E-Male

The Defensive Triangle Strategy

I was trying out a strategy over the last two nights (one certainly obvious to the more experienced TGers) that proved pretty well unbeatable (keep in mind I did not have a chance to try it on ALL of the maps). Also keep in mind it may have been ‘unbeatable’ because the enemy often had no CO!

1. Hold the two flags closest to our UCB, and take a third in close proximity to the first two (try to get all three simultaneously). Allocate one squad for each of the rear flags, and ALL other squads to the forward flag.

The first two flags are almost certainly to be gained in the opening moments. This strategy does not outline how to get the third if it is already in the hands of the enemy. Nonetheless, aside from the two defending squads that are holding the rear flags, throw everyone else at the third target and chances are that you will have an overwhelming force ratio in your favour. The same attacking group is then immediately ordered to hold and defend the third flag.

Take a moment to assess your SLs and squad strengths. Everything depends on SLs who will obey orders.

2. With a reasonably populated server, you can usually count on four full squads and a fifth smaller squad. Order two squads to hold and defend the forward flag.

3. Your fifth squad is your reserves. Explain the following to the fifth SL – ‘You will be a reserve unit. You will be stationed at a mid-point between our three flags. You will be a rapid response squad, called upon to assist a fallen flag or repel an overwhelming force, or repositioned as a forward defence to eliminate enemy before they reach a flag.’ Give the fifth (or fourth, or sixth, as the case may be) a marker to hold on and return to after each subsequent mission. There are obvious variations on the role of a reserve unit. The point is to quickly appoint and position your reserve unit AND inform all SLs that they are standing by.

It takes a highly disciplined SL to patiently follow these orders (it is not long before they will be called into action), understand the need to remain equidistant between our three flags – for efficient response time – and return to the station marker after each engagement. The use of vehicles by the reserve unit will be determined by the map and the circumstances. Being able to commit a force unit to attack or defence means that we are able to keep the enemy in a constant state of bleed and respond to shifting attacks without compromising defence.

I am not saying this is the only way, nor the best way. It is simply the way I will be COing for a while as I test the ‘Defensive Triangle Strategy’. This strategy is defensive in that once we establish our hold on three flags, no further attacks are initiated on the enemy. They attack, we defend.

Issues:

I am not sure how this will ‘play’ with SLs and TGers who like to be on the constant attack. The more aggressive units can be moved to the forward flag, which tend to see more action. There is no reason for defence fatigue to be a problem if SLs communicate with the CO. Assignments can be adjusted, and as in war, troops can be moved back and forth to the frontlines.

I can see the two squads holding at the rear getting a bit bored. This is solved by rotating squads in and out of the back flags ONCE we have established a fairly good lead on the enemy. I will make a point of letting the back flag SLs know that this is an option. Also, the CO can instruct the two rear-flag SLs to send a few men forward to assist at hotspots.

Biggaayal raised an important issue regarding flag defense: ‘I usually get the impression, that the longer my squad defends a flag, even if not attacked, the better we are able to defend it. This maybe also because I like to defend, but I think it has to do with spending more time on a specific area, with that specific squad. I think during the minutes that your squad defends a pole, you get more ingrained in it, your positioning gradually improves, your organisation, your knowledge of the specific small area you as an individual are assigned to. Best is when you get small attacks to help you find good positions gradually. I have often observed a squad defending a cp easily, but then the second another squad takes over, they get wiped out.’

I could not agree more. A squad that is devouted to a flag for a prolonged time will master defense of the flag. This requires patience and a willingness to sacrifice ‘runnin and gunnin’ for the greater good of the team and the battle.


The advantage of the ‘Defensive Triangle Strategy’ is that it creates a stable situation. A stable environment frees the CO up for more strategic spotting, and allows defending units to gain familiarity with good defensive postures and the habits of the attacking enemy.

There are many disadvantages to any one strategy, and other COs will learn ways to respond to this, leading to further tactical changes.

Much comes down to the conflict between the desire of a squad to win tickets, versus the overall desire of the team to win the war. A good battle plan should allow for both.

The initial response from SLs suggests that there is merit to the ‘Defensive Triangle Strategy’.

Obviously, such speaking out loud of ones strategy is not the best thing, but it is best for our collective intelligence. As Spock once said, ‘Military secrets are the most fleeting of all’ (The Enterprise Incident, stardate 5027.4). Success will depend less on ‘secrets’ than on team discipline.

Feedback is welcome.

E-Male

__________________
E-Male

Exploding_Silver

The standard winning strategy, I think
what you have described is the most reliable way to bleed them for 30 mins

One thing about this strategy is that it relies on most of the enemy forces attacking the point on your triangle that is closest to them

On pubbie servers all you see is people spawning at the most forward flag and attacking the nearest enemy flag
and moving in a straight line towards that flag, I call this the 'rat run'

Even on our server there is a bit of the 'rat run' and they probably will attack the flag that you want them to attack,
so as CO you are taking their predictable behaviour and turning it to you advantage,
you are creating a meat grinder for them to walk into (1st whammy), while all the time having 3 flags for bleed (2nd whammy),
a double whammy

hardly even do you see two full squads sneak around the side to attack a back flag in a co-ordinated fashion,
thats the only real weakness of you strategy and not much of a weakness at that

great going E-Male

__________________

[TG] IronClaw

Silver

That is a lesson taught to me last nite by you and it is appreciated.
It`s funny how "rat run"mentality and pride over a lost flag can really get you into a mindset
that results in nothing more than getting you bled.


IronClaw

E-Male

Good points, Silver. Now that I have published the strategy (certainly not my 'invention'), opposing COs will clue in and assume that the forward point is the most defended, and thus try for flanking attacks on rear flags as you suggest.

Of course, the Defensive Triangle Strategy (DTS -- another acronym!) anticipates this via the reserve squad, which is able to respond to flanking attacks. The DTS should not be easily defeated via a two-squad flank if the reserves are doing what they should be.

This leads makes me to think that on larger, vehicle-heavy maps, the reserves should be standing by with fast movers -- which then makes the problem of air strikes on the reserve an issue... and so on...

I have not yet tested the DTS on larger armor-intense maps with airpower, but the basic principles should hold true.

No perfect solutions.

E-Male

__________________
E-Male

Dick Blonov

Very sound. If I read you right, by holding CPs in a triangle, you are, in effect, creating a bigger virtual CP. Defending that zone is made easier by the fact that no matter what side the attackers come from, you can engage them from at least 2 directions.

Splendid.

DB

__________________
|TG-6th|Blonov

E-Male

And most maps allow for the utility of the 'virtual CP' you describe. I can see the larger maps not lending themselves to this strategy, and have had a heck of a time moving an extra squad out of a CP when there is extensive enemy airpower. I suspect the DTS will work best on forest-style maps.

Time and again we have all seen a good lead fall apart when too many flags are grabbed at once, making all vunerable, leading to the loss of most, then a game of catch up. A bore, not very tactical, usually the result of a lack of a CO.

E-Male

__________________
E-Male

Ol'Smoke

Some notes:

-This tactic relies on the enemy not having a CO (wich is most of the time)
-The rear bases can be defended by one squad
-Have the rear squad use all of the armor from the ucb
-It DOES work on big maps
-Have a small Quick Response squad wait in the ucb beside the transport helo.
-If the enemy is not defending their bases, make quick dashes for them with the QR squad, leave them open: you are only forcing them to defend their bases.
-Make sure the rear squad has spotter/ambusher for each base (AT, with vehicle), and let your air forces react to incoming targets.
-The rear squad will be an easy target for enemy airforces, just let them. As long as you have blead it doesnt matter. Make sure they keep fetching tanks.
-Forbid your airfoces to attack the enemies rear bases, even verify if they listen. Not only does it help your team, it also elevates the quality of play (for the opponent). Make them defend your rear bases. Let your attack helo hover over or between your rear bases, verify. If they dont listen, report them. Its rare for a CO to step in, they should listen when you volunteer, period.

__________________
Hear ye, of the dragon, Smoke is his name.
Solely surviving the fires,
and sad and angry he became.
Until his angre became dismay,
as the elders sent him away.

Now we can hear his wings, once a year,
And, his empty cry we fear.
Sad old Smoke, out there in the rain,
We can feel your suffering, we can feel your pain.

Lucky Shot

It's definitely 1 way to look at things and it's a VERY good way to achieve your goals. 2 quick spins on this would be:

1) You have multiple squads up front as the point of the spear for the enemy to impale himself. What should happen if the flag improbably falls and the defending squads are wiped out? Now there is a 15 second gap between when those squads reappear and set off to their objective again. 15 key seconds of bleed, 15 extra seconds for the opponent to set up. What I would suggest is that as a squad and their flag falls, have them spawn at a back flag and IMMEDIATELY relieve the defending squad from defense. It mixes things up a bit, provides extra incentive not to lose the flag in the first place, and keeps things "fair" for other squads who may otherwise stay on defense at a quiet flag all round.

2) The idea of solely holding the 2 flags by your UCB and the middle flag may not be THE BEST flags to hold on the map. It may be easier in terms of logistics, creating a solid front line, but if you set that aside and said "Which 3 flags are WORTH holding" on a map it may not be the three closest. In fact, sometimes you are better off LEAVING the middle flag to the enemy (See Dnister River's Island flag) where others (First Snow Middle Flag gives you an extra Attack Chopper) which can change the way the game finishes. If you have not researched the maps, then EMale's methods will allow a slow, grind it out win. By denying the enemy assets and taking them for your own use, you may be able to eliminate the enemy even faster.

So which is better? Emale's way should work with most maps and keeps all your men contained in an easy to reinforce manner. My suggestion spreads out your team making it tough to reinforce against attacks, however denial of assets (You lose 2 armor pieces and I gain 2) may lead to a quicker win, especially against someone who stacks his defense into the middle. Neither way is better, if you do your research on the maps, you can get a win either way. Without doing your research, your probably spinning your wheels.

Lucky Shot

tHa_KhAn

This a great strategy to bring up. The most important point to beat into SL's is that your team(on a 64 man map) only needs 3 flags. There is little incentive to attack other flags than the 3 easiest to hold. That brings me to my big x2 of what lucky shot said. The 3 flags to hold, may not be the 3 closest. Certain maps have far flags that are easy to defend and because they do not contain any significant vehicles they are often avoided by the less tactic savvy gamers.

Another slight deviation of what lucky said is that while certain flags like the center one on first snow have great assets(Helo), those assets can only be a problem if they can't be neutralized. On maps with Helo's I rather use the spawn as a trap. Take 3 other flags that will be less contested and use AA to neutralize the helo, preferable keeping it grounded. While it is risky, it wastes alot less manpower than trying to take and hold a flag that would be dearly sought by the enemy. Remember an enemy's Helo's effectiveness is inversely proportional to your AA's effectiveness. If you have solid guys in the AA vehicles, extra air for them becomes easy points for your team.

Password nights you can see this strategy used even without a CO, I would love to play a password night with a good CO organizing this strategy. Now if we could just convince the average pub player to realize you get bleed with 3 flags and you'll get more kills if they come running at you in a heavily defending position, then life would be good.

E-Male

All good comments, thank you.

Keep in mind that the Defensive Triangle Strategy (DTS) does not necessarily imply holding any particular flags, although I do believe that a strong tactical advantage is gained when two conditons are met:

(1) three flags are held, which puts the enemy in bleed, and bleed provides a point spread that allows for overcoming a loss of a flag or a change in battle plans without risking victory;

(2) a unit (squad) is held in reserve and is able to rapidly deploy to a hot spot or fallen flag.

While I do not deny that some flags are more valuable than others, this value is only relative, as the enemy can shift tactics. Much armor can be met with much AT, much airpower can be met with much ground fire and use of buildings for cover.

Keep in mind that the DTS is only ONE of many possible battle plans. I am not proposing it to the exclusion of others or as inherently superior to all others. The beauty of the DTS is its simplicity. With each additional requirement or level of complexity a battle plan gains that much many more weaknesses.

At some point of modification, the DTS is no longer the DTS. This strategy is based on command of geography between the three points in the triangle. Dominating that inner area allows for movement of excess troops for supporting other flags, and creates a relatively safe zone for the reserve unit itself. Whether these three CPs/Flags are at the front or the rear of the map is less important than their relative proximity to each other.

The essence of the DTS is that a defensive situation is created that allows for the mutual support of each flag by all others, AND that this support is capable of rapid response.

A reserve unit held back at a UCB with a helo is an interesting idea, but such a unit would be quite vunerable to ground and air attack. Nonethelss, it does have merit, although it dilutes the resources that are available for immediate on-site response within the triangle. A good idea, nonetheless (no point in debating about specific modifications of the DTS, as the stategy allows for modification and is flexible by design).

More complexity also leads to more communication between SLs and the CO, and this in itself presents numerous problems vis a vis voice traffic within squads and between SLs and CO. A good battle plan will minimize the need for specific and detailed communications, as well as reduce the overall volume of communication.

Luck Shot's comment is also insightful. The triangle may not necessarily consist of the middle flag plus two back ones. It is frequently useful to leave a middle flag in enemy hands (for example, on Fallen, the crash site, which is difficult to hold).

The DTS does not dictate which three flags on any given map should be held. It dictates how to allocate resources BETWEEN held flags relative to the enemy's forward positions and ideal placement of your reserve unit.

Defense vs. Domination in the DTS

It must also be repeated that the DTS is a DEFENSIVE strategy. Once three flags are gained, no other flags should be attacked for any reason (I usually try to make this very clear to all SLs). Such attacking reduces your defensive response capability, and the very point of the DTS is to maximize defensive strength. Any actions that reduce response capabilities makes the DTS pointless. The idea is to reinforce the NATURAL advantage of defense.

The exception to this occurs in the last third of a round IF a large point spread has been gained (approx 100 points). At this point resources and points may be safely spend acquiring a fourth flag and dominating the map. Domination is NOT the goal of the DTS -- victory is. Domination is sought only when victory is no longer at risk.

Finally, contra Ol'Smoke, the DTS does not depend on an absence of an enemy CO. The first rule of warfare is 'never underestimate your enemy.'

E-Male

__________________
E-Male

Lucky Shot

Let me ask this for furthering the conversation. So, Say you own 2 flags and you have 3 squads available to attack other flags (1 squad at each of your 2 flags leaving 2 and a half full squads). Do you Mass Attack that third flag, or do you spread the three squads out to the other 3 three flags and hope one of them will be successful?

When I look at the map in this scenario, I prefer a mass attack on that 3rd flag, whichever flag I deem worth holding. The pitter patter attacks on the other flags generally don't yield fruit. That's my thought, what say you?

Lucky Shot

Acid

I would just do a mass attack, but choose the SL's that you know you can communicate with. That makes the option of "attack together" possible. When squads arrive at diffrent times, it is similar to just a single squad attack, except the reinforcements come in sooner, and it gives the enemy a chance to repel the first attack and send their backup units to that flag.

For CO vs no CO, you can even expect more drastic measures from the side without a CO, because every SL has diffrent objectives in mind in terms of attacking flags, so none of you flags can be considered safe. With a CO, they still will plan back-flag attacks, but may not want to put a whole squad into attacking.

__________________

E-Male

RE: Lucky Shot on Mass Attacks

Not enough experience to talk much about this, but of late I have been using the mass attack, trying to get all to arrive at the same time (almost impossible if there is airpower against you). Repeat one more time then send a strong squad on attack against a back flag in the hope that enemy forces are now concentrated on the previous subject of the mass attacks (which is usually the case).

E-Male

__________________
E-Male

Wimpinator

I know you used this strategy last night and it worked very well. I know that my squad (4) along with squad 1 was able to just plow through a CP. We did have a bit of trouble getting together to prepare for the attack because I had a fire team at a different CP. Luckily I had a pretty well disciplined squad who pulled back as soon as I asked them to.

__________________

|TG-6th|Wimpinator

[TGU Staff]