Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The 3 Fireteam Method

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

  • The 3 Fireteam Method

    http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f138...am-method.html

    tell me what you think


    I am the Infantry FOLLOW ME!!!

  • #2
    Re: The 3 Fireteam Method

    Good attempt but I'd suggest doing something of this difficulty on a map that is easier for your team. Muttrah would come to mind and so would any real INS map. My issue with fire teams is that its just a fancy way of enforcing teamwork and seems to require a good amount of micromanaging. When it comes to it the force shouldn't need anything more than basic attachment and the SLs should be of the mold to be able to adjust to things as a part of the whole.

    I'd love to try this out with you if only for the experience... suggest a TS channel.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The 3 Fireteam Method

      i think the biggest issue more often then not (not specifically on TG) is that squads look at themselves as exclusive entities that are trying to accomplish 1 goal at a time. i.e. "My squad is going to go and take this flag, sq2 why aren't you helping/come help" is usually the flow of communication. It's more based between SL communication then it is from a Strategic standpoint like we see sometimes in Scrims. There is usually not a higher command element saying "Sq1 you should attack from this side, while Sq2 I want you to provide the base of fire/diversion element" (as the example was in the thread Foxxy just posted regarding the L shaped building attack). If there is a CO that is trying to organize a fight, again, its more along the lines of "Sq2 I need your squad to assist Sq1" but they aren't providing a clearer vision of what that squad should do. Should my Squad move to interdict the incoming flow of enemy troops, thereby helping Sq1 take the flag? Should we help Sq1 eliminate the targets in the flag cap? Should my sq move to a higher vantage position to provide overwatch?

      The Fireteam Concept is great, but it requires 1 step higher of communication between the appropriate SL's. I remember being a part of Cougar's squad almost a year ago on one of the chinese maps as we were working with 1 other squad led by Fuzzhead. We rolled through the flags just because while we had 2 SL's, we had 1 person that was more in charge of the whole group.

      Until each SL in our game get's into a more tactical playstyle (which can sometimes happen in PR) with how they want to operate with supporting squads (not "Hey mortars we need fire here...) I'm not sure it'll happen.

      Plus unless its an INF only map, you usually only have 3 INF squads anyway which isn't really realistic when you've got to attack and defend.


      These Things We Do... That Other's May Live

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The 3 Fireteam Method

        well Serjikal the way we did it when we tried is that the overall SL was foxxy commanding the entire group, with each of the fire team leaders in a teamspeak channel with him which is generally where most of the orders were dealt with relating to where the fireteams should go etc which I think is a little essential to this method, so that the SL channel is not being spammed with our in-squad communication. I agree with what you said about not having a higher command element giving a specific order to the squad in most regular situations. In this method, foxxy (the overall SL) eliminates that with ordering exactly how he would like each fireteam to be moving. I do agree with your final point on if its an INF only map, I don't really believe this would work well on a map such as Kashan at least until we possibly get the 128 players in the future but if its the INF layer of a map such as Muttrah as yt said or say Fallujah it might not be realisticly acheivable

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The 3 Fireteam Method

          Actually, in the case of larger server sizes I'd really want to see this implemented. Give it a sort of command structure where the Infantry section is commanded by one specific person who has direct comms with the CO, the Fire Support sections, and the armor recon sections allbeing commanded by seperate persons. This really would grant the CO less headaches.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The 3 Fireteam Method

            3 Fire Teams is not that complicated, if fact its not more complicated than 3 people. You need to think of each fireteam as an entity in itself as someone suggested. Every tactic in this sort of game can be applied to single body entities as well as squads.

            For example you have 3 men in your squad who communicate well and understand position, fire support, suppression and movement. Seriously, this is just as important individually as it is for groups. You assault an objective. Player A is south, he provides suppession. Players B and C assault from South and West. The concept and to a large degree execution is exactly the same for 3 players as it is for 23.

            The sticking point is synchronicity and getting people to follow simple yet critical instructions. Far too often 6 man squads, even ones that rack up kills, have no coordination. They lack fire control, discipline. This failing will be much more apparent with decent player numbers. 64 players is a barren wasteland in terms of the map size etc, there is such a huge margin for error. It's often just glorified hide and seek, you run around the side of your opponent (in an approximation of actual flanking), because you are able to due to lack of players, and then charge at them. It's nonsense.

            With more realistic numbers you would have fire support and less margin for error. You would have fields of fire and limits of exploitation, i.e. Bravo you will not move past the westernmost building at 320, everything past that to the east is a killzone. Once you have to think like that regularly it becomes easy.

            What you do have to achieve is a degree of focus from your squad and clarity in your instructions. They must fire when instructed and keep their sector covered, not scan here there and everywhere because they want the next kill, only to be killed by the guy they didn't spot that was in their sector.

            Multiple fireteams works and will work better with larger numbers. I am guessing that the better players will move in a less random fashion on a higher player count server. Instead they will move when ready, when they have covering fire available. Command of this element works well with a defacto ground commander who sets the objective. His subordinate Sl's run their teams and stay on comms with the ground commander. Squad members operate comms discipline and stay off all nets and local as much as they can. It's about Sl's thinking of their squads as an extension of the individual player, with abilities that an individual player can't have, i.e. 360 degree security, massive firepower. The SL's must be willing to direct that tool, the squad members must be up to being led in that fashion and have their stuff together.

            This sort of thing only works if the squad members buy in, that's the key issue. With a multiple squad/fireteam set up you have a surfeit of leadership, if one leader is quiet another will fill the vacumn or the ground commander will exert more influence. If however the squad members fail to carry our simple but critical instructions in a timely fashion, it's just a blob.
            Last edited by Wicks; 06-04-2011, 10:39 PM.


            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The 3 Fireteam Method

              Originally posted by A.WICKENS View Post
              3 Fire Teams is not that complicated, if fact its not more complicated than 3 people. You need to think of each fireteam as an entity in itself as someone suggested. Every tactic in this sort of game can be applied to single body entities as well as squads.

              For example you have 3 men in your squad who communicate well and understand position, fire support, suppression and movement. Seriously, this is just as important individually as it is for groups. You assault an objective. Player A is south, he provides suppession. Players B and C assault from South and West. The concept and to a large degree execution is exactly the same for 3 players as it is for 23.

              The sticking point is synchronicity and getting people to follow simple yet critical instructions. Far too often 6 man squads, even ones that rack up kills, have no coordination. They lack fire control, discipline. This failing will be much more apparent with decent player numbers. 64 players is a barren wasteland in terms of the map size etc, there is such a huge margin for error. It's often just glorified hide and seek, you run around the side of your opponent (in an approximation of actual flanking), because you are able to due to lack of players, and then charge at them. It's nonsense.

              With more realistic numbers you would have fire support and less margin for error. You would have fields of fire and limits of exploitation, i.e. Bravo you will not move past the westernmost building at 320, everything past that to the east is a killzone. Once you have to think like that regularly it becomes easy.

              What you do have to achieve is a degree of focus from your squad and clarity in your instructions. They must fire when instructed and keep their sector covered, not scan here there and everywhere because they want the next kill, only to be killed by the guy they didn't spot that was in their sector.

              Multiple fireteams works and will work better with larger numbers. I am guessing that the better players will move in a less random fashion on a higher player count server. Instead they will move when ready, when they have covering fire available. Command of this element works well with a defacto ground commander who sets the objective. His subordinate Sl's run their teams and stay on comms with the ground commander. Squad members operate comms discipline and stay off all nets and local as much as they can. It's about Sl's thinking of their squads as an extension of the individual player, with abilities that an individual player can't have, i.e. 360 degree security, massive firepower. The SL's must be willing to direct that tool, the squad members must be up to being led in that fashion and have their stuff together.

              This sort of thing only works if the squad members buy in, that's the key issue. With a multiple squad/fireteam set up you have a surfeit of leadership, if one leader is quiet another will fill the vacumn or the ground commander will exert more influence. If however the squad members fail to carry our simple but critical instructions in a timely fashion, it's just a blob.
              I think I'm going to quote this for an upcoming course.... such... correctness!
              Last edited by Wicks; 06-04-2011, 10:40 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The 3 Fireteam Method

                I can see this being an effective method of infantry operations on a 128 player server.

                sigpic

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The 3 Fireteam Method

                  Has any one got footage of this in action somewhere ?
                  RIP Spc Daniel Gomez July 18 2007
                  Adhamiyah, Iraq
                  1-26IN 2BCT 1ID

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I might let me have a look see.

                    sent from the phone using magic
                    doYouEvenLuftwaffe

                    Comment

                    Connect

                    Collapse

                    TeamSpeak 3 Server

                    Collapse

                    Advertisement

                    Collapse

                    Twitter Feed

                    Collapse

                    Working...
                    X