.
              Not to mention the tens of thousand young brilliant officers who died aboard the Executor SSD.... never forget.

              But in all honesty, I'm not saying it should be 1 to 1, no game ever should be that complex. I'm just saying that a good deal of insurgency and counter insurgency is not being translated in the current game mode.

              There is no protecting the citizens and gaining their trust, there is no constant patrols to be ambushed, there are tons of civilian buildings to demolish indescriminately... a lot is lost in translation.


              • #8
                Originally posted by McGann View Post
                I agree I don't think you would ever want to get "the life of insurgency" right. The horror the Rebel alliance caused to the First Death Star was a tradegy. But, seeing them do it again on the second flagship was unbearable.
                You sir, made my day! And I don't mind insurgency now but it definitely needs some work.

                Do you really want invincible bears running around raping your churches and burning your women?

                Intel i7 3930k @ 4.4ghz, 8gb RAM, 2x GTX 570 1gb, OCZ Vertex 3 120 gig SSD


                • #9
                  Re: [Poll] Is insurgency (INS) gamemode flawed?

                  Its fine. Excusing a number of balance issues and the fact that it is nothing like a real Insurgency, its fine.
                  Its the decisions you make, when you have no time to make them, that define who you are.


                  • #10
                    Re: [Poll] Is insurgency (INS) gamemode flawed?

                    well i agree that it is nowhere near real-life insurgency, but that's a different story.

                    I think that this depends on the map and layer alot. 16 ins could be really unfair for both op and blufor.


                    • #11
                      Re: [Poll] Is insurgency (INS) gamemode flawed?

                      if players wouldnt spawn and shoot from purple caches it would be harder for BlueFor to find that caches. (sometimes they just have luck)
                      more ammo techies would also solve that problem a bit that you can see insurgents walking to rearm at unknown caches as Bluefor.

                      i also think that the caches marker is to accurate right now = make a blue mob go for the marker = cache dead (75% success).

                      Insurgent mode is not designed to play it at TG, its made for other server where everyone does his own thing = insurgents wins (hope you understand what i mean)

                      | | | |


                      • #12
                        Re: [Poll] Is insurgency (INS) gamemode flawed?

                        Yes- its flawed, its too easy to cheat and too hard to prove. Disco Jedi has made some good points.

                        Only one known cache should be spawned, then when the blufor has enough intel a second should spawn unknown(for5mins to let the insurgency coordinate) then become known. That was the biggest BS ive ever seen on insurgency. Just sad.



                        • #13
                          Re: [Poll] Is insurgency (INS) gamemode flawed?

                          I voted yes it is flawed. But that is not to say that I do not enjoy the game mode. It is in fact my preferred play style.

                          It's hard to find a balanced game of insurgency with two teams of players that know what they should be doing and then execute it effectively. You know the nail biting, fight to the finish kind of game that gets your blood pumping.

                          It's just hard to balance the teams because of all our inter personal connections. But lets not make this about talent or leadership balance - if we look at the typical reasons that an insurgency map goes downhill fast common themes occur, many of which have been touched upon already in this thread.

                          1)Wandering BluFor Troops stumbling upon unknown and undefended caches because of a clever squad leaders deduction skills. Most 2km maps only use about 1km of the available map area and then to top that off approx. 2/3 of that 1km area is active because of the domes of death. It leaves predictable patterns in cache spawning locations.

                          2)Teammates who just can't get it through their heads that spawning on the unknown, picking up 3 rpgs and a PKM is not the most subtle way of keeping the fight going in their favor. More people need to read the 'how to play insurgency' thread.

                          3)New Known Cache Marker is so darn literal. Before you would know that a cache was spawned in a 140m perimeter of the marker. Now it basically gives you a door key, a cup of tea and a blanket in case you need to rest before you RTB singing Trolololo all the way back to main.

                          4)Team switching. We've all seen it. We've all had or have been with that guy in a squad going 'i was just on the team and i know where...' It's been talked about time and time again. Is there anyway to lock the teams or at least give someone the 9999 timer when they switch over. That should be discouraging enough.

                          5)That Cheeky Radical Freedom Fighter Ahmed left the cache in the middle of the open field again. Why do caches spawn in these locations? They simply become APC food.

                          These are just the few that I can think of this early. But I'm sure many more exist.

                          I think that once a few 4km maps become playable with the insurgency layer that the dynamic will change. Other than that, people need to play smarter, with more integrity and be patient with the mod, ever thankful that we have a great free game like this to play.

                          The 189th Infantry Brigade: Taking the 'the' out of psychotherapist since 2010.

                          XFire: mrthomasking


                          • #14
                            Re: [Poll] Is insurgency (INS) gamemode flawed?

                            Flawed, the concept was solid when it was introduced, but many generations of changes have rendered it a white elephant for TG. Consider the game mode: The insurgents, when operating realistically, are the opposite of the TG game style. They have no training, they have no proper equipment, they have no tactics available to them other than IED and flee or zerg rush. They thrive on lone wolf behavior, and they are designed to operate independently of any central supply chain. Mortars are the first thing insurgents have ever had that REQUIRE a logistics train, and even then, one guy in a pickup truck making a new stop on his route is all it takes for that.

                            Along with the propensity to lonewolf comes new challenges for teamwork. In AAS, even in CnC, one player can't ruin the game intentionally or unintentionally. A bad commander can be removed if he's trying to obviously ruin everyone's fun. Insurgency is unique in that it places the quality of the game squarely in the hands of each player individually to control. Greifing is as simple as firing off one RPG every 60 seconds from a cache. Speaking of caches, having such a pinpoint marker completely nullifies any concept of a "random cache". That and the fact that there are, at most, 20ish places a cache can spawn on a map with the new logic.

                            This game mode, in my opinion, should be treated as skirmish. It is fun, but it runs in a stark contrast to the TG way of play in its present form. Numerous suggestions have been put forth, but they are honestly just bandaids for a bleeding stump of a game mode that should long ago have gotten a total overhaul in core mechanics to accommodate the formidably large amount of changes introduced since Insurgency was born.


                            • #15
                              Re: [Poll] Is insurgency (INS) gamemode flawed?

                              what your all forgitting is that even with the current system, a decent ins team will slauter a blufor team. there HAS TO BE another cach on the map somewhere or else it is just a wait of time. tell me, how mant times do you attack a cave cach that has 3 ins squads dug in before you give up and eather rage quit or go looking for the other cach? if any one has questions about that, let me remind you about the ins pickup might we had a while back. a cach in a building with no other building for almost 100 meters in every direction, was the first cach the go live. it was very clearly the cach building. it was also the only cach on the map that dident go down. we had 2 squads protecting it all round and the Germans smashed there head against it non stop.thay never even got near the door.
                              on TG the insurgents have a massive advantage of not haveing to worry about deaths, this factor combinded with a good squad leader often meants that it will cost around 100 tickets for blufor to get a single cach. if there wasent an undiscovered cach on the map then there would be 32 insurgents, who dont have to respwan at bace, protecting a single building or inaccsessable cave. there have to be other alternatives for the blufor or its just stupid.




                              TeamSpeak 3 Server


                              Twitter Feed