SloppyJoe

So often I see the point-man on a stealthy advance walking ahead quietly, which is cool, but I usually find myself somewhere behind him trying to cover him and help out in some way. Sure enough, A gunfight breaks out and I'm faced with the problem: Open fire and pray I don't hit my buddy in the back of his head instead of the enemy, or hold fire and stand there like a usless sack of sloppy joe?

An alternative would be to leave the point-man alone and let the poor sucker advance quite a ways ahead and if he gets ambushed pray that he lives through it.

Screw that though, I like to give support where I can and I hate to see comrades die.

Advancings in a stack essentially means this: A 2 man point team, the first guy most ahead crouching with a second man close behind him standing and walking, effectively making a wall with 2 gunners.

If it's done right it can be nasty, if it's half-ass it can be sketchy.

If the 2 man point gets ambushed by an opfor firing a gun, sure, the opfor has a lot of meat to shoot into, but, he's facing twice the gunfire and twice the potential of going down to a headshot and he's faced with the confusion of where to shoot to score a kill (and that often leads to "when in doubt spray it"). All things equal, the opfor is way more likely to go down first and fast if the team holds steady and fires into him.

This tactic can be sketchy if the first guy decides to stand up instead of staying crouched. If that happens it can lead to a sloppy situation. If the opfor use HE or flashes, then the point team is more susceptible to the damage or blindness.

The point team needs to have an understanding or a keyword like "break" "fall back" or "regroup" to get out of the situations that are bad for them.

This technique is only good for slow advances (since a crouch is a must). It's optimum effectiveness is in securing narrow LOF (line of fire) environments like hallways and alleys. It's also good at securing corners, especially after flashing around it. And, this can be used in conjunction with leapfrogging advancement tactics with multiple teams of 2 advancing and covering each other (slow, but very nasty).

So if you guys get tired of twitching and want to team up with me and use this tactic, just mention stacking and I'm good to go!

__________________
.

Vulcan

There is a real life tactic called stacking where the front man remains crouched and the man behind remains standing, however his field of fire is offset to the left or right of the point man depending on the surroundings.

If your entering a corridor that leads to an open area, the second man should be on the opposite side of the point man giving covering fire with his field of fire ahead of the point man and offset from him, while the point man adjusts his for up close and directly in front of him, then you can do leap frog.

__________________

Root

Lets start seeing these tactics implemented. I also think we need to educate players as to the jargon that goes with a higher level of tactical play. For example, the number of times I've told a team to stack up along a wall, and none of them have understood.....

__________________

What Is Schwa?

I disagree with any tactic involving close proximity of any number of players.

Two players in close proximity present themselves as a single target. What would be a stray incoming bullet is now a lucky headshot for the opposition.

If you want to assist an advancing player do so from heavy cover. Keep an eye on positions the enemy can pop out from. Allow the advancing player to get into a position of heavy cover, than move forward yourself. Two players can "leapfrog" in this manner.

Remember too, that stationary players have exponentially increased accuracy. If during your advance you encounter the op-for, the point man will be scrambling for cover while the assisting player will be able to calmly fire. The point man will have the attention, the assisting player will be free to shoot.

-Aaron

Root

That's perfectly true. However, the same applies in the real world, yet there are times when you see SWAT and other specialist teams stacking up anyway, because in those situations, it IS the best method.

Not only is it a tactic that we can employ under certain circumstances, I'd like to see us get to the stage where we have the right weapons in the right position in the stack. I would suggest that the second man should be the flashbang guy. That way the point man is ready to go with his primary weapon.

__________________

StainlessSteel

Stacking can and does work but mostly in a breaching situation. I still prefer a 2x2 cover formation With 2 players advancing short/medium distances with 2 others stationary covering them. Once the first 2 are at a post with cover/concealment, the others to advance past the first set. Continuing this movement until the destination is reached.

nulloperations

I like this tactic, but one of the few problems I notice on the server is lack of awareness of teammates' lines of fire. It's quite common I see someone take up a defensive position, and then see a teammate standing in front of that player further down, keeping them from being to cover an area as effectivly. Granted in the middle of a fire fight, I can understand this lack of awareness, but when setting up for a raid or a defensive bunker down, I'd like to see people more aware of where their teammates will be covering and where people don't need to be.

All in all, I tend to use this stacking tactic. It does lead to more successful planning.

__________________

Not for the Glory. Not for the Honor. For the Team.

Second Life
Let your creativity flow in a fully functional MMO enviroment

Atomic Dog

I see this a lot too. And to be honest, the only cause is lack of communication.

__________________