Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A Discussion of Strategy and Tactics

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

  • A Discussion of Strategy and Tactics

    Strategy
    - Grand scale
    - The art of the general
    - Planning and conduct of campaigns
    - The employment of battles to gain the end of war
    - The art of distributing and applying military means to fulfill the ends of policy

    Tactics
    - Small scale
    - The art of small unit leader
    - Planning and conduct of an operation
    - The employment of men, weapons, and equipment to win a battle
    - The art of distributing and applying military means to attain an objective

    Tactics continued
    - Battle drills
    - Fire and maneuver (shoot, move, & communicate)
    - Patrolling
    - Collective tasks

    Different Roles
    - A lot of players want to play as individual soldiers
    - Some want to be part of a functioning squad (teamwork/cooperation)
    - Others want to lead a squad
    - A segment of the Battlefield Community want to lead the team

    Taking on the role of an officer by coordinating support, gathering intelligence on enemy disposition, viewing the big picture of enemy/friendly activity, and directing squads is rewarding. It is an enchancing feature that is appreciated by players who participate in the system/process.

    Video Gaming Application
    Real Time Strategy - Strategy
    First Person Shooter - Tactics

    In online gaming
    Tactics Actions conducted with cooperation between individuals or elements
    Strategy Maneuver, intelligence, and logistics plans and actions coordinated with the use of a map. The fusion of gathered intelligence of the enemy disposition which contributes to making informed decisions as to the prioritization of scarce resources to create the greatest effect against enemy targets and in support of friendly forces.


    How can Strategy and Tactics be incorporated into the Battlefield franchise?

    Should Strategy and Tactics be incorporated into the Battlefield franchise?

  • #2
    Re: A Discussion of Strategy and Tactics

    hey sfscriv, welcome to TG! :)

    That's a pretty broad topic you've posed there. We have multiple forums with hundreds if not thousands of threads dedicated that very topic :)

    I bet you'll get more community involvement if you can narrow the discussion a bit. Maybe make a provocative claim?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: A Discussion of Strategy and Tactics

      I hate to turn down the chance to discuss strategies, but it's my personal feeling that this may be best saved for when we discover actual facts about the multiplayer gameplay. After all, strategies differ based on the game. Sure, there are universal strategies that will work for any game, but I'm sure tactics in 1 game won't be as effective in another. PR and BC2, although both Battlefield-based games, are completely different in style and pace, so tactics in one won't translate as well into another.

      Once we get a better idea of how this game plays, I think discussions can really open up.


      Comment


      • #4
        Re: A Discussion of Strategy and Tactics

        Originally posted by WhiskeySix View Post
        hey sfscriv, welcome to TG! :)

        That's a pretty broad topic you've posed there. We have multiple forums with hundreds if not thousands of threads dedicated that very topic :)

        I bet you'll get more community involvement if you can narrow the discussion a bit. Maybe make a provocative claim?
        Thanks for the warm welcome. Folks will not get that kind of reception in most forums. The angle I was attempting to take with this thread was to lay the foundation for a discussion about BF3 and beyond with definitions of strategy and tactics and my understanding of the integrated systems within the video games. I thought I was sparking the conversation with these two questions:
        Originally posted by sfscriv View Post
        How can Strategy and Tactics be incorporated into the Battlefield franchise?

        Should Strategy and Tactics be incorporated into the Battlefield franchise?
        I have my opinion and have developed a desired structure, but did not want the thread to commence with mud slinging.


        Originally posted by Pvt Brokeback View Post
        I hate to turn down the chance to discuss strategies, but it's my personal feeling that this may be best saved for when we discover actual facts about the multiplayer gameplay...
        I was seeking a discusssion of how you feel the Battlefield franchise could develop integrated systems to encourage the use of tactics and strategy. What is your Vision?

        Back to terminology. Are Tactics and Strategy components of teamplay (teamwork)?
        Last edited by sfscriv; 04-22-2011, 02:45 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: A Discussion of Strategy and Tactics

          Originally posted by WhiskeySix View Post
          Maybe make a provocative claim?
          Sure: Strategy and tactics are unimportant. Only logistics matters. :-)

          --------------------

          Well, you need to define strategy and tactics.

          Strategy is the approach to achieve a particular objective. Broad and vague, eh? How about this...

          Point B = Desired condition
          Point A = Current condition
          Strategy = Realistic approach to get from point A to point B

          Realistic = within the capabilities of your organization.

          Tactics = The skillful exploitation of time, space, resources, and enemy behavior to fulfill an objective

          Objective = Goal of an effort. The strategic objective is the final goal that leads to the desired condition. Strategy objectives are cascaded down into multiple intermediate steps aka tactical objectives.

          http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf4/user/58Congo/

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: A Discussion of Strategy and Tactics

            (repurposing this reply now that I see your reply)

            I think DICE would need to be very careful about adding strategic elements because it would cause the game to evolve along pre-ordained paths instead of organically. It could easily get constricting and artificial.

            For example, zerging seems very unstrategic and untactical but the constraints built to defeat it could make the game more clumsy than simply forcing the players to come up with something that defeats zerging. Same for main base raping.

            I have seen many people try to train their clan or tournament squad in "real life tactics" and it almost always fails. It fails for 2 reasons. First, it's done in a tops-down fashion (squad level tasks down to invididual tasks). Second, the training or tactic ignores operation tempo (making it weak towards zerging).

            When I trained my DC-era CAL clan and my DC/BF2-era 21CW tournament companies, I found much more success starting with the individual and working up from there. Individual, then buddy team, then squad, then multi-squad/division. Good individual decisions turned into good squad decisions.

            Translating this to DICE, they first need to optimize and empower the squad. Everything needs to be oriented towards making the squad fun and effective. For example, they need to carefully need to manage the "density" of maps. Too linear like BC2, or with ineffective push mechanics (JOTR Advance and Secure) and there is little benefit to squadding because it's just a big mob advancing along a single axis.

            Once they get the squad fully empowered, the role that a commander or "next-level-up" organization would arrive naturally with the needs and features apparent for Battlefield 4.

            The best way to fully empower the squad is to make it logistically self-contained while making the individual logistically vulnerable. For example, only allow healing and re-arming by sitting in a vehicle and only allow squad members to enter the vehicle. These vehicles would be spawnable anywhere by the squad leader (a C-5 would swoop in like in World in Conflict and para drop your team's vehicle). Now the squad can go places and sustain themselves. As the squad performs team oriented tasks (attacking or defending flags, etc.) they earn "squad points" that could be spent on drones, close air support, or better equipment (again like World in Conflict).

            Combine that with a persistent world map divided into micro environments and you have quite an experience. Of course what I am describing is very different than what Battlefield is now but they need to be revolutionary and transcend in order to dethrone COD. DICE's current evolutionary + eye candy path will only lead to incremental new players. It certainly won't dethrone Activision.
            Last edited by Ski-Racer; 04-30-2011, 05:44 PM.

            http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf4/user/58Congo/

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: A Discussion of Strategy and Tactics

              Originally posted by Ski-Racer View Post
              Translating this to DICE, they first need to optimize and empower the squad. Everything needs to be oriented towards making the squad fun and effective...
              Excellent! This is the kind of discussion I was seeking. Both your posts are excellent. Thanks, Ski-Racer.

              I had to look up this term and will share its meaning for the other readers of this thread.

              The term "Zerging" comes from the Zergs in Starcraft which are able to produce large amount of units very quickly.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: A Discussion of Strategy and Tactics

                As the producers of BF3 have stated, the maps will be HUGE! But most of it will be urban and will probably require many small squads. Much different than BF2142, where you had bigger squads and less of them as well, making the battle more intense. Maybe thats what the makers were intending to go for but it will require a little bit more communication between squads. This is also why i think it was a bad idea to take away the commander position. Someone who can communicate between the squads would be great but it will take more effort as well as making the squads effective in the long run.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: A Discussion of Strategy and Tactics

                  Originally posted by Ski-Racer View Post
                  ...I found much more success starting with the individual and working up from there. Individual, then buddy team, then squad, then multi-squad/division. Good individual decisions turned into good squad decisions.

                  Translating this to DICE, they first need to optimize and empower the squad. Everything needs to be oriented towards making the squad fun and effective...

                  Once they get the squad fully empowered, the role that a commander or "next-level-up" organization would arrive naturally with the needs and features apparent for Battlefield 4.

                  The best way to fully empower the squad is to make it logistically self-contained while making the individual logistically vulnerable...

                  Combine that with a persistent world map divided into micro environments and you have quite an experience...
                  Here are some concepts related to broadening the strategic aspect of military gaming using Battlefield as a template. One potential area to expand integrated teamwork is through organizational structure and the communication architecture.

                  This first image is based on the Battlefield 2 Commander position:
                  **Forum restriction to post image link**

                  This next image is based on expanding the BF2 32-player team:
                  **Forum restriction to post image link**

                  Comment

                  Connect

                  Collapse

                  TeamSpeak 3 Server

                  Collapse

                  Advertisement

                  Collapse

                  Twitter Feed

                  Collapse

                  Working...
                  X