Never see servers running Insurgency anymore

[Beans]

Anyone else notice you see very few servers running Insurgency anymore, what is up with that?

 

Does the general community dislike INS? If you have thoughts on INS I'd like to hear why people dislike or like it compared to AAS.

Edited March 14 by Beans

[CageMatchKimsey]

Server runs like crap on Insurgency.  Too many folks in one place, emplacements, smoke, etc.  Also, AAS = Conquest in Battlefield, any other mode too many maps in a row can kill a server population.

Edited March 14 by CageMatchKimsey

[Engagedrook8]

Well, until they implement a better way to destroy caches ( c4, like in project reality, not battlefield c4) insurgency just isn't that great

Edited March 14 by Engagedrook8

[.Bole]

We run all INS map on all of our servers

[Romby]

12 hours ago, Engagedrook8 said:

Well, until they implement a better way to destroy caches ( c4, like in project reality, not battlefield c4) insurgency just isn't that great

The problem with Ins is missing C4 for US???? What?!

 

Insurgency just isn't really that fun for insurgents and the result is that most people leave. I have been on servers where the population was 30 Ins v 40 US because people constantly left the Ins side. The gamemode will be cool in the future but it needs work and new maps. In my experience Insurgency on Logar for example is just a horrible experince for Ins players.

 

The problems i see with insurgency:

- Lack of urban maps. Streets would help funnel US players into choke points further from caches making defence/ambushes easier. Right now way to often the cache is inside a compound surrounded by hills making it really fun for US scopes and M203s and not very fun for insurgents inside compound.

- Ins can only spawn on caches. I find this really fustrating. Vehicles spawn on supply points or the unspawnable main. So to get vehicles you often have to run a lot. If cache is far from a supply point this means it takes ages to get the logi and start building defences. Ins also need their fast vehicles to move around and set up ambushes. Having to start round running really far for vehicles really removes an insurgent strenght. Last thing it makes it really easy for US to find caches before they are even on map. Just look for players. I really think ins needs to be able to spawn on some kind of main all round (where better vehicles should spawn), spawn on supply points at start of round and have a couple of random forward spawns at start of round. This would simulate ins homefield advantage and help them set up ambushes, get their hand on logis quicker and make sure they always have somewhere to spawn. Also if US runs into players they can't be sure if there is a cache in the area (like it is now).

- Caches dont stay secret long enough. So often you lose a round because a new cache spawns and US can see it before you can set up defences in time. Also find it a bit of a problem that ins with weaker weapons have to defend 2 places while US with crows and scopes can throw their whole force at 1 cache at a time. My experience with Insurgentcy the ins team have to split up on the caches. US attacks one with most of their team and takes it down. They then attack the other where now the whole ins team is. New cache spawns and ins team is split again and US takes down one more cache. It goes on like this until US have won round.

Edited March 14 by Romby

[suds]

it is far harder to win as ins now that vehicles provide fast access around the maps.

Alpha 8.1

[Zylfrax791]

13 hours ago, Beans said:

Anyone else notice you see very few servers running Insurgency anymore, what is up with that?

 

Does the general community dislike INS? If you have thoughts on INS I'd like to hear why people dislike or like it compared to AAS.

Nobody likes playing Wheres Waldo is why. The entire team ends up being bunched up a few areas of the map with constant smoke grenades which makes the frame rates drop. Also seen it glitch out several times where a new cache never respawns. Also the trick where the cache is entirely covered in 50 sandbags gets old. 

[Engagedrook8]

1 hour ago, Romby said:

The problem with Ins is missing C4 for US???? What?!

 

Insurgency just isn't really that fun for insurgents and the result is that most people leave. I have been on servers where the population was 30 Ins v 40 US because people constantly left the Ins side. The gamemode will be cool in the future but it needs work and new maps. In my experience Insurgency on Logar for example is just a horrible experince for Ins players.

 

The problems i see with insurgency:

- Lack of urban maps. Streets would help funnel US players into choke points further from caches making defence/ambushes easier. Right now way to often the cache is inside a compound surrounded by hills making it really fun for US scopes and M203s and not very fun for insurgents inside compound.

- Ins can only spawn on caches. I find this really fustrating. Vehicles spawn on supply points or the unspawnable main. So to get vehicles you often have to run a lot. If cache is far from a supply point this means it takes ages to get the logi and start building defences. Ins also need their fast vehicles to move around and set up ambushes. Having to start round running really far for vehicles really removes an insurgent strenght. Last thing it makes it really easy for US to find caches before they are even on map. Just look for players. I really think ins needs to be able to spawn on some kind of main all round (where better vehicles should spawn), spawn on supply points at start of round and have a couple of random forward spawns at start of round. This would simulate ins homefield advantage and help them set up ambushes, get their hand on logis quicker and make sure they always have somewhere to spawn. Also if US runs into players they can't be sure if there is a cache in the area (like it is now).

- Caches dont stay secret long enough. So often you lose a round because a new cache spawns and US can see it before you can set up defences in time. Also find it a bit of a problem that ins with weaker weapons have to defend 2 places while US with crows and scopes can throw their whole force at 1 cache at a time. My experience with Insurgentcy the ins team have to split up on the caches. US attacks one with most of their team and takes it down. They then attack the other where now the whole ins team is. New cache spawns and ins team is split again and US takes down one more cache. It goes on like this until US have won round.

I actually haven't played Ins on insurgents side, so I did not know they could only spawn on chaches, yeah that's dumb. 

      Insurgents haveibg to defend two chaches at once will make more sense when they start having weapons like PKM, or RPK with bipod that can effectively defend against infantry with a few defenders.

       Also, yes, insurancy needs more urban maps, but the mode can work on less urban maps ( to some degree) also, I'm just not a fan of a lot of the squad map in there current form at least, I know changes are supposed to be coming.

[Romby]

27 minutes ago, Engagedrook8 said:

I actually haven't played Ins on insurgents side, so I did not know they could only spawn on chaches, yeah that's dumb. 

      Insurgents haveibg to defend two chaches at once will make more sense when they start having weapons like PKM, or RPK with bipod that can effectively defend against infantry with a few defenders.

       Also, yes, insurancy needs more urban maps, but the mode can work on less urban maps ( to some degree) also, I'm just not a fan of a lot of the squad map in there current form at least, I know changes are supposed to be coming.

Ohh so you are one of those guys (switching to the better team). But insurgency really needs a lot of improvements to be fun (maps being a big part of it).

 

I dont really see how a PKM and RPK is different for 50 cals. Ok easier to set up, but i still think these weapons will be easy kills for scopes. I actually find that Ins work really well on the maps with less hills (Chora and Kokan). The hills on Khohat and Logar makes it way to easy to **** over defenders inside compounds, since hills allow you to shot over walls and easily fire M203 grenades into defenders.

 

For me Ins is fustrating both when playing US and Ins. As Ins you fell like you have no chance and as US you fell like you are beating up people in wheelchairs (i guess it can be fun, but for me it feels cheap).

Edited March 14 by Romby

[Marijuanoz]

INS mode on the current maps is pretty crap, + its buggy as f, sometimes that darn cache spawns in the middle of nowhere.. I hope that they re-work this mode in V10. This game needs some more diversity, im tired of playing AAS all the time.

Edited March 14 by Marijuanoz

[Engagedrook8]

10 minutes ago, Romby said:

Ohh so you are one of those guys (switching to the better team). But insurgency really needs a lot of improvements to be fun (maps being a big part of it).

 

I dont really see how a PKM and RPK is different for 50 cals. Ok easier to set up, but i still think these weapons will be easy kills for scopes. I actually find that Ins work really well on the maps with less hills (Chora and Kokan). The hills on Khohat and Logar makes it way to easy to **** over defenders inside compounds, since hills allow you to shot over walls and easily fire M203 grenades into defenders.

 

For me Ins is fustrating both when playing US and Ins. As Ins you fell like you have no chance and as US you fell like you are beating up people in wheelchairs (i guess it can be fun, but for me it feels cheap).

No I do not switch team, I don't have too much time in squad, and few servers run ins.

    And yes, US scopes are a huge advantage, and I'm not saing that it would be magically balanced with more insurgents weaponry, insurgancy in not really supposed to be balanced, at least not in the traditional sense, you definitely have to work around the barrier of less scopes, also it's a pain because you can't put down IEDs yet 

[Giongiorris]

4 hours ago, Romby said:

The problem with Ins is missing C4 for US???? What?!

 

Insurgency just isn't really that fun for insurgents and the result is that most people leave. I have been on servers where the population was 30 Ins v 40 US because people constantly left the Ins side. The gamemode will be cool in the future but it needs work and new maps. In my experience Insurgency on Logar for example is just a horrible experince for Ins players.

 

The problems i see with insurgency:

- Lack of urban maps. Streets would help funnel US players into choke points further from caches making defence/ambushes easier. Right now way to often the cache is inside a compound surrounded by hills making it really fun for US scopes and M203s and not very fun for insurgents inside compound.

- Ins can only spawn on caches. I find this really fustrating. Vehicles spawn on supply points or the unspawnable main. So to get vehicles you often have to run a lot. If cache is far from a supply point this means it takes ages to get the logi and start building defences. Ins also need their fast vehicles to move around and set up ambushes. Having to start round running really far for vehicles really removes an insurgent strenght. Last thing it makes it really easy for US to find caches before they are even on map. Just look for players. I really think ins needs to be able to spawn on some kind of main all round (where better vehicles should spawn), spawn on supply points at start of round and have a couple of random forward spawns at start of round. This would simulate ins homefield advantage and help them set up ambushes, get their hand on logis quicker and make sure they always have somewhere to spawn. Also if US runs into players they can't be sure if there is a cache in the area (like it is now).

- Caches dont stay secret long enough. So often you lose a round because a new cache spawns and US can see it before you can set up defences in time. Also find it a bit of a problem that ins with weaker weapons have to defend 2 places while US with crows and scopes can throw their whole force at 1 cache at a time. My experience with Insurgentcy the ins team have to split up on the caches. US attacks one with most of their team and takes it down. They then attack the other where now the whole ins team is. New cache spawns and ins team is split again and US takes down one more cache. It goes on like this until US have won round.

THIS!!! make supply points spawnable instead of the cache. You can drop a FOB near the cache anyways, you need one to build defensive structures.

Romby is right .. by making supply points spawnable you give multiple spawn points across the map and faster FOB deployment. This way insurgents can come from everywhere.. US team will need to scout better, move carefully and give support to logistics. Now it´s super easy to have just one person supplying US FOBs.. 

[Migillis]

If we get some balls to the wall urban maps it'll be better, I've lost at Logar Valley once when the last cache was in that central strip of housing and we just couldn't find the damn thing. Currently  there's a lot of times when the "intel" tells you the cache is at x position and when you get there there's only 2 or 3 huts in the middle of the desert and it doesn't make for very interesting or challenging games.

 

I do like the gamemode though, as has been mentioned AT mines will help a lot, I basically bought the game in anticipation of cache mode and IEDs. I love the idea of the attacking team having to narrow down their search based on where the enemy is coming from and the defenders having a chance to mislead the attacker's search based on where they THINK the enemy is coming from.

I'm not into making superFOBs but if it's going to happen I like to make them off the objective so when the "good guys" finally breach they realize they've been attacking a FOB for 30 minutes and not the objective. The second the attackers see sandbags they get excited and report they've found the cache so, to me, it's pretty important to build off of the objective.

[CageMatchKimsey]

INS is good for variety.  You see the "plain burger" folks coming out the woodwork posting how bad it is, but its really fun every 3rd or 4th map.

[DoctorKamikaze]

Just now, CageMatchKimsey said:

INS is good for variety.  You see the "plain burger" folks coming out the woodwork posting how bad it is, but its really fun every 3rd or 4th map.

 

I tend to agree with this. While it is a flawed mode in some ways, its nice to have a break from the same AAS/PAAS strategies that always come up playing those game modes. ITC/Conquest/INS are nice to breakup the usual game.

[Nugz]

Hey guys got this game last night because of AAS.  Played Joint Operations for years since 03...   been playing arma3..   never got attached to the cods or battlefields..   hoping this will get my fix!   Hope to see you all in the battle field! 

Edited March 14 by Nugz

[Exodus19]

Because people don't understand how to play, on any map I rarely see INS using the fastest vehicles in the game to out maneuver the enemy. Usually people just drive them directly into the enemy because they thing they are in an armored vehicle. Everyone runs around like normal and teamwork is lacking in almost every game between squads or even in squads.

[Socrates]

I personally think Insurgency is a great game mode, it could use some work but I think it's current state is still enjoyable.

[marxman]

I've had a lot of fun on insurgency, and I know I'm not the only one. It gives you a chance to use tactics and strategies that are totally nonviable for a linear game mode.

AAS is fun, but it feels very repetitive to me. I get pretty tired of flag rushing and everything that goes with it after 2-3 games. Insurgency is a far less serious game mode (IMO) that really lets you have fun and be abstract in a way that AAS can't. For instance, I've rarely executed a well timed vehicle  ambush in AAS. The main routes are usually highly contested, and half of the rare times I have successfully ambushed its been an accident and a bit of luck in my positioning. Insurgency is fantastic for this, on the contrary. The way blufor has to search for the caches opens up tons more possible ambush routes and flanking routes Than would be in AAS. In AAS an asset can usually be deployed in a better (and more predictable) location than in insurgency.

 

Insurgency has been the highlight of my shooter experience since PR .7, and I have faith the devs will continue the trend after the game has been updated more. As for servers running it, I dont see em much either. It's sad, but like I inferred above I think its popularity will rise.

Edited March 15 by marxman

[Peerun]

Just played a 2-hour long Insurgency game. It was a good one.
It was that 1%, because 99% of the time insurgency sucks.

[Beans]

Have the devs commented on future plans for insurgency? I feel like just adding some additional spawn points for insurgent would help.

[Shadow_]

Insurgency would be much more fun if there were maps specifically designed for the game mode. Currently the maps are a one size fits all type that never really tap into what makes a great insurgency game. Some of the best insurgency games in PR come from maps that have been designed around the game mode like Fallujah West, Al Basrah, Karbala and Ramiel.

 

On top of that currently the insurgents arsenal is severely limited. In PR they have IED's, Bomb cars, Bomb trucks, traps, mines, Roadblocks which make gameplay an infinity more interesting and different experience than AAS. In short, INS will get better over time.

[Ti0mat]

On 3/14/2017 at 11:30 AM, CageMatchKimsey said:

INS is good for variety.  You see the "plain burger" folks coming out the woodwork posting how bad it is, but its really fun every 3rd or 4th map.

 

Agreed. But it really needs to be the right map. Too hilly or not enough structures/compounds, and it's kinda meh. For me, anything other than Sumari currently, and it's probably not worth it.

 

But as with the list of issues with it, until those are fixed (especially the cache not spawning - something that could kill a server if an admin isn't on), it's probably still going to be a niche mode.