I'm not entirely sure how XP is calculated at the moment. But, it seems that XP for objectives is worth more than XP for kills. I like this as it encourages people to focus on the objective rather than their personal K:D.
However, you only seem to earn objective bonuses if you are ON the objective when it is captured/defended.
If I'm at an objective and see many teammates are already parked inside cap'ing. I tend to circle outside and try to flank enemies and/or mark their approach path. I'd argue this is a valid way of supporting the capture/defence of the objective. But, as I'm not in the building at the time, I usually find I'm not credited with any objective bonuses.
I'd suggest that if you kill, hit or even suppress any enemy player/bot that is within a certain RADIUS of the objective as it is being captured/defended - even if YOU are not within the capture area at the time - you also be awarded XP for supporting the objective.
This would mean that if you aren't inside the objective zone, you'd only get XP if you actually engaged a nearby enemy. Simply camping behind a rock so you don't die while your teammates do all the work wouldn't net you anything.
So, as mentioned above, flanking or snipers providing overwatch for example would be considered support of the objective.
I just think that actually being inside the objective zone (while of course necessary for the capture) is to narrow view of "playing the objective".
I very much agree with the general sentiment of the OP and do believe they would benefit from a rethink rather than adopting the Day of Infamy approach.
At present, I avoid the Commmander & Observer roles as they are. Partly because I don't feel I've learned the maps well enough yet, but also because I just don't find them enjoyable.
Observer feels more like SL's pet, babysitter or personal bodyguard. It's not an active role at all. Also nothing distinguishes observer from other roles visually.
This is very true and makes it possibly the least appealing role. The only thing that distinguishes you is that you get yelled at if you stray off your leash. Not fun.
Make SL call fire support using a map...
Absolutely! This would be MUCH better and more precise.
As for how the roles might be redesigned, my suggestion would be based around a fire support call-in going something like this:
Commander: "Give me a strafing run on that ridge line - NOW!"
Observer: "Roger that, tasking asset..."
To make it more cooperative in game, split the duties between the two players based of the dialog above rather than making the Observer a puppet like so:
COMMANDER initiates by picking the TYPE OF SUPPORT and designates a GENERAL AREA - denoted by a fixed (largish) circle - where he'd like it.
OBSERVER would get this request over radio so he doesn't need to be physically close to the Commander. He'd then have X number of seconds to call in the pre-selected strike. It's his responsibility to pick the EXACT LOCATION (within the commander designated area) and TIMING.
Once the Observer makes the call, the fire support would have to come QUICKLY as the delay would already be baked into the cooperative effort.
EDIT: Perhaps the fire support aircraft could start to come on station as soon as the commander gives the order so it would be ready for a quick response when it gets the final coordinates from the observer.
However, as the Observer is no longer tethered to the commander, he might be closer to the action and have better knowledge of current squad position. He could then adjust the exact strike location (or cancel it entirely) to avoid any friendly fire.
Anyway, something like that might work with some tweaking/finesse.
The important thing is that these roles should be FUN and COOPERATIVE rather than the RESTRICTIVE role of the Observer now.
I'm sure I've seen other threads that have mentioned this but I'd like to see specific keybinds for the items in the comm menu like Ins2 had.
The one I'm missing the most is "Enemy Spotted". Often I like to circle the objectve (especially when defending) and call out enemy approaches to help other defenders. The auto compass pop-up makes this especially useful.
Can we expect this feature to return for release? I find using the Comm Rose cumbersome.
Disclaimer: I'm not a gun nut and acknowledge this may have little to do with real life. However, for game play, I thought this might be worth considering:
LMGs (as I understand them) are designed as a support weapon for suppression and area denial.
In Insurgency, they seem to be used more as automatic battle rifles with huge ammo-boxes. To compensate for this, they have been given very large recoil in an attempt to balance them vs. battle rifles.
To encourage their use in a support role, perhaps consider:
- ONLY let them ADS if the bipod is deployed.
- Decrease their recoil (they're heavy/stable guns, no?).
- Increase their suppression.
- Increase their penetration.
I can hear the objections to increased RNG/suppression already Fair enough, but I don't have that particular issue. I think suppression isn't rewarding misses as much as it is a tactical tool.
The idea is that:
- Once set up, LMGs become laser death machines but at the cost of manoeuvrability.
- If you tote them around, they can still suppress and spray down an area like a fire hose, but aren't good for precision work.
- Tracer rounds become really useful as you could walk your rounds on target even when compensating for hip-fire sway.
This would give LMGs a very distinct role and encourage a support style of play. They'd be most effective when setup at key positions rather than say clearing a house where smaller guns with greater mobility would be advantageous (thus making your sidearm more useful than just a backup).
Some of you who have read my other suggestions may see a trend here: I find myself looking for tweaked gun mechanics that help differentiate between different classes of weapons beyond recoil/penetration. Having greater differences in utility I think adds a lot and makes choosing between them more interesting.
As always, just my 2¢
The option to invert the Y-axis is of course crucial for many of us. However, when driving a vehicle or in spectator (3rd person cam) for example, the Y-axis is no longer inverted.
Please be consistent with the Y-axis inversion or (better yet) give options to invert each use case individually.
issue with this though, is that once set up, they are really easy to take out in a game like this...
That's a fair point. I'm thinking these would perhaps help offset that somewhat:
- If suppression on LMGs is substantially increased, shooting back in the general area quickly enough would prevent effective continued fire and/or require the shooter to relocate. This wouldn't help with 1-shot kills but I guess that's the advantage a sniper is supposed to have.
- Reduce cost of heavy armour for Gunners.
- Forced use of the bipod to ADS means they'd either be prone or behind cover in order to setup making them at least a little harder to hit.
- With the low recoil and increased accuracy the bipod enables, they'd be effective from medium to long range. Learning to position themselves further from the fight would make flanking and return fire more difficult thus increasing their survivability.
As mentioned, right now I feel LMGs are just glorified battle rifles and people are playing them as such. With the changes I'm proposing, tactics would have to change (which is kinda the point). If you continue to use a LMG prone too close to a firefight, you are likely to get picked off as you suggested. But, if balanced properly and used as intended, I'd like to think they'd not only be viable but a genuine value add for your team.
I envision the Gunner's role similar to a Sniper in a way. Both provide overwatch with the Gunner piercing cover and pinning targets in a narrow cone while the Sniper picks them off individually.
Suppression would really need to be upped for LMGs. For other weapons, the point is to kill with a byproduct being some suppression. For LMGs I think it would work well the other way around: The main purpose of a LMG should be suppression with kills being a byproduct of so much lead flying downstream.**
I have found it is extremely difficult to win any matches in 'local play'. The biggest problem is defending an area.
If I die, I will re spawn miles away. By the time I get anywhere close to the area again, my team are all killed and we lose. I can never win!
Yes, defending is difficult because if you die, you don't have time to run back and stop them from recapturing as you pointed out. As a recapture is an immediate loss, it's game over.
One thing you can do is as soon as you die, quickly switch your view to one of your AI teammates (presuming at least one is still alive) and then take possession of that bot and keep defending.
If you don't do this quickly enough, the game doesn't make you wait while your bots fight (this is solo mode after all) and just respawns you with a new wave of AI.
However, it's this respawning that pulls your remaining AI from defending the point causing the problem in the first place. So, once again, if you can take control of an AI bot QUICKLY you can hopefully keep fighting and complete the defence.
All that said, as Local Play is non-competitive solo mode (presumably just for practice and fun) it might be nice if the devs considered:
- Adding some bonus time if you die while defending so you have time to salvage a defence of a point.
- Simply remove the Defend requirement from Local Play and avoid the problem entirely.
The other issue I have is that sometimes I will be in the defending area, and still be alive, but the opponents still capture it! I think unless myself and the whole of my team are killed, then the opponents should not be able to capture the defending area.
Capturing is "pushed" back and forth by the number of bodies on the objective. Your team needs to outnumber the enemy team for it to move in your favour.
Having to cycle through your explosives is very time consuming. Especially when you can't set the order you prefer at loadout.
If I have an RPG & Moltov and want to quickly toss the Molly, I usually have to cycle through the RPG first which takes an age. With heavy carriers this just gets worse.
Please consider adding dedicated binds for each explosive slot and/or at the very least let us set the order which we want to access them.
Thanks for the consideration.
No, the speeds are acceptable as they are, you're just using a heavy loadout and expecting the speed of a light loadout.
Try maxing out the carry capacity with heavy items and doing a ads test then compare it to a light loadout, you'll notice you move faster, sprint faster, and then you'll probably go "Gosh darn i'm such a silly sausage i can't believe i forgot Ins has a weight mechanic!"
We are very aware there is a weight mechanic. As @cyoce pointed out, that's not what we are discussing.
My suggestion was that there be a relative difference in ADS times to reflect different classes of weapons. Personally, I don't think ADS should be changed based on scope type as @MAA_Bunny suggested but done rather on size/class of the firearm.
Currently, the only reason you'd switch to your sidearm is if you're out of ammo and don't have time for a reload. For immersion, I like to equip a pistol when I enter a cramped building rather than use a MBR. But, TBH, this is generally a disadvantage.
Even with the much longer length of an Assault or Battle rifle, I'm able to ADS and turn around in staircases without problem. I'm not suggesting this change so you bump into stuff more often. Just to point out that equipping a pistol isn't necessary.
By adjusting the ADS times between different classes (Pistol / Carbine+Shotgun / Assault Rifle / Battle Rifle / LMG) you'd be modelling the advantage of a smaller sized weapon when used in the setting it is designed for.
Thus also differentiating weapons based on their ergonomics, not just bullet trajectory or penetration. Do you prefer a slight advantage in draw/ADS time or increased penetration/scope options/mag size when indoors? I'd argue this makes for a more interesting tactical choice.
Also, not everything has get faster. Perhaps sidearms would get 85% of current ADS speeds. Carbines/Shotguns stay the same, Assault + 10% (so slower)... you get the idea. This is something the devs would figure out if they are interested in pursuing it.
It feels to me that aiming down sights (ADS) is slower for my pistol than my primary. Is this by design?
This was my original concern and, on further testing, it seems there may be an intermittent bug with the sidearm ADS which did make the pistol ADS slower:
The first time I ADS after equipping my sidearm there was a small initial delay. After that ADS worked as expected until switching away from my secondary and back again. It's that initial delay that was bothering me.
I tested again last night with the M005 (after playing for a while) and it was clearly noticable. However, when testing this morning after boot, it did not occur. I'll monitor and report the bug if/when I can find a way to reliably reproduce it. If anyone else has experienced this, I'd be curious to know.
You want it to be more cod like....
You want to be able to sprint a marathon combat slide into cover and instantly be able to take aim...
Tbh its like you expect cod out of insurgency...
I have no issue if you disagree with any of the suggestions brought up, but I'd prefer if you stuck to your option rather than telling me what I want.
I don't want a COD/arcade experience any more than you do. My suggestion was in fact aimed to help bring more realism to the game - not the other way around. FWIW, I think you're aiming your anti-arcade sentiments at the wrong people.
*Edited for a typo
You may want to check out this thread where we are discussing the same issue.
After switching back to INS2, I wanted to check out the new hardcore checkpoint mode and am happy to see the direction it's going! Thought I'd pass along some of my initial impressions:
Movement speed is MUCH better. I realize this is personal preference depending on whether you lean towards arcade or milsim but for me I prefer a methodical/stalking type of gameplay.
The new map (Outskirts) is very nice. Once again a preference issue. I but I like having to survey the terrain and clear the nooks and crannies. Having a few "lanes" that can easily be memorized and blocked off isn't as much fun for me. The collapsed building is a nice touch.
The idea of limited supply is good. BUT... It's a bit TOO limited IMHO. I like the idea of taking what you need for the mission and making it last. But, if you die, it's a bit of a bummer to get stuck with a kit you don't like for the balance of the match. I'm not sure what a good solution is yet but I'll give it some thought.
Friendly fire is an issue I don't want HUD markers in hardcore mode but this is where I like the original cosmetics much better than all these new accessories that players have asked for (and NWI have delivered). It used to be much easier to tell Security from Insurgents. But with both sides getting similar cosmetics, you can't use head scarves/helmets/face covering to quickly tell each side apart as you used to be able to. That was the obvious good solution which I felt WAS done well and has been spoiled which is a shame. I'd love to see a modding option that forces the cosmetics for each side to more unique and easily identifiable outfits.
All in all, it's a great step to coax me back but I'm still holding out for:
- Varying objectives (co-op) so that each time you play a map it isn't Groundhog Day. DOI started to innovate with this. Why not SS?
- Modding - While SS is getting there, I'm eager to tweak it to my groups exact preferences.
But overall, well done! I love Insurgency and am eager for SS to mature to the point where we're all happy to move on from INS2/DOI. I want the snazzy graphics, awesome sound and better bots... But gameplay comes first!
Even though I'm replying to my own post, I thought this topic warranted a new thread. Would love to hear other peoples suggestions too about how to improve on the idea of limited supply for hardcore checkpoint.
- The idea of limited supply is good. BUT... It's a bit TOO limited IMHO. I like the idea of taking what you need for the mission and making it last. But, if you die, it's a bit of a bummer to get stuck with a kit you don't like for the balance of the match. I'm not sure what a good solution is yet but I'll give it some thought.
MY SUGGESTION: Spawn the player with their original pistol choice (with 3 clips) instead of the Makarov and NO primary weapon at all.
Why do I think this suggestion is worth considering?
It would make your pistol choice more meaningful. The pistol is your BACKUP weapon. Well, let it be your backup. This would also mean that putting points into your pistol selection is more important as you may actually need to rely on it! More meaningful choices is a good thing.
Surviving with your chosen pistol until you can scavenge a better primary could be fun! Surviving with a Makarov on a single clip? Less fun...
Achieves the idea of limited supply without completely invalidating the players weapon preferences. We each have our favourites. Having your entire kit ditched when you die and being forced to play with random weapons isn't always fun. Keeping your chosen pistol but having to "make do" with the rest seems like a good compromise.
Anybody else have thoughts on how this aspect of the game might be improved?
I'm very jazzed about the co-op modes! Checkpoint & Hunt in particular.
As I understand it, once you die, you have to sit out until either the round is over (Hunt) or the next objective is captured (Checkpoint). In the first Insurgency, I believe you also had the option of taking over one of the surviving bots on your team and keep playing until the next respawn.
What I'm wondering is: Can you configure (per game) a specific number of bots to add your team that (in addition to helping of course) would function as "extra lives" for whomever might die first?
I ask because our group has a wide range of FPS skills and the weaker players will of course die much more often. If they have to sit out most of the time, they will likely get frustrated and lose interest. If they could jump into surviving bots and use them as extra lives so they don't have to sit out for most of the round, that would be excellent and make Sandstorm viable for us!
Ideally, we'd like to be able to add as many bots to our team as we felt were necessary to support our weaker players and keep them in the game.
On the other hand a windowed magazine is not standard neither in regular military nor in insurgents weaponry.
I like that idea and can see a legitimate implementation of a mechanic like this and to help this across there are plenty real world examples.
This also doesn't necessarily have you be applied to all weapons, thereby having an impact on player weapon choice.
Exactly. My thought is that it would be a weapon accessory and thus not every weapon would have the option. As it would cost supply, you'd really have to decide if it's worth spending the point. It is definitely non-standard and I think this could address that.
The idea isn´t bad but how you handle this with MG´s ( they have ammo-boxes ) and Shotguns ( internal tube for shotgun shells )?
You can´t just exchange the "check ammo" sequence by tilting the weapon to the side to see how much ammo left.
One nice thing about the current hold "R" mechanic is it also shows you the status of mags on your body too, for which the brief pat-down animation makes sense.
A windowed mag accessory would be kinda cool, but then should be a separate thing to the full body check, and I'm not sure how you do that...
Agreed. For the mechanic to be relevant, I think the ammo display would need to change back to the original Insurgency behaviour: Showing you only how many magazines you are carrying but NOT tell you how many rounds are currently loaded in your gun.
I'd suggest a new keybind [Check Ammo] that is separate from [Reload]. A Single-press for a quick glance at your magazine (this needs to be fast and thus h-o-l-d-i-n-g [Reload] might be too long) and double-press for a body pat-down to see how many mags you are carrying which would work as it does now showing icons for mags (without what is loaded in the gun).
The biggest issue is that it's a lot of work for arguably small amount of gain. It would be very cool and add realism, but adding new animations, modelling new magazines/bullets, adding a mechanic to have the bullets visually deplete as you fire them... Obviously, I like the idea but I also could see this being an extra gravy feature that doesn't make the cut. Still, doesn't hurt to put ideas out there for future consideration
I love using them. However, I believe their cost is already baked into the hefty supply point cost.
I have to give up carrying explosives to equip them. No need for further restrictions IMHO.
Would definitely like to see the LMG's reduce movement further than a normal rifle when ADS, that makes a fair bit of sense...
I edited my original comment and deleted the line about limiting the player to walking speed while ADS because I'm suggesting that ADS be ONLY allowed with the bipod deployed. Thus ADS with a LMG would only be possible with NO movement at all.
More suppression for all guns in general would make for a better game and define the MG's role further.
Not so sure about this. My gut tells me to NOT increase suppression for all weapons but increase suppression significantly for LMGs ONLY. That would really make effective suppression unique to LMGs and give them a very specific competitive advantage thus defining their role.
Holding [Reload] to check your ammo status is slower than quickly changing to and from your secondary anyway making it a bit redundant. (If you switch very fast before letting the animation complete).
However, the idea of a mechanism to check your current ammo status is a good idea.
I'd suggest adding a Windowed Magazine attachment option and having the the check ammo function quickly tilt the side of your weapon towards you so you can visually check the remaining ammo.