Welcome to Tactical Gamer

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 13 of 13
Discussion: Battlefield 2 / Battlefield 2 - Ranked Vanilla - TG vs. =US= discussion - Greetings TG community. Wow, I checked out their website, and they look like a real
  1. 08-15-2006, 10:48 AM #1
    Rick_the_new_guy
    Rick_the_new_guy is offline

    Rick_the_new_guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Age
    32
    Posts
    1,788

    Post TG vs. =US= discussion

    Greetings TG community.

    Wow, I checked out their website, and they look like a real class act.
    I like their set up, and their style.

    It is interesting that the two maps are assault maps (one attacker and one defender). =US= gets the pick of the team they want. They most likley will go with the Corp.

    This will indeed be good maps to play on.

    I wonder if the bleed will be vanillia stock were the attackers stop bleed when they get their first CB and the defenders bleed when they lose all of the flags?

    Here is a link to their server IPs. =US= Barracks :: View topic - Game Server Information

    have a good'n.
    (PO3) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Member
    (CPO) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Leader
    (LCDR) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Commander

    Squad Member pledge to their SL:http://www.tacticalgamer.com/battlef...ad-leader.html
    Squad Leader pledge to their team:http://www.tacticalgamer.com/battlef...r-platoon.html
    Commander pledge to their SL:http://www.tacticalgamer.com/battlef...d-leaders.html
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    2.  
  2. 08-15-2006, 11:00 AM #2
    Tempus
    Tempus is offline


    Tempus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Age
    41
    Posts
    8,684

    Re: TG vs. =US= discussion

    They do seem like a nice bunch of guys. Very organized. They have dedicated branches of the military, and this will be their first opportunity to bring them all together. I expect that they will put up a very strong fight.



    -- Suits are what you wear when doing things you shouldn’t want to do anyway.

    FROM THE TACTICAL GAMER PRIMER.
    3) Support game play in a near-simulation environment. Where the focus of play would not be solely on doing what it takes to win, but doing so utilizing real-world combat strategy and tactics rather than leveraging exploits provided to players by the design of the game engine.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    3.  
  3. 08-15-2006, 11:13 AM #3
    Faultline
    Faultline is offline

    Faultline's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Tennessee
    Age
    33
    Posts
    1,568

    Re: TG vs. =US= discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by Rick_the_new_guy View Post
    It is interesting that the two maps are assault maps (one attacker and one defender). =US= gets the pick of the team they want. They most likley will go with the Corp.

    This will indeed be good maps to play on.

    I wonder if the bleed will be vanillia stock were the attackers stop bleed when they get their first CB and the defenders bleed when they lose all of the flags?
    .
    Interesting point. We have had our vanilla maps modded for some time I think and whether or not we use the modded version (bleed) will play a huge role in tactics.

    Tempus, have you had a chance to discuss this with them or should we just assume standard maps without bleed?

    Either way, should be a great battle and =US= looks to be a well organized bunch. Thanks again to the admin team for putting the effort into arranging such events.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    4.  

     
  4. 08-15-2006, 12:32 PM #4
    Tempus
    Tempus is offline


    Tempus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Age
    41
    Posts
    8,684

    Re: TG vs. =US= discussion

    I have not discussed it with them, but I expect we will run full vanilla, meaning all CPs for bleed.



    -- Suits are what you wear when doing things you shouldn’t want to do anyway.

    FROM THE TACTICAL GAMER PRIMER.
    3) Support game play in a near-simulation environment. Where the focus of play would not be solely on doing what it takes to win, but doing so utilizing real-world combat strategy and tactics rather than leveraging exploits provided to players by the design of the game engine.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    5.  
  5. 08-15-2006, 12:42 PM #5
    BaneII
    BaneII is offline

    BaneII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Posts
    2,423

    Re: TG vs. =US= discussion

    Nice find, Tempus! Should be interesting opponents.
    -33rd- BaneII
    Smokers & Jokers
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    6.  
  6. 08-16-2006, 01:24 AM #6
    troublesome4u
    troublesome4u is offline


    troublesome4u's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Miami Beach
    Age
    33
    Posts
    1,671

    Re: TG vs. =US= discussion

    Interesting indeed. =US= Barracks :: View topic - =US= vs |TG| (32 vs 32)
    Cool website. =US= Barracks :: View Forum - Battlefield 2
    They have cool badges too.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    7.  

     
  7. 08-16-2006, 03:38 AM #7
    Melee
    Melee is offline

    Melee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    San Diego
    Age
    43
    Posts
    1,105

    Re: TG vs. =US= discussion

    This looks like a great match-up. I hope to score a slot and represent!
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    8.  
  8. 08-16-2006, 12:09 PM #8
    RocketPunch
    RocketPunch is offline

    RocketPunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    NY, USA
    Posts
    1,120

    Re: TG vs. =US= discussion

    They sounded very well organized.
    Slow is Smooth. Smooth is Fast!
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    9.  
  9. 08-19-2006, 08:01 PM #9
    Paperchase
    Guest

    Re: TG vs. =US= discussion

    Ah, I used to be with the =US= unti I ran out of time to dedicate to the clan.

    Good bunch of guys. We were a force in a couple of other previous scrims.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    10.  

     
  10. 08-24-2006, 09:07 PM #10
    Rick_the_new_guy
    Rick_the_new_guy is offline

    Rick_the_new_guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Age
    32
    Posts
    1,788

    Re: TG vs. =US= discussion

    go, go, go, go!
    (PO3) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Member
    (CPO) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Leader
    (LCDR) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Commander

    Squad Member pledge to their SL:http://www.tacticalgamer.com/battlef...ad-leader.html
    Squad Leader pledge to their team:http://www.tacticalgamer.com/battlef...r-platoon.html
    Commander pledge to their SL:http://www.tacticalgamer.com/battlef...d-leaders.html
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    11.  
  11. 08-24-2006, 09:18 PM #11
    icky
    icky is offline

    icky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Ottawa Valley
    Posts
    6,152

    Re: TG vs. =US= discussion

    Much more interest in this tonight than there was last night!

    To clarify things for everyone, stock is:
    - Dragon Valley, you need 9 of 10 flags to cause bleed.
    - Cleansweep, you need all flags to cause bleed.
    - sniper rifles all more accurate by a small amount
    - grenades fly 33% farther
    Peace through fear... since 1947!
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    12.  
  12. 08-24-2006, 09:40 PM #12
    Rick_the_new_guy
    Rick_the_new_guy is offline

    Rick_the_new_guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Age
    32
    Posts
    1,788

    Talking Re: TG vs. =US= discussion

    Quote Originally Posted by icky View Post
    Much more interest in this tonight than there was last night!

    To clarify things for everyone, stock is:
    - Dragon Valley, you need 9 of 10 flags to cause bleed.
    - Cleansweep, you need all flags to cause bleed.
    - sniper rifles all more accurate by a small amount
    - grenades fly 33% farther
    Now that sir, is a intel report.
    (PO3) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Member
    (CPO) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Leader
    (LCDR) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Commander

    Squad Member pledge to their SL:http://www.tacticalgamer.com/battlef...ad-leader.html
    Squad Leader pledge to their team:http://www.tacticalgamer.com/battlef...r-platoon.html
    Commander pledge to their SL:http://www.tacticalgamer.com/battlef...d-leaders.html
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    13.  

     
  13. 08-24-2006, 10:00 PM #13
    Rick_the_new_guy
    Rick_the_new_guy is offline

    Rick_the_new_guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Age
    32
    Posts
    1,788

    Re: TG vs. =US= discussion

    I wonder if we will have a third map?

    I think it would be keen if it were a OpFor attack map. That way we could plan on a assault strategy, and they could plan on a defense plan.


    If we were Opfor, the only map for us would be S. Penn. This would allow us to be attacker on one map.
    (PO3) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Member
    (CPO) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Leader
    (LCDR) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Commander

    Squad Member pledge to their SL:http://www.tacticalgamer.com/battlef...ad-leader.html
    Squad Leader pledge to their team:http://www.tacticalgamer.com/battlef...r-platoon.html
    Commander pledge to their SL:http://www.tacticalgamer.com/battlef...d-leaders.html
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote
    14.  
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Forum Rules



  
 

Back to top
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.9
Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0


©2004-2011 - Tactical Industries, LLC - All Rights Reserved
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:18 PM.