Re: Wed. July 12th Video AAR

**Grunt 70** · 07-13-2006, 04:38 PM

Originally Posted by Strag

In general, our comms were fairly weak tonight. We could really use some work on contact reports and overall comm discipline.

I agree completely. With BF2 being the main game I play I really miss the command heirarchy. COD2 doesn't give that kind of command structure and I really miss having a single person in charge. Sometimes I don't know where to go and when and I find myself just affixing myself to another TGer. It'd be really cool if we had a commander...someone to fix fireteams and assignments. Without that the tactics of many of the rounds I've played have felt so random. with the randomness of who's joining and when however, I'm not so sure it would work as well for real as it sounds in theory... The TG'ers would go for it but I'm not so sure the random joiners would buy in.

**Strag** · 07-13-2006, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by Grunt 70

It'd be really cool if we had a commander...someone to fix fireteams and assignments. Without that the tactics of many of the rounds I've played have felt so random. with the randomness of who's joining and when however, I'm not so sure it would work as well for real as it sounds in theory... The TG'ers would go for it but I'm not so sure the random joiners would buy in.

Great points. One way to improve this situation might be to create a group standard at TG for Call of Duty 2 similar to what Counter-Strike has with PCS. Call it PCoD2, or something similar. Players would have to prove that they're willing and able to play CoD2 at a more "advanced" level, and then we could have locked server nights for these players as the PCS players do. This would allow us to set up more structured games, where organization and tactics could truly come into play.

Anyone have any thoughts or interest in this?

**Strag** · 07-13-2006, 05:45 PM

Originally Posted by Bonehead

Edit: One point, PCoD2 should be open to sm's and non sm's alike?

"PCoD2" is the way we really should already be playing the game as Tactical Gamers. I guess it would be more correct to say that if we had a PCoD2 Proven group, these players would have access to special locked server nights, where they could enjoy a higher level of play with their peers. Read more about what it means to be PCS Proven at TG when it comes to Counter-Strike; something along these lines for CoD2 is what I was thinking of. And yeah, I'd think it'd be open to both SMs and non-SMs alike, as the PCS group is.

I dunno if folks would want to try something like this with CoD2 at TG, but it is something to think about.

**wildcat2000** · 07-13-2006, 07:37 PM

I am ready for lockdown, I'm getting tired of these immature players entering our server. Tuesday night was enough for me.

**Clodhopper** · 07-13-2006, 08:02 PM

Sounds like an amazing idea, can we pull it off though? You've got my support.

I get way more enjoyment when I'm on a team thats communicating and strategizing... I don't have much fun at all when people are just winging it... and thats usually when I start speaking up, asking what we should do... or saying what we should do.

I'd be more than happy to put my fair share of time into something like this. As of now, the kind of gameplay I want is hit and miss usually. A game night may start off nice and end up with the top players just running n gunning, winging it as they would on a normal server and I really don't want to bother with that.

**Al_Capone** · 07-14-2006, 02:23 AM

I think that it would be a good idea

**Trooper** · 07-14-2006, 11:27 AM

im all for it, i have been staying away from cod2 lately cuase it seems we get alot of clanners who think they are playing tactically. Id gladly lock down the server, post the password in the forums.

**Gileren** · 07-14-2006, 01:13 PM

I'm all for it. having a locked server night would also help refine our tactics and comm discipline.

i think we should keep grinding tactics into our games until we can have a (atleast 5v5) map without ANY friendly casualties, i think if we can do that then we've reached our goal.

Last night we had some interesting kills, i know several people saved my but when an enemy was going in for the bash, and i remember me doing the same when an enemy was going for bone on Flakbatterie, i think we need to utilize this ability (and some luck lol).

many times i've been guilty of being a lone wolf (curse my statwhore-ness), and while it usually pays off i think we should be against it, and enforce it. sure there may be times when a friendly needs to take a flank by himself, but not to go rambo from the start.

**Obi** · 07-14-2006, 02:11 PM

A locked server night would be good.

I have certainly noticed some players that are emerging into very good leaders. I think that having a strong leader on a team is the most important asset that a team can have. A strong leader can rally his troops, increase morale and enthusiasm and put together and dictate strategies. In my experience the best games are those where there is a good leader calling the shots and everyone else is falling into line.

**Gileren** · 07-15-2006, 02:20 AM

i wouldn't mind being a SL, though i think there are a few other TGs that would be much better at it than moi

**Strag** · 07-18-2006, 03:19 PM

Sounds like a passworded night would be the way to go. This shouldn't be too hard to do.

**Bubba** · 07-18-2006, 03:37 PM

I agree on Pass Word Nights. Maybe two a week. We will discuss it.

**kin3** · 07-18-2006, 04:07 PM

What would the role of SL be? I think it would be to direct and lay back and not be on the point. If we keep playing S&D once he's killed then we are on our on. Or would he give the orders at the start of the round for example 1st squad attack "A" and 2nd squad attack "B"?

Over all sounds like a fun way to play.

**Gileren** · 07-18-2006, 05:45 PM

Originally Posted by kin3

What would the role of SL be? I think it would be to direct and lay back and not be on the point. If we keep playing S&D once he's killed then we are on our on. Or would he give the orders at the start of the round for example 1st squad attack "A" and 2nd squad attack "B"?

Over all sounds like a fun way to play.

whenever i'm the SL it is a combination thereof, we usually group up together at the start, say who is the SL's and who is in each squad, making sure we have a good combination of weapons and skill, so as to not have all of the SMGs in one squad lol. then once that is taken care of the squads go to their designated strike point and the Squad Leaders give commands based on the situation.

and on the matter of the SL dying that isn't a bad idea, when i'm SL i usually take point because i know the common enemy location (mainly in V2), but it would be interesting to keep the SL protected, may have to test that idea.

**Bubba** · 07-18-2006, 06:01 PM

Oh yea, send us to our deaths.......

Thread Tools

Display