Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bomb Down?

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

  • Bomb Down?

    Lately when I played I have goten grief from two diffrent players regarding a scenario with the bomb down.

    I'll use the more extream case as an example:

    We where playing de_cbble and we just beat back a hard attack on A, we killed of all but one T that was reported running towards B bomsite. Since we did not have anybody protectin B site I ran back to defend it. As a got in on the bombsite a CT reported Bomb down. Instead of running back I stayed on B site and just shifted may angle so instead of protecting B I was aiming at the door to Darkroom. This ment that I would allow the guy inside B and shoot him in the back when he tried to get into Darkroom. And then I shot him in the back. Next rounds I got a lot of greaf from the play for not portecting the bomb when it was down etc. I explaind my self then just ignored him untill (I think) he "rage quit".


    To me "bomb down" does not mean everbody run to the bomb and sit on it, it means obective has changed and your goal is now to prevent the T from geting the bomb back.
    A lot of players seem to feel that the" PR way" is that we are all suppose to group around the bomb so they can freely move around the map and try to pick us off without having to fear any threat from anywhere except the exact location of the bomb itself.

    I would love to hear your opnion on this and if I'm doing things wrong or if Im breaking any rules here.

    TG-E1st TacticalGamer European Division |




  • #2
    Re: Bomb Down?

    I totally back you up Skylark being that I was there myself. I have to admit though when I am the only one left on T and there are multiple CT's alive, I do get pretty pissed when they kill me and theyre not guarding the downed bomb(I am pretty sure everyone does...). However, you are correct in saying that we should not 'huddle' around the bomb and just let the terrorists pick us off.


    303rd Logistical Studies Group

    "The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of millions is a statistic."
    - Joseph Stalin

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Bomb Down?

      As I see it, that was completely legal. Especially since you were there already. Besides, it would be stupid to just run of to the bomb. You'd just be crossing an open expanse when you know the enemy is coming that way anyway.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Bomb Down?

        This post should probably go on the tactics discussion I believe there is one similar to this that I posted awhile back http://www.tacticalgamer.com/counter...-coverage.html check it out.


        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Bomb Down?

          I agree with this Skylark and I've caught myself doing it once or twice. Very well structured post as well.
          "Be careful guys, he's got a gun"
          - Sparhawxx

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Bomb Down?

            Ok, bomb down does change the priority of the objective. But you were still on the main objective by covering B. If he had snuck in and taken the bomb out from the other CT's noses, you would have been in the position to still defend the bombsite. Now if you were pushed way up into Mid, took him out next to T spawn, and then claimed you were covering bomb or B bombsite. That would be a whole nother story.
            sigpic




            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Bomb Down?

              You have to get to the bomb and get a visual on it. Doesn't mean you have to be on it. Most importantly backup your teammates and quit playing solo.


              - -

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Bomb Down?

                I posted up a clarification in the SOP's for this as I've had questions from a few people recently.

                http://www.tacticalgamer.com/counter...fications.html


                - -

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Bomb Down?

                  I am late to the party but here is my take on it:

                  You played the situation well, but not well enough. If I were in the same situation I would have done the same thing but I would have also asked if anyone had a visual on the bomb. So long as one teammate did have a visual on the bomb I would have stayed where I was and communicated my intention to my teammate(s).

                  I think most situations in which your team completed the objective (but some of your teammates are complaining about the manner in which it was completed) is simply a case of too little communication.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Bomb Down?

                    If the bomb has been downed at A site, i think you did well in covering B in the way you played but thats all you did. You prepared for your teammates failure if it did so happen however the idea was a good one. I do not fault you for playing the way you did but i believe i would have moved slowly down double doors to the dark area to help my teammates cover the bomb from being re-obtained

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Bomb Down?

                      I'm more than late on the conversation considering its been almost a month since the last post. However, I believe this is were team communication and cooperation comes in. Now from Skylark's position, he could have prevented the T from even getting within CQB range of his teammates. Thus saving his teammates time, trouble, and anticipation. While Skylark is in his post he could be communicating enemy movement, and confirmation on the location of the bomb. If the T were to get passed him and then they would have the OpFor surrounded. Had Skylark failed and became a casualty, then his teammates, at the least, still would have had a heads up. In another scenario, had Skylark been engaged in a 'neutral' fire fight (fire fight in which neither side was killed) then he could have gathered such intel as his weapon, injuries (blood stains), and how many times he shot the enemy thus lowering the moral of the OpFor, and at this time, Skylark could have rendezvoused with his team. I understand getting upset because the CT "was not guarding the objective" cause I have been there. However, I still believe the OpFor should be mindful of an ambush or trap such as one. Realistically, a team could have set men on entry points such as Skylark's position. 'You' hear people say it, "...well they'll be on the bomb since its down." In reality you wouldn't know that. The CT could be anywhere and still have confirmation of the bomb's location.
                      |TG| Mr. Jingles
                      Callsign: Preacher115
                      End Transmission...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Bomb Down?

                        The concept of teamwork means you work WITH another player. That means you have to be near them to assist them. When the bomb goes down the objective for everyone becomes the downed bomb as long as it's within attainability.

                        What you have described are communication and intel jingles.

                        So as i said, the players are required to get to the bomb down and not go off looking for kills. Use teamwork on the downed bomb to make sure the T's don't get it back as it's their only way to complete their objective.


                        - -

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Bomb Down?

                          I realize this thread is a bit old, but I actually was the T who was shot in the back, and in the interest of telling a story that may help clarify some rules for myself or someone else, I'll put in my 2 cents.

                          Skylark was behind the boxes in the planting zone of B and the bomb was at LONG A, not in A. In other words, the exact opposite side of the map.

                          Now I am not one to be a stickler on boundaries; anyone that has played with me knows that I will appear in places that might seem unexpected, but they always are situational. I can understand why Skylark may have thought this was legitimate at the time, but there are many reasons why, in my opinion, this spot was no good. From both a SOP perspective AND a defensive CT perspective. And I will explain my thinking (mostly on the defensive disadvantage, leaving the SOP talk to the admins).

                          - Too far from any teammate: If, for whatever reason, I had decided to look that direction he would have been either an easy kill or easy to avoid. This essentially takes him out of the defensive picture. Had I killed him, his position (10 miles from bomb) would have been indicated, but they wouldn't have even heard my AK from that distance, so no intel would be gained whatsoever.

                          I realize that the idea of me killing more than 1 CT with a lucky headshot is absurd, but IMAGINE...

                          - If I had killed all his teammates near the bomb, I could have gotten away without him having a clue which direction I went.

                          I guess thats all of my 2 cents for now. G'day!


                          "Who put the fun in dysfunctional? I." - Aesop Rock

                          "Cuz you can choose to say 'Good morning, God! =)' or 'Good God, morning! =(" - Blackalicious

                          Comment

                          Connect

                          Collapse

                          TeamSpeak 3 Server

                          Collapse

                          Advertisement

                          Collapse

                          Twitter Feed

                          Collapse

                          Working...
                          X