Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

So, are flags a waste of time?

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

  • So, are flags a waste of time?

    It has been my experience that my squad, and my team, does significantly better when we focus on killing the enemy instead of capturing flags.

    Bleed seems to play nearly no consequence Squad currently. I strongly doubt that bleed even exists.
    Note: bleed meaning the enemy loses tickets when our team holds the majority of the flags. Say, 3/5 on the map.

    Moreover, the majority of our (easily preventable) deaths are from attacking flags. So I ask other people who have SL'd ... is capturing flags worth it?

    It's true that destroying an enemy FOB or capturing their flag loses 10 tickets for them. But do any of us honestly think we can capture a flag without 10 deaths? It's not a matter of competence, or teamwork - just the sheer number of enemies. So if you're not getting a return on your investment in attacking - why do it? What am I missing?

    The way I stand right now - and this is a complete 180* shift coming from BF - I'm strongly inclined to ignore flags, and simply put my squads in a place where they can murder, and keep murdering, the enemy squads. To be effective in wining firefights, not be effective at capturing flags.

    Am I wrong?

    Is the game in such an early stage that bleed hasn't been thought through?
    Am I making a logical mistake?

    I'm all for criticizing the above train of thought - go nuts - I just feel if I want my team to win, attacking flags is probably the wrong call to make.

  • #2
    So, are flags a waste of time?

    I agree with your post somewhat. But I think that turning a flag to neutral loses the enemy 10 tickets and capturing it fully losses them another 10 tickets. So, 20 total.

    While capturing a FOB/Destroying it loses the team 10 tickets.

    The issue then becomes the balance of taking out FOBs while maintaining defensive positions on flags you hold while at the same time turning flags that are less fully defended.

    In many maps there are 3 flags in play at any one time. So to competently defend 3 flags you'd need 3 squads on defense at a minimum. Assuming you can get enough communication going to have squads actually working together. That leaves 3 squads to attack or roam aimlessly around the map.

    Squad is kind of like herding cats to some degree. Getting the team working together is key... Thankfully. We at TG are pretty good at that.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: So, are flags a waste of time?

      I don't necessarily disagree at all with your premise, Zhohar. Flags are currently a mechanic to try to focus the fighting. Tickets are just a "timer" to determine when a round comes to a conclusion.

      However, I'm very confident that this is not a design flaw in the game as much as it is just a function of where the game is currently at in development. Sprint speeds are up, stamina is up, flags are close. This is a function of not having vehicles or transportation other than your own two feet. Once vehicles and logistics make their way in to the game, I believe that bleed will be introduced and more prevalent. Flags will be more spaced and hold greater importance, as losing one will force an entire team to shift their logistics/spawns quickly to hold the line.

      As Zhohar has suggested, right now it is of more value to your team to flank an enemy, find their spawn location and bring the fight to them there instead of on a flag. Flags tend to be focused on compounds that end up being a kill zone for defenders that are trapped within the confines of that compound.

      I'm looking forward to the evolution in strategies that the changes in this game will bring as it continues to be developed and new features are introduced.

      "You milsim guys are ruining the game."

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: So, are flags a waste of time?

        Originally posted by disposableHero View Post
        I'm looking forward to the evolution in strategies that the changes in this game will bring as it continues to be developed and new features are introduced.
        Zho and Disp...so happy to see discussions like this evolving so early in this title's life at TG. You guys are light years ahead of me on the tactics...I'm still digesting the game mechanics and really just following Sl's around the map and trying to keep myself and others alive as long as possible. I can see a time in the future leading squads and this manna from heaven so keep it coming.

        On the topic...as long as bleed isn't the tipping point then I can see your point and strategy easily as a good one. Getting the mechanics down for a true op between two squads with a real blocking force in place to wipe out an enemy squad and spawn area is something to really look forward to. One or two squads to sweep and one or two as the blocking force. In theory this makes great sense but it will take a TG or TG like crowd to work. Getting those squads off the flags will take some persuasion at first.

        Tactically I see elimination of the enemy spawn points and rallys as a key to victory so this totally makes sense.
        sigpic
        |TG-1st|Grunt
        ARMA Admin (retired)
        Pathfinder-Spartan 5

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: So, are flags a waste of time?

          Some clarification before I forget:
          - Flags cost your enemy 20 points when capped (no points for neutralizing)
          - All maps have a fast ticket bleed on the last flag, so if you can cap out your enemy you will undoubtedly win.

          The only gameplay mode that has a bleed for intermediary flags is Territory Control. In that, which ever team has the most flags will very slowly bleed the other team. You can also attack any flag and have to defend every flag you control, so no linear flag set-up like in AAS.

          As Dispo said, flags are a way to focus the fighting but are not meant to be the only place for action. We fully expect one squad defending, one or two attacking, and another one or two taking out enemy FOB and maneuvering for strategic positions. Just don't ignore the flags completely because 1) you'll lose 20 tickets and 2) you'll find yourself completely out of position as the enemy team moves across the terrain and onto your next flag.




          Comment


          • #6
            Re: So, are flags a waste of time?

            Originally posted by AFsoccer View Post
            - All maps have a fast ticket bleed on the last flag, so if you can cap out your enemy you will undoubtedly win.
            It's not THAT fast. At least, not what we're used to from PR's red bleed flags. I think IronTaxi said something about adjusting the bleed rate on the last flag. That and adding a main base dome of death protection to mitigate main base spawn camping which has been a problem.
            YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/user/DesmoLocke
            Twitch - http://www.twitch.tv/desmolocke/profile

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: So, are flags a waste of time?

              Originally posted by DesmoLocke View Post
              That and adding a main base dome of death protection to mitigate main base spawn camping which has been a problem.
              Does increasing bleed rate for flags lost closer to the main base fix this issue? In the games I've been a part of that had spawn camping, it was because one team was winning by a landslide. I feel like when one team is far enough ahead to spawn camp without any sort of detriment, the issue can be fixed by a mechanic that ends the game when one team is ahead by an insurmountable margin.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: So, are flags a waste of time?

                Spawn camping won't be an issue once we are able to protect the main bases with a dome. This should be part of the January update.




                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: So, are flags a waste of time?

                  Originally posted by AFsoccer View Post
                  Spawn camping won't be an issue once we are able to protect the main bases with a dome. This should be part of the January update.
                  Good. There are a few bases where spawn camping occurs during a cap out, but part of it is the proximity of the main to the first flag and another factor is that the mains are not easily discerned from other compounds. I'm sure that mains will be placed much further back once vehicles are introduced.

                  "You milsim guys are ruining the game."

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: So, are flags a waste of time?

                    If it plays like Project Reality did and it sounds like it does, then objective is not to capture the next flag. The objective is to get enough logistics(fast movers, automobiles/helicopters) and reinforcement points(firebases) so that you can capture all the flags in quick succession. The people responsible for the "logistics and firebases" usually end up attempting to avoid all combat. It is not as exciting as getting into the large firefight so it is not as likely to be done. If you destroy the enemy firebases near the points before you move to capture them it makes it easier still.

                    What are the requirements to destroy a reinforcement point in squad?
                    Last edited by Namebot; 12-30-2015, 04:06 PM. Reason: clarified "this"
                    |TG-12th| Namebot

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: So, are flags a waste of time?

                      I think we have to bear in mind that this is early days as regards everything, including mechanics. I fully expect bleed and territory control to play a much bigger part in deciding games as Squad develops. My theory both supports and refutes Namebot's supposition regarding PR as it's entirely situation dependent.

                      For example it was possible to push hard for a cap out relatively early on but it had to be pretty well organised and as Namebot suggests you had to have all your ducks in a row as regards logistics and reinforcement, no small task. In addition pushing multiple objectives simultaneously meant you could bring less forces to bear on each point, you were pushing a long, thin line into contested territory, which by definition was extremely fragile. It is relatively easy, if you communicate and react decisively, to isolate each forward group and cause massive casualties by bringing double the force to bear on each flag they had raced to.

                      It then became in essence a race between their flag induced bleed and your attrition bleed. To do this you need to roll as more of a group, your mass vs their smaller spearheads, hit them, clean the flag and let your back elements cap as you push onto the next flag. You also need to create FOBs as you go to enable you to maintain momentum and replace any casualties on your side. That kind of fight was actually quite interesting as each strategy was very different and to some degree it boiled down to conviction and execution.

                      The 'GO Fast' spearhead type strategy could work in PR but was generally more successful against less organised teams. It was also inherently fragile as mentioned and quite bold. If it failed it failed big and any early lead created by rapid capping could easily be surrendered to casualty bleed as your forces were dotted all over the map. Spearhead groups would run often run into slower moving but numerically superior elements and get routed. If their FOBS were taken down then they were reduced to spawning at the nearest available flag (if they persist in the 'Fast' strategy). This rendered them easier to pinpoint and mitigated some of their designed advantage, mobile/hard to locate etc.

                      I have seen a lot of 'Go Fast' teams crumble, largely through a collapse of morale followed by disintegration/breakdown of cohesion, due to hitting larger elements. As Namebot points out a lot of the Spearhead forces time is spent out of the battle, attempting to maneuver. If you are another Spearhead squad and meet a larger enemy element head on and get wiped it can be frustrating to see someone miles up the map "Not helping". The recriminations start then the forward squad reluctantly pulls back to help. This doubles their time in no man's land and off the flag, which is the antithesis of their purpose. They've sacrificed direct combat by design to cap. If they fall back and don't secure the objective they were out of the fight on the way there, failed in their mission and out of the fight on the return journey until they arrive at the previous flag.

                      Creating this situation as the 'defending' team is actually what you're looking for to some degree. Disrupt the momentum, use their fractured, fragile nature against them and slowly march up the map eliminating them with your weight of numbers. Used to be a very interesting dynamic and I'm looking forward to seeing all the different strategies and tactics evolve as Squad matures.
                      Last edited by Wicks; 12-30-2015, 03:20 PM.


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: So, are flags a waste of time?

                        Wicks that is an awesome post. Anyone interested in the bigger picture needs to read the post above.
                        sigpic
                        |TG-1st|Grunt
                        ARMA Admin (retired)
                        Pathfinder-Spartan 5

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: So, are flags a waste of time?

                          I think you've misunderstood one of my vague terms, I've clarified it in the above post.
                          |TG-12th| Namebot

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: So, are flags a waste of time?

                            Originally posted by Wicks View Post
                            Creating this situation as the 'defending' team is actually what you're looking for to some degree. Disrupt the momentum, use their fractured, fragile nature against them and slowly march up the map eliminating them with your weight of numbers. Used to be a very interesting dynamic and I'm looking forward to seeing all the different strategies and tactics evolve as Squad matures.
                            Coming at it from a BF2142 perspective, this is actually incredibly easy to do, and it's why I suspect we don't see an entire team rushing a flag together. All it takes is two guys to flank your assault from the back and mow down a couple of people to stop an assault. In fact, mass frontal assaults are just so incredibly hard in this game because of stamina and medic system.

                            I used to rush flags like it was BF, but now I take a more relaxed and effective approach. I'll instruct my squads to just kill people, and move slow. If we get the flag, great. If not, great, keep killing them.

                            This has three important benefits.
                            1. Less squad chatter. The more people talk in a squad, the harder it is to focus on effectively killing the enemy.
                            2. Less 'FLAG FLAG FLAG' mentality. The more relaxed people are about objectives, the more likely they are to make smart decisions in combat. No one in their right mind is going to rush an open field near a contested flag, but if you make the squad's focus 'FLAG FLAG FLAG', people start doing silly things like that.
                            3. My squads live longer, and have more fun. When you remove the 'FLAG FLAG FLAG' mentality, people naturally start doing smart things, like shooting grenades from highground and then manouvering to a different position, throwing grenades over walls instead of peeking doors and windows, etc.

                            This is just an evolution of squad tactics. Rushing does not work. No matter how clever a plan is to rush a flag, no matter how much concealment and cover you have, rushing a flag is nearly never the right call in my opinion.

                            Instead, I now simmer down, and let people go at it loose. Let them go a 100m away from the squad to get an elevated ACOG or GP position. Let them flank around a field and disperse the squad. Let them slow down, focus on having free stamina. It seems to work better.

                            In fact, the most effective way to take a flag I've seen, is to have two squads hit it from different directions.
                            The enemy just can't handle that level of coordination at this point, and one of the squads nearly always stays alive, while the other dies. On Kohat especially, as US attacking Bahadur fields with either Nix or Baron SLing the other squad, it's almost absurdly easy to take the flag while two squads come at it from a different position. Even losing a FOB on the Insurgent side of the river, and getting my squad nearly wiped is not enough to stop us. It's just too damn hard to defend against 18 people coming from two angles.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: So, are flags a waste of time?

                              Originally posted by Zhohar View Post
                              In fact, the most effective way to take a flag I've seen, is to have two squads hit it from different directions.
                              The enemy just can't handle that level of coordination at this point, and one of the squads nearly always stays alive, while the other dies. On Kohat especially, as US attacking Bahadur fields with either Nix or Baron SLing the other squad, it's almost absurdly easy to take the flag while two squads come at it from a different position. Even losing a FOB on the Insurgent side of the river, and getting my squad nearly wiped is not enough to stop us. It's just too damn hard to defend against 18 people coming from two angles.
                              This is as it was in PR, rushing decent teams does not work or at least it shouldn't. This is why PR had such a long life at TG and why I think Squad will eventually surpass that (fingers crossed). A degree more realism in a game means you have to use realistic tactics. Why because they are battle tested. They work. Weight of numbers, communication and coordination will win the day. Being able to shoot and move as individuals is a desirable skill but games like Squad are much less susceptible to being 'gamed' because of designed limiting factors like stamina, lethality, map size.

                              Really loving the fact you are theory crafting Zhohar and approaching Squad with that ole tactical/strategic/analytical head on, makes great reading, interesting debate and it's certainly fun to be in your squads. The more players and squad leaders we have with this mindset the better. It makes TG what it is. Bravo (tips hat)!


                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X