No announcement yet.

Something to try: setting a trap for enemy forces that try to re-secure.

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Something to try: setting a trap for enemy forces that try to re-secure.

    I'll give the example of a near undefended biolab.

    1) What usually happens:

    Platoon goes into biolab.
    Cleans up resistance.
    Waits for cap.

    Enemy outfit spots capping attempt.
    Enemy leader checks on map to see size of your force.
    If he can tip the balance considerably, he can then attack and be pretty sure to stop the cap.

    This is the standard way most outfits defend biolabs. It is a very effective tactic in any way, as it makes enemy platoons sit around waiting, only to die and redeploy empty handed with a lot of time lost guarding shield campers.

    2) My plan for a ruse:
    Send out only as much manpower as is needed to the biolab.
    Keep the rest OUT OF THE HEX TERRITORY. (This is the key idea)

    Now if the enemy checks the map to see if they can re-secure, only a part of your force will show up on the map. With luck, the enemy will send a force to re-secure, that is larger than what you have in the hex, but not larger then your whole force, most of which is ready come help, but just outside of the hex.

    Then when the enemy launches his re-secure attempt, he will initially be effective, but when the rest of your force comes in, you can then un-re-secure that base. With a bit of luck, you will now have way less capping time left (as you already were capping for some minutes). The larger enemy forces should not have time to react and send even more forces.

    3) Conclusion:
    If successful you will have turned the tables on them. You'll have made them lose time, die, AND lose an important base (and lose face). In a way it is also punishing the enemy leaders for relying on the map info. And in terms of meta game, it may make enemy leaders think twice about attempting this cookie cutter gamy redeploy tactic.

    I think this ruse can work on any of the slow capping bases. So specifically towers, amp station, biolabs and techplants. The other bases do not take long to cap so they usually do not offer the enemy chance to redeploy and re-secure, making this ruse non-applicable.

  • #2
    Re: Something to try: setting a trap for enemy forces that try to re-secure.

    Also a good tactic to get into is to wait until you have at least one man close to each point before you start to cap any of them. This makes it harder for defending forces to guess your direction of attack, and also starts the timer with the fastest cap time.

    If you roll up to a base and "C" point is closest to your Sunderer if you cap it first you give away your position.

    Al: Another part of your tactic could be to flip the points and Proxie mine them as you withdrawl. This lets you know when they are back to recap it and also slows them down even more.


    • #3
      Re: Something to try: setting a trap for enemy forces that try to re-secure.

      Alright, here's my thinking:

      Once we have the SCU down and the satellites under control, they've got absolutely no way to respawn short of bringing Sunderers in (which is typically not the case) or relying heavily on spawn beacons, medics, and squad deployment (which denies them MAXes, is relatively easy to shut down, and doesn't survive heavy attrition). In other words, they CAN'T contest the capture without resecuring the SCU or a satellite, and they can't really do either of those in a piecemeal fashion. A re-secure attempt requires them to apply overwhelming force to at least one of those four objectives. This is almost always a multiple Galaxy drop straight from the warp gate instead of a more sustainable Sunderer-backed push.

      Basically, there are two elements of a Bio Lab re-secure which are non-negotiable:
      1) A cohesive attack
      2) A sufficiently large breaching force.

      If either of those elements are disrupted, the re-secure attempt is likely to fail.

      I like Al's strategy because it can trick the enemy into committing too few people to the breach (attacks the enemy on point 2). Also, I love the idea of baiting people into a prepared killzone. However, it requires us to have a significant reserve force (multiple simultaneous platoons, or playing the reserve force ourselves by coordinating with NCC). It also gambles on the enemy only committing the minimum number of squads required instead of just throwing in everything they've got (which I've seen happen a lot, just overwhelm the attackers outright until they're broken, then pick up and leave). It could also backfire if it draws smaller squads into the fight that wouldn't normally think they had any business at the Bio Lab.

      Still... we know they're coming, and we know HOW they're coming, and we almost always know WHERE they're coming from (and can even track and verify by looking at enemy force concentrations on the map). We also know that the key ingredient to re-securing a Bio Lab is a cohesive breach with concentrated force. I'm starting to think that we might have more success by disrupting the Gal drop en-route, with the goal being to either destroy their cohesion by scattering the Galaxies around or removing their ability to apply overwhelming force by bringing enough of them down.

      I'm thinking the best way to do this is to run a dedicated air squad deep in hostile territory. The window in which the enemy is travelling can be as small as 60s depending on the Bio lab's position, so it'll need to be pretty coordinated. When the "multiple platoon" sign is noticed on the enemy warpgate, they position themselves about midway between and prepare to intercept. It might work even better with a forward scout near the enemy warp gate who can call out the enemy position and shadow them to feed the squad intel, which would give tighter timing and force size data. Fly high to avoid flak and interception, and then dive down on enemy Galaxies once spotted.

      This air squad would be a mixed force of Reavers and Liberators (Dalton's + Tank busters preferred). Reavers alone just don't have the DPS to bring down multiple Galaxies within a minute even with concentrated fire, especially with multiple Galaxies worth of turrets blasting away at them, so the Liberators are there for the heavy demolition. Tank Busters on the pilot are a great air-to-air weapon if you can line up the sights (galaxy down in four magazines), and the Galaxies are easy targets, and the Dalton is absurdly effective on its own (four Dalton hits to kill). Maybe 3 Liberators (2 man) with 6 Reavers for escort and fire support would be a good combination... we'd need to experiment to see how well we can integrate Liberators into an interception squadron. I've played around with Liberator loadouts in VR enough to be confident that they'd have a substantial damage advantage over Reavers, but their sluggish maneuvering and maximizing their output by getting the nose gun and belly gun firing on separate targets leave some questions. It might be a case of running solo liberators instead, which would allow more aircraft into the fight but at the loss of the powerful belly guns.

      Bring down a few of those Galaxies before they're even in the Bio Lab hex (where, theoretically, they could drop and hit satellite bases) and you've not only screwed up their re-secure attempt with a force about a quarter of the size, you'll also have cost them significant resources and cool-down times (the galaxies plus whatever MAXes they have) as well as the several minutes they spent organizing everything. If they bail outside the Bio Lab territory instead of going down with the ship, you might not have destroyed their force advantage, but you'll have disrupted their cohesion enough that the concentrated, sudden breach they need to oust the attackers will be dependent on them taking a Satellite and organizing a MAX crash, giving more time and an extra point of vulnerability to counter them with.



      • #4
        Re: Something to try: setting a trap for enemy forces that try to re-secure.

        I like both your ideas.

        One thing I will say without a doubt, as a long time Gal pilot the only thing that I am really scared of are enemy Liberators (with good pilots, and/or above me). Enemy Liberators come second only to so called "friendly" blueberry Reaver pilots as a threat to the endangered Auraxian Skywhale! LOL But seriously...

        Ground troops we can fly away from.
        ESFs we can usually kill, unless there are a lot of them. The Gal can take so much damage, the ESFs cannot do enough damage fast enough to kill us, before we kill them.

        But Libs, Libs are not only faster and more maneuverable (can't outrun them) but also (and this is critical) they can do enough damage to kill you. They are the "Japanese research vessels" of the skies!

        Some times I can kill a Lib by out-flying him and putting #2, #3 and/or #4/5 gun(s) on him at once. But you need very good gunners for that. Usually I stay above him and get him with the mortar (i.e., if I see him first). But a good Lib pilot/gunner combo will get me every time if I don't have a Reaver escort. Luckily good Lib crews are usually pretty few and far between in game nowadays.

        But the bottom line is, if you want to hunt Gals, use Libs. With fighter (and/or battle Gal) escorts, to counter the enemy's ESF escorts (sometimes there are none).
        "The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it." - George Bernard Shaw


        • #5
          Re: Something to try: setting a trap for enemy forces that try to re-secure.

          I've done a little bit of testing, and here are my thoughts on Liberator loadouts for interception:

          Both the Tank buster and Dalton will kill a liberator in four magazines, and with roughly similar magazine reload/firing cycles. Of the two, IMO the nose gun is going to be easier to get onto a fleeing aerial target. This would seem to make the nosegun the obvious weapon, but a tank buster is incredibly short range... I'd give it MAYBE 100-200m effective fire range on a target as large as a Gal before the spread, drop and damage falloff become huge concerns. The default nosegun, the Vektor, is accurate over long range, but suffers in terms of DPS. My first impression is that the close range Tank Buster is a better choice for an interception role for its ability to take the target down rapidly... range may not matter so much unless you end up badly undershooting the Galaxy you're intercepting.

          Having someone in the belly gun makes the Liberator more than a one-trick pony outside of interception duties, but I'm skeptical of how easily you can get an angle on the target AND put shots down accurately from the range you'd need to be at. It's also impossible to get both guns firing on the same target, so the only way to get 2 operators worth of damage is to target two Galaxies simultaneously, and I doubt that's really feasible without some incredibly tricky positioning.

          I haven't tried the Shredder or Zephyr for anti-Gal duty, but unless they've got a huge DPS advantage I don't seem them changing the equation much.


          • #6
            Re: Something to try: setting a trap for enemy forces that try to re-secure.

            I do not think it possible to stop a big gal drop. Combined they have so much health, that I think there isn't a weapon in the game that can kill before they get over target and drop troops.

            ANd if it is possible, I think it would be so hard, that killing the troops on the ground would be more effective. A good lib will kill a gal from decent range. If you get close the guns will chew you up if they are manned. You may get the kill, but you won't survive.


            • #7
              Re: Something to try: setting a trap for enemy forces that try to re-secure.

              You're absolutely right that you're not going to be able to stop a drop in progress... not from the target zone. That's not what I'm proposing, though.

              I'm suggesting interception while they're en-route to the Bio Lab area itself, which provides a minute plus window to engage them, as long as you know when they're coming. This maximizes the time available to whittle down their health, AND ensures that if they do bail, they bail out as far from their intended target as possible.

              I think you'll find that the math will work out surprisingly well. A Liberator with a tank buster nosegun can take an individual Gal down within 20-30 seconds (which I think is a conservative estimate). With three or four liberators concentrating fire, the Galaxies will completely melt. Call it 10s per kill. Against a typical drop size of 3-4 gals, a minute or so window for interception will give you plenty of time to take them all down. Es[ecially with the Reaver escort chipping in.

              The key points are to have a large, cohesive squadron using Liberators as heavy interceptors (though I suspect 12 Reavers focusing fire will also work) combined with the best intel you can manage. The squadron isn't providing air cover over the biolab like normal, but is instead operating in enemy territory to reduce response times. With a forward observer combined with close watching of troop concentrations, I think it's entirely possible to catch the Gal fleet with enough time left to take them all out. It'd require close teamwork and coordination, but that's something we do pretty well here at TG.

              I don't think a liberator would be all that much at risk at close range, either. Libs are pretty beefy machines, and Galaxies aren't particularily well armed (unless Randy is flying it), and the intent is to fly as a squadron and focus fire. The Galaxies won't have much time, and if they aren't well coordinated they'll waste their fire by spreading it around the entire attacking squadron. Even if they do shoot you down in the process, though... consider the respective losses on each side. Your interceptors might have lost a few fighters and a liberator or two... lets call it 1000 air resources, plus your respective vehicle downtimes (which aren't all that big a deal most of the time). The enemy, on the other hand, has probably lost 3-4 galaxies (1050-1400 air resources), will have big timers because those vehicles were just pulled, AND they've also lost whatever MAX units they were carrying (300 infantry resources each plus timers).

              Perhaps most critically, though, they already spent a few minutes setting up the galaxy drop, and it will take them several more to get another one together if they even can. Given that resecuring a Bio Lab is a time-critical objective, that is a MASSIVE win. You could lose every single intercepting aircraft and you'd still come out on top by a mile.


              • #8
                Re: Something to try: setting a trap for enemy forces that try to re-secure.

                I'd have to agree with Starstriker, if we could "Hide" a squad of liberators, with a few reaver scouts flying near the top of the flight window, the would most likely go un noticed, and as TG is well coordinated, we could view the tech labs/warpgate to see where the enemy gals are coming from, and could move the liberators to intercept, WHILE the gals are loading up, so by the time they are loaded and in flight, we are right on top of them.


                • #9
                  Re: Something to try: setting a trap for enemy forces that try to re-secure.

                  Rather than hiding the liberators, my inclination would be actually put them at the flight ceiling in formation with the Reavers. At that height they're unlikely to gather too much attention, and any attackers would have to be foolhardy to engage a 12 man air squadron unless they themselves were bringing in an organized fighter wing. It'd also help interception to have them up high, since Gal drops are often done from the flight ceiling, and liberators are pretty slow to get up to speed. If they come in at max height, we're at least waiting for them, but if they come in lower we can dive for rapid acceleration.


                  • #10
                    Re: Something to try: setting a trap for enemy forces that try to re-secure.

                    I say we cap a base, then leave me and a knife. That's all the trap we need :)


                    • #11
                      Re: Something to try: setting a trap for enemy forces that try to re-secure.

                      DocFinley has us covered then. No more strategizationing required, he's got this! :D


                      • #12
                        Re: Something to try: setting a trap for enemy forces that try to re-secure.

                        I thought it would be you and a stack of C4. Knowing how much you like to stick it on people and set them off and all :P


                        • #13
                          Re: Something to try: setting a trap for enemy forces that try to re-secure.

                          Well, we want to keep it a fair fight.


                          • #14
                            Re: Something to try: setting a trap for enemy forces that try to re-secure.

                            I LOVE making things go BOOOOMMMM!!!!!!!!!!


                            • #15
                              Re: Something to try: setting a trap for enemy forces that try to re-secure.

                              Alright, so apparently we've given up on the "fair fight" idea. Okay by me.




                              TeamSpeak 3 Server


                              Twitter Feed