Tactical Advancement

aesop rock · 01-17-2006, 03:24 PM

This thread is a serious one. I am not trying to be rhetorical, so please feel free to reply with your opinion. I am not trying to start a flame-war or anything like that. I love TG servers. In fact, if it weren't for TG I probably wouldn't play online games, when given a choice. I am simply a TGNS player, who also enjoys the occasional mature game of CS. That being said, there are certain things I don't understand about the CS:S server.

What exactly is "playing tactically?" As any military planner will tell you, tactics come in all shapes and sizes. One of the most famous tactic in all of war is the "Double development." Where the defending army allows the attackers some amount of advancement, just to be flanked on both the sides and the extreme flank (in this case, CT spawn), allowing for a total rout. From what I can tell, this strategy is, on TGCS:S, considered 'untactical' and therefore not allowed? I remember playing cs_prodigy. I waited at the APC (tank) room for about 30 seconds of the round. Hearing nothing, except my teammates insisting that the bomb was moving down the long hallway towards our spawn, I understood that I had two choices. Either a) RUN back the way I came, making noises the whole way (this is a noisy map) or RUN through the counter-terrorist spawn in hopes to flank the enemy. Not only are CTs less likely to translate footsteps behind them as a threat, not only did my teammates have the hall covered from other angles, giving me a terrific advantage, but the path was considerably CLOSER! Anyways, point is: I ran thru the CT spawn. I was carrying a shotgun. When I approached the long hallway, I began hearing silenced m4 rounds, and so I hurled a smoke grenade into the hall, and raised my shotty. Blam, Blam, Blam!! The voice says "Terrorists Win!" Woot! That felt great!

Woah. Staring at console.

Reconnect to ask why. Play tactically, they say.

Now seriously, is it really tactical to force people to come from only one direction? If I wanted to play Hogan's Alley, I would play that. Counterstrike is a game involving positional sound, stealth, and dead accuracy. Don't force a certain type of gameplay. It's BORING.

Thanks

- aes0p r0ck

**Wyzcrak** · 01-17-2006, 03:33 PM

I'll take this thread to mean that you're not interested in having an admin answer for his decision, as that's what PMs are for.

Regarding "coming from one direction".....

PCS requires trust to play correctly. It's the game's fatal flaw when applied to public servers.

Steeped in trust, server #2 supports the freedom you're looking for. Server #1 rarely does, as anyone and everyone may join it, which makes trust difficult to maintain. For clarification regarding the difference between the two, I refer you to the PCS rules/announcements.

To do the sort of stuff you're talking about doing on the PCS servers, you've got to earn the trust of your peers. Until that point, you're likely to be casted a "fragmonkey," regardless of how inaccurate that may be.

If you want in PCS all of the freedoms that your target gameplay requires, do what it takes to get yourself on server #2, as, once you're on that server, you've convinced the PCS authorities (those who "get it," I mean -- nevermind who enforces it) that how you play is spot on.

Root · 01-17-2006, 03:38 PM

Are you saying you were kicked for your actions? If that's the case, could I direct you to the SOP forum, which states that we don't permit admin decisions to be questioned in public.

I'm happy to discuss this with you via PM if you don't recall which admin was involved.

Edit : Despite the apparent 5 minute difference, I was typing this *while* Wyz was typing his response.

**Wyzcrak** · 01-17-2006, 03:42 PM

Doen't it takes posts five minutes to cross the Atlantic?

Root · 01-17-2006, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wyzcrak

Doen't it takes posts five minutes to cross the Atlantic?

lol

No, I started by responding to the post, but then decided not to, as on reflection, the original post seemed to be about questioning an admins decision.

Mateo · 01-17-2006, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aesop rock

Counterstrike is a game involving positional sound, stealth, and dead accuracy. Don't force a certain type of gameplay. It's BORING.

To quote Root's prophet, and WoW Addict:

Quote:

Originally Posted by TG_Mateo First To Die (TM)

If you, your clanmates, or anyone else disagrees with the procedures in place, you are welcome to avoid our servers in the future.

Ben · 01-17-2006, 05:58 PM

You are correct aesop, it is tactical to flank when the action calls for it. But, on this server we must establish some sort of rule and order, less it turn into a frag fest for pubs to come and do as they please. We are about order, discipline and communication, all towards a single objective depending on which team you are on.
To flank IS tactical, but on our server we forbid spawn rushing in order to maintain a sense of order and discipline. The person who told you it isnt tactical was not using the correct words. He means that by doing your idea of spawn flanking, you are disrupting the only tool we have to maintain an orderly gameplay environment. Just compare the way our server runs to a typical public server and you will understand. BUT, either learn to love it or find a server that you are more comfortable with.

poe · 01-17-2006, 10:13 PM

Ben put it very well. As it is a game, and we are not capable of all that the 'military' is (like better communication [CS:S voicecomms are quite restrictive], intelligence [we don't have any outside force relaying information to us]). If we defined no "boundaries," things would become chaotic and disorganized.
Imagine the chaos if you set out a bunch of weapons and armor, and was like, "Hey, let's fight those guys over there!" It wouldn't be very tactical. But put them in some sort of training-like course, and it forces them to work how the course shows them (working with your team, sticking to objectives, &c).

Let's put it in this mold, too, though... The focus of the servers is that they are objective based. Let us say that there is a real-life hostage situation going on.

The CTs will begin their plan not immediately at their destination point, but a little ways away. The Ts would need to remain with their hostages, not because it is a moot situation if they don't (other CTs would snag the hostages, Ts arrested). Ideally there would be more than a maximum of eight CTs, these eight are merely the "strike force." If the Ts go running about haphazardly, well... blam, blam, blam. Imagine that the map is simply the area the CTs have cleared to execute their plans.

But alas, I ramble now. I think that I got my point across... hopefully

If not, just see Ben's post and ignore what I said.

/flips in another penny for good measure.

**CingularDuality** · 01-18-2006, 01:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aesop rock

What exactly is "playing tactically?" As any military planner will tell you, tactics come in all shapes and sizes. One of the most famous tactic in all of war is the "Double development." Where the defending army allows the attackers some amount of advancement, just to be flanked on both the sides and the extreme flank (in this case, CT spawn), allowing for a total rout.

Some good answers here already, but I just wanted to point out that CounterStrike is not a Team DeathMatch style of game, despite the way it's played on pub servers. There are defined objectives and one team is set up to defend an objective, while the other team is set up to attack the objective. Our rules reinforce the intent of the gamestyle and attempt to prevent it from devolving into constant Team DeathMatch play. This will often preclude many tactics from being used on our servers.

JoshZeitlin · 01-18-2006, 11:31 AM

All of you are getting WAY to theoretical with your responses (all-though they are good ones.)

Think about it this way aesop.

Protecting the hosties must be treated the way you'd protect your family. I dont care how "tactical" your ideas may be. The FACT is: if you were defending your family, you wouldn't leave the house to go watch a side street that offered better lines of fire, you'd stay with your family and do the best you could.

**TheFeniX** · 01-18-2006, 11:32 AM

Flanking in the military is usually done en-masse or with a highly specialised team of soldiers: not one guy with a pump shotgun. It is useful when your objective is to kill all the enemies, but you always have other objectives in CSS.

It would be a great idea for an assasination type map.

Save that kind of flanking for maps like office that are so intertwined inside the building that flanking is not only viable, but gives you great cover to work from.

I will grant that in groups, a team should always have one man pointed backwards covering the flank. I see this so rarely when it should be SOP.

This really makes me want to host a small unit tactics session on server 2.

Ben · 01-18-2006, 01:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheFeniX

Flanking in the military is usually done en-masse or with a highly specialised team of soldiers: not one guy with a pump shotgun. It is useful when your objective is to kill all the enemies, but you always have other objectives in CSS.

It would be a great idea for an assasination type map.

Save that kind of flanking for maps like office that are so intertwined inside the building that flanking is not only viable, but gives you great cover to work from.

I will grant that in groups, a team should always have one man pointed backwards covering the flank. I see this so rarely when it should be SOP.

This really makes me want to host a small unit tactics session on server 2.

In regards to having a man facing backwards to cover the rear, the best way to do this is the second to last man faces the rear. This way the last man wont get seperated from the squad while facing the rear.

**TheFeniX** · 01-19-2006, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben

In regards to having a man facing backwards to cover the rear, the best way to do this is the second to last man faces the rear. This way the last man wont get seperated from the squad while facing the rear.

That's what the radar is for, and further: that leaves one man completely undefended from the rear.

Ben · 01-19-2006, 12:59 PM

who is undefended??? if the 2nd to last covers the rear then who is undefended?

**Wyzcrak** · 01-19-2006, 01:02 PM

And, if knowing Fenix has taught me anything, it's that you never want to be alone and undefended from the rear.

01-17-2006, 03:24 PM	#1 (permalink)
aesop rock Join Date: May 2005 Location: Olympia, WA Age: 27 Posts: 319	Tactical Advancement This thread is a serious one. I am not trying to be rhetorical, so please feel free to reply with your opinion. I am not trying to start a flame-war or anything like that. I love TG servers. In fact, if it weren't for TG I probably wouldn't play online games, when given a choice. I am simply a TGNS player, who also enjoys the occasional mature game of CS. That being said, there are certain things I don't understand about the CS:S server. What exactly is "playing tactically?" As any military planner will tell you, tactics come in all shapes and sizes. One of the most famous tactic in all of war is the "Double development." Where the defending army allows the attackers some amount of advancement, just to be flanked on both the sides and the extreme flank (in this case, CT spawn), allowing for a total rout. From what I can tell, this strategy is, on TGCS:S, considered 'untactical' and therefore not allowed? I remember playing cs_prodigy. I waited at the APC (tank) room for about 30 seconds of the round. Hearing nothing, except my teammates insisting that the bomb was moving down the long hallway towards our spawn, I understood that I had two choices. Either a) RUN back the way I came, making noises the whole way (this is a noisy map) or RUN through the counter-terrorist spawn in hopes to flank the enemy. Not only are CTs less likely to translate footsteps behind them as a threat, not only did my teammates have the hall covered from other angles, giving me a terrific advantage, but the path was considerably CLOSER! Anyways, point is: I ran thru the CT spawn. I was carrying a shotgun. When I approached the long hallway, I began hearing silenced m4 rounds, and so I hurled a smoke grenade into the hall, and raised my shotty. Blam, Blam, Blam!! The voice says "Terrorists Win!" Woot! That felt great! Woah. Staring at console. Reconnect to ask why. Play tactically, they say. Now seriously, is it really tactical to force people to come from only one direction? If I wanted to play Hogan's Alley, I would play that. Counterstrike is a game involving positional sound, stealth, and dead accuracy. Don't force a certain type of gameplay. It's BORING. Thanks - aes0p r0ck

01-17-2006, 03:33 PM	#2 (permalink)
Wyzcrak Join Date: May 2003 Location: Memphis, TN Posts: 14,148	Re: Tactical Advancement I'll take this thread to mean that you're not interested in having an admin answer for his decision, as that's what PMs are for. Regarding "coming from one direction"..... PCS requires trust to play correctly. It's the game's fatal flaw when applied to public servers. Steeped in trust, server #2 supports the freedom you're looking for. Server #1 rarely does, as anyone and everyone may join it, which makes trust difficult to maintain. For clarification regarding the difference between the two, I refer you to the PCS rules/announcements. To do the sort of stuff you're talking about doing on the PCS servers, you've got to earn the trust of your peers. Until that point, you're likely to be casted a "fragmonkey," regardless of how inaccurate that may be. If you want in PCS all of the freedoms that your target gameplay requires, do what it takes to get yourself on server #2, as, once you're on that server, you've convinced the PCS authorities (those who "get it," I mean -- nevermind who enforces it) that how you play is spot on. __________________ Steam Community? Add me. \| Join #tacticalgamer \| Search Results Legend \| New Posts Forum Filter \| Postbox Toggle \| Live Thread Review \| One Line Results \| Free Remote, Encrypted Backup Darkilla: In short, NS is pretty much really fast chess. With guns. Apophis: I haven't seen anyone say that SM's are better than non-SMs. Nordbomber: This is THE first server I've seen where either side can comeback from out of seemingly nowhere with the right teamwork. en4rcment: I have NEVER experienced the type of gameplay that I have found here. Nightly I am amazed at the personalities and gaming talent. Root: Welcome to TG. Feel free to punctuate your sentences correctly. Monkerz: Its gonna take all my skills to beat those boys off in the future.

01-17-2006, 03:38 PM	#3 (permalink)
Root Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: South east england Posts: 8,839	Re: Tactical Advancement Are you saying you were kicked for your actions? If that's the case, could I direct you to the SOP forum, which states that we don't permit admin decisions to be questioned in public. I'm happy to discuss this with you via PM if you don't recall which admin was involved. Edit : Despite the apparent 5 minute difference, I was typing this while Wyz was typing his response. __________________ BFCL TF2 league admin

01-17-2006, 03:42 PM	#4 (permalink)
Wyzcrak Join Date: May 2003 Location: Memphis, TN Posts: 14,148	Re: Tactical Advancement Doen't it takes posts five minutes to cross the Atlantic? __________________ Steam Community? Add me. \| Join #tacticalgamer \| Search Results Legend \| New Posts Forum Filter \| Postbox Toggle \| Live Thread Review \| One Line Results \| Free Remote, Encrypted Backup Darkilla: In short, NS is pretty much really fast chess. With guns. Apophis: I haven't seen anyone say that SM's are better than non-SMs. Nordbomber: This is THE first server I've seen where either side can comeback from out of seemingly nowhere with the right teamwork. en4rcment: I have NEVER experienced the type of gameplay that I have found here. Nightly I am amazed at the personalities and gaming talent. Root: Welcome to TG. Feel free to punctuate your sentences correctly. Monkerz: Its gonna take all my skills to beat those boys off in the future.

01-17-2006, 05:58 PM	#7 (permalink)
Ben Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Israel / Memphis Age: 31 Posts: 872	Re: Tactical Advancement You are correct aesop, it is tactical to flank when the action calls for it. But, on this server we must establish some sort of rule and order, less it turn into a frag fest for pubs to come and do as they please. We are about order, discipline and communication, all towards a single objective depending on which team you are on. To flank IS tactical, but on our server we forbid spawn rushing in order to maintain a sense of order and discipline. The person who told you it isnt tactical was not using the correct words. He means that by doing your idea of spawn flanking, you are disrupting the only tool we have to maintain an orderly gameplay environment. Just compare the way our server runs to a typical public server and you will understand. BUT, either learn to love it or find a server that you are more comfortable with. __________________ A battle is dynamic, i.e constantly changing and evolving. Follow the strategy in place but never be afraid to improvise if the situation calls for it. All I ask for is communication

01-17-2006, 10:13 PM	#8 (permalink)
poe Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Olympia, Washington (USA) Age: 21 Posts: 1,105	Re: Tactical Advancement Ben put it very well. As it is a game, and we are not capable of all that the 'military' is (like better communication [CS:S voicecomms are quite restrictive], intelligence [we don't have any outside force relaying information to us]). If we defined no "boundaries," things would become chaotic and disorganized. Imagine the chaos if you set out a bunch of weapons and armor, and was like, "Hey, let's fight those guys over there!" It wouldn't be very tactical. But put them in some sort of training-like course, and it forces them to work how the course shows them (working with your team, sticking to objectives, &c). Let's put it in this mold, too, though... The focus of the servers is that they are objective based. Let us say that there is a real-life hostage situation going on. The CTs will begin their plan not immediately at their destination point, but a little ways away. The Ts would need to remain with their hostages, not because it is a moot situation if they don't (other CTs would snag the hostages, Ts arrested). Ideally there would be more than a maximum of eight CTs, these eight are merely the "strike force." If the Ts go running about haphazardly, well... blam, blam, blam. Imagine that the map is simply the area the CTs have cleared to execute their plans. But alas, I ramble now. I think that I got my point across... hopefully If not, just see Ben's post and ignore what I said. /flips in another penny for good measure. __________________ Official CS:S SOPs \| Official Natural Selection SOPs \| Official Dystopia SOPs \| CS:S Development Team \| Help Support TG \|

01-18-2006, 11:31 AM	#10 (permalink)
JoshZeitlin Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Memphis Age: 24 Posts: 149	Re: Tactical Advancement All of you are getting WAY to theoretical with your responses (all-though they are good ones.) Think about it this way aesop. Protecting the hosties must be treated the way you'd protect your family. I dont care how "tactical" your ideas may be. The FACT is: if you were defending your family, you wouldn't leave the house to go watch a side street that offered better lines of fire, you'd stay with your family and do the best you could. __________________ Josh - Some men will always be animals, while others ... they will be Men.

01-18-2006, 11:32 AM	#11 (permalink)
TheFeniX Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Houston, TX Age: 26 Posts: 4,478	Re: Tactical Advancement Flanking in the military is usually done en-masse or with a highly specialised team of soldiers: not one guy with a pump shotgun. It is useful when your objective is to kill all the enemies, but you always have other objectives in CSS. It would be a great idea for an assasination type map. Save that kind of flanking for maps like office that are so intertwined inside the building that flanking is not only viable, but gives you great cover to work from. I will grant that in groups, a team should always have one man pointed backwards covering the flank. I see this so rarely when it should be SOP. This really makes me want to host a small unit tactics session on server 2. __________________ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - TheFeniX's Steam Profile TG's Team Fortress 2 Steam Group

01-19-2006, 12:59 PM	#14 (permalink)
Ben Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Israel / Memphis Age: 31 Posts: 872	Re: Tactical Advancement who is undefended??? if the 2nd to last covers the rear then who is undefended? __________________ A battle is dynamic, i.e constantly changing and evolving. Follow the strategy in place but never be afraid to improvise if the situation calls for it. All I ask for is communication

01-19-2006, 01:02 PM	#15 (permalink)
Wyzcrak Join Date: May 2003 Location: Memphis, TN Posts: 14,148	Re: Tactical Advancement And, if knowing Fenix has taught me anything, it's that you never want to be alone and undefended from the rear. __________________ Steam Community? Add me. \| Join #tacticalgamer \| Search Results Legend \| New Posts Forum Filter \| Postbox Toggle \| Live Thread Review \| One Line Results \| Free Remote, Encrypted Backup Darkilla: In short, NS is pretty much really fast chess. With guns. Apophis: I haven't seen anyone say that SM's are better than non-SMs. Nordbomber: This is THE first server I've seen where either side can comeback from out of seemingly nowhere with the right teamwork. en4rcment: I have NEVER experienced the type of gameplay that I have found here. Nightly I am amazed at the personalities and gaming talent. Root: Welcome to TG. Feel free to punctuate your sentences correctly. Monkerz: Its gonna take all my skills to beat those boys off in the future.

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

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Tactical Mod v1.3 Released!	Mateo	Tactical Gamer News Items	0	07-22-2006 07:43 PM
Tactical Gamer Launches The Tactical Mod for Battlefield 2!	Mateo	Tactical Gamer News Items	3	04-13-2006 11:17 PM
the next BIG thing from Tactical Gamer:	Wyzcrak	General Discussion	20	12-13-2005 12:54 PM

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links