Last Online
Recent Posts
posted in Insurgency - General Discussion read more

@MarksmanMax said in Make Insurgency Great Again: Part II - Tough Love:

Do you mean more recoil when crouched or less? I want more as the recoil reduction is too much IMO.

I mean that being crouched should give you a definite advantage in sway and recoil management over standing up because it just makes more sense. I don't necessarily think the way to balance this would be to make the crouch recoil any different. I think a lot of the problems stem from the way recoil in general is being calculated. Right now we have a first bullet recoil and recovery being kind of weird, as shown in my first video. I think changing that would give you a different idea of how standing vs crouch works. It's a matter of how the recoil mechanics work, not how they're being manipulated by the seperate stances. Being crouch/prone should definitely give you a obvious advantage in terms of sway and recoil management in comparison to standing up.

If that makes sense to you.

posted in Insurgency - General Discussion read more

@MarksmanMax said in Make Insurgency Great Again: Part II - Tough Love:

->Something I complained about ages ago was how effective crouching was at reducing recoil. Since then, it's been slightly nerfed, but holding down "Ctrl" still removes 40% of your weapon's recoil, which is insane. I made a video here talking about this.

I definitely think there should be an improvement in recoil management going into crouch. There is definitely a need to balance this feature slightly.

-> The ADS time being linked to total weight is another change I think was designed to cater to Competitive players while punishing casual ones.

I think this change is not really catering to anyone. I think it just kind of makes the gunplay worse. I've been arguing that the weapons weight should control this. But again, now we are still talking inside the box. I don't think changing levers within the current mechanics should be the go to. I see a need to change to the mechanics themselves.

-> Another change I've bitched about for months was the armor nerf. When Sandstorm launched into the first Betas, the newer casual players complained and said the reason they couldn't kill anyone was because armor was too strong, but the real issue was that the hitreg was completely fucked for most players, including myself. When NWI released a patch to help fix the hitreg, they also heavily nerfed armor in the same patch. Yup. They made armor worthless while hitreg was fucked. While the CTA is under an NDA, I will say that I'm like 99% sure that no one complained about armor being too strong in the CTA.

I have a great in-depth idea of how I think the armor should work in the game. I agree, right now it isn't what it should be. I won't go in-depth into this though. I'll probably make another video if the situation allows for it.

"It feels really good in the beginning, but once you start looking past the atmosphere, once you start looking past the map design, once you start looking past everything else, you start to get good, you start to master the mechanics, and you start to really really shine in the game, there's just nothing left for you to play."

^^ This 100%. When I first starting playing back in the CTA, I logged 88 hours in an 11-day period. That averages to 8 hours a day, which is pretty insane. When Sandstorm launched into the Betas, it took me almost a month, if not longer, to get 88 hours logged onto the game:

Yeah, I had 300 hours and level 100 by the time the game was first announced to be released in Sept 18. I was level 245 on reset and now I'm close to 200 again but like I said in the video. I've barely played the game for the past few months.

One more thing, as well. I noticed that in your hodge-podge mess of words that are on your whiteboard, I see this:


Looks like it says "Pistols eyesight distance".

Yes that is what it says. I wish they would stretch the arms out to make the pistol cover up alot less on the screen. Right now it looks like you're holding the pistol so close to your face the blowback might hurt you. This makes the iron sight huge and the pistol accuracy horrible.

posted in Insurgency - General Discussion read more

Youtube Video

Hello again Sandstorm Community,

I am back with another video with some more feedback. The first video I made was a lot more in depth in terms of things that I want to see changed within the game. In this video I am going to be a little more vague in terms of actual solutions but rather give you my emotion and thoughts concerning the gameplay.

In the video I talk about playerbase, viewerbase and pointing alot of fingers towards the competetive side of the community and it's absence in the game. I would love to go in-depth in all of the problems that I've found and talk about potential solutions but I don't think that is as valuable to the devs right now. I just felt like I needed to ventilate myself for my own community and potentially the developers and anyone interested.

I would love to hear what other people think about what I talk about in the video.

Best regards,

posted in Insurgency - General Discussion read more

@cool_lad said in Make Insurgency Great (again) - Part I: Gunplay:

On the topic of suppression; i'll just repeat what I already said in another thread on the topic.

That increase in recoil simulates an important aspect of suppression, the stress and fear of being under continued fire, which makes it virtually impossible for the group or individual being suppressed to fire back.

It's also part of the reason suppression is so important. The purpose of suppression isn't to kill the enemy (which is more of a bonus in such cases), but rather to deny the enemy's ability to return fire (or really do anything else for that matter). If you are capable of returning fire under suppression just as easily as if you were not suppressed, then the very reason for using suppression is lost.

There's no such thing as breaking out of suppression. You'll virtually never hear of a pinned down group or person getting out of suppression on their own; the source of the suppression has to either be removed by someone who isn't suppressed, or has to be circumvented by finding a covered path out of the suppressed area.

The only actual method for a suppressed group to somehow break the suppression on their own is the (horribly impractical and largely wasteful) human wave. Something that is eminently unsuited for modern combat and a practical impossibility within the game (since you require numbers at least in the triple digits to even think of pulling that off).

tl;dr: Demanding that you be able to fire back effectively when suppressed pretty much ignores and invalidates the whole point of suppression. The removal of recoil from suppression simply inflates the value of the wrong kind of skill (ability to aim quickly and accurately) in a situation where the ability should not be relevant.

This ability to fire back also, rather conveniently, removes the entire purpose of the gunner class; since the major reason for the use of Machine Guns in modern warfare is to provide suppression fire. This is pretty much pointless if the person under suppression can simply pop off accurate shots regardless of suppression. Contrary to popular imagination, the MG in modern warfare is not a weapon meant to do most of the killing; it's role is largely to provide suppression fire for the rest of the squad to work around; something that is pointless if the person being suppressed can still fire back and kill with the same ease as before.

There is a big difference between getting overpowered by machine gun fire during an ambush designed by a horde of taliban when you are walking along a barren path eating a snickers and in a duelsituation when you find yourself against one foe in CQB, ready for action at any given moment. There is also a big difference between realism and this video game. There is another very big difference between competetive shooters and milsim shooters. This game wants to combine it all.
However, to have mechanics that hinder or lower the skillceiling of the players are not appropriate for competetive play (as the majority, if not all, of the current competetive players have complained about). I believe we have to find a middle-ground and I believe my idea is just that. It combines the immersion of visual- and hearing impairment that in most cases will scare and put you behind cover due to the fact of how hard it will be for you to spot your enemy during these circumstances. But if you happen to know where he is shooting from or you are in a situation where you see eachother at the same time, you will be perfectly able to land your shot. I have also suggested in the equivalent reddit post that if said suppression effect reaches a certain volume that sway would occur. For example by a bipod machinegunner really blasting away at your position or directly by sniper fire.

I also believe that there is different training and mindset among nations and units. I am for example trained to shoot back first to "create" cover for me and my unit, if I am the pointman. But my MOS isn't infantry warfare against vast hordes of enemies, an neither is this games MOS either.


Competetive play is desperate for a change. My idea combines immersion with skill. Sway could occur during heavy volume of suppression by machine gun- and sniper rifle fire. As discussed here: reddit

posted in Insurgency - General Discussion read more

@maa_bunny said in Make Insurgency Great (again) - Part I: Gunplay:

Modern combat training mostly emphasizes avoiding a fight-or-flight reaction when possible. Combat mindset emphasizes breath control and deliberate action to control heart rate and maintain clear thought. I'm certainly no hardcore SOF guy, but in my experience the best soldiers are those that stay calm under pressure, not embrace an adrenaline-fuel fight response.

Plus, Sandstorm does not depict combat between elite operators. Most are basically militia.

Ok I think we are just arguing for the sake of arguing now. Embracing the adrenaline-fuel fight response and entering flow state is a "relaxed" state of mind during very objectively stressful conditions. The people that can stay calm under pressure are most likely in this state.

Well, Sandstorm also wants to become a competetive game. I don't believe limiting the players skill-ceiling because it should feel like you just came out of basic is the right way to go. Rather make it difficult with the potential to be a god, if skilled enough, among men.

posted in Insurgency - General Discussion read more


Precisely what I am trying to explain. I could've talked about what I said in the video for hours on end. I'm glad you grasped the concept.

Thank you for your feedback.

posted in Insurgency - General Discussion read more

@tzaeru said in Make Insurgency Great (again) - Part I: Gunplay:

Personally I don't mind hipfire being somewhat inconsistent.

I agree to somewhat inconsistent. Not it's current variant. Counter-Strike has somewhat inconsistent spray aswell but it is consistent within it's useful range.

This game has a fantastic idea with the deadzone implementation. What I saw with the game when I started playing the beta was that there was enormous potential to have skillful "hipfire" being a part of the game. Not saying it should be favoured over ADS for all situations but promote it when the circumstances allow for it. I think it would make for amazing "noscope" situations and "OMG WHAT A SHOT" kind of gameplay which would motivate players to keep watching and playing the game.

posted in Insurgency - General Discussion read more

@maa_bunny said in Make Insurgency Great (again) - Part I: Gunplay:

Thank you so much for your elaborate feedback and your ideas. Here is my response to you.

Yah, part of the issue is figuring out is this really hip fire?

Exactly. There are just not enough fingers on your hand to account for the amount keys to press if you want to have all these different stances and shooting styles. That is why we have to find a balance sweet spot between what hipfire and shoulder-ready (duckwalk/tactical walk as I describe it). That's why I suggest that the current way the "hipfire" works should be more of a shoulder ready semi-accurate way to shoot being balanced through movement speed based on the weight of the weapon instead of being nerfed to another dimension.

You're right, your mind doesn't want you to die, not really. It just works out that way. The problem is the human fight or flight response didn't evolve for combat with ranged weapons that require fine motor skills. It thinks we'll be arm wrestling a saber toothed tiger, or beating a Neanderthal to death with a club. Elevated heart rate, rapid breathing, narrowed vision, and restriction of blood flow to the extremities all conspire to make shooting more difficult. Combat shooting statistics would certainly look a lot better if soldiers got more accurate with stress, but unfortunately that's not the case.

I would actually instead argue that we are evolved for ranged combat. Our arms are long and we utilize our hands to throw stones, use spears, clubs and other tools in order to distance ourselves from our opponent. The reason we are the apex predator is because of our ability to kill from a distance. Using our fists to fight being our last resort of combat. I would also argue that only a small percentage of people are truly warriors. These individuals enter "fight-mode" immediately and are almost seeking combat where as the majority are more prone to flee, run away or taking cover. I would suggest that the elite forces, warriors and successful clutch athletes among us fit into the category of facing their fears and accepting the fact that they have to fight and upon embracing this state of mind enter what is known as flow-state in order to conduct themselves in peak performance to win or in this case, survive.

Looking at statistics of what the majority of people experience during stress doesn't really make a solid argument in my opinion. Mainly because I believe that there are more factors involved than just fear in those statistics. Physical fatigue, combat fatigue, unit morals among others and not just fear alone. I would rather have the game feature attributes of elite warriors that are leaning towards the "fight-mode" to increase the skillceiling and promote offensive plays. The reason I think so is because this game wants to be a competetive sport. If we were to have a ultra-realistic MMORPGFPS it would be a fantastic idea for your character to have to train or strengthen these attributes in order to perform well during said circumstances.

I really like most of this, with one caveat: movement speed should always be effected by total weight. Speaking from experience, the weight of armor and gear is the single biggest factor in how quickly and nibley you can move around the battlefield. Next to that, the weight of the rifle is pretty minor. It's especially true in close quarters, where not only does your gear weight restrict your movement, but bulk becomes an issue too. Snagging on a door frame is a really good way to mess up dynamic movement into a room. I've actually been stuck in a doorway for a few seconds before because I was wearing gear optimized for outdoors combat - oops. And I find that with a heavy gear load, I subconsciously just don't want to move as quickly, or crouch as low, or contort into a weird stance to get behind cover, or hop over the ledge. Fighting with a light gear load is remarkably refreshing.

But ADS speed and sway should absolutely be determined by weapon weight. How quickly you can drive a weapon onto a target and hold it there has very little to do with the weight of your gear, and a whole lot to do with the weight of the weapon and all the stuff you've got hanging off it. In some respects, a bulky gear loadout can almost help reduce sway - if I can tuck my elbows into my vest or rest them on a pouch I can actually hold my rifle a little more steady.

I agree with this. The only problem is what I mentioned earlier in this response. There is just not enough fingers on your hand to account for the dynamics of real life. We have to find a balance. My idea of making a competetive e-sports potential shooter is to have it work this way. I think it combines alot from previous competetive shooters but also give you the idea and immersiveness of realistic hardcore shooter mechanics.

Best regards,


posted in Insurgency - General Discussion read more

@slazenger said in Make Insurgency Great (again) - Part I: Gunplay:

No mention of weapon lethality and caliber, waste of time.
If you want to make the gunplay great make the guns kill in 1 shot to the head chest and stomach with 5.56 and above.

Thank you for your honest feedback. The reason I didn't put this in the video is because I could talk for hours if I was to include everything in one video. What you are talking about is a perfect follow-up subject to this series I am going to make. I have alot of ideas and suggestions regarding these issues aswell. So stay tuned and come back when the subject interests you.