Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Countering the redeployment meta

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Countering the redeployment meta

    Anyone who's talked to me for any amount of time on the subject knows that the current strategic "meta" of the game is one of my big frustrations with the game. To summarize: the reinforcement needed spawns will be available for any meaningful fight, and will allow the enemy to trivially move troops around the map to meet or exceed 50% population. This means that any offensive fight that's doing well can expect to suddenly get steamrolled by a mass deployment that happens invisible, uncounterably, and instantaneously. While it's supposed to only get the fight back up to 50%, in practice a platoon can easily send their SLs to the fight first, or even just get everyone in for the server can update and realize that the pops are even.

    It's obnoxious, robs you of well earned and hard fought victories, and inevitably escalates every fight into a massive grindfest. I'd very much like, in the absence of the developers resolving it, a way to mitigate the effect of that spawn.

    I think one of the hooks that could be exploited is the <50% limitation (a more recent addition). Specifically, my thought is to somehow escalate the fight at a pace of your own choosing, denying easy reinforcements and progressively maintaining population advantage at a fight as you close on your capture timer. I've noticed that the vehicles on the outside of a base often allow the defender to get more troops in, effectively giving them a pop advantage since the vehicles can't really participate in the infantry fight. I think, by being mindful of how unused troops can work against us with the current spawn system, we can do the reverse and deny them easy reinforcements.

    For instance:
    I have three squads available to hit a base, which has less than a squad available for defense. Traditionally, we'd just roll in the whole platoon, crush the defense, and hope we maintain population long enough to flip (or the enemy doesn't think it's worth it to try and match us... almost never the case!). Instead, what we could do is send a single squad over and dig them in. We would keep the other two squads OUT of the hex entirely, preventing them from counting towards local population and allowing the enemy to spawn in defenders. As the fight slowly escalates (as blues head in, enemies arrive, pops even out) it will trend towards even pop. We add another squad to the mix right around the same time the cap is becoming difficult to hold. Because the enemy population will NOT have been able to spiral up through the population matching spawns, these fresh troops will represent a full squad population advantage. The enemy will be able to draw more troops in, but that takes time, and while we've still got the population we can buy a few more minutes. The next squad arrives under similar conditions.

    The core idea here is exploiting the small delays that are still inherent to the redeploy meta. The populations do not typically equalize immediately, and it often takes about a minute for freshly deployed troops to have their presence fully felt in the fight. That means with every cycle of this redeployment denial strategy, we can gain a minute or two of local population advantage under good conditions. The corollary to this is to avoid over committing to a fight, because it minimizes those same lags.

    Naturally, this would completely fail against a defender who was NOT abusing the redeploy meta to defend bases. It'd also fail if the enemy had a large force nearby that can just spawn over through normal lattice connections. Both would need to be taken into account. If the enemy were to reinforce the base via a gal drop, we'd need to have some forewarning of that so that we could get our reserves in position ASAP and try to hold out the old fashioned way (though we might be lucky enough to have the enemy misjudge our attacking force and send less dropships than they need). I'm also dubious that this would work in a fight that's already reached a fairly large scale.... in principle, it should work, but the logistics of organizing it become more difficult. You also would need to scale up the size of the reinforcing elements, as a squad in a multi-platoon fight can just feel like a drop in the bucket. Also, larger fights are perhaps a bit more likely to see reinforcements pulled from elsewhere, and will more quickly draw reinforcements through the reinforcement spawn options.

    Even so: this is something we should try, and add to our toolbox.

    Thoughts?




  • #2
    Re: Countering the redeployment meta

    Theory sounds stable. The troops outside the hex need to be able to get to position as fast if not faster than the redeploying enemy or it puts our squad already on point at disadvantage against superior numbers. So obvious some risk there yes, but I believe there is potential in this tactic.

    Nice logical approach. I think we have all been scratching our heads on how do beat the redeploy crash.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Countering the redeployment meta

      I think we can tolerate up to a minute lag from the reinforcement, just because troops deploying to the hex often take about that time to really have their effect felt. Even so, it'll require some gut intuition and careful timing from the commander... ideally, those troops would already be moving in at the moment they're needed.

      Even so, once they arrive they should be in a position to impact the fight well above their numbers, due to increased cohesion after a drop.



      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Countering the redeployment meta

        I like it, a couple additional thoughts:

        Anti - air assets do not have to be in the hex at all to be effective. I disrupted an air squad solo with a burster max from over a base away from the conflict. Got a thank you or two in Orders chat for that one. Place anti-air assets between the air assets' source and target, making them have to double back over you to escape, and giving you the maximum impact without increasing the pop in the target hex. That is influence within the hex with no corresponding population. Also, any ineffective air resources within the hex count against their long-distance redeploy numbers.

        I would plug Harassers here, but it would appear we don't quite have the level of maturity necessary when handling a gun-wielding turbo dune-buggy: ("OMG I CAN JUMP AN ESF WITH THIS THING"). In light of that, a small contingent of Skygaurds, gaurded by MBT's to make up for their relative lack of maneuverability, and an ammo sundy to make up for low ammo counts of the MBT's would work, it would simply limit the useful range and number of guns looking at the sky, not to mention be a huge hit on versatility and a generally more resource-intensive activity much more vulnerable to, well, everything (Over 50% of the squad is a support role for the AA, jack of all trades master of none).

        Thank you again, StarStriker, for continually coming up with new methods of tactically improving our odds. I'm in favor of SOE making spawn time distance-dependent. (You can spawn ANYWHERE you want, but here's how long it's going to take to get you there)If we have to keep the zergice (er, I mean Lattice) system, those times would cascade along lattice nodes, preferably following a factored exponential (Each base adds a bit more time to the total than the last one did). So, if a force over-extends on a single, separate lattice link, reinforcements would be slow in coming via the direct-spawn method. (Think southern Amerish). Another thought is to have an SCU on every single base.
        MacKahan -- Mac-Kay-an In case you were curious. ;-)

        sigpic

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Countering the redeployment meta

          Really good point on the AA being able to influence the fight from beyond the hex. We should maybe think of a few ways to keep assets in play without exposing ourselves to extra enemy reinforcements. In particular, commanders should be cognizant of base layouts where nearby bases intrude a little into the playable area... I seem to recall that a few bases have hills overlooking them that don't count as a base! That'd be a really good place to stick a backup squad while waiting to commit them.



          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Countering the redeployment meta

            The problem is that if their squad leaders are 3/12 first to deploy their whole squad can spawn there anyway. And dont tell me we dont see it all the time. We move in on a point. in less than 2 minutes and entire platoon of GOKU/AT shows up. and we're suddenly outpopped 66/33.

            I really like the idea, staggered deployment of squads, probably couldve won us a base earlier tonight (we were withing 5 seconds of capping it).

            nonetheless 50/50 pop isn't as advantageous as it sounds if there are squad-leads there to force redeployment. And no one is honorable like us to change squad leads just to gain a redeployment advantage.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Countering the redeployment meta

              Sure, but it greatly reduces our exposure. An organized squad can get past the 50% limitation, sure, and probably don't even need to exploit that limitation due to delays in updating, but against the typical trickle of lone wolves it prevents fight escalation. Plus, even if an organized squad CAN tilt it in their favour a bit, our backup squads can tilt it the other way. That doesn't hold if they decide to just drop two platoons on us out of nowhere, but we're also less likely to provoke that response if our apparent commitment to the fight is low.

              We need to see how it works live. Actual spawn behaviour is pretty much impossible to get hard data on... my suspicion is that the reinforcements are largely driven by a slow trickle of lone wolves and public squad members, with occasional (but typically decisive) mass redeployments from organized outfits, but we aren't going to know one way or the other without poking the bear and seeing what he does.



              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Countering the redeployment meta

                Good theory. Good thinking starstriker.

                While I am not against armor (brace for comment against armor...) in many bases armor cannot assist with holding a point. Thus the usefulness of armor support outside hex would be limited on those bases. If we are attacking we can assume that the enemy has the main spawn room, which often grants them a fairly quick and covered route to the A, B, or C point. Not always, granted, but often.

                For this reason, I think the backup force waiting outside hex should normally be infantry.

                But really good idea! I tried to +1 rep you but it wouldn't let me. :)
                The question foremost in my mind is "what will bring the most tactical fun to the server?"

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Countering the redeployment meta

                  I'll go one further and say that the backup force should be airborne infantry, to minimize downtime and get them into the fight ASAP. It also means they get their choice of deployment locations.

                  If we have armour, we should try to keep them outside the hex if at all possible. As Mac said, AA support can still be done from another base over, and often tank suppression can as well with favourable terrain. Certainly, tanks can position themselves to stop traditional reinforcements as well.

                  An interesting option would be how an air squad might fit into this. Instead of a traditional air squad that maintains position over the target to secure air superiority and engage targets of opportunity, we employ the hit-and-run air squads we've effectively employed in the past (preferably with a spotter). This allows us to keep them out of the hex for the majority of the time, only temporarily spiking population as they do a strike... hopefully both preventing too much reinforcement activity and lowering our apparent force size on the map. That might be a preferable way of getting heavy ordinance into a fight in a hurry without risking giving the enemy too much of an opening to drop on us.



                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Countering the redeployment meta

                    I've been in a hit-and-run air squad, typically very effective, although for an attack situation it will probably (like everything else) be highly situational. The heavy concentrations of armor/infantry are typically only in need a a full-on air response during an offensive zerg, I'm not sure what they would do in the down time between precision hit and run strikes. I'd estimate a pair of battle gals to be the most useful, with an ESF to scout.
                    MacKahan -- Mac-Kay-an In case you were curious. ;-)

                    sigpic

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Countering the redeployment meta

                      I could MAYBE see one or two battle gals and liberators being useful here, but the main problem with them is that they need to loiter to be effective, which means they're more likely to bring their weight in reinforcements. Probably not a problem with regard to the galaxies, though, since they're already THERE dropping off the troops... might as well hang around with a bulldog, which can be pretty dominating in a small fight with little AA.

                      You're right that a hit-and-run squad is situational on the attack, where there usually aren't Sunderers to snipe, and they're often not that effective in an interior infantry fight either. Still, if you wanted on-demand heavy ordinance that wasn't contributing to the local population, that's what you'd want: something FAST that can get in and out in a hurry.



                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Countering the redeployment meta

                        I did some poking around, this discussion has me considering how we deal with support squads in platoon,be it air or land vehicles. Typically they simply can't fall into the "Go here, position there" rule of the PL, and have to be a lot more fluid and think on your feet than that. Have we spent any time defining how an Autonomous Support Squad should work? (Do not make an acronym for that, friendly warning :-) ) In any case, avoiding reinforcement direct-redeploy is one of those cases, where the PL should most likely mark the theater of operation, and specify parameters for the air/land assets to operate by rather than giving a hard waypoint with instructions to loiter. For the case in this thread, mark the hex we're attacking, then specify forces to remain outside of hex but within effective range to engage threats, and specify land or ground targets being priority. As far as our most effective role during such an engagement, I think in terms like those below:

                        For a single point base, we secure the point and set up a room defense. We are excellent at that activity. I'm ignoring some typical offensive movement here because we're assuming we're coming in before a population hike, so room entry/etc should not be an issue, or this thread does not apply. We set up a sunderer in an applicable location and allow blueberries to come in (this could be one of our "gates" to control reinforcements, hold sunderer deploy until we seriously need it. Blueberries can and will do everything BUT hold the point room, we hold there, let them be meat shields/spawn campers. We only need 2 TG squads to successfully pull that off, and that is assuming a fairly determined and coordinated enemy.

                        Now, if I'm OPFOR and see a base going down that I can't spawn on (which is the goal of this activity), I'm going to do one of two things: Spawn as close as I can and pull armor/sundy support, or pull galaxies and air at warpgate and crash the party that way. Even someone spawn-hopping is going to get a base away and,if smart, realize an external assault on our positions is more likely to succeed. (Late-night squad tactics 101: Zip around destroying attacking enemy spawn logistics at a safe range, allow naturally occurring blueberries to retake points). In a purely infantry move, we have absolutely no defense from external attack, other than hoping we've established our defense of the point adequately to defend against gal drops / random sundy placements / tank shelling.

                        The way I see it, in about 75% of our defense battles, we would be best served coming in from outside and flanking the enemy and/or dropping directly on the point. We used to do it all the time (it was pretty much all Randy ever wanted to do, and it was effective). I can only assume our enemy will think likewise, and bring in their large population via conventional means (rather than magical nanite tubes). I think an AA nest of some variety is critical to this working, I believe air to be the biggest threat to the plan, with armor being #2.

                        A 3-point base is considered "Major", and if I'm not mistaken will be a spawn option 90% of the time anyway, so I don't think this necessarily applies there. In any case, assuming TG was the only game in town,we would need a full platoon on the ground (or available at the drop of a gal), with a single squad on each point (4 points), or a single squad on each point with one shoring up any heavily assaulted position (3 points).

                        As always, if SCU exists, destroy it before hitting point with as few people as possible. Create AI minefields and then take point.

                        Originally posted by starstriker1 View Post
                        You're right that a hit-and-run squad is situational on the attack, where there usually aren't Sunderers to snipe, and they're often not that effective in an interior infantry fight either. Still, if you wanted on-demand heavy ordinance that wasn't contributing to the local population, that's what you'd want: something FAST that can get in and out in a hurry.
                        Man, that sounds like a job for a certain vehicle.... :P
                        MacKahan -- Mac-Kay-an In case you were curious. ;-)

                        sigpic

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Countering the redeployment meta

                          ESFs (and Liberators) are 2-3 times faster and are not terrain dependent. :P

                          You raise a good point about an organized group just grabbing Gals and crashing us that way. I think that'll be one of the failure cases of the strategy, and would require forewarning of a drop and hurriedly rushing the last of our reinforcements onto the point for a more traditional base defense. Preferably, we'd have long-range warning and possibly interdiction in play... might be time to dust off that warpgate interception tactic.

                          For those unfamiliar with it, the basics are this: one person serves as a forward spotter, preferably with clear sight lines to the enemy warpgate. The remainder set up in ESFs and Tankbuster/Shredder Liberators at a muster point somewhere between the base they're defending and the enemy warpgate. When the spotter sees a Galaxy take off, they phone it in with position, height, and heading info and the interception squad rushes off to shoot them down before they get anywhere near the base in question, breaking their drop cohesion and possibly preventing them using local lattice spawns.

                          We'd need to adjust and update it for our current reality on the server. Between the more active air game and the current easy resources, getting caught in a furball with an enemy air squad is a real possibility. Stealth and/or overwhelming force is required to stop that from wiping or distracting the interception squad... which means hiding, AA on the muster point, or something else.

                          As for major bases: there's no reason that this couldn't work there, but it'll be more difficult to pull off. Blues will filter in faster, and the enemy will take more notice of the threat (and will probably have deployed ahead of the advance if they're paying attention), not to mention the increased manpower requirements for managing multiple points. Might be more viable for sniping undefended Bio labs with their easily accessed SCUs, or Tech Plants with their single points, but it'd be roughest trying to handle an AMP station. The traditional 1 point AMP station might be doable, but the three point ones would be... challenging.

                          I like the idea of combining this with AI minefields. They're not an overwhelming advantage, but they'd serve as a nice little buffer to gain a few seconds, and this is a strategy that's all about gaining seconds.



                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Countering the redeployment meta

                            Originally posted by starstriker1 View Post
                            ESFs (and Liberators) are 2-3 times faster and are not terrain dependent. :P

                            You raise a good point about an organized group just grabbing Gals and crashing us that way. I think that'll be one of the failure cases of the strategy, and would require forewarning of a drop and hurriedly rushing the last of our reinforcements onto the point for a more traditional base defense. Preferably, we'd have long-range warning and possibly interdiction in play... might be time to dust off that warpgate interception tactic.

                            ...

                            I like the idea of combining this with AI minefields. They're not an overwhelming advantage, but they'd serve as a nice little buffer to gain a few seconds, and this is a strategy that's all about gaining seconds.
                            Liberators and ESF's are also visible from afar, unless the pilot is very, very good, and running solo. They are also much more exposed (complete spherical susceptibility to incoming projectiles).

                            Asset interception is fun, I'd be up for some of that.

                            AI minefields have fringe benefits of letting you know people are coming if your Infil is being lazy. ;-)
                            MacKahan -- Mac-Kay-an In case you were curious. ;-)

                            sigpic

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Countering the redeployment meta

                              This past Friday (8/22/14) we tried this strategy. Starstriker was PL, with 2.5 - 3 squads in the platoon for a while. I was SL for alpha for a bit.

                              I think the tactic was a real success! I know I had lots of fun, and I think most of the guys did. The action was fast, and you never had to wait that long in reserve before you were called in. Even during prime time alerts we were able to take a few bases. When we lost, we survived much longer than we otherwise would have.

                              BRAVO to [MENTION=16189]starstriker1[/MENTION], for coming up with a theory that does what so many theories cannot, and actually works in practice!
                              The question foremost in my mind is "what will bring the most tactical fun to the server?"

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X