IRL wartactics in Planetside and Planetside 2 - Page 2

Grognard · 2012-02-12, 06:58 PM

Originally Posted by Xaine

I like it to be serious, but with a relaxed atmosphere at the same time. Which is hard to find, but i've found it in a few places - GotR was one of them.

My daughter and I were in GotR, they were a class act.

Graywolves · 2012-02-12, 07:19 PM

Originally Posted by Xaine

Personally, I disagree.

I like the Outfits that try and be serious, use proper tactics, have a chain of command. If i play a game, i play it to win and be good at it - I enjoy winning. Thats just me as an over competitive bastard.

However, there is a limit. When people start raging and excessively 'pulling rank' it gets old. I like it to be serious, but with a relaxed atmosphere at the same time. Which is hard to find, but i've found it in a few places - GotR was one of them.

Likewise. An outfit without a command structure just feels like a circlejerk to me.

Warborn · 2012-02-12, 07:25 PM

Originally Posted by WiteBeam

Yeah. Leadership, teamwork and organization. And not so much on the actual tactical skills aspect.

Those are not military things, those are things which are important every time more than one person works toward a common goal.

Cosmical · 2012-02-12, 07:25 PM

As long as people are willing to accept defeat, which was a big part of PS1, then following commands isnt an issue if EXP and character growth are involved.

We will have to see how willing people are to throw themselves at the meat grinder.

My main qualm with command is when they start telling you how to play. I dont like being threatened in chat by some loser who says i need to be in a MAX suit or i will be kicked!

Xaine · 2012-02-12, 08:59 PM

Originally Posted by Grognard

My daughter and I were in GotR, they were a class act.

They certainly were. A very solid bunch of people. The command structure there was very good. Robocpf, RedKnights and LocoCyote were the three i remember. All very solid guys, friendly, helpfull and knew their stuff.

Originally Posted by Graywolves

Likewise. An outfit without a command structure just feels like a circlejerk to me.

I agree completely. I'm looking to get into a solid outfit pre-launch, but sadly i'm in England and the EU playerbase seems to be lacking a bit at the moment. I'm sure that will change.

DayOne · 2012-02-12, 09:03 PM

Originally Posted by Xaine

I agree completely. I'm looking to get into a solid outfit pre-launch, but sadly i'm in England and the EU playerbase seems to be lacking a bit at the moment. I'm sure that will change.

Try them.

Not sure who they are but I'm gonna roll with them for PS2. They are VS and some are based in the UK like me.

HoovesMcG · 2012-02-12, 10:22 PM

WEll, Room clearing, could work, Suppressive fires might work. But RL small infantry tactics are generally not going to work in a game. Casue they are all about inflicting mass casualties while taking less yourself.

However, LArger Idea tactics are by far more effective. Say for instance Blocking forces on a Main MSR, or canyon will work. Or even some pincer movements between squads. Those broad tactics, will work and individual infantry tactics will have to be learned in game.

DviddLeff · 2012-02-13, 02:18 AM

Originally Posted by HoovesMcG

But RL small infantry tactics are generally not going to work in a game. Casue they are all about inflicting mass casualties while taking less yourself.

As long as the squad follows up on their kills and denies the enemy their respawn point then there is not reason they won't work. Yes players attitude differs from real life as they will play in an unsurvivable way, but this makes it more important for a coordinated squad to play tactically; checking rooms, covering each other, using suppressing fire, flanking the enemy, etc. Most of these things an FPS player will do anyway but with a squad doing the same with them they are going to be much quicker and more effective.

beekergunship · 2012-02-13, 10:46 AM

One of the reasons I play PS instead of ArmA, CoD, etc, is that it has qualities that I liked about my military service while solidly based in fantasy. I really liked that the nature of close air support was there without the JFIRES rules and nine lines being tallied off by a nervous controller. I like that I don't have to manage fuel flow in my reaver. I like that strangers from around the world with a military background or not can get organized, communicate clearly, and share in the victory of pulling off the impossible with teamwork.

Our outfit trains to tactics that work in the game. They wouldn't translate perfectly to the real world, but over the years we have figured out that they seem to work well on Auraxis, and with novice players. People grief us about going to empty continents to train, but at this point, I don't play for a high kill/death ratio. I play to see a forum post from a new player thanking us for a fun night.

Figment · 2012-02-13, 11:13 AM

The player psychology is different from a player in RL, but most basic military principles, such as holding the high ground et all do apply.

If you ever read Sun Tzu, while you play PS you can see a lot of it is valid. Even if the context is different and some things cannot apply anymore literally, some other things do make sense.

For instance:

"In the practical art of war, the best thing of all is to take the enemy's country whole and intact; to shatter and destroy it is not so good."

Take a base intact, or destroy every fricking wall turret and generator? (Damn zerglings wasting time in the CY shooting up everything they can destroy, then leaving without repairing). Also why a lot of players destroy their own (lobby & top base) equip and vehicle terms: scorched earth strategy.

But the same goes for other things like "leaving an opening for the enemy to escape". The amount of time I've layed minefields in the route an enemy expects to be clear (because they entered the battlefield there), then chased them back in that direction on my Fury, right over the minefield is numerous.

"All war is Deception": lay minefield, sit on it with Fury, fire at BFR, faint retreat and backup in straight line while continuing firing: BFR runs straight at you. BOOM.

Throw EMP at Lightning, uncloak, wave, run off. They follow you: BOOM.

*player patrols area with Dark Light* "Hi, I'm not sitting behind that rock" *player will run directly at that rock - move past guard*

*Boomer at gen ready* *prepare tubes with boomers* - make gen boomer explode "This facilities generator is under attack" *people run off to gen with glue guns and stop paying attention to spawns* *blow tubes and equip terms, while BD is Gal dropped and enemy players are in the wrong area of the base with the wrong equipment*

Applying Sun Tzu in PlanetSide == Win.

But be imaginative.

NewSith · 2012-02-13, 11:26 AM

Russian Airborne sniper here, tactics are different. General strategies are the same. (Figgy said it all, basically)

Firefly · 2012-02-13, 12:01 PM

The only use I see in battle drills is practice. Getting your players to work well together. I'd place money on a ten-person unit that practices together over an oddball pick-up group with 50% of them being skilled at ADADADADAD ADADDDDAAADDAD.

I like all those outfits that lay claim to "We wrote the rule-book on/invented tactic X, Y, Z". Not gonna name names, but if I had a dollar for every outfit that claimed they invented the hot-drop or they invented the Mossie Bailure Swarm or they invented the orbital strike on the back door as a counter to hot-drops, I could buy myself a couple of #3 Combos at McDonalds. Having a playbook is one thing - laying claim to pioneering something means you're a fucking idiot. Everyone discovered the same shit at the same time - this is evident in the amount of outfits that all say "we invented this".

Ripping stuff out of FM 7-8 worked for a little while in Planetside, back in the day. A lot of us did it, especially those with military veterans. After a while it came to "overload base front door and back door with bodies, park AMS, capture tower. Wash, rinse, repeat." The methods of delivery changed here and there - full Sunderer crashing the gate, Flight of the Valkyries playing to swarms of Mossies, multiple Galaxy dropships at high altitude until someone discovered the CR5 OS could be properly timed. In-game tactics may use some of the same concepts but by and large they no longer work. The game revolves around 1) get to base, 2) get inside base, 3) blow gens/tubes/neither, 4) get hack, 5) dump all players on one target.

Basic concepts of real-world tactics such as combined arms (aka close air support), coordinated firepower, sweeping combined small arms fire, and flanking... those work to some degree in certain situations. The tactic is, knowing how to use them and knowing when to use them. Things like three-to-five second rushes, cover and concealment, squad formations those are all irrelevant on the battlefield. Indirect fire and orbital strikes from 70% of the playerbase made a lot of "old-school" stuff obsolete (why take cover when Thumper spam or CR5 OS nullifies it?).

Trolltaxi · 2012-02-13, 12:26 PM

Applying real life tactics would mean a much slower gameplay. No one really seeks that ingame.

Planetside tactics are pretty much the mix of logistics and sheepherding. Anyone ever tried to lead a continent will agree!

General tactics do apply - as others mentioned - and teamwork will always overcome solo skill.

Firefly · 2012-02-13, 12:34 PM

Originally Posted by Trolltaxi

Applying real life tactics would mean a much slower gameplay.

Maybe if we're playing Stratego or turn-based strategy games, maybe even an RTS. A flanking manoeuvre done slowly is not a flanking manoeuvre. It is a change in orientation. A proper flanking manoeuvre done properly is done swiftly. In all likelihood, a properly-executed flanking manoeuvre was done by people who practice such a thing. I've been flanked before in Planetside, and I've done it to people - sometimes it works, other times it doesn't. The tactic itself is a variation on the real-world tactic and thus leads me back to both "time and place" and "adapted for gameplay" arguments. I define it as a real-world tactic because that's what I know it as, others may not. In the end, it really boils down to coordination, which some people feel is a leadership aspect and others feel is just common sense among gamers.

Graywolves · 2012-02-13, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by Trolltaxi

Applying real life tactics would mean a much slower gameplay. No one really seeks that ingame.

Planetside tactics are pretty much the mix of logistics and sheepherding. Anyone ever tried to lead a continent will agree!

General tactics do apply - as others mentioned - and teamwork will always overcome solo skill.

On the contrary, real world tactics are all about overrunning the enemy as quickly as possible. You act with violence and give the enemy no time to figure out what you're doing. As firefly said, if you flank slowly you're not going to properly flank them.

Someone trained in setting up a hasty defense might get people into good positions to cover different avenues of approach such as doors, roads, or the space between two hills. Maybe a road. If they know the enemy is coming.

Like I said earlier, leadership/soldier management stuff.