I find myself liking the new layout for selecting roles. I like not being forced into a squad because of role selection. However I do miss the squads and the unique color markers, usually, featured above your squad mates. I also miss the unique color for my online steam friends, such as the one featured in the Red Orchestra series. So I thought up an idea for how to implement squads without changing how class selection is done and at least would like to get the conversation started.
- A TOP DOWN MENU FOR SQUAD SELECTION* -
Essentially you would just have a optional top down menu located somewhere in the the class selection and deploy menu. You can click and select, we'll say, Squads 1-10. Anyone can join a squad, there is no specific squad limit and you get a unique colored markers for those individuals. By no means do you have to select a squad but the benefit of a unique mark for certain players becomes an option and the only benefit.
I find it mildly frustrating trying to link up with friends within a match. All we see are identical blue markers and sometimes they follow the wrong momma duck. This could potentially help drive more effective squad play and overall team Objective success. The Commander can now deliver goals and split the offensive in a coordinated attack (If they choose). The other benefit is single party players who want to link up easier with competent teammates/Mic'd teammates when one finds themselves frustrated with campers, scrubs, etc.
Just an idea. I like not being forced into squads for roles but it would be nice even if it was just unique friend markers. Looking forward for thoughts and maybe other takes on introducing squads.
I like the helicopters in PUSH mode. I've seen them used effectively. If Insurgents want to fire rockets at the objective and not the heli that's a fine time to use it. Also on final waves it can clean up a match really fast. The fact they can get shot down so fast is a good thing. It shouldn't be a god mode call in and calls in faster then artillery.
I feel like the speed isn’t too far off from the original. Definitely faster, but not as overwhelming as some feel. The question I would raise is do you still feel like the maps would still work for the game if players were slowed significantly? I see larger maps being the drive for a faster movment change. At what point is the balance between getting to the action quickly and walking simulator? Another perspective, speed allows you to cover large open ground, something that is more prevelant then in the first Insurgency. You might feel frustrated watching the enemy push ground from afar but is it more frustrating then feeling it’s impossible to push. With a bullet drop tweak to the main rifles, I see them encouraging other roles for the job rather then anyone without a submachine gun can pick off targets easily from a distance.
I feel like some slight speed tweaking would be nice. However I don’t feel like mid to long range targets are impossible to pick off. It’s a fine line but their close.
No one wants to play ranked on a unfinished product. Glitches that can be exposed, frame rate issues, possible balance problems. You can play the ranked mode in the casual server with simply a larger team size. Maybe it’s not how you feel, it does seem a lot of people are crying for things NOW and TODAY while they develop the game. There should be more faith. They have shown commitment to improving the game and developing the best product they can. Many other teams would have released the game today and moved on.
I would try the other game modes where that first Insurgency feel is more present. Even in Push you can work around, sometimes, wide open flanks but ultimately all flanks lead to a single destination. I think skirmish has a place, maybe in a larger competitive scene where small groups are more coordinated. Possibly a larger player count on custom servers. The fuel trucks are not main objective now and are, if anything, simply bait to reveal am enemy position or waste ordinance.
In Push the commander definitely matters. Well placed calls or lack there of can make or break the match. If the commander is asking himself “how many kills did my artillery get?” over “how did my artillery influence the team?” then it can feel useless. In my opinion, ordinace and communication spur the team to push objective. Meaning a well placed RPG on infantry may cost you the ground a attack chopper takes back. The balance of the RPG and air support feels much better in the push Mode. Even on the flip side in relation to a well positioned truck.
My frustration comes from lack of Objective priority and it seems partially you too perhaps. Vote to Kick will fix this. It did in the last Insurgency and in Red Orchestra.
I am in full favor of earning extra credits for making the end of round/match board. Kills and objectives not so much. I would be happy on rewards being scaled to difficulty. Example; MVP 75€, Proffesional €50, Headbanger 25€. I would like to see kill rewards minimized to promote objectives. I would hate to see any system that promotes more team members hiding away from objective with a scoped bolt action in the name of credit farming.
An implementation of this would add a rewarding second source to earning Character Items and hopefully will also help newer players feel more driven to objective success.