I think there are a few ways to make this better:
- Randomize points and switch between cache/capture each playthrough
- Increase number of bots, but have them spawn further back so that we can't just run into the points
- Instead of a 5 minute timer to cap point, have a 10 minute timer with bot waves spawned in every few minutes.
- Have bots set up actual defenses, where one machinegunner will lock down a lane with riflemen covering his flanks. Right now, they all just stand up and run around like idiots until they get an instant headshot on me.
- Allow players to go back to last objective/spawn to be able to respawn dead teammates. Only allow once per objective, and call in extra enemy reinforcements to create a penalty for needing the respawn.
The way I handled this in the Source version was to increase the amount of points given based on certain actions.
If a kill was suppressed or assisted by another player, each received double points.
On a capture, every tick was given a multiplier based on how many players were on point, up to 100% bonus if at least 80% of the remaining living players were on point.
For demolition, all players received the same amount of points regardless of who blew it up.
I wasn't able to account for things like overwatch and defense, because I sort of gave up on the mod given that player behavior was already baked from playing on non-modified servers. But I think that structuring point rewards to encourage team coordination is a good start, and focusing on that should give us some better incentives to make players want to work as a unit.
nope, it's pretty good actually
I'm honestly happier without the option.
My opinion has always been that there is a huge amount of customization that doesn't really offer players choice.
AP ammo was always better, so there was never a reason to use anything else.
If the customization doesn't offer any significant differences, or one is so overpowered that it becomes meta, then it stops being an option and becomes another thing one has to click when setting up loadouts.
I'm having a couple issues in coop that I think we can address easily, with practically no downside compared to the way these things are now.
Wait until everyone is loaded in and has a loadout screen. Wait 20 seconds, then spawn everyone.
Spawn in all players on first point as soon as they're ready, even if they miss the wave. There is no reason to punish players for slow network or complex loadout management.
The whole "ride in the truck" gimmick just wastes 12 seconds of my time. I don't like it.
XP for losing is basically a quarter of winning, even if I'm 140:3 with 16 objectives. Why should I finish a game if I'm losing XP, when leaving and finding a new match is almost guaranteed to be a better option?
Running ahead and capping/blowing objectives like a lone wolf is a problem. I've already posted myriad ways to make this better.
Parties should be able to stick together at the end of the match and continue queuing together.
Voice chat needs to show player name. In real life, I know the names and voices of my squad mates, and can see them talking. In game has no such cues.
Also voice should be full map and loud. The radio mechanic from DoI isn't a good fit here.
Counter-attack should never "re-capture" the point, I end up C9'ing so often because I need to retreat and reload. Make it contest, and require clearing it.
Final point should have some sort of respawn in support for dead teammates. I've had matches where ten seconds into a 3:00 counter, an IED guy kills three teammates. Be nice if they could respawn at 2:00 or 1:00 so they could help relieve us.
I was talking about the upcoming release and reset on a stream recently, and we realized the experience reset is going to cause a problem I've not heard mentioned yet.
I don't care about having any sort of carry over for cosmetics sake, but we need to have a way to show who has experience from the beta, versus new players.
As an example, if we all are level 1, it's hard to tell what player knows the maps and mechanics well enough to follow.
So, that player can explain himself on voice comms, but there's no way for new players to be able to see who might have an idea what to do, versus the mass of new post-release players who just started at the same time.
Maybe some sort of "brevet" rank or something just to show "this person was in alpha/beta" during the first months of release, so that we can have a better idea who knows the game and which players may need more guidance?
Bots need to slow down, suppress more, react to you killing their teammates, and have less wallhack/aimbot powers. I'm tired of getting killed by a bot tracking me through the wall, it's absurd.
If a knife kill isn't instant, a door shouldn't be either.
Or, add a tiny melee door as an unlockable 1 hit kill weapon.
bots could be fixed pretty easily.
- make them spawn far from players, in small fire teams, and have them move in from there
- drop their accuracy, but increase their firing to increase suppression
- make their grenade/explosive accuracy reduced to reasonable levels
- have bots take longer term debuffs from suppression and having teammates killed
- keep the bots in smaller groups that work together, with a mechanic to split and run if players are routing them
this would solve most of the problems, and make the game more challenging as a tactical shooter, and reduce the random punishment difficulty that makes coop so frustrating.
this game is 75% of the way to being awesome as a coop shooter, if we just had bots that made the game fun and challenging instead of glitchy and making me rage quit for days at a time.
It's not on purpose, or I hope it isn't.
The two extremes are "so dumb that they can't shoot someone in front of them" or "instant headshots through walls", and neither of those are fun to play against.
The problem is that it's way more effective to just run around, hip firing and quick-scoping bots on the run, than it is to move slowly and tactically.
I'd rather the difficulty make it harder for me to play based on increasing challenge, and not just be "increase chance of a wall hack headshot by 40%".
You probably heard about LEAN production and the principles about asking "why?" until you expose root causes of problems.
This is pretty spot on. It seems like the focus is on features that are fun to add, rather than addressing the long-running problems that continue to degrade the gameplay experience for the core player population.
I loved the last Insurgency, and I'm pretty sure this one could be even better, but these major problems need to be addressed in earnest so that it can shine.
Well, I always saw things like explosives (esp. RPG/AT4 and artillery) as something to punish players who are not in hard cover.
It wouldn't be a big deal if artillery went through buildings though, so long as it was consistent.
Sometimes I'll be right next to a window, barely shielded from the shell exploding ten feet away, and nothing happens.
Sometimes I'm in a stairway, away from the walls, behind tons of hard cover, and get killed through a wall.
My personal take is that artillery should be something to force players to take cover or get punished, but that a player in hard cover should survive.
Maybe if the mechanic as implemented was better explained, and we knew what the "right kind" of cover and positioning was to survive it consistently, it would be OK.
But as it is, most of the time I'm just irritated that another random inescapable death has put me into spectate mode for 5 minutes
I think the feedback shows that people like the game. I've played games that simply sucked and weren't fun, I just uninstalled and moved on.
People are giving some hard to read feedback in these forums, but I believe we as a community are simply showing that we have strong preferences which the previous games satisfied, and that we want this game to reflect those.
I share the frustration over the amount of issues in the beta, and the feeling that this is on the cusp of being an amazing game.
I obviously want NWI to succeed here because their success means another game I'm going to love will be supported and improved, as the last two Insurgency releases were.
There will always be those who just complain and make noise, but you'll notice that many of these people posting their criticism also suggest ways that the issue can be resolved.
That tells me that these people also want to see this game succeed, and I take it as a good sign that even in the face of all the remaining issues, so many players are sticking it out to try and see it finished.
Yeah it seems like the behavior is more like Ins 2 than I'd have hoped. For Ins 2, I had created a "better bots" config (which I guess is subjective) that made the bots move more, shoot more, and suppress the player constantly.
Those might be applicable to this game as well.
I dropped their accuracy at distance, and increased it close up, so that engaging from farther away was encouraged.
I decreased the time it took them to recognize a player, and begin firing.
I set them to approach players aggressively, while suppressing with reduced accuracy.
Added accuracy for crouched or stationary bots, to encourage players to target the supporting fire elements.
It worked pretty well, with the exception that sometimes it'd make bot machine gunners insta-headshot targets while deployed. But it made for a much more tense but manageable experience, so as long as players weren't making mistakes or moving too quickly they made it through.
@master-quixote yeah I have seen that, but to me that's not what the game should be encouraging. I don't think a tactical shooter should reward people for foot-shooting people.
In coop, it's frustrating that players spawning in have no ammo box or resupply area near them, I've had a few times where I switched kit while dead but got spawned while picking loadout, requiring me to hunt for the box.
Also in coop, the boxes should not close up and stop working when the next point gets capped. When one player rushes ahead to solo cap a point, it makes it so the remaining players have to decide to run towards point or have their resupply disappear.
At least keep them for a minute or two after the point gets capped, it's very annoying to be running backwards to an ammo box and have it disappear because someone is rushing ahead to get a high score.
I did a lot of the modding in the last game. Myself and a couple other old hands are putting together a Trello to record ideas, and have the community vote on them. Feel free to request membership, and anyone can vote the items up so we can prioritize on what the community is looking for. https://trello.com/b/IMoI1Bp4/insurgency-sandstorm-mods
My view is, the progression system should be tied to progress.
If I play a game and don't help my team, and we win, I should get less rewards.
If I help my team, and we lose, I should get more rewards.
The rewards should encourage good gameplay, so that it's another way to incentivize players to play in a way which makes the experience fun for all players.