Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Breaching out

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

  • Breaching out

    TheFatz brought up an interesting point this weekend that I'd like to explore. While we've given much thought to pushing OUT of a building, Fatz asked if we had any procedure for pushing OUT of a building. As far as I know, we don't. It seems like an important thing to cover because moving building to building often requires hopping into the open.

    My first thought here is that it would just be an extension of the breaching drill, with a larger "room". However, there are important differences in the scenario that need to be taken into account, and which the standard breaching approach may not cover:
    • There is no roof. That means there's greater risk of attack from above, even from behind our exit. More angles to cover.
    • The "room" is MUCH larger, and might expose us to far more enemies at once than even a contested room hold
    • On the same line, the sight lines aren't constrained by a "back wall" in many instances, potentially putting an enemy position past a range where we can effectively engage it. In particular, doors that lead out to long corridors on either side are relatively common (think the hallway just outside C point and the SCU shield building in a biolab) and can easily become killzones
    • Enemy force multipliers might be in play; air support or fire from enemy vehicles are both concerns, as are snipers
    • Any enemy forces are less likely to be holding stationary defensive positions; if they are, they're more likely to be defending from strong points and high ground rather than spread throughout a room as in a room hold.


    "Moving along the walls" works pretty well in a breach, but might fail in this situation. It provides a strong formation to anyone in front of the door, but is much more vulnerable from the sides, and unlike in a room breach there aren't any corners to clear to make that safe. Moving along the walls is also perhaps more likely to expose the team to angles they haven't cleared yet; many doors are adjacent to an outward corner and rounding that will open up a huge field of view.

    Clearing the fatal funnel seems like it's still important, of course, but the door might also form the cover you need to engage enemies to the right and left of the door.

    I feel like proper intel on the situation outside is probably going to be the key here. Motion sensors are more likely to catch enemies moving around out there, there are more likely to be friendly eyes outside. Friendly positions nearby might constrain the possible spaces outside where the enemy could actually hold a position. Knowing where potential enemies are on the outside might require different movements to best counter them.

    Some initial thoughts:
    • If the enemy is arrayed in front of the door then a traditional breach, sans grenade is probably the best way to go through the door. Moving sideways from the door clears the fatal funnel and presents a wide front to the enemy.
    • If the enemy is arrayed to one side (IE, you're turning a corner into an enemy position) then you're best charging straight through; you're vulnerable to anyone in front of the door, but you'll present a wide front to the sides.
    • If the enemy is at a diagonal to the door or is spread along the front and one side, move along the other diagonal; same idea as above.
    • If the enemy is stacked up on your door (and you're still intent on pushing through it) suppressed them, hammer them with grenades, then aggressively breach forward without a proper stack up (speed is imperative and you can't afford to not be in a position to cover the door while preparing). Troops to leave the building first try to draw fire away from the doorway as you crash out into them. This could be an effective way to crush a breach in the making.
    • If the enemy has positions on all sides of the door... why are you trying to walk into their kill zone, dummy? :P Best I can think of is to push out with superior numbers and make a mad dash for the nearest strong position to try and gain a foothold. Advance in several directions at once so no enemy has a clear shot on everyone at once.
    • If the enemy is unknown, or has weak forces, fan out to try and cover as many directions as possible and prevent any one position from having clear shots on everyone.


    In terms of doing this all more organically, or having a basic playbook to draw from... I think maybe something like this...
    • Squad approaches doorway fanned out and covering multiple slices of the pie, maybe 3-5 meters away
    • Breach order given
    • Squad fans out in all directions from door until formation has reached a comfortable size based on our usual squad cohesion
    • "Right clear" "Left hot" etc call outs are very useful. First people out the door check the sides, as in regular breach. Depending on terrain, they may sweep the sides/corners or dash to cover that is able to watch that direction and cover the squad as they exit
    • If enemies are encountered, squad attempts to move laterally while engaging OR dash to cover. With larger distances involved speed may be more decisive than accuracy in keeping the squad alive


    I think, even more so than breaching a building, keeping it fluid and organic rather than structured is important. The wide variety of situations and terrain you might hit on exit demands it.

    Thoughts?




  • #2
    Re: Breaching out

    - Initial thoughts are, I think the bottom method given is what seems to be the most easily applied. During one of my squads tonight we did essentially what the bottom method was and we were able to get outside under hot conditions.
    -Also I cannot stress enough during this the key to making it work is the timing wait for a break in the enemies charging you and then push out.
    -Also this is an excellent place to use my max shield forward style push i described in an earlier post.
    -Callouts become all the more important here as well.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Breaching out

      I think we need some language for stacking up without all lining up beside the doorways. That has its place (no exposure to fatal funnel, tightest possible cohesion, closest distance to door) but it's vulnerable to attack and isn't able to suppress the doorway or gather intel.

      A looser stack up would consist of the squad all being near but not directly on the door, preferably with cover or near cover, and fanned out around it. Every member is close enough to the door for a fairly fast breach (but slower than a standard stack would be), and since they're roughly equidistant force cohesion is maintained as they go through the door. In the meantime, the squad is able to put effective fire on anyone coming through the door, has a better view of the outside with multiple people slicing the pie at different places, and is more robust if ambushed, being able to quickly recover a defensive posture.

      Such a pre-breach grouping would be useful for breaching into a building (I've seen it done in a heavy firefight, where being able to suppress the enemy inside the room was very helpful), but it seems especially relevant when trying to move out of a building in a tough fight where enemies streaming into the room unexpectedly is a constant threat.

      I'm not sure how to call for it, though. Maybe "loose stack", but not great. "Group up at the door", or "circle the door" also might work. Ideally it would be something that is evocative enough to suggest the proper maneuver without having to have drilled it, while also being clearly identifiable and succinct.



      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Breaching out

        For breaching out, given the greater potential for danger outside (armor/air/more angles) I think slicing the pie before exiting to gain intel becomes more important. Maybe one guy does that, could be SL or non SL?
        Also, could we just say "stack up on the door?" Or "stack for breach out?
        The question foremost in my mind is "what will bring the most tactical fun to the server?"

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Breaching out

          I think if you say that you'll get everyone crowded to either side of the door, as in our breaching drills. You might actually want that, sometimes; for instance, if there are enemies set up outside the door but you expect them to hang back and shoot instead of try to enter, stacking up that way minimizes exposure.

          Agree with you about slicing the pie; having someone clear the door and get a sense of the other side might lead to very different breaching orders. Might as well be the SL in that case; if they get shot they're in a relatively safe place, and not having to go between to someone else means better detail and timeliness of intel.



          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Breaching out

            I hate to throw around the La, but for intel on whats outside that door i believe he could be useful same with an infiltrator. with a pair of drifters LA's become essentially very fast running troops or fastly ascending troops with the standard or icarus jump jets. Another benefit of the LA too here is that from the rooftop la's can deploy smoke and flash bangs as cover along with dropping c-4 on n enemy troops grouped up outside. once the squad moves outside he can easily descend and be with the moving squad within moments. Also the LA can give a clearer understanding of the ebb and flow and let the squad know when the next wave is approaching and when the next wave is relatively clear. If things are too hot someone good in the roll will be in a position to move off and get to a balcony or entrance for medic pickup. moving under hot and live fire conditions I think should be about timing. would your rather have your squad face 2 to 3 enemies whilst pushing out that door or 7 to 8.

            I myself am a fan of having SL do certain things on exiting and entering (smoke nades etc...). Provided he isnt medic or the lone engi.... anyways have another idea for another post so sorry if this gets cut off mid thought... final thoughts are though the simpler you can make it the better...

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Breaching out

              Originally posted by Garthra View Post
              For breaching out, given the greater potential for danger outside (armor/air/more angles) I think slicing the pie before exiting to gain intel becomes more important. Maybe one guy does that, could be SL or non SL?
              Also, could we just say "stack up on the door?" Or "stack for breach out?
              Thirded. And I'm with SS saying it should be the SL in practice since the time scales on PS2 are so short that communicating this information in detail would likely compromise the accuracy (i.e. the state would change).

              I also think that stacking isn't so necessary in the wide open location. In fact you probably want some spread while your group is crossing vulnerable terrain. Stacking is a means of providing the enemy too many targets to engage all at once when breaching. This implies the stack outnumbers the guns pointed at them significantly. In the wide-open such an assumption is far less likely. Add this in with the fact that the direction of engagement will probably be near 360 degrees and stacking sounds like a good way to get the group trounced with no hope of revive. (I mean stacking as a 'movement' order not as a organizational micro-management system before a movement)

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Breaching out

                I don't understand what you mean by stacking as a movement, Ytman.

                A breach does *not* operate under the assumption that you outnumber your opponents (though, of course, it's sound policy). If you're referring to the method of entering in close order and then moving along the walls, the purpose is to get as many guns in play as quickly as possible so that you aren't defeated in detail as you go through the door. Spreading laterally to the direction of contact (IE, along the walls) is to ensure that you don't block friendly fire, don't give easy targets to enemies focused on the doorway, and to give the enemy a more difficult shot by forcing more horizontal movement into their aim if they want to acquire a new target.

                I'd argue all these objectives are exactly as valuable when pushing out of a building. Every moment that part of your squad is engaged while the other part is unable to assist drastically increases your odds of losing the fight, and any measure that can reduce attrition when moving through a potentially deadly doorway means that more of your squad will still be up by the time the entire squad has moved through.



                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Breaching out

                  Seems like a good opportunity to use smoke to aid in exiting the building.
                  sigpic

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Breaching out

                    [QUOTE=starstriker1;1880452]I don't understand what you mean by stacking as a movement, Ytman.[quote]

                    I was fumbling for words. I meant that moving in the open in a tight cluster, whether this is in a line or column or chevron etc., isn't a directly beneficial method when potentially exposing the group to the cited force multipliers of enemy airpower, road-killers, tanks, and other enemy infantry who are potentially all around and perhaps in greater quantity.

                    This might be me over anticipating how 'tight' a stack is.

                    Originally posted by starstriker1 View Post
                    A breach does *not* operate under the assumption that you outnumber your opponents (though, of course, it's sound policy). If you're referring to the method of entering in close order and then moving along the walls, the purpose is to get as many guns in play as quickly as possible so that you aren't defeated in detail as you go through the door. Spreading laterally to the direction of contact (IE, along the walls) is to ensure that you don't block friendly fire, don't give easy targets to enemies focused on the doorway, and to give the enemy a more difficult shot by forcing more horizontal movement into their aim if they want to acquire a new target.
                    Any offensive action in order to be successful must have a local superiority in numbers to afford realistic chances of success. This is a tried and true axiom in real life and in PS2 and simply refers to the quantity of weapons. If someone is ordering a breach into a room where numbers are equivalent or larger then one must hope for very significant force multipliers in their favor to counter the enemy's numbers due to defender's advantage. I was more or less just assuming that was the functional purpose of bringing all your squad to bare at one entrance in a breach operation. I'm not trying to critique the breaching method at all (in fact I support it).

                    My concern about applying the 'stack' when moving in urban environments is exactly what you were concerned about in the OP - the openness and lack of a supporting wall. Most urban environments are small and densely packed with buildings. The first things that come to mind are BioLabs, Amps, and Techs. Moving from building to building, or at least utilizing buildings as 'walls' to block lines of sight, should be a valuable aid. However, in most such battles the element we are in is a fraction of the total forces being engaged. With this in mind it is highly likely that a group would attain incredible attention if in a large cluster.

                    The availability of AoE weaponry is quite limitless and the benefit of us having more guns to bare is again mostly voided at large. What I think needs to be focused on is limiting the variables when planing movement. I should have a good video of Sly running us around an AMP station's walls on Esamir and I'll provide it, but I think it is a good demonstration of movement in the open: i.e. it happened at the perimeter of the bulk of enemy troops.

                    Originally posted by starstriker1 View Post
                    I'd argue all these objectives are exactly as valuable when pushing out of a building. Every moment that part of your squad is engaged while the other part is unable to assist drastically increases your odds of losing the fight, and any measure that can reduce attrition when moving through a potentially deadly doorway means that more of your squad will still be up by the time the entire squad has moved through.
                    I'm not suggesting to not move as a group. I'm saying keep some moderate spacing between elements unlike the tighter cluster in a building.

                    Comment

                    Connect

                    Collapse

                    TeamSpeak 3 Server

                    Collapse

                    Advertisement

                    Collapse

                    Twitter Feed

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X