Re: Suppressing Fire

**What Is Schwa?** · 03-14-2007, 10:34 PM

I use supressive fire often.

However, there is some confusion as to the difference between "blind fire" and suppresive fire.

In my oppinion, blind fire is similar to wall-banging: shooting where players often are, but not having any in-game clues that would lead to the conclusion an enemy is in that location.

Supressive fire would be shooting a location that enemies are not with the intention to keep the opponent from advancing.

It's been a little while since I read the SOP, but I don't recall if "blind fire" is specificly defined, or it's distinction from "suppressive fire." I hope we can all agree that it is important to clearly define those terms...

Would a PCS player care to chime in?

-Aaron

**Atomic Dog** · 03-14-2007, 10:45 PM

I've used supressive fire on occasion. In most cases it's a response to someone in the team calling for supressive fire. It should be used to help your team advance through potentially "hot" areas. In most cases I use supressive fire on location where there are known hostiles. This in order to keep their heads down or to ensure the team is not engaged while advancing. There are times when supressive fire is called for to locations where it's unknown whether or not hostiles are present. This is tactically sound and should be distinguished from blind fire.

**What Is Schwa?** · 03-14-2007, 10:54 PM

Atomic Dog>

I promise I'm not being a jerk here. I cannot see from that post how you distinguish between "Suppressive Fire" and "Blind Fire"

I feel I have a good grasp of the subject, I just don't think there is a clear definition of either term.

-Aaron

**Atomic Dog** · 03-14-2007, 11:00 PM

Suppresive Fire is the act of firing toward a known enemy location with the expectation of reducing their ability to defend themselves and/or the ability to return fire.

Blind Fire is just shooting wildly into a location an enemy "might be" with the expectation of scoring a cheap kill.

Does that help?

**What Is Schwa?** · 03-14-2007, 11:07 PM

Heh... seriously, i'm not trying to be a jerk!! On the cusp of this assault on our server I feel it is important to clearly define terms. I get it, but I've been here a long time.

Your terms are similar to what I said, however, as far as a definition goes, I don't like including the player's intentions. This creates an obvious loophole that will be abused.

I think I was hitting on an important point when I mentioned the distinction between "firing where a player could be" vs. "firing where a player is not"

-Aaron

**Atomic Dog** · 03-14-2007, 11:09 PM

Yeah, but either of those could be used to describe aspects supressive fire or blind fire...so I see your dillema.

And I don't think you're being a jerk at all.

**Vulcan** · 03-15-2007, 12:20 AM

How I see it, if they could be there, you must have some intel that tells you that. This intel is what allows for suppressive fire. If that intel does not exist then you are blind firing. You could say that anywhere some could potentially be but this is not rational. Tactically speaking it's not a good idea to stand in a hallway looking out into an open area and firing anywhere in that area, even though someone could be there. Does that make sense?

Suppresive fire has a purpose and focus. Your doing it because you know from another piece of intelligence that a spot might have enemies in it.

Taking that to CSS this becomes pretty common because we all know the hiding spots.

**Jaykay** · 03-16-2007, 05:03 PM

I find that suppressive fire works far less effectively than it should because obviously, players in a game have no fear of death.

I've heard people scolded in voice comms for being too afraid of dying, and not "moving".

**Root** · 03-17-2007, 08:06 AM

Originally Posted by Jaykay

I find that suppressive fire works far less effectively than it should because obviously, players in a game have no fear of death.

I've heard people scolded in voice comms for being too afraid of dying, and not "moving".

This is a sad fact of CS.

Dog - nice write up on the differences between blind and supression fire. Schwa, keep asking the important questions.

Here's an example of blind fire : cs_militia_tm2. We all know there's going to be a T at the bottom of the garage stairs. As the CT's approach, they fire through the garage door.

Here's an example of suppression fire : cs_militia_tm2. On their way up to the garage door, they CT's are running, so the T's have a fairly good idea of their location. They open fire, shooting through the garage door.

Suppression fire does border on blind fire sometimes. A CT is ordered to get striaght down the left side of Kismayo. This is either going to be a stealth or overt approach. If it's overt, he's going to run, and cover fire can realistically be employed. How's that not blind fire? It is! It's blind fire with the intent of keeping heads down so that the CT can get to his immediate objective. It directly relates to that team member doing something. In a situation like that, silencers should be off, weapons fire should be continuous (this is where the SAW can be useful), and on reaching cover, the CT should let the team know and the cease-fire order given.

**Jaykay** · 03-17-2007, 01:04 PM

Originally Posted by Root

This is a sad fact of CS.

Well I wouldn't be too hard on yourselves; I'm actually a BF2142 player who was attracted by the topic of this discussion, as a long-time believer in support weapons, and suppressive fire.

I've played on TG since the first PC release of Ghost Recon, and we had the exact same feelings and problems with suppression of red cons even back then.

Multi-player shooters all lack reality, in that no one has a gut-crushing fear of death while under fire. Games which limit respawns to 1 or 3 per round help with this.

Of course casual players HATE this, since the first time they play Rambo, they are out of the game for 30 minutes.

**Root** · 03-17-2007, 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by Jaykay

Well I wouldn't be too hard on yourselves; I'm actually a BF2142 player who was attracted by the topic of this discussion, as a long-time believer in support weapons, and suppressive fire.

I've played on TG since the first PC release of Ghost Recon, and we had the exact same feelings and problems with suppression of red cons even back then.

Multi-player shooters all lack reality, in that no one has a gut-crushing fear of death while under fire. Games which limit respawns to 1 or 3 per round help with this.

Of course casual players HATE this, since the first time they play Rambo, they are out of the game for 30 minutes.

It sounds like we could use you on the PR server. Leave that 2142 stuff for the kids.

**I.R. Hogan** · 03-17-2007, 09:22 PM

All I know is that Suppressive fire is a usefull tactic when used properly for example

To stop the enemy from shooting at attackers, the attacking force divides in two.
The first group of attackers fires on the enemy. This will cause the enemy to take cover, thus minimizing their ability to return fire.
While the first attacking group is firing at the enemy - keeping them suppressed - the second group of attackers advances toward the enemy position.
This second group now stops, and begins laying down their own suppressive fire. The first group can now advance under cover of the second group's suppressive fire.
The process repeats as needed, with each attacking group alternating roles (either advancing or laying down suppressive fire) until they can attack the defenders at close quarters.

The one thing I feel this server is missing is practice time. For TG and PCS that want to improve thier tactics or learn more. Both which are difficult on an open server.

**Root** · 03-18-2007, 10:59 AM

Originally Posted by I.R. Hogan

The one thing I feel this server is missing is practice time. For TG and PCS that want to improve thier tactics or learn more. Both which are difficult on an open server.

This can be arranged with great ease. All that's required is genuine committment from SM's and PCSP's.

**What Is Schwa?** · 03-18-2007, 01:00 PM

Root> you are correct that "suppressive fire" [i]is[/b] "blind fire." To say that "blind fire" is not allowed is confusing.

For this reason, I think we need a more appropriate term for the type of fire that isn't allowed on this server.

For example "wall banging" isn't allowed on this server.

-Aaron

**Vulcan** · 03-18-2007, 03:01 PM

Excessively firing at every single corner consistently is the extreme of blind firing.

Thread Tools

Display