IRL wartactics in Planetside and Planetside 2 - Page 4

Figment · 2012-02-13, 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by Soothsayer

Where did you learn about the Spartans vs Persians?

I'll take it as a serious question.

Not sure where I heard of it first, already read about ancient Greek (particularly Homerus), medeval, renaissance and WWII combat in grammar school, quite sure I heard about the Spartans long before the time I got it in Greek class in high school. Loved the history bits about the greek wars, Sparta vs Athenian alliances and all. Great stuff.

Heck, annoyed a religion teacher with continuous questions about Greek gods in fifth or sixth grade because they were so much more interesting than some angel supposedly impregnating a random woman... I mean Zeus did that weekly for the fun of it and it got him an angry wife! Woot!

Played any strategy game I could get my hands on, watched Discovery and History channel for anything to do with battles and historical campaigns. Read up on units, leaders, battles, etc. Even dug into the US Civil War on a similar level, I doubt that the majority of other Europeans know where "Bull Run" was waged, who won and why (or that people used to go out and have a shoreline picknick party to watch the sea battle when a blockade was being run).

Started reading up about units, tactics and that sort of thing way, way back as a kid. And I mean, Ceasar's De Belli Gallico was quite an interesting read in Latin class. >.> Beats "Marcus et Cornelia in hortum ambulant." You can apply a lot of it in the Total War games, sadly the AI sucks for anything too complex. Plus is abusable, so incites lazy, default play.

Does that answer your question?

Either way, I hope you heard of them prior to the 300 movie. Please, allow me to presume you heard of them and derived they held a choke point and that this is actually a good tactic to apply anywhere where you are numerically disadvantaged?

Even if you don't use a phalanx?

And that Sun Tzu already mentioned it's a good thing LONG before someone figured it out for themselves in game?

Even if every single individual will... well SHOULD... eventually figure out that to maximise their potential in an unequivalent fight, they have to dose the enemy?

But surely this is only set away for those who get to be good at the game naturally as Warborn implies by trial and error and rinse and repeat over and over again until they "get good"? Such people never apply military pinciples even if they don't know it?

Bullox. It's logical military thinking ("common sense"), already long applied in RL whether Warborn wants to realise it or not. The context emphasizes which can be applied, which are most effective in a given situation and how they have to be adapted. But it doesn't end there.

Btw, I'm also skeptical of anyone who is skeptical of others just to try an ad hominem undermining insinuation of incompetence ("they quote Sun Tzu, so they probably don't know what they're talking about, but I, who do not quote or refer to any verifiable sources can and are to be trusted on my blue/brown/green eyes"). >____>

Oh hey. Figure that. Ad hominem undermining argument boomeranged.

No offense, but it's not a very nice thing or neede thing to state.

Long story short: military tactics are common sense and psychology based. Gamers having to figure them out by trial and error will take significantly longer than people who already know about general applicable tactics and strategems from other sources. I'll also argue they are more limited, because they have less sources to gather inspiration from and have to completely rely on personal experience.

Trolltaxi · 2012-02-13, 04:39 PM

Originally Posted by Firefly

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.

Originally Posted by Graywolves

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.

There are huge differences in PS compared to real world. First and foremost the respawn seconds the (almost) eternal amount of technicals at your disposal.

These two factors turn the picture upside down. Soldiers don't fear death so they charge in even alone during an attack and you will never be able to force them to withdrawn. You cannot ruin their morale. You cannot cut their supplies.

Another aspect. You hardly get a decent frontline. Most battles, even the larger scale tank battles happen between two groups moving towards each other, actually you have two long (transport) lines and at the end there is some shooting. Even the terrain works against flanking (usually), you may take them by surprise from the air, attacking from a non-obvious angle, but you can never roll your armour column around the Cyssor hill. Or if you do, and you take them from the side you will soon face their next wave rolling out from the nearest base.

What I meant with slower gameplay is a smaller case, like clearing a room or a building. Stacking up properly, set a charge (hack the door), charging in, checking corners, moving to the next door... that's not it's done in PS. The defenders will swarm out of the spawnroom, they will get behind you or simply reappear in "clean" rooms. The basefight is a grind to spawns or gen, where the attackers have longer and longer supply routes (from the AMS to the fight) and the defenders have shorter and shorter...

And everything works around these "supply lines" - in theory. That's why I said it's all about logistics. A good AMS provides short supply line and short idle time. A bad AMS wastes too much time, that's all, but it is enough to loose a base.

Real life tactics focus on dealt and received damage, so it often means regrouping, reorganizing even entrenching. In PS you simply throw your body into the meatgrinder and hope to score a kill.

I wish it was different. When I lead my squads I have always tried to set smaller goals. I tried a lot of time to galdrop an interlink main room with the intention to secure the main room, or at least the gallery to hold it for 30 seconds till the rest swarms in. I tried to drop on v-term, secure the corner as best as a galdrop could and tried to hack out an ams. Most of the times we were grined. I tried to play tactical, but the grinder won...

Soothsayer · 2012-02-13, 04:45 PM

Like I said, I am skeptical of any person that quotes The Art of War as it applies to video games. I feel as though it is a bit of a stretch and does not make the transition well.

Also I feel that it would take more than the usual cursory read to fully put the concepts in place (the headspace that is often referred to in other words). That cursory read is what usually comes through, as experienced in so many other threads about this very topic. I've seen it so many times, really sorry if you feel like I'm making personal attacks, but its just.. so .. old...

The problem is that too often someone will get the idea that they want to try out some of these theories and they end up inflicting them on the general public.

There is usually a common sense approach that could be described as "military tactic x" and it makes sense to do it. So people do it, but they don't reference where it came from, it's just an idea and to relate it to something someone else did or said takes away from the experience.

Figment · 2012-02-13, 05:14 PM

But that's not the point of this debate. The question posed by the thread starter was if RL military stuff could be applied to PS.

The initial mood of people posting was taking LITERAL military training and saying "no", by default.

I'm not using Sun Tzu to display authority, I'm using Sun Tzu (and other examples) as ways to show that prior knowledge can be quite useful. They can be used as inspiration.

There are few things that have not been tried in war before, knowing of them means you are more likely to see a way to implement them. Even if they are "common sense", or can ALSO be learned from personal experience. It's better to know the possibilities, limitations of a strategy in many contexts, to be able to apply it to other contexts.

This is called insight. Insight is not just gathered from personal experience. Otherwise there would never have been reason for Napoleon to read about any of those generals.

Again, long story short: no need to reinvent the wheel at all times, if just the package suffices.

Firefly · 2012-02-13, 05:17 PM

Before I embark on another TL/DR tome let me say this: Trolltaxi, I'm not picking on you but there's a lot of things you typed in that one post with which I disagree. I'm not trying to be a dick, it just naturally happens that way.

Originally Posted by Trolltaxi

These two factors turn the picture upside down. Soldiers don't fear death so they charge in even alone during an attack and you will never be able to force them to withdrawn. You cannot ruin their morale. You cannot cut their supplies.

In Planetside, technically no so I agree with the literal sense. The spirit, however, I disagree completely. You *CAN* force a withdrawal. You *CAN* ruin their morale. You *CAN* cut their supplies. Maybe you missed the heyday and maybe you didn't. If you didn't then you had to be living under a rock. Force a withdrawal by systematically wiping out spawn points and denying terrain or in this case bases/towers. I cannot speak for anyone else but I've had my morale - my will to fight - utterly sapped. Ever hear the term rage-quit? That right there is a prime example of someone's morale being ruined. I've had my morale sapped by retarded allied CR5s. I've had it sapped by being tag-teamed and double-teamed. I've had it sapped by being on during a low-population time where the entirety of TR forces were bogged down in a stupid fight over a stupid base that meant absolutely nothing. I'm fairly sure I've seen the enemy forces lose their will to fight as well - judging by both the complete lack of fight that resulted in the battle turning into "Quick, cap all these bases so we can get to the new primary!" and by the fact that someone gets sanc-locked. As for cutting supplies - I think that will change in PS2, at least I hope - but in Planetside terms, you can target and destroy enemy ANT runs to deny NTUs, thereby forcing a base drain. You can go into a base and kill any number of objects to deny them, or at least impede, their ability to respawn, to equip gear, to pull vehicles, etc.

Originally Posted by Trolltaxi

What I meant with slower gameplay is a smaller case, like clearing a room or a building. Stacking up properly, set a charge (hack the door), charging in, checking corners, moving to the next door... that's not it's done in PS. The defenders will swarm out of the spawnroom, they will get behind you or simply reappear in "clean" rooms. The basefight is a grind to spawns or gen, where the attackers have longer and longer supply routes (from the AMS to the fight) and the defenders have shorter and shorter...

Aside from this paragraph essentially proving my point and nullifying your earlier point (the mention of supply routes versus earlier "can't cut their supplies"), I'd like to point out that you can, in fact, stack up properly, set a charge/hack the door, charge in and pie the corners, check all four directions for threats. You can do this quickly, if you work with a coordinated force that practices these things (ohnoez, the dreaded petty dictator that likes to train and do battle drills!). I've seen it done with great effect from both the receiving end and the giving end - my outfit does it, other outfits do it. I've also seen it done with absolutely dismal failure (again, my outfit, other outfits). Knowing when and where to do it is just as important as doing it swiftly and correctly. When there's no need to do it, don't do it. Doing it for the sake of fancy showmanship ends up with you looking like a moron.

Originally Posted by Trolltaxi

And everything works around these "supply lines" - in theory. That's why I said it's all about logistics. A good AMS provides short supply line and short idle time. A bad AMS wastes too much time, that's all, but it is enough to loose a base.

But wait, you just said...

Originally Posted by Trolltaxi

You cannot cut their supplies.

Again, thanks for proving yourself wrong.

Originally Posted by Trolltaxi

Real life tactics focus on dealt and received damage, so it often means regrouping, reorganizing even entrenching. In PS you simply throw your body into the meatgrinder and hope to score a kill.

This is what we call the zerg. Anyone who entrenches in a video game that isn't pulling defense is asking to get slamfucked up the ass. "Real-life tactics" such as coordinating your firepower, sweeping fire from one side to the other, or even simply ensuring that your ingress team has ample real-time intel on the objective... Number one not all real-life tactics focus on dealt and receied damage. I can list off at least five off the top of my head that are not. Number two, and this is for people whining about how game-based tactics are not real-life tactics: you can call this by any other name but in the end, it's a TACTIC. Getting into a Mosquito and flying fast-as-you-can and bailing out over the base, whether you're alone or with a swarm like KAAOS or TRx or DT, is a tactic. It may be a stupid tactic, it may be a smart game tactic. But it's a tactic. You can be a fat REMF civilian who's never done a day's military service. You can be a drop-out Section 8 who got kicked out for being gay or smoking pot. You can be a frat boy with a Justin Bieber haircut who's predisposed to playing console shooters with other frat boys. You can be a hard-ass military veteran or a casual-gaming veteran. At the end of the day, regardless of where you learned it, IT IS A REAL LIFE TACTIC. It's called: swift of movement/violence of action, also known as shock & awe, also known as first-to-fight. Doesn't matter who you are or where you came from. Sure, the US Army (for example) doesn't all fly into combat in a video game aircraft and then bail out with their big fucking guns. But they do practice getting into battle immediately and then kicking the shit out of whoever's in the way. Call it what you will.

Tactic. That's what I call it.

Originally Posted by Trolltaxi

I wish it was different. When I lead my squads I have always tried to set smaller goals. I tried a lot of time to galdrop an interlink main room with the intention to secure the main room, or at least the gallery to hold it for 30 seconds till the rest swarms in. I tried to drop on v-term, secure the corner as best as a galdrop could and tried to hack out an ams. Most of the times we were grined. I tried to play tactical, but the grinder won...

Not even going to say "you're doing it wrong". I will point out that trying to camp an Interlink farm is the stupidest thing I've ever seen anyone do and I refuse to throw my outfit into a fight like that. What I will say is what I've been saying all along: whatever you do, however you do it, whenever you do it: know it and know when to do it. And make sure you have a lot of extra plays. Even if that play consists of "make shit up as I go along pressing ADADADDDDAAADADADADDAD". Which is also a tactic (I do it in paintball and I think one time I may have done it in an Afghanistan firefight, can't remember).

Figment · 2012-02-13, 05:24 PM

@Trolltaxi: I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with most of that.

Just because they come back for a next fight, doesn't mean a flanking maneuvre wasn't succesfully applied.

Morale can break and it can determine the outcome of a fight. A fight that is seen as a lost cause or not fun will sooner break than one where people have hope or fun.

Farming setups are the same as entrenching and using short supply lines. Keeping supply lines short is a very military thing as well. Why do you think Cherbourg was a priority target in the Normandy invasion, soon followed by Antwerp? Sure, in PS we take it to the extreme, but in essence, it's the same.

The main difference is, PS is more quick paced action oriented than actual warfare. The frequency is higher and downtime between battles shorter. That doesn't mean that a Dark Light sweep is not anywhere similar to a SWAT team moving through a building in some ways. Of course it will be different in a way. But is it not true that we prefer even in PS to have one of our sides backed up by a wall to limit the directions and angles one can be assaulted from?

Guess who suggested that already? Sun Tzu.

Soothsayer · 2012-02-13, 05:24 PM

Originally Posted by Figment

Again, long story short: no need to reinvent the wheel at all times, if just the package suffices.

Sure, I think it's more rewarding when you figure something cool out that works and you don't need to ruin that feeling by relating it to something that has been done in the past.

When you try something new and it is effective there's a really awesome moment where you think, "haven't seen that before, that's pretty cool..."

I'd rather be in the moment and think I'm clever for coming up with something, than be detached from the situation and reading off a list of steps in a protocol.

Again, personal opinion, no doubt.

Figment · 2012-02-13, 05:28 PM

Oh but you can still be the first to apply it in a game! Hell, you can be the only one to see the obvious! You can take the credit for that, absolutely and you should if you want to. Doesn't mean your inspiration can't have come from somewhere else or prior knowledge. It can still be a brilliant move in and on itself. That's all I'm saying.

In fact, now and then it's also the opposite: if it is a proven tactic, you can convince the more conservative, one trick old dogs riding ponies into learning a new trick.

Checowsky · 2012-02-13, 06:09 PM

The tactics that work are only as good as the players doing them.

Sure some RL tactics will work and be effective, generally in FPS games its macro tactics as the gameplay in the micro depends on the games TTK times etc....

At the end of the day though it all comes down to individual player skill. A few days ago 5 or so DT and Co. we holding Hurakan vs roughly 30 NC [most of whom were Blue Lions apparantly] and we pushed them out and killed several AMSs. We didn't just 'pwn' them we had to use some tactics to win. Baiting them to the stairs so we could flank and pin them into a small space etc... sounds familiar.

Warborn · 2012-02-13, 08:37 PM

It is funny reading the ravings in this thread and then considering the success of top guilds/outfits/etc in games like EVE Online, WW2 Online, Planetside 1, every FPS game ever, stuff like Starcraft, and so on. The gulf that separates the reality of excelling strategically and tactically in competitive online video games, and what certain pedantic individuals in this thread believe, is truly staggering.

Firefly · 2012-02-13, 08:54 PM

Originally Posted by Warborn

It is funny reading the ravings in this thread and then considering the success of top guilds/outfits/etc in games like EVE Online, WW2 Online, Planetside 1, every FPS game ever, stuff like Starcraft, and so on. The gulf that separates the reality of excelling strategically and tactically in competitive online video games, and what certain pedantic individuals in this thread believe, is truly staggering.

Success in Planetside was determined by outfit points. Outfit points came from having thousands of people (666th, HMX-1 and other invite-spammers, looking at you). I suppose we're considering the draft to be excelling strategically and tactically? I can't imagine infantry tactics being used in EVE Online and I can't imagine Starcraft, an RTS, using small-unit tactics at the squad level, either. But to talk about EVE: Goon Swarm. Zerg the shit out of people. Real-life tactic. The Chinese called it human waves.

I find it confusing that you first naysay anyone or any outfit that uses real-life tactics, and then say "excelling strategically and tactically in competitive online video games". What specific real-life tactics are you talking about? Do you have examples or are you just going to make veiled potshots at every pedantic person here who disagrees with you?

Call me pedantic but I'm proud of my outfit and its record in military-themed games that require teamwork. Call me pedantic but the Enclave got results as well, though a chunk of that came from certain individuals screaming over Teamspeak. From the outside, fighting alongside them and watching their tactics, I can't argue with their results at their prime. Dark Skyes did the same thing (just not as pretty) and achieved results. Sturmgrenadier did the same thing and was successful at times. Delta Triad uses small-unit tactics adapted for use in Planetside and just about everyone I know who isn't VS hates those sons of bitches because of what they do. Along with all of these wins, each of the name-dropped units experienced defeats.

Elude · 2012-02-13, 09:26 PM

A circle jerk of friends who know each other well and don't hold onto specific roles will always beat the group that tries to organize itself into sections.

I find it funny how people think that if there is no order in a group than there is no tactical value and that it's basically a small zerg.... I will take any player who can dynamically change to any class or any role based on the situation rather than rely on a specific player who only wants to do that one role and nothing else.

Relying on players to be experts at one role is the worst tactic in any team oriented game.

Warborn · 2012-02-13, 11:48 PM

Originally Posted by Firefly

I find it confusing that you first naysay anyone or any outfit that uses real-life tactics, and then say "excelling strategically and tactically in competitive online video games". What specific real-life tactics are you talking about? Do you have examples or are you just going to make veiled potshots at every pedantic person here who disagrees with you?

Examples aren't important because it's easy to just scythe them all down with one specific assertion: Nobody who got really good at any video game had to read something about military strategy or tactics in order to do so.

The same thing that happens in any game will happen in Planetside 2. People will play it, they'll get used to how stuff works, and their brains will figure out what works and what doesn't. From there, tactics naturally grow. You don't need to know anything about infantry tactics in real life to become exceptional at playing a FPS game, especially one as dissimilar from reality as Planetside 2 will be. Quoting Sun Tzu and whatnot is nothing more than vanity.

Incidentally, Goonswarm's usage of newbees in rifters as expendable tacklers really isn't so much about human wave stuff. It's equally capitalizing on the ability to lock down valuable targets using hard-for-them-to-hit tackling frigates, and equally, it's a method of getting new players involved in a game that is notoriously difficult for new players to get into otherwise. So it was half a recruiting strategy to build up the corp's numbers and half about using tacklers to be awesome and make really expensive ships die hilarious deaths.

Firefly · 2012-02-14, 12:24 AM

Originally Posted by Warborn

Nobody who got really good at any video game had to read something about military strategy or tactics in order to do so. [...] People will play it, they'll get used to how stuff works, and their brains will figure out what works and what doesn't. From there, tactics naturally grow. You don't need to know anything about infantry tactics in real life to become exceptional at playing a FPS game [...] Quoting Sun Tzu and whatnot is nothing more than vanity.

Bold-italicised emphasis is all mine, to provide stress to key words. I find myself in complete agreement. One doesn't HAVE to do any of this, one doesn't NEED to do any of this, and quoting Sun Tzu (versus knowing the lessons he tried to impart) will not make you a better FPS player.

Warborn · 2012-02-14, 01:08 AM

Attempting to shoe-horn in tactics, rather than allowing tactics to be developed out of experience playing the game, would be to one's detriment, though. Someone like Figment I could imagine wasting a lot of effort trying to use real world tactics for the sake of using real world tactics. Using them not because those tactics are appropriate for use in a setting completely unlike the one they were developed for, but because they are infatuated with the idea of using those tactics. There is a danger in even keeping those tactics at the forefront of one's mind, lest one be sidetracked.

There is another side to this worth pointing out, however. While dwelling on real-life tactics will be a distraction, there will no doubt be games which play very much like Planetside 2 will. It is possible that tactics which worked in those other games might be applied to this new one. Stuff that worked in Planetside 1, or Battlefield 3, could find new life here. Those are tactics potentially worth considering.