No announcement yet.

Total Fire superiority

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Total Fire superiority

    As all TG players know, fireteams can be utilised to great affect. However the BF2 engine limits squads to 6 men and therefore a max of 3 men on average per fireteam.
    Due to the semi realistic nature of PR firearms, any player is capable of killing mulitple enemies at both close range and medium. This combined with high levels of similar team work and organization (namely 4+ players sticking and working together), a 3 man fireteam is extremely vunerable to being totaly anilated (no nice way of putting it! heheee), however carefull they are with their use of tactics.

    Therefore an increase in fireteam size would be beneficial for overall fireteam and squad survial but also for both squad organization and tactics.

    SO how you ask can this be done, well just go on and read the below:

    I propose the use of use of external VOIP software (namely TS becuase TG already has a server and it is the most popular amung most players) to create a single squad TS channel and the creation of 2 – 4 man squads in the game itself but with the 2 squads using the same TS channel, equating to 8 players on the same TS channel.
    The idea is to reflect the almost total, modern day use of separate fire teams among small groups of soldiers, where communication between fire teams can take place fairly easily.

    Each separate squad represents 1 fire team, with 2 fire teams in total. For ease of naming I suggest, one is called Fire team Alpha (FA) and the other, Fire team Bravo (FB).
    The actual name displayed on the squad list, for FA I suggest is S1 – FA (Squad 1 – Fire team Alpha) and for FB I suggest is S1 – FB (Squad 1 – Fire team Bravo).

    This enable other non “Squad 1” players (those not on the S1 TS channel) to easily identify that the 2 supposedly different squads are actually working as one squad.

    All players with in "Squad 1" are also totaly clear as to which fire team they are in.
    Having no more than 4 in each Fireteam, means a maximum of around 8 players and this is probaly the max number of players that can effectively use 1 channel. This is a increase over the present 6 man squad number but the possible minor decrease in the overall standard of communication is, i believe, totaly made up for in the gain of 2 extra players and the very rigid formation of 2 fireteams.

    Those unfumilia with fireteams or how to use them, here are some ideas/reasonS:

    Fire teams are nothing unless the players know how to take advantage of the simple fact, of the squad being able to focus on 2 different objectives, however similar or different and have a significant and equal number of men engage each objective. This being the principle point of fire teams.

    With out realizing the above, the squad’s only possible advantage is that of numbers over the enemy and we all know that is never enough to be successful and therefore all the effort put into organizing the 2 fire teams becomes worthless!

    Therefore we must consider in advance the most appropriate tactics to utilize the 2 objective model, with in the present build of PR, not reality. Failure to recognize the distinctions between game and reality results in tactics not being totally designed for the PR environment.

    Below I have given a precise explanation of one of the main tactics (are a few) and I have tried to explain it in the simplest possible terms.

    (1) Suppress THEN Move

    Made up of 2 objectives:
    1) Suppressing the enemy, FB’s Responsibility - stopping them from firing at you by making them think it is to dangerous for them to expose them self’s and fire.

    Vital kits: Support gunner – his ability to fire for long periods of time.

    Stages: FB moves to a location where there is cover but they can also fire easily on to the enemy’s position.
    A single area is selected using a map marker (area example: wall, building/s, construction site or even 50m line).
    All of FB begin firing at the same time and do so until either FA enters their line of fire or FA have completed their objective or it is safe for FB to advance with out fire support.

    Smoke – Imperative that IF the enemy will become or are aware of, in particular FA’s movement or future movement, every smoke the squad has is placed on top of and just in front of the enemy – obscuring their view as much as possible, thus unable to return accurate fire again you.

    2) Moving onto the enemy’s position or a specific location near (example: high ground over looking the enemy position) FA’s Responsibility – gain the advantage of a
    NEW position, be it a cleared out flag area or roof top.

    Vital kits: Ones with Frag grenades but NO snipers or marksmen.

    Stages: An objective is selected using a map marker.
    FA moves to a position where FB can cover them with fire and smoke but also where they can reach their objective the safest. This often means flanking – coming around from the side.
    Once FB begins suppressing and smoke is up, FA moves from their cover towards
    the objective.
    FA secures area, allowing FB to move up safely.

    Frags (un-line) – Imperative that any suspected enemy position is “fragged” before any of
    FA move on to it – even a near miss causes serious blurring of vision for the enemy and
    thus makes them easier to kill for a very short period.


    It is Vital that all players with in the squad are on TS, however at present most players are not ready to join a TS channel, either becuase they do not have TS or they cannot see any reason to do so.

    Solution: This threads attempt to outline the reasoning for its use and the contiunued perserverance of myself and other TS users trying to organize the above idea on the TG server only.

    MAny will recognise this thread from the PR forums, however after speaking to many in-agme on the TG server, it appears, few read the PR forum but do check the TG alot. Therefore it seemed more appropriate to post it here aswell, considering i will only try the above on the TG server.


    They attempt to understand the idea and the reasoning behind it.

    They show respect to any that attempt to implament this on the TG server - in that they do not intentionaly make negative comments or take physical actions with the intent or without to hamper efforts to organize it (no mocking please - i have had it else where! lol, NOT!)

    I HOPE:

    Some will be able to actively participate, by joining the given TS server and any connected squad and bringing a highly possative attitude.

    Imput ideas and constructive critisms to help improve the organization and use of it.



    8:30 pm GMT most nights through out the week, and around miday to the evening on the weekends.

    PS. I AM SURE I HAVE MISSED SOME THING REALLY IMPORTANT out so please, ask and many questionings as you can think of. Any thought, problem, anything about the above, please do not hesitate to mention.
    Last edited by Top Cat AJA; 03-08-2007, 03:10 PM.

    TG-E1st TacticalGamer European Division |

  • #2
    Re: Total Fire superiority

    Using an external communication tool will be detrimental to the overall cohesion of tactics on a PUBLIC server. This may be a good idea on a PRIVATE server, or a SCRIMMAGE, but with 64 different players joining, and not all of them knowing or caring about TS, this will just cut off many of them.

    3) Support game play in a near-simulation environment. Where the focus of play would not be solely on doing what it takes to win, but doing so utilizing real-world combat strategy and tactics rather than leveraging exploits provided to players by the design of the game engine.


    • #3
      Re: Total Fire superiority

      I have achieved the above once on the TG server and all players enjoyed it.

      Not all players had TS at that, however mixed use of VOIP and TS is difficult, however it does not toaly excluded non TS users.

      PLayers simpily log on to the TS server when they join a squad trying the above and log out when they are finished.

      @Tempus: THis idea posted on the PR forums got responces form TG members, and 1 suggested this actual site to me - therefore it seems odd that it should be recieved so differently here!

      Once you get the players on TS, i am extremely confident i can organzied the tactical side, therefore, all players would be albe to take part in and learn serious tactics and ofcourse have a great time, is this not what TG is about.

      I have tried this on other servers, but have quite simply been mocked! I came to TG hoping to recieve the opposite. I am not out to undermine tactics or overall gameplay but to advance and developt the ALREADY EXISTING TACTICS/systems and ideas used SO MUCH BY TG MEMBERS already!

      TG-E1st TacticalGamer European Division |


      • #4
        Re: Total Fire superiority

        Hey Topcat! It was a pleasure serving under you today! (This guy is a top notch SL!) I think that TS is really just too much for day-in day-out usage however. Perhaps if you want to organize fireteams, you should just have the FTL's communicate in TS. (And if you're going to do it on the TG server, at least use TG TS - since many players are already on there... it's just too hard getting 8 people to dial up the proper IP, etc)

        I think the perfect compromise is if the two FTL's communicate with eachother using TS... but intrasquad-comms remains VOIP.

        Also - you should check this thread out: and get involved (or help plan) another 'event' like that... where everyone knows the drill...



        • #5
          Re: Total Fire superiority


          Kudos for trying to get more teamwork and more realistic gameplay with the mod.

          teamspeak is an excellent tool to do that.

          However, we will need more time and take baby steps before using such a set-up.

          I recommend a channel for COs and SLs to use during random play and see from there.

          This would be a good first step.

          however, seeing how we are recieving a large influx of players (myself included, hehe) with .5, I believe it is best to wait and let things thin out a while.

          Once we can proof that having a CO and SL channel can work during random play we can evolve from there.

          Again, do not think your work is not respected. It is.

          We just need the server population to calm down, and take things slowly.


          I may be starting some light scrims soon, there we can experinment with your set-up, and play PR to the extreme!

          Hope to see you this weekend at the Rally.
          (PO3) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Member
          (CPO) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Leader
          (LCDR) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Commander

          Squad Member pledge to their SL:
          Squad Leader pledge to their team:
          Commander pledge to their SL:


          • #6
            Re: Total Fire superiority

            Don't think that your idea will be mocked here, as it's a good one overall. In fact, we have tried a similar idea in the past (having a TS channel for squadleaders to facilitate inter-squad communication).

            There are a few problems that come from the reality of things, however.

            1. Public server, and not everyone knows about the TS server or has TS.
            2. Joe Random is not likely to know the proper etiquette for our TS server (I don't look forward to hearing "I totally pwned that chopper!")
            3. It is extremely hard to organize yet one more channel of comms, especially when you add "pubbies" into the mix.

            We did try this before with SL channels for each respective team. It pretty much failed completely due to organizational problems, and this was solely with TG community members. I don't see it working any better with people from the public. The only group that I know of that's achieved success with this idea is the 1st MIP group within TG, and that's because they have dedicated members and procedures (they train, basically).

            So, again, good idea overall, I just don't think it's a realistic expectation.
            "I am the prettiest african-american, vietnamese..cong..person." -SugarNCamo


            • #7
              Re: Total Fire superiority

              Not intotal context but just posted on the PRM forums:

              fully understnad you reasoning behind the use of VOIP and allowing new players to fully enjoy PR.

              I have been playing PR for a year, however i only started using VOIP about 3 months ago. However, the 9 months previous allowed me to fully plan the use of fireteams with in 6 man squads using VOIP.
              HOwever i have reached a stage now, where even this bores me due to the lack of tactical possibilities, direclty related to the limited no. of players.

              The use of TS poses many problems, as you are aware. The 2 main are:
              - Actualy having the software or not
              - Having access to a appropriate server.

              In terms of TS access, i have found on the TG server, that over half of thsoe using VOIP have TS and those that do not, i have perswaded (heheeee) to get it. The number using VOIP is also extremely high with over 2 out of 3 i would say.
              Therefore, the numbers excluded from play with in squad would be significant over the next few days, but give it a week of players joining and me explaining them the wonders of THE TG FORUMS, ts and fireteams, most that do not should have it swifely.
              SO in the long run, the exclusion of players due to lack of TS should not be a problem - will always be double the no. of squads not using TS.

              The issue ot actauly TS server is more of a short term problem. Getting 8 players all on the same TS is difficult to say the least at the moment, again it will improve in the long run once people save the address.
              MY reluctance to suggest the TG is for the above post reason and the fact, a serious number are not members.
              IF TG is the only allow TS server, this will affectivley make implamentation at the moment, impossible.

              HOWEVER once things are up and running, a change over could be done very quickly and easily to the TG server (getting standard TS players to join TG forum).

              So overall, i believe i have fully considered the implications of using TS but i beileve the long term befits will wipe the floor of the short term disadavantages. Long term = 2 weeks +.

              So i ask you, can i use the given PRM TS server for the next week or so, a short as time is phyically possible to get this up and running becuase i see NO OTHER of getting this going - I do not have the energy/time/support to wait for ever to get this going, NOw or never. Thanks, TG SERVER ROCKS!

              Hope this answers you question about TS.

              So - Over 1 year of PR means i am ready, ARE YOU????? - You = YOU and every TG player out there, YOU are the new players, old.

              I EITHER THROUGH ABSOLUTELY Everything in NOW and continue trying for a few week every night or.........*snoors*.

              THE MINimum: 6 peeps on TS and 2 non VOIP - THAT IS NOTHING - if it where, i would not be talking to you about this.

              OK: another reason: I dont think slow evolution will work for the big sweeping changes i am looking for. I am for democracy (not dictatored change) and i know it is the only SUSTAINABLE way to create change, but in this case i am absolutely sure that this big step must be taken and i believe truely i can carry it through but with out you i can do nothing.

              It is a difficult situation, and relies more on trust than many things else, trust that it will work and TopCAt can do it............Trust, hmm..... Your throw, i am all out of ideas!

              TG-E1st TacticalGamer European Division |


              • #8
                Re: Total Fire superiority

                Top Cat,

                Good to see your discussions on TG forums (I was the one inviting you here and I am glad I did).

                Dont worry. You are at the right place. In time you will see that for someone who has ambition to develop systems, methods, procedures and tactics TG provides everything.

                If I may, here is the feedback I wanted to give:

                There is a huge practical difficulty in bringing 8 people into a teamspeak channel. Even if it can be done easily, 8 people for a single comm channel is too much. Based on my experience, I would suggest: a) Find just one person who will be leading a squad on your team b) Get into a TS channel with this allied SL. Lets say you wanted to cooperate with a 1stMIP SL, you can join 1stMIP TS channel and coordinate with his squad.


                What is our TS policy on channel creation? Wouldn't it be a good solution to suggest Top Cat to create a TG TS channel for his squad, under teams subchannel. He can then send a text message and invite SLs who are interested to his squad channel. I would definitely join him.


                • #9
                  Re: Total Fire superiority

                  A couple of things based on your post Top Cat... just my own thoughts BTW, not a reflection on the TG admin teams.

                  1.) Not to sound like a jerk, but I don't think there's any other way of saying this: TG isn't a democracy. What the game admins feel is best (based, of course, on conditions on the server and suggestions in the forums) is what will end up happening.

                  2.) At TG, we try to adhere as closely to real world tactics in the limitations of the game engine. Real world tactics include Chain of Command. The BF2 engine nicely simulates this by providing SL's direct VOIP contact with CO's and with squad members. This provides an easy (if a bit akward sometimes) coordination between multiple squads on the battlefield. When you add the element of TS to try to coordinate multiple squads, a number of things happen - the CO starts to lose a certain level of control over the direction of squads on the battlefield, and people who are not on TS for whatever reason cannot participate in the tactics going on at the squad level. Some people can't run TS in the background because their computers are not up to par.
                  "No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country.
                  He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."

                  - Attributed to General George Patton, Jr.


                  • #10
                    Re: Total Fire superiority

                    Originally posted by John CANavar View Post
                    There is a huge practical difficulty in bringing 8 people into a teamspeak channel. Even if it can be done easily, 8 people for a single comm channel is too much.


                    Well at the moment, when not trying to use TS, i have been asking all VOIP players whether they have TS and what are their opinions on using it and a basic brief of my idea.

                    This will take a few for days or longer, but i intend to get an idea as to how many people would be willing to use it.
                    SO far so good, with more players than i said above having TS, last squad was all 4 players out of 4 having it.

                    When it comes to communicating the difficulties of so many voises talking over TS, below is a previous quote of my self in the FireTeam Thread on the PR forum:

                    I do understand the complications of large numbers of players communicating on the same channel however i did mention in the orginal post that it is a small sacrafise worth taking.

                    But there are methods to reduce confusion over the air ways:

                    1) Learn to regonise FA leader and FB leaders voise. FB leader being the SL for all the men.

                    2) Keep communications short and simple, for example: 1 man from FA dies, he then says: "FA, one south east of SL, pulling back" .
                    This 8 word sentance, has clearly stated which players much listen and the location of an emeny that killed a player already and his status (enemy getting closer or retreating ext.)
                    RATHER THAN(please avoid saying the below, heheeee)
                    1 player from FA dies, then his cousins brothers sisters uncle, who married... says "O sht, i am down, i think the guy who got me is to the south east of your possition squad leader and ..........yer, he is running away towards that tree...."

                    THerefore, it is quite simple and extremely quick to communicate large ammounts of information over 1 channel and if all players communicate in such a way, the many problems that are already appearent in a 6 man squad (too much chatter from S memebers and CO) should actualy decrease, even with the introduction of an extra 2 men.

                    Like all things, it will take practise but deffientrly poffisible.

                    In regards to the SL channel, it sounds great and alot mroe simple. I wont lie, but for the moment i will hammer on with my idea but give it a few days (LOL - saying that forevery thing) and i will give it a go. And by then, i should have recruited some more TG members who ahve access to the TG TS Server.


                    - 70 % + of players are TG forum members on the TG server
                    - 40 % + uptake on SL channel
                    - 15 % + uptake on the 8 man squad

                    Date: June 1st.
                    Last edited by Top Cat AJA; 03-08-2007, 04:58 PM.

                    TG-E1st TacticalGamer European Division |


                    • #11
                      Re: Total Fire superiority


                      There seems to be a confusion here. There is absolutely nothing wrong if a SL playing on our server wants to get in contact with an allied SL in a TS channel. Even in the presence of a CO. One of these cooperating SLs can contact CO and request to receive orders for both squads. That's it. If CO has good reasons not to allow it, then they operate independently. So far, none of my requests were declined by a CO.


                      • #12
                        Re: Total Fire superiority

                        Good Luck Top Cat,

                        Please keep us informed and share your experience/protocols. There is not a single solution to such problems and I hope you develop a solid, practical and efficient protocol in the shortest time possible.


                        • #13
                          Re: Total Fire superiority

                          Originally posted by Evo<^|SiNz|^> View Post
                          The BF2 engine nicely simulates this by providing SL's direct VOIP contact with CO's and with squad members. This provides an easy (if a bit akward sometimes) coordination between multiple squads on the battlefield. When you add the element of TS to try to coordinate multiple squads, a number of things happen - the CO starts to lose a certain level of control over the direction of squads on the battlefield, and people who are not on TS for whatever reason cannot participate in the tactics going on at the squad level. Some people can't run TS in the background because their computers are not up to par.
                          Well If you have another look at some of my above posts, i think i have done my jolly best to explain that the TS situations is much less of a problem, and also note Long Term point.

                          When it comes to TS and VOIP intergration:
                          - I have to calibrate my VOIP before every time i start PR and i will always do this, till i stop playing PR. THis simple action, show i am willing to put the time into to make sure i can use VOIP and TS will not change this.
                          - In all 8 man squad attmepts, TS and VOIP have been used side by side, not particularly well but still, neither prevents the use of one another and in this case, they complement each other, to raise the level of communication.
                          Therefore, using VOIP to communicate to the CO but TS to squad mates should not be a problem. Reverting to "old ways" will never be a problem becuase most certaily 2 out of 3 games will still use VOIP only.
                          Commanders really ONLY communicate with squad leaders, nad becuase TS does not interfear with this, i see no reason why the CO should loose any level of control of his squads.
                          IN many respects he will have Squads with GREAT TACTICAL POSSIBILITIES and therefore a more potent and powerfull force.
                          8 man squads is all about making squads more powerfull - and if the squad is more powerfull, so is the commander. Every thing is done in relation with the affect = higher chance of out flanking and out gunning the enemy (see Fireteam usage example in Orginal post).

                          CUT TO CHASE:

                          Will be creating squad called "TEAMSPEAK1" when i am seriosu about 8man squad, i tell players about the TG forum and joining it, TS and how and why to get it, and if they do not have it, i will appologise hugely and say they can stick around but they wil have more fun in a "normal" VOIP Squad. I will not kick if they dont have TS - i hate kicking but i will explain clearly what i am trying to do and hopefull those with TS wil join server and stay and those with out with come running back in a day or hour with TS! LOL

                          So, any chance, a few players on this forum, can say HERE AND NOW they will keep an eye out of TEAMSPEAK1 squad and consider joining it with TS AT THE READY?????????????????????????

                          TG-E1st TacticalGamer European Division |


                          • #14
                            Re: Total Fire superiority

                            No, but we came through the Jack Abramoff school of lobbying together and copied off each other a lot.

                            Jack, our Master was impressed with our style, but said we sucked as lobbyist.

                            To quote him:

                            "You two working at full capacity could not even sale a glass of water to a man walking through a desert."

                            Yeah, Jack and the class got a good laugh out of that on.

                            /Ric starts stomping the ground while looking down/
                            BUT WHO'S LAUGHING NOW, UHH? UHH?

                            (PO3) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Member
                            (CPO) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Leader
                            (LCDR) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Commander

                            Squad Member pledge to their SL:
                            Squad Leader pledge to their team:
                            Commander pledge to their SL:


                            • #15
                              Re: Total Fire superiority

                              The idea is a good one and worthy of exploration. There isn't anything to restrict players from attempting to organize and communicate via TS. What we will still require is that the squad(s) using TS aren't cut off from the chain of command.

                              TG has explored using TS as an extension to VoIP. We can explore the option again.

                              One of the biggest draw-backs to overall adoption is that some players are technically not able to run teamspeak and BF2 at the same time. One or the other ends up not working.
                              |TG-12th| asch




                              TeamSpeak 3 Server


                              Twitter Feed