pr wedge - Page 3

**NerdyDodge** · 02-18-2008, 11:00 AM

I was in that video, hurrah! The light AT soldier.

billyinorganic · 02-18-2008, 12:11 PM

The music in that vid is the most bad arse i have heard in a while.

As for more relevant informations. Something i have learned about squad tactics is that it is generally better to be able to direct more fire from one position rather then to have a spread out / misaligned squad with multiple fire positions, better in terms of kill / survivability. Alot of time it seems people want to naturally rush forward for a one on one type of battle. They figure that if the squad is attacking a certian position, then they might as well advance as much as they can and take up the positions which they think are important, thus having a chance at killing.
Which is the main point here.

It's not always about killing or dropping a leet nade on a whole squad, or being the hero guy who pseudo-disobeys the SL and ends up killing like 4 dudes. But, this can be a good thing, alot of people are the type of people you just want to send forward on their own as flankers or engineers who kill tanks / sneaky people...

But in an infantry squad which i am imagining, the key is not so much ground pounding rushing auto blazing close range knuckle head, but more of a long / mid range organized well defined fire position type squad.
So they key i feel is that the squad has a well defined fire position, which means they are all relatively the same angle to the field of fire. What i mean by this is that if the squad leader defines a field of fire and he is perpendicular to that field, then the rest of the squad should be perpendicular as well.

A good long range infantry squad can do huge amounts of damage, especially if they are all realtivly close together and have the same field of fire. I think this can be done by making sure that your squad mates keep the "line" defined as linearly as possible / desired, and that they do not "creep forward". Lol, my pet peeve (creeping forward).

Waiting, a well defined line and field of fire and good kit selection is desired.
Yesterday on the desert city map (dunno whats it's called, east and west hills with nort (mec) and south (us) base)
we were MEC, and our role was INFANTRY squad. At one point, after we started getting smashed all to hell i ordered my squad to fall back a bit north of the north desert. I wanted them to Line up about 2-5 meter spacings and get eyes out on the field of fire defined to our south. The line came together, but it was very jumbled. Some people were off to the side behind a building and had no view of the fire field, some where way to far east, either way, the field of fire which i was observing only had 2 guys at it, and they ended up running around a bit.

In the end i made contact with 4 whole squads within about ten minuets, and each time i did there was only about 2 our people (if that) from my squad firing on the position which i had seen. The squad was not spread out too much, and they were not rushing forward against my orders, but they could not see where i was seeing. I demanded eventaully "come on guys there is not **** for shooting going on at my attack marker, we need to get everyone shooting there, get in a position to get visual on my marker.

bahh, all i know is that those enemy squads never saw us, we were shooting long range over our friendlies heads and we could of devastated a lot of squads, but we did not have the ability to direct fire the way we needed.
4-6 people shooting from relatively the same position at long range is good. Especially if you keep a low profile and have everyone sink behind a berm when the fire starts coming in. Wait it out, then have the whole squad crawl up and get visual over the berm at the same time (of course we do this after a single unit scans out to see whats there) and you will have a good number of guns ready to fire where you need them...

INF are like low caliber tanks with cloth armor.

BigGaayAl · 02-18-2008, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sabre_Tooth_Tigger

Try hosting on www.stage6.com if you want divx level of quality or a bigger picture

www.wegame.com has a slightly better online codec then youtube but they wont accept .wmv

www.Putfile.com is the last option, it is slightly better quality then youtube.

Thank you. It was only a 24mb video, but still they butcher it

. Youtube is not going to work well for anything but close-ups, and that shows you well.. nothing interesting. I'll have to try those other hosting services.

**google** · 02-18-2008, 03:59 PM

It was a nice video with good music. I liked how you used alpha and bravo to cover eachother.

BigGaayAl · 02-19-2008, 03:19 AM

Haha de Vlaamse Leeuw he google

.

I've uploaded the video again in decent quality on the stage 6 site.

Further experience with the plan showed it was most useful when you set the kits at the beginning for everyone. If I didn't do it immediatly, kits tended to be forgotten and switched between different members.
This failed to provide the most important things:
-L-at ready to engage within seconds at any time
-ammo ready within seconds at any time.

Another problem arose when bravo is driving a vehicle. If it is a jeep, B2 can still have the H-AT. And no engineer is needed (=>A3 = L-AT).
When Bravo has a tank, H-AT isn't really needed as the tank is much faster at engaging and deals a lot more damage per second then the H-AT. In that case A3 should be engineer as spawned.

But when bravo has an APC a serious problem arises: you can really use the firepower of a heavy-at, and you need an engineer (especially if no tanks are in the area). In my plan I said A2 should take the H-AT in that case, but that leaves you out of ammo!

Now I could give H-AT to the medic, but the typical longe range use of the H-AT makes the medic very effective in that situation especially, as he will very often be able to revive a kiled H-AT soldier. That leaves the SL or the engineer to take H-AT.

I'd like to find a standard solution for this, as it shortens the decision making time by by a large margin. It isn't such a huge problem though, because you won't have or need an apc AND a H-AT that often (most on desert maps with tanks). As of know, if there are plenty of spawnpoints available or the RP is quite safe, I think I will go with SL as H-AT.

**google** · 02-19-2008, 07:04 PM

Yeah I was born and used to live in Antwerp. De vlaamse Leeuw is so much cooler than the rooster of wallonia (I'm still convinced it's a chicken).

**StevieRay** · 02-21-2008, 10:04 PM

First....holy lord! EMALE? Wow...the first SL I ever had....created my addiction...ok now.

Al, great write up, I agree with Disposeable...no SL front...but...

If you ever played with TopCAt...or crawl....this formation would really rock with a coordinated 2 squad team of 8 or so. Some of you know what I mean...

BigGaayAl · 02-22-2008, 05:55 AM

I am indeed honored beyond measure by th eappearance of the sacred E-Male-squad-leading-book-writing phenomenon. Come back E-male (wihtout sacrificing RL duties off course

)!

BigGaayAl · 03-15-2008, 08:51 AM

I've used my plan a lot lately. Here aremy findings, I should update the pic soon.

The most useful aspect by far is teh kit lay-out. Everything flows from there. The core kits are:
Medic
Ammo (support)
AT (spawn engi)

This is alpha.

Then for bravo I usually get one scoped rifleman and an engineer.
With an apc or tank in bravo, I will ask the AT soldier to stay engineer next time. It is a difficult choice, but I would go with having an engineer over an AT because you have firepower anyway, and someone else may need the AT/HAT more then you. Off course you can then repair your vehicle.

For some reason I find using obne 2 man fireteam much easier. I can ust take all the inexperienced/less disciplined players in alpha if I have to, and need two decent players to make bravo.

In general, I use bravo as jack-of-all-trades. They could be guarding a flank (interlocking firezones) , or they can be ooking for RP's etc...
Bravo is also higly flexible in kits, but they spawn scoped rifleman and engineer.

I can really recommend using the two man fireteam. The core kits is also a robust finding imo; keeping thos kits in yuor squad as much as possible will yield results everytime. The support gives you at least equal force in any engagement against infantry, the AT soldier will save your ass from those 50-cals several times per round, if he does his job well and keeps getting it.

I rarely use the formation setup, only in jungle maps and with a very good sqad.

BigGaayAl · 03-24-2008, 01:50 AM

I've updated my strategy quite a bit to allow for the ammo problem that the new patch 0.756 brought.

So here is an updated version of my PRwedge schematic. The formation itself is rarely used in game, so I've put less emphasis on that.

I also want to bring up Kingkong's idea of naming Fireteams by their teamleader. Perhaps this is a good idea.

Then I've added a new squad schematic which I use quite a lot on open armor maps, with lots of enjoyment and considerable succes as effect.
This second squad-type can be run very well with everything from 3 to 6 squadmembers.

1 PRwedge

2 T(a)nksupport squad (I drop the "a" ingame because the name is too long)

Here are some pics fuzzhead's armor squad which we were able to support quite effectively, and they defended us as they soon realized that a couple of wrenches and free ammo make a good place to hang around. After a while we had more and more armor alive and grouped up.

I would be pleased to read your comments.

**Katanama** · 03-24-2008, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O=T-M-A-N=O

I think presuming a team A / team B concept would rely on a very diciplined squad that is really tight on the advance and additionally survives the movement to contact / initial contact scenario totally in tact. A good concept, but not very supportable in PR or real life.

considering some armies actually work on the concept of alpha and bravo teams I dont see your point. It is also workable in PR thou it takes alot of yelling from the SL to get the sq moving as a unit.

when i try to make fireteams its usually on the form

Alpha:
SL
supportgunner
medic

Bravo:
scoped rifleman (point when moving in formation)
engineer (or greadier)
scoped rifleman/LAT

Here Bravo can work as an assultteam and they are also the point team when moving around while Alpha is a supporting team. If my sq makes contact I try to get them on a line for the most effective fire.

Both teams are pretty ballanced and it also gives the sq the ability of fire and manuver. which i think is something lacking in BigGaayAl's formation, here the assult team wont be abel to lay down effective supression for alpha to move, so withdrawl from a fight or advancing is harder when contact is made.

Just my perscective

**Sabre_Tooth_Tigger** · 03-24-2008, 12:09 PM

Looks good

BigGaayAl · 03-24-2008, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Katanama

when i try to make fireteams its usually on the form

Alpha:
SL
supportgunner
medic

Bravo:
scoped rifleman (point when moving in formation)
engineer (or greadier)
scoped rifleman/LAT

...

Both teams are pretty ballanced and it also gives the sq the ability of fire and manuver. which i think is something lacking in BigGaayAl's formation, here the assult team wont be abel to lay down effective supression for alpha to move, so withdrawl from a fight or advancing is harder when contact is made.

Just my perscective

*First I think your setup is also quite effective.
I've worked with it also, but I feel it is too difficult for pubbie play, and relies too heavily on the FTL. Now when he gets kicked or something, the reorganising is going to screw up the round. I usually lead the pack, because that is easiest for low-discipline persons to follow.

Now on the firing and movement: the suppression in my squad is greater then with 3man fireteams because I use a 4 man team for suppression. I did this because I had read that one must always use a larger force to suppress then to assault. Makes sense too; whether it is one guy assaulting, or 3, it is not going to matter if your firesupport gets killed while your in the open.

I've decided for myself that 2man/4man fireteams is the way to go, the kits however give me headaches. So much so, that I've stopped putting down what kit people spawn in with and instead remember only their intended kit after spawn. It was simply horribly complicated to have to remember 2 kits per person, and really there were only very few players even within TG that posess the mental power to remember two kits for themselves

.

PS Plz let me know your name in a post here if you want invites to these squads if I run them. I'm in need of some people that somewhat know the plan, and have thediscipline to make it work.

Yesterday I had to kick a TG-tagged person from my squad again on a PW night because he needed a bigger gun in his opinion. And I'm seriously disappointed in the willingness of people to not play kit-switcheroo. At the same time, I discover new great teamplayers nearly daily, and I thank them all for that. Especially the E-1st does an outstanding job in european hours. Together with Onemanwrecking they are doing great organising games[/off-topic]

**google** · 03-24-2008, 01:08 PM

The tank support squad seems really useful and effective. However, I would not advise clumping so much armor together on maps such as kashan. Even if the support squad has AA when needed and a bunch of engineers, on CAS missle can ruin everything. It also helps to have have two tank squads spread out across the map to support many different squads on the battlefield.

**Crawlingeye** · 03-24-2008, 01:19 PM

I'm willing to do this with you anytime Al!

02-18-2008, 11:00 AM	#31 (permalink)
NerdyDodge Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Worcestershire, England Age: 17 Posts: 219	Re: pr wedge I was in that video, hurrah! The light AT soldier. __________________ Kicked? Banned? \| Want to wear \|TG\| tags? \| TG 15th Young Warriors

02-18-2008, 12:11 PM	#32 (permalink)
billyinorganic Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 84	Re: pr wedge The music in that vid is the most bad arse i have heard in a while. As for more relevant informations. Something i have learned about squad tactics is that it is generally better to be able to direct more fire from one position rather then to have a spread out / misaligned squad with multiple fire positions, better in terms of kill / survivability. Alot of time it seems people want to naturally rush forward for a one on one type of battle. They figure that if the squad is attacking a certian position, then they might as well advance as much as they can and take up the positions which they think are important, thus having a chance at killing. Which is the main point here. It's not always about killing or dropping a leet nade on a whole squad, or being the hero guy who pseudo-disobeys the SL and ends up killing like 4 dudes. But, this can be a good thing, alot of people are the type of people you just want to send forward on their own as flankers or engineers who kill tanks / sneaky people... But in an infantry squad which i am imagining, the key is not so much ground pounding rushing auto blazing close range knuckle head, but more of a long / mid range organized well defined fire position type squad. So they key i feel is that the squad has a well defined fire position, which means they are all relatively the same angle to the field of fire. What i mean by this is that if the squad leader defines a field of fire and he is perpendicular to that field, then the rest of the squad should be perpendicular as well. A good long range infantry squad can do huge amounts of damage, especially if they are all realtivly close together and have the same field of fire. I think this can be done by making sure that your squad mates keep the "line" defined as linearly as possible / desired, and that they do not "creep forward". Lol, my pet peeve (creeping forward). Waiting, a well defined line and field of fire and good kit selection is desired. Yesterday on the desert city map (dunno whats it's called, east and west hills with nort (mec) and south (us) base) we were MEC, and our role was INFANTRY squad. At one point, after we started getting smashed all to hell i ordered my squad to fall back a bit north of the north desert. I wanted them to Line up about 2-5 meter spacings and get eyes out on the field of fire defined to our south. The line came together, but it was very jumbled. Some people were off to the side behind a building and had no view of the fire field, some where way to far east, either way, the field of fire which i was observing only had 2 guys at it, and they ended up running around a bit. In the end i made contact with 4 whole squads within about ten minuets, and each time i did there was only about 2 our people (if that) from my squad firing on the position which i had seen. The squad was not spread out too much, and they were not rushing forward against my orders, but they could not see where i was seeing. I demanded eventaully "come on guys there is not **** for shooting going on at my attack marker, we need to get everyone shooting there, get in a position to get visual on my marker. bahh, all i know is that those enemy squads never saw us, we were shooting long range over our friendlies heads and we could of devastated a lot of squads, but we did not have the ability to direct fire the way we needed. 4-6 people shooting from relatively the same position at long range is good. Especially if you keep a low profile and have everyone sink behind a berm when the fire starts coming in. Wait it out, then have the whole squad crawl up and get visual over the berm at the same time (of course we do this after a single unit scans out to see whats there) and you will have a good number of guns ready to fire where you need them... INF are like low caliber tanks with cloth armor. Last edited by billyinorganic; 02-18-2008 at 12:59 PM.

02-18-2008, 03:59 PM	#34 (permalink)
google Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 449	Re: pr wedge It was a nice video with good music. I liked how you used alpha and bravo to cover eachother.

02-19-2008, 03:19 AM	#35 (permalink)
BigGaayAl Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: gent, belgium Posts: 1,378	Re: pr wedge Haha de Vlaamse Leeuw he google . I've uploaded the video again in decent quality on the stage 6 site. Further experience with the plan showed it was most useful when you set the kits at the beginning for everyone. If I didn't do it immediatly, kits tended to be forgotten and switched between different members. This failed to provide the most important things: -L-at ready to engage within seconds at any time -ammo ready within seconds at any time. Another problem arose when bravo is driving a vehicle. If it is a jeep, B2 can still have the H-AT. And no engineer is needed (=>A3 = L-AT). When Bravo has a tank, H-AT isn't really needed as the tank is much faster at engaging and deals a lot more damage per second then the H-AT. In that case A3 should be engineer as spawned. But when bravo has an APC a serious problem arises: you can really use the firepower of a heavy-at, and you need an engineer (especially if no tanks are in the area). In my plan I said A2 should take the H-AT in that case, but that leaves you out of ammo! Now I could give H-AT to the medic, but the typical longe range use of the H-AT makes the medic very effective in that situation especially, as he will very often be able to revive a kiled H-AT soldier. That leaves the SL or the engineer to take H-AT. I'd like to find a standard solution for this, as it shortens the decision making time by by a large margin. It isn't such a huge problem though, because you won't have or need an apc AND a H-AT that often (most on desert maps with tanks). As of know, if there are plenty of spawnpoints available or the RP is quite safe, I think I will go with SL as H-AT. __________________ I wsih to agzoiollppie for tinpyg so mnay tpoys The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ~ Bertrand Russell Away from gaming, lost everything, trying to rebuild my life from scratch.

02-19-2008, 07:04 PM	#36 (permalink)
google Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 449	Re: pr wedge Yeah I was born and used to live in Antwerp. De vlaamse Leeuw is so much cooler than the rooster of wallonia (I'm still convinced it's a chicken).

02-21-2008, 10:04 PM	#37 (permalink)
StevieRay Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: CT, USA Posts: 376	Re: pr wedge First....holy lord! EMALE? Wow...the first SL I ever had....created my addiction...ok now. Al, great write up, I agree with Disposeable...no SL front...but... If you ever played with TopCAt...or crawl....this formation would really rock with a coordinated 2 squad team of 8 or so. Some of you know what I mean... __________________

02-22-2008, 05:55 AM	#38 (permalink)
BigGaayAl Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: gent, belgium Posts: 1,378	Re: pr wedge I am indeed honored beyond measure by th eappearance of the sacred E-Male-squad-leading-book-writing phenomenon. Come back E-male (wihtout sacrificing RL duties off course )! __________________ I wsih to agzoiollppie for tinpyg so mnay tpoys The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ~ Bertrand Russell Away from gaming, lost everything, trying to rebuild my life from scratch.

03-15-2008, 08:51 AM	#39 (permalink)
BigGaayAl Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: gent, belgium Posts: 1,378	Re: pr wedge I've used my plan a lot lately. Here aremy findings, I should update the pic soon. The most useful aspect by far is teh kit lay-out. Everything flows from there. The core kits are: Medic Ammo (support) AT (spawn engi) This is alpha. Then for bravo I usually get one scoped rifleman and an engineer. With an apc or tank in bravo, I will ask the AT soldier to stay engineer next time. It is a difficult choice, but I would go with having an engineer over an AT because you have firepower anyway, and someone else may need the AT/HAT more then you. Off course you can then repair your vehicle. For some reason I find using obne 2 man fireteam much easier. I can ust take all the inexperienced/less disciplined players in alpha if I have to, and need two decent players to make bravo. In general, I use bravo as jack-of-all-trades. They could be guarding a flank (interlocking firezones) , or they can be ooking for RP's etc... Bravo is also higly flexible in kits, but they spawn scoped rifleman and engineer. I can really recommend using the two man fireteam. The core kits is also a robust finding imo; keeping thos kits in yuor squad as much as possible will yield results everytime. The support gives you at least equal force in any engagement against infantry, the AT soldier will save your ass from those 50-cals several times per round, if he does his job well and keeps getting it. I rarely use the formation setup, only in jungle maps and with a very good sqad. __________________ I wsih to agzoiollppie for tinpyg so mnay tpoys The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ~ Bertrand Russell Away from gaming, lost everything, trying to rebuild my life from scratch.

03-24-2008, 01:50 AM	#40 (permalink)
BigGaayAl Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: gent, belgium Posts: 1,378	Re: pr wedge I've updated my strategy quite a bit to allow for the ammo problem that the new patch 0.756 brought. So here is an updated version of my PRwedge schematic. The formation itself is rarely used in game, so I've put less emphasis on that. I also want to bring up Kingkong's idea of naming Fireteams by their teamleader. Perhaps this is a good idea. Then I've added a new squad schematic which I use quite a lot on open armor maps, with lots of enjoyment and considerable succes as effect. This second squad-type can be run very well with everything from 3 to 6 squadmembers. 1 PRwedge 2 T(a)nksupport squad (I drop the "a" ingame because the name is too long) Here are some pics fuzzhead's armor squad which we were able to support quite effectively, and they defended us as they soon realized that a couple of wrenches and free ammo make a good place to hang around. After a while we had more and more armor alive and grouped up. I would be pleased to read your comments. __________________ I wsih to agzoiollppie for tinpyg so mnay tpoys The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ~ Bertrand Russell Away from gaming, lost everything, trying to rebuild my life from scratch.

03-24-2008, 12:09 PM	#42 (permalink)
Sabre_Tooth_Tigger Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: eurasia Posts: 1,929	Re: pr wedge Looks good __________________ “Only a Sith Lord deals in absolutes.”

03-24-2008, 01:08 PM	#44 (permalink)
google Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 449	Re: pr wedge The tank support squad seems really useful and effective. However, I would not advise clumping so much armor together on maps such as kashan. Even if the support squad has AA when needed and a bunch of engineers, on CAS missle can ruin everything. It also helps to have have two tank squads spread out across the map to support many different squads on the battlefield.

03-24-2008, 01:19 PM	#45 (permalink)
Crawlingeye Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 342	Re: pr wedge I'm willing to do this with you anytime Al! __________________ TG-E1st TacticalGamer European Division \| Team up with us today!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links