War Tactics

[Revolution]

Now I am interested on your opinion about teamplay campaigns.

My fun IDEA would be to have a campaign similar to Germany in WW2. Just start from our sanctuary and have a huge collumn like Hitler's tank collums with supplies and re-enforcements comming in a straight line utilizing every troop on the faction. Thus we march from one continent to the next taking over anything in the way, then turn around and come back.
Wonder if it would work in PS? Sounds fun to me though.
:mad: :mad: :mad:

[BLuE_ZeRO]

:nazi::nazi::nazi::nazi::nazi::nazi::nazi::nazi: :lol:

The problem with that is trying to organize something like that on such a massive scale. You'd get maybe 20 people at the most to go along with it.

[SandTrout]

And someone could drop-pod in behind your collums through the gaps in the SOI emited by bases. Looking at the zone map we've seen, there are notable gaps in the spheres that would allow large groups to drop in.

[Kyonye]

If you split the army in half and attack from both sides, then, my personal, it would work better. charging from both sides is always a better idea. not saying it will work only because they could have a more massive army but it's possible.


You know BLuE_ZeRO, that is a good question. Why are we all purple. hmm. guess we'll never know.

[Revolution]

Yea It will probably more like the AMerican Indian wars with small War Parties. But it COULD be pulled off like on a friday night at least to some degree, even having like 50 people on one campaign would be fun. Sorta like Island Hopping in WW2, start base hopping.

[Warborn]

Originally posted by Revolution
Now I am interested on your opinion about teamplay campaigns.

My fun IDEA would be to have a campaign similar to Germany in WW2. Just start from our sanctuary and have a huge collumn like Hitler's tank collums with supplies and re-enforcements comming in a straight line utilizing every troop on the faction. Thus we march from one continent to the next taking over anything in the way, then turn around and come back.
Wonder if it would work in PS? Sounds fun to me though.
:mad: :mad: :mad:


How is this anything like "Hitler's" tank columns?

[Sputty]

I think any major attack will be outfit only. Maybe more than one outfits but I think that random squads and the platoons of people would undoubtedly fail.

[BLuE_ZeRO]

all major attacks will be eventually thwarted by the mighty "lake of death" :rawr:

[Navaron]

I hear the first GM events will be to find the "Life preserver of justice" and save "Hammas drowning ass".

[Sputty]

:rofl:

[BLuE_ZeRO]

omg :lol: :rofl:

Hamma's not going to ever live down his dip in the lake of death.

[Sputty]

Wait until he plays. That lake will learn who's boss!

[Navaron]

I have decided to speak on behalf of hamma:

*glub* *glub* *ban* *glub* *lock* *glub* *glub*

[Sputty]

:lol:
When he comes on later he may start crying

[BLuE_ZeRO]

hahaha :lol:

[Navaron]

hamma--> :tear:

forum trolls --> :domotwak: <-- hamma

It's all penis envy, he runs a pimp site and has played and we haven't. Wait thats not it. It's cause he crashed into a frikkin mountain and drowned in a lake. God, he was the plane they were talking about in tommy boy.

[Zanzibar]

lol. HOW can you drown in a 1st person shootem up. part from being hamma and having peeps mercifully remind you of it so much you just cant take it any moreand well u get the picture.

[Zanzibar]

They say drowning is not painful...
Let's put it to the expert...
;)

[Hamma]

It gets kind of old and played out tho when u bring it up in every thread.

[Sputty]

That's what you say. We all enjoy it still.

[Hamma]

When i start locking threads for going off topic with that stupid event it will get old to you all too. :D

[Marsman]

In all fairness, Hamma encountered a beta bug that forced his craft to land resulting in the unfortunete "accident" we've all had fun ribbing him about. Hamma is actually an excellent pilot and I'd have him cover my tail from the air anytime, anywhere.

(There. I defended you Hamma. Can I have my admin status back now? :D) :love:

[BLuE_ZeRO]

roflmao :D

[NapalmEnima]

Just for amusment value, lets see if we can't bring this thread back on topic, shall we?


I don't think a single, massive column would work in PS. Every base will take you at least 15 minutes to take, plus travel time, plus however long it takes to crush any resistance you encounter.

In that time, enemy troops could easily drop-pod in behind you and retake any bases.

I think such a column might always control 2 or 3 bases, but everything else behind them would be reclaimed.


And that's if you could actually organize such a thing. I think large, multi-outfit actions may well break the 100-man mark, but it won't be all that common. More than 3 full platoons will still be an impressive sight. Or a terrifying one, depending on whose side you're on.

[BLuE_ZeRO]

For the sake of argument... how much damage do you think a tank would take from ramming a column of people. Could it successfully plow over like 30 people before blowing up?

[NARF]

I see this being a game with more vietnam style tactics, with smaller parties going in quietyl, and the occasional large conflict at a base, so a mix of the gulf war tactics and vietnam tactics. Oh yeah, and drowning DOES hurt, trust me, I died once, they smacked me back to life though, so its all good.

[Sputty]

Columns probably wou never take a single base. APCs would drop off a sqyuad to take each base as the rest of the army moves on to the enxt base. This would continue until the tank would stop the attack, dissapate and defend waiting for the ineveitable counter attack. When the prepared infantry cn handle any attack because they've fortified their positions.

[Ouroboros]

I'd guess that the tank driver would become blinded by the splattering blood and loose his hearing from the bodies hitting the hull. He would then blindly scream, "Merciful God almighty!" as he swerves around, eventually beaching himself in a body of water and drowning.

But that's just my guess.

[Ouroboros]

Of course, the column COULD just rape the tank. :D :confused:

[BLuE_ZeRO]

rofl :rofl:

[Ouroboros]

It's a revolution!! ...again!!

Give tanks padding and windshield wiper!!

:rock: :ugh:
:stupid:

[Manitou]

The referrence to "Hitler's" tank columns is kind of wrong.

The tactic employed by the German Army in 1939 was actually a fairly new way of waging war. It was the result of a long thought out plan involving masiive propoganda, subterfuge and not a little underhanded diplomacy (the agreement with the Soviets).

Once the German government had brow beat the Chek Republic into accepting their occupation, and having gained Anschluss with Austria, the German Army was in a perfect position to employ the two prong attack from the north near the Polish corridor. This effectively cut that and reunited the main part of Germany with the little area of ethnic Germans separated by the Treaty of Versailles. Then the southern part of the German Army swept up and hit the southern part of Poland. The Polish Army, though massively outdated in comparison to the Wermacht actually fought valiantly. In one little known counter-attack, they nearly dealt the Germans a nasty defeat. There are many German soldiers who have much respect for the ferocious defense put forth by the Polish Army. This battle lasted nearly a month before the Germans were able to plant any ideas of Polish victory. It was further sealed by the Soviet Army's push from the east as guaranteed by the treaty between her and Germany.

This initial bloodletting experienced by the German Army did a few critical things.
1) It allowed the Germans to test their new form of warfare now well known as "Blitzkrieg", or "Lightning War" (actually coined by Western press).
2) It tested the "intestinal fortitude" of Britain and France (they failed the test).
3) It most importantly allowed the Germans to recover what they had been missing since 1918; the fierce national pride that would fuel the people and lend to an almost fanatical belief in total victory.

Sorry... I love history... hehe

[Sputty]

Good story...How'd it end?
:lol:

[BLuE_ZeRO]

Stay tuned for the next episode of "Hitler: Man he was a bad guy" with your host Manitou only on the history channel :D

[Sputty]

:rofl:

[Manitou]

Did you realize that they very Nation Hitler claimed was the super race, the Aryans, he was not a member of? He was from Austria and he had Jewish blood.

[Sputty]

Ooohhh......
:eek:
So much information to mold my young, impressionnable mind!

[NARF]

Interesting how a short, scrawny, brown haired brown eyed Jewish-Austrian can convince an entire nation that the ideal (and only person worthy of living) was a tall, strong, blond haired blue eyed person and that the root of all evil was the ****. Did you know that one of the major reasons Hitler lost the war was his dabbling in the occult, had he not done so, many things would have been different, not to mention my despise for him would be somewhat less, and i would be less motivated to piss and dance on his grave.

[Camping Carl]

A sqaud of reavers could drestroy such a wall of tanks withs little difficulty. So sorry, that only worked in hitler's day because he caught people by suprise with his massive tank rushes, such tactics were fairly new on the battlefield then. Think up an original strategy, it'll work better. :D

[Sputty]

Don't forget about his love of square dancing!

[NARF]

*coughsplintercellcough*

Has anyone been watching the news lately, the new tactics in the world are small, elite, assasins. Of course its illegal, but alls fair in Love and War, not to mention Sex.

[Sputty]

Any major offensives would require air and ground co-ordination.

[Sputty]

I hope you're joking NARF..

[Warborn]

I'd say the Fins did a lot better against the Soviets than the Poles against the Germans, if you're talking about bravery and valour. While, sure, it takes some balls to ride a horse up against the tank divisions of the Wehrmacht, Poland itself suffered a remarkably swift defeat. Only their staunch hold on Warsaw made the battle drag on, and even then, the Poles in their capitol city were being bombed and shelled unmercifully, and were reduced to a starving wreck by the end of the campaign. As they say: Some people should know when they're conquered. While I respect the fact that the Poles did not want to lose (who would?), they really, really suffered unnecessarily for just another week or so before the white flag went up.

2) It tested the "intestinal fortitude" of Britain and France (they failed the test).

Britain and France weren't afraid to fight or anything. The tactics of the French were pretty much resting upon the principles that de Gaulle had thought of for his book, which was published prior to the war, and was emulated in spirit by the Maginot Line. The French and British were both looking to slog it out in the trenches, not race across Europe and bring the fight to the Germans. Hell, neither France nor Britain was even remotely capable of doing such a thing anyway. Their infantry were largely unmechanized, and their tanks were mixed into infantry divisions as support units, rather than the Panzer Divisions which served as a steel fist which would punch through enemy lines.

Unless you meant something else by it, in which case, do tell. I love history also.

So sorry, that only worked in hitler's day because he caught people by suprise with his massive tank rushes...

German tactics didn't rely on massive tank rushes. That was the Soviets. The Germans actually, at the start of the war, had tanks which were inferior in armor and firepower to the French tanks, and they also had about 200 or so fewer tanks than the French. The reason they whupped their ass so heavily is because the bulk of the French Army was at the Maginot Line, so they were able to totally avoid most of it, and because the Germans relied on mobility and, yes, surprise, rather than huge numbers. That coupled with the fact that the French didn't know how to properly use their tanks, and with their infantry being largely unmechanized, meant that not only were the French unable to effectively fight the Germans, but they were also unable to actually move to intercept, encircle, flank, or otherwise use movement to their advantage. They were about as bad off as the Italians were in North Africa when they engaged the meager British troops holding Egypt.

[Guardian AngeL]

Originally posted by Sputty
Don't forget about his love of square dancing!

:lol:

[Revolution]

The strategy I was referring to was based on a Discovery Channel special Hirtler used. I am not to much in WW2 history but the tactics that I was watching were pretty nice at least on DIscovery. (maybe it was just one country dont know)
But true a major offensive would have to utilize all 3, men, ground vehicles, and air vehicles.
I liked the suicide bomber squads (haha) and heavy defensive with War parties to antagonize the enemy back to the fortified front lines, and just wear em down. Least thats how I always kicked ass in AOE. Plus camping in quake2 and actionquake 2 hahah( only sometimes its fun)

[Guardian AngeL]

Originally posted by Revolution
I liked the suicide bomber squads who wouldn't! suicide bombers rule!

[Revolution]

Its a mixed subject GA, half are like ROCK ON, other half are like NOOO THATS LAME!! But hey, alls FAIR in War!
Personally I love to do it every once in a while. hehehe. DEATH BEFORE DIS-ALLAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Dont get all rowdy on the allah thing I am USA.

[Guardian AngeL]

in sof2 i just run around with nades

[Manitou]

Originally posted by Warborn
I'd say the Fins did a lot better against the Soviets than the Poles against the Germans, if you're talking about bravery and valour.
Very true. The Fins were legendary in their defense against the Soviets. The Poles were just so outdated in equipment. My reference to their defense was on a relational perspective.

Britain and France weren't afraid to fight or anything. Unless you meant something else by it, in which case, do tell. I love history also.
I believe they were more into appeasement than fighting. I won't sit in judgement of that as they were still cowed by the prospect of another affair such as the horrific Trench Warfare of WWI, which is to be expected. But there was a window of opportunity when Germany had her military might on the eastern front and was susceptible to an attack from the west. The military surplus Germany enjoyed in the May '40 campaign was accumulated due to inaction by the two only powers that could have slowed that buildup.

German tactics didn't rely on massive tank rushes. That was the Soviets. The Germans actually, at the start of the war, had tanks which were inferior in armor and firepower to the French tanks, and they also had about 200 or so fewer tanks than the French. The reason they whupped their ass so heavily is because the bulk of the French Army was at the Maginot Line, so they were able to totally avoid most of it, and because the Germans relied on mobility and, yes, surprise, rather than huge numbers. That coupled with the fact that the French didn't know how to properly use their tanks, and with their infantry being largely unmechanized, meant that not only were the French unable to effectively fight the Germans, but they were also unable to actually move to intercept, encircle, flank, or otherwise use movement to their advantage. They were about as bad off as the Italians were in North Africa when they engaged the meager British troops holding Egypt.
Well said. The Soviet T-34 was the best tank ever built at the time, in my opinion. The German Panther G that came along later was probably the best tank overall, but as far as mechanically speaking in terms of reliability, the T-34 had a slight edge. But, the key here is numbers. The T-34 was deployed in veritable swarms, while Germany had a hard time producing the Panthers in the needed numbers.

Warborn, good conversation! I love to see another fan of the craft! By the way, have you read Guderian's Actung-Panzer! yet? Good stuff. The guy was awesome...

[The Prudential]

Panzer Leader is an excellent book, but I would also recommend Battle Leadership by Captain Adolf Von Schell. It's about combat leadership, most relating to combat action. Also, Von Schell is a World War One officer so you also pick up some interesting facts about that war (safe to say the lesser studied world war).

Also, I recommend How to Make War by James F. Dunningan. This is one of the best books you could ever read on Post-Cold War engagements and possible strategies. Also, Strategy: The Logic of War and Peace is a very good book. It's a bit deep, and only a serious student of strategy should read it.

If you're soley interested in military history then Blood, Tears, and Folly by Len Deighton is an excellent source. It doesn't cover the entirety of the war, but focuses on a few important points. Highly recommended.

Other than reading material I do have to agree with Manitou (Fading Suns?) that the English and French had an excellent opportunity to invade western Germany while the majority of the Wehrmacht was still fighting the Poles. During this time the British Expeditionary Force was the first fully motorized military formation and could have made great time in moving against Germany. The French formations would have been slower, but no less effective. This could have bought the Poles some time as the Germans would have been forced to pull units, probably the invaluable Panzer Divisions, off the Eastern Front to engage the British and French. Of course, given the political weakness of the British and French governments at that time, this 'theoretical offensive' had almost no chance of ever occuring. Of course, WWII would have been a lot shorter, and Adolf Hitler might be a footnote to history.

[Manitou]

Thanks for the nice reading list, Prudential! I am currently reading two books, one is John Keegan, The Second World War, and the other is a sort of war diary from a journal written by a German soldier stationed on the Eastern Front by Gunter Koschorrek, Blood Red Snow. The war diary book is very gripping.

[Warborn]

Well said. The Soviet T-34 was the best tank ever built at the time, in my opinion. The German Panther G that came along later was probably the best tank overall, but as far as mechanically speaking in terms of reliability, the T-34 had a slight edge. But, the key here is numbers. The T-34 was deployed in veritable swarms, while Germany had a hard time producing the Panthers in the needed numbers.

The Soviet attack on Germany from the East had nearly 1000 T-34 tanks with it... must have been a hell of a sight for any German defender unlucky enough to be in their path.


Warborn, good conversation! I love to see another fan of the craft! By the way, have you read Guderian's Actung-Panzer! yet? Good stuff. The guy was awesome...

No, not yet. I've been busying myself with The Rommel Papers and various other books my girlfriend/family got me for Christmas. I'm definitely interested in picking that, along with an English version of Infanterie Greift An if I can find one. Guderian was an absolutely phenomenal tank commander. He knew those vehicles inside out, and knew how to use theym extremely well. Really lucky for the Allies that Hitler sacked him early in the war.

[Warborn]

Well, although the British and French armies weren't built for the war that the Germans were waging, I do agree none the less that if they would have done something, things could have gone differently. But, the same could be said for various other points during the war, also. For instance, had Goering not been such a prick about the Luftwaffe pounding the French/British at Dunkirk, 350,000 French/British soldiers and officers would have been taken prisoner -- among them, people like Montgomery and Wavell. Had Dunkirk been a Wehrmacht victory, rather than a Luftwaffe failure, the war would not have gone so well, and I imagine that Britain may very well have surrendered, given that its Expeditionary Force contained its most seasoned troops and officers.

[The Prudential]

Oh, I agree Warborn. Had the Panzers not stopped outside of Dunkirk the loss would have been so catastrophic that a unit of Fallschmirjager (sp?) could have taken Britian. Also, given the fact that such a horrible loss could have resulted in the sacking of Winston Churchill...the anti-war elements of Parliament could have pushed for a peace treaty with the Germans.

[FraBaktos]

Holy shit this post is almost as boring as going to my history Gr10 history class everyday. DON'T BE SO NOSTALGIC, THERE IS NO USE DWELLING IN THE PAST!!!:mad: :mad: >:| :domotwak: :P~ :devilwink :flamemad: :furious: :twisted: :evil:

[Duritz]

Wow, you can tell he's 15......:rolleyes:

Just because history class is boring to you doesn't mean that everything that ever happened has no significance, importance, or interesting factors related to it.

You could, at the very least, not say anything and let them talk in peace.

[Revolution]

To tell you the truth history class was one of my favorite classes. Too bad I smoked too much of that CIGAWEED in college, it took some of it out.
This thread would not be boring if some think it would be if we could have a more distinct discussion about tactics IG. I know its hard to fathom at the moment since its not out yet but as maybe some of you I am wetting my pants waiting for it. Damn, have to change my diaper. I wear one so I do not get any liquids on the computer.
Anyways, some people had some tactics ideas, ty for those.

[Duritz]

Well, I'm not really worried about looking at tactics right now, because we don't know the mechanics for the weapons, vehicles, and infantry. If those mechanics are unrealistic enough then real life tactics won't suffice and if they are realistic enough most IG tactics won't work.

However, there are ideas that work on both fronts and have been used in almost every competitive, warlike game. For the most part, they are lopsided tactics like tank rushes and the rocketeers from RA2 or maybe glitch uses like the wingwalking on BF1942. Hopefully, the main tactics used in PS won't be as obvious as these, nor will they be as unpreventable as some. I am simply hoping for enough teamwork to pull ANY good ideas off.

[Sputty]

I liked..maybe because history is interesting or because I found the class really easy...hmmm..not sure which.

[Warborn]

FraBaktos,

History isn't for everyone, but we're not "dwelling" in the past. We're discussing it. WW2 was a major point in the 20th century, and you'd do well to understand it, and its implications further down the road. But, at the very least, as Duritz said, if you don't like it, ignore it.