Foregrip op?

I think the foregrip should cost ALOT more. without it, the recoil is huge and for just 3 points your gun becomes a laser gun. Either reduce the foregrip recoil or increase the price.

I am pretty sure that 3 points is enough. If you get a weapon+foregrip, you don't have that much left to make a decent loadout. The foregrip is a must-have for automatic weapons, and if it costs more than 3 points we will find unbalanced loadouts real quick.

Love you all!

@kerroro Thats was im saying "The foregrip is a must-have" . I dont think thats the way to go tbh. I want to make the choice of adding 3 points on my gun (to make it usable) or 3 points to fuck around with. Like testing different sights or stuff for my gun.

I want more recoil in the game to begin with, but thats just my opinion.

I think in general the point economy of the game needs to be more strict, in combination with also adding weight to more items and rebalancing weight on other items. (Attachments and even drum mags currently have NO added weight)

Every match (coop) should start with stricter point allowances. And after failures give more points to spend (like INS 2 did)

last edited by AMURKA

I think the foregrip cost is fine but the guns and reflex sights are too cheap.

If you want to talk about must-haves, using iron sights is just not an option because a reflex sights are only 1 supply point despite the fact that they are the best sights in most scenarios.

I personally think that all the sights should cost 3 supply points, foregrips should also cost 3 points, and no primary weapon should be cheaper than the attachments that go on it or the secondary weapons for that matter.


I dunno. Some of the weapons that come cheap initially are made expensive by potential must-have attachments. Weapons such as the Mosin Nagant, M24, and SKS are made expensive by crucial attachments, that in theory aren't necessary, but have their purposes.

As for the cost of 1X sights, I think they're in a decent place. A good player doesn't "need" the sight. Simply choosing to take it is the drawback, as you have less points for spending on bombs, armor, and other useful attachments. Most of the weapons with exception to the M4 and M16A4/A2 have decent default irons. Maybe the only change I'd suggest is to offer flip-ups as a free alternative to default irons. They don't typically change a whole lot.


Personally I feel like PVP point distribution is in an okay spot right now. I always feel like I have what I need, but not everything I want on most classes, and that's the point. Every match I feel like I'm sacrificing something

As for Coop point distribution, I'm on the fence. There's a LOT of AI to deal with, and its pretty easy to get overwhelmed. If anything, I'd like to see a return of how INS2 handled point distribution, at least for coop. You start off skimp on supply points, and as you lose rounds, you get a few more points to work with. Tack on bonus XP for winning coop rounds on as early a round as possible, and it'd be a pretty decent system.

As for weapon modding weight, it was definitely a little screwy in INS 2. Besides making drum mags weight a lot, everything would probably be pretty marginal in terms of weight addition. It'd stack up over a lot of mods, but not much independently. Maybe also tie handling speeds such as draw and ADS to weapon weight, and the only way to get around it is to invest in slings and speed holsters.


I understand that reflex sights aren't totally necessary, but my argument is that in most cases they are more useful than 2x and 4x sights, yet they cost much less. The higher cost of magnified sights adds another disadvantage on top of having a major disadvantage in close range engagements. That's why I feel that all the sights should have the same supply cost since they have their own roles along with balanced advantages and disadvantages.

@qarisma said in Foregrip op?:

s that in most cases they are more useful than 2x and 4x sights, yet they cost much less. The higher cost of magnified sights adds another disadvantage on top of having a

Thats a really good argument!