Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

TG and platoons

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

  • TG and platoons

    Not sure if i am correct in this, but a platoon is like 35-50 people right?

    Well, i doubt that in a real military setting that this small group of people would be afforded such things as tanks and the likes. With that aside we can consider that the rally points + tickets and spawn points represents an actual force of a few hundred.

    So... i have been wondering about various tactics which an entire team could employ as of late, especially with the changes brought via .8
    In my time i have observed that each squad works relatively independent of the other squads, and this is good. However, on many maps where two flags are captureable at the same time the squads will split up, 1 squad goes here, 2 squads go there, and 1 squad is randomly walking around. So the general tactic used by the team seams to be "some attack / some defend" which spreads out the amount of fire power quite a bit.

    Here is what i was wondering. On some maps (not all, for example fools road would be a bad idea) i wonder if it would be a good tactic to have the entire team work together, that is move the entire team as a giant unit. The whole unit could define a "front" of some hundreds of meters, perhaps 400-500 or so, with certain squads designated to take certain positions on that front... As an example two squads would be designated to be on the left and right "FLANKS" of the front, while 2 squads are designated to be in the middle. The whole team would then move together, in some type of loosely defined formation. Moving into a flag area and securing it with their overwhelming firepower is what i imagine.
    I feel this would work really well with tanks or APC.

    IN this reguard, real military tactics could actually be used. For it seems from what i have researched in my quick little spree of military history / tactic research i did last week that most armies work from the ground up. For example, in taking a flag you would fire define a very powerful base of fire. Next you would observe what is there, and finally you would send in part of the team to take the flag while the other provides over watch, once your done you would "move the front" so that the flag is behind you and proceed on to the next place. Tactics like we know them in PR, like flanking and the likes, are more "squad leader" tactics, where as the stuff i am talking about is more of a strategy...

    One thing i will say about PR though, you will always need a fast INF squad with a jeep or something which can rush past / sneak past large groups / defenses and take flags, and that no matter what happens this tactic is always going to be useful. The only way i can see it being countered is to have a secondary "fast inf" squad with L-AT or just a 50-cal, and then have observers far out from the front who can inform commander on any flankers, after which the mobile force can go and intercept them before they get to a flag.


    I mean ****, you guys realize that the way we use fire bases is total crap.
    Move a large group up, set rallies, build FB / hmg, define overwatch , send in assault.
    Fire bases to me seem more like "attack positions" which you attack from, not simply back up spawn points.

    A few extra points:

    The whole team does not need to make one solid straight line. Specific parts of the team can break off and define fronts towards a different direction, for example in use during encircling.

    There will always be an assaulting force and an over watch force.

    The key idea is to provide put the entire firepower of the team close together in hopes of either totally overwhelming the opposition, or at least providing a "RELIABLE" base from which to attack them from.

    I acknowledge that putting the entire team together leaves flags easily opened.

    Observation is key. Having forward observers and observers on the flanks is aboslutly necessary for this to work.

    Directing fire is the other key, massive suppressive fire works wonders.
    Just imagine, 20 + people all randomly firing with tanks + 50-cal and APC as well as light arms / grenades. What ever is in there is going to be scared. Even if they are all under cover, that amount of fire power is enough to keep anyones heads down while a small, yet well protected assault force moves in close.
    listen close
    to the rat-tat-tat-
    as the metal flies,
    we should know as fact:
    that unearthly demons
    are part of our pack,
    and as we engage you
    in battle we pass.

  • #2
    Re: TG and platoons

    3 Soldiers are a Team
    4 Teams in a Squad
    3 Squads in a Platoon
    3 Platoons in a Company
    4 Companies in a Battalion
    3 Battalions in a Brigade (Regiment)

    Or between 25–60 Men.
    Randy = Ace ! - Warlab
    Level II Volunteer FireFighter
    Level I HazMat Technician
    NYS EMT-B
    Town of Mamaroneck Fire Dept.

    sigpic




    Bring On Project Reality 1.0!!!
    RSS Feeds:Bamboo | | 9/11 - Never Forget |
    Apophis - "TG was created to cater to a VERY specific type of gamer rather than trying to appeal to the greater gaming population.
    Tactical Gamer is not mainstream.
    We are not trying to attract mainstream gamers."

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: TG and platoons

      For a year and a half I was in a platoon of 350+ people. But it was certainly the exception. ;)
      Last edited by FFLaguna; 10-28-2008, 12:40 PM.
      TG5th USARMY||JeonJiHyeon

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: TG and platoons

        I wish there was a way for SL's to talk to each other, it would insanely increase the cooperation and strategy possibilities in PR.

        Does the BF2 engine even allow this? I'm guessing if it did, PR would have already implemented it.



        Comment


        • #5
          Re: TG and platoons

          Originally posted by Mobius007 View Post
          I wish there was a way for SL's to talk to each other, it would insanely increase the cooperation and strategy possibilities in PR.

          Does the BF2 engine even allow this? I'm guessing if it did, PR would have already implemented it.
          The TG servers already have this capability, it's called TEAMSPEAK.
          |TG-X|Turkish

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: TG and platoons

            Forming a frontline with multiple squads is very effective for clearing forests. Open spaces are usally dominated by strongpoints for which you do not need a frontline but a force that suppresses the enemy and an assaulting force.

            If you see me online leading a squad, give me a shout, and you can count on me for moving up together and being able to be patient while regrouping or consolidating.

            Having reserves would work very well. A squad with 50% losses is less than 50% effective, especially without a SL. If you have reserves you can quickly plug the gap while the reduced squad recovers.

            Perhaps a bit idiotic, but how about putting an asterisk * behind the squad name to indicate that you are motivated to work together. I know that there are plenty of able SLers around, but at least when I am playing teamwork between squads is not rarely seen and I think that is because people just do not expect it. I am going to try that tomorrow morning (Netherlands). I am getting the feeling that my playtime, when there are only 2-4 |TG| players, differs greatly than the one where there are 10-20 |TG| people around.

            p.s. And billy, thanks for the supply drop at Kashan today. Your timing was excellent.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: TG and platoons

              Originally posted by TurkishDelight View Post
              The TG servers already have this capability, it's called TEAMSPEAK.
              Too bad a lot of squad leaders don't use it.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: TG and platoons

                Originally posted by TurkishDelight View Post
                The TG servers already have this capability, it's called TEAMSPEAK.
                -_-, I know. I meant to say built in, sorry.



                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: TG and platoons

                  Originally posted by Mobius007 View Post
                  -_-, I know. I meant to say built in, sorry.
                  Comanders do that job...
                  |TG|
                  ||||


                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: TG and platoons

                    Originally posted by Sonic View Post
                    Comanders do that job...
                    If 2 squad leaders could talk to each other, it would be a lot more effective then having a commander communicate for both squads.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: TG and platoons

                      Originally posted by VividSynergy View Post
                      If 2 squad leaders could talk to each other, it would be a lot more effective then having a commander communicate for both squads.
                      Which brings us back to Teamspeak. :)

                      If your team is fortunate enough to have a CO that likes to be hands-on and relay messages to help coordinate through their plan however, then it's best going through him. It's just to keep your CO in the know.

                      Minor stuff like communication between FAC and CAS, that's what Teamspeak will always be good for.

                      | |

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: TG and platoons

                        Originally posted by MarineSeaknight View Post
                        Which brings us back to Teamspeak. :)

                        If your team is fortunate enough to have a CO that likes to be hands-on and relay messages to help coordinate through their plan however, then it's best going through him. It's just to keep your CO in the know.

                        Minor stuff like communication between FAC and CAS, that's what Teamspeak will always be good for.
                        I know but: =P
                        Originally posted by VividSynergy View Post
                        Too bad a lot of squad leaders don't use it.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: TG and platoons

                          Originally posted by Sonic View Post
                          Comanders do that job...
                          Yes, but like Vivid said, if 2 SLs could talk to each other, would mean one less person to mess up orders, would lead to much better coordination.

                          I should get in on the TS thing haha.



                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: TG and platoons

                            I like the asterisk * thing. I will have it on for sure!
                            ​​​​​​​

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: TG and platoons

                              In PR 2 squads in a platoon I reckon, its been done on TG.
                              In theory you dont have to have voip to do it, tanks often wander off by themselves so if an infantry squad tries to work off their position its usually to their mutual benefit


                              If you find yourself in a fair fight, then you have obviously failed to plan properly.

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X