Assault - Defence & Strategic CO Assets

[[T]Terranova7]

One thing I notice with PR is how some of the maps, especially the larger ones tend to spread out alot of players. Although AAS helps by making it so that both sides must concentrate on specific flags, with these large maps players take all sorts of different routes and such that engagements tend to be few and far between. Some of the best memories from older versions of PR was storming a flag with not just your own squad, but most of the entire team.

What I'm thinking of here, is redesigning maps in a more "breakthrough" like fashion. With one team mostly on the assault and the other on mostly the defence. It is to my understading, this is the sort of manner many RL engagements are fought in. It's normally one side attacking an enemy held position, not both sides racing toward a head on collison with one another.

So what I propose is making some of the existing maps so that one side holds the majority of CPs. On Kashan, the MEC could hold most of the flags except one of the villages (the one close to the U.S base) and U.S outpost. On Operation Ghost Train, perhaps the PLA could hold possesion of all flags except the British MB and Tunnel flags. You can change the AAS group too, such as making the Temple and North Bunker flags the first priority for the Brits to attack, and the PLA to defend. This concept can be applied to other maps also.

The thing about breakthrough though, is that once the defending team loses a flag, there's no chance of taking it back as it becomes uncappable to the defending team. An idea (hopefully possible) would be to create a brief "Counter-Attack" period where the defending team has the opportunity to reclaim the flag. This period may last anywhere from 5 to 10 to 15 minutes depending on balance, size of the map and amount of CPs needed to take to move onto the next CP group.

What this does is allow the defending team to respawn on nearby spawns (RPs, Bunkers, Command Trucks, APCs etc.) that may be still in the region and continue to make attempts at recapturing the flag, though they must be quick about it. During this phase the assaulting team must make an effort to "secure" the area around the CP, they cannot capture the next CP group until this counter-attack period is over.

What this concept does is allow the defending team to concentrate their resources on defence, while the assaulting team on attack. The Counter-Attack feature sort of turns the table for both teams a bit, making it possible for the defenders to retake lost flags, and give attacking teams reason to defend.

__________

Some more complicated ideas might fall into the hands of the team's respective Commander.

* Instead of the "Counter-Attack" period occuring automatically, I'm thinking of possibly having the defending team's commander have to intiate this process. Basically the Commander can request "Counter-Attack" through the commo rose or command screen. He/she can use this function at any time, allowing the defending team to make an attempt at retaking the assaulting team's closest CP group. The Counter-Attack function has a long reload period, and can only be used once every 20 or more minutes, so timing is critical. The assaulting team however can still attack the defender's CP group.

* For the attacking team, their CO has the option to use a "Blitzkrieg" function (I couldn't think of a simplier or better name). What this does is open up the next CP group to the assaulting team. For example, say on Ghost Train you're the British. You've just captured the North Bunker, and your next objective is the South Bunker. What Blitzkrieg does is give the Brits the chance to not only capture the South Bunker, but attack the Trenches and Train flags as well. What the Blitzkrieg function does is allow the assaulting team to capture the next CP group in addition to one already needed to move on. The reload time is very long, possibly 30 minutes or more, and of course, the effect lasts only for a short time period (say 5 to 10 minutes). So timing and organization is crucial to using this tactic effectively.

The Counter-Attack and Blitzkrieg functions add a dynamic to the AAS order, it also gives the commanders an interesting, powerful and strategic asset to work with. Overall it delivers the potential of having a different round every time you play the map.

[Cerberus]

One of the best suggestions I've seen in a while, Terranova. I especially like the Blitzkrieg and Counterattack commands.

[dbzao]

Very interesting ideas indeed...

[[T]Terranova7]

Glad to see some positive responses . I'm still working out the typos, this idea took me a few hours to brainstorm on and actually type the thing. I tried to make it understandable without creating an extremely lenghty post.

[danthemanbuddy]

I support this message, and suggestion :d

[GeZe]

I while ago I posted something similar, yet the very opposite.

My idea is to keep maps as they are now, even, not attack/defend.

Then, when a team caps a flag, it is given a 5 minute period where that flag can not be retaken so it can attack the next flag.

The idea being that you have advances over multiple flags. Concentrated pushes, and when it runs out of steam, the other team can have their push, again over multiple flags. Instead of the back and forth over a single flag or two.


The problem with your idea is it creates the very opposite. Say the Brits take the first flag, then the Chinese counter attack. They take it. Then the Brits take it again after a while. The Chinese counter attack and retake it. ...over and over...

[Outlawz7]

I like the current setting, because it forces you to DEFEND one CP, while going for another...

Start defending and the whack-a-flag as it is now, may dissappear

[[T]Terranova7]

I while ago I posted something similar, yet the very opposite.

My idea is to keep maps as they are now, even, not attack/defend.

Then, when a team caps a flag, it is given a 5 minute period where that flag can not be retaken so it can attack the next flag.

The idea being that you have advances over multiple flags. Concentrated pushes, and when it runs out of steam, the other team can have their push, again over multiple flags. Instead of the back and forth over a single flag or two.


The problem with your idea is it creates the very opposite. Say the Brits take the first flag, then the Chinese counter attack. They take it. Then the Brits take it again after a while. The Chinese counter attack and retake it. ...over and over...

You have a point but...

That might happen with the intial idea (The one where counter-attack is automatic) But with the Counter-Attack and Blitzkrieg functions being granted to the Commander, it might turn out a little differently.

With the CO using these as strategic assets, both the Counter-Attack and Blitzkrieg functions have long reload periods. My idea puts it around 20 minutes or more. But that of course, is assuming the team has an active Commander and potentially (Just thought of this) an active command post. (Taking your scenario) During this counter-attack period, there's a limited amount of time the Chinese have to recapture the British flag (I'd put it around 10 minutes). Even more so, the British have the opportunity to take the Chinese flag. The Brits can even take it a step further if their commander intiates a Blitzkrieg, allowing the Brits to take the next flags in AAS order.

Also, we have to consider that Counter-Attacks and Blitzkriegs may not always be successful.

[nidpants]

I guess I don't support the notion of commander "power ups" like the Blitzkrieg and Counterattack "triggers", though I appreciate the thrust of your idea (and don't feel PR would be the worse for its implementation). It's just that specific commander-enabled "triggers" don't feel "right" in a game that strives for realism, and I can't think of a real rationale for limiting the use of these decisions (unless your force is North Korean or Ba`athist Iraqi or something - even the PLA emphasizes commanders taking the initiative instead of asking permission).

I've felt like the AAS game mode represents meeting engagements of two forces attempting to take the same strategic points (in the case of Kashan, it's the two airstrips and the bunker within several kilometers of eachother.) I think what you're presenting is a good example of the necessity for a new game mode, i.e. a Hold the Line sort of scenario in ADDITION to Assalt-And-Secure.

I guess my suggestion is that for this type of game, the Attackers ALWAYS have the option of attacking the next two "levels" of flags, and the defender is ONLY allowed to counterattack on the next level, so pretty much Counterattack and Blitzkrieg are always in effect. It's hardly historically exceptional to try to cut off or encircle a defending force, right?

[indigo|blade]

Interesting ideas there Terra, very creative!

However, I tend to agree with nidpants.

I've felt like the AAS game mode represents meeting engagements of two forces attempting to take the same strategic points (in the case of Kashan, it's the two airstrips and the bunker within several kilometers of eachother.) I think what you're presenting is a good example of the necessity for a new game mode, i.e. a Hold the Line sort of scenario in ADDITION to Assalt-And-Secure.

[Long Bow]

Terranova I really appreciate the effort you put into this. I don't know if I can really see this working on a public server though. A tournament would be a different story perhaps.

What I see is Hills of Hanoymang (sp?) which is a complete slaughter fest currently. Unfortunately commanders that know what their doing are few and far between, so may never use the extra command functions. The current system is more dynamic and has a risk/reward thing happening (though your system has this as well). You know you have to defend one CP and attack another, how much to you push and when?? (again yours has this but it is soley up to the commander instead of the squads) One thing that I don't understand is how would the blitz work? If you are attacking point A, initiate the blitz allowing for B and C to be capped and your team caps B but not A, then what? Can you attack C from B or must you cap A first?

I would love to see something like you have described as I think it would be great to play with on a server with lots of experinced players. I just fear how it will play with the current amount of new players still trying to grasp the basics?

[[T]Terranova7]

I guess I don't support the notion of commander "power ups" like the Blitzkrieg and Counterattack "triggers", though I appreciate the thrust of your idea (and don't feel PR would be the worse for its implementation). It's just that specific commander-enabled "triggers" don't feel "right" in a game that strives for realism, and I can't think of a real rationale for limiting the use of these decisions (unless your force is North Korean or Ba`athist Iraqi or something - even the PLA emphasizes commanders taking the initiative instead of asking permission).

I've felt like the AAS game mode represents meeting engagements of two forces attempting to take the same strategic points (in the case of Kashan, it's the two airstrips and the bunker within several kilometers of eachother.) I think what you're presenting is a good example of the necessity for a new game mode, i.e. a Hold the Line sort of scenario in ADDITION to Assalt-And-Secure.

I guess my suggestion is that for this type of game, the Attackers ALWAYS have the option of attacking the next two "levels" of flags, and the defender is ONLY allowed to counterattack on the next level, so pretty much Counterattack and Blitzkrieg are always in effect. It's hardly historically exceptional to try to cut off or encircle a defending force, right?

Hey thanks for the response.

What I was trying to accomplish with the Blitzkrieg and Counter-Attack effects was to give the Commander a new important function on the battlefield. Thus making the need for not only just a commander, but a good one as well. It's not so much that the CO is asking for permission or anything, but has gathered the logistics, intel, resources etc. to intiate a new strategy.

The whole Defenders and Attackers concept makes it so that each team has a priority, assault or defence. With Blitz and Counter-Attack functions serving as "gamebreakers" of sorts. However, with only a limited window of time to make use of the Counter-Attack and Blitz functions, the team must have good coordination between the CO and SLs to be successful.

If Blitz and Counter-Attack were always in automatic effect, it would be no more different than the current AAS design (By that I mean somewhat predictable). With the problem being that the attackers have an advantage of always being able to capture a larger set of flags and the defenders only the next flag in the AAS chain. Which might create more imbalances than anything if one team has to spread itself out to defend 1, 2 sometimes up to 4 flags simultaneously while trying to capture the attackers CP.

As CO assets, they can be used but have strict limits to them. However, using them successfully can be very rewarding.

Terranova I really appreciate the effort you put into this. I don't know if I can really see this working on a public server though. A tournament would be a different story perhaps.

What I see is Hills of Hanoymang (sp?) which is a complete slaughter fest currently. Unfortunately commanders that know what their doing are few and far between, so may never use the extra command functions. The current system is more dynamic and has a risk/reward thing happening (though your system has this as well). You know you have to defend one CP and attack another, how much to you push and when?? (again yours has this but it is soley up to the commander instead of the squads) One thing that I don't understand is how would the blitz work? If you are attacking point A, initiate the blitz allowing for B and C to be capped and your team caps B but not A, then what? Can you attack C from B or must you cap A first?

I would love to see something like you have described as I think it would be great to play with on a server with lots of experinced players. I just fear how it will play with the current amount of new players still trying to grasp the basics?

The Assault & Defence concept in its base is just the breakthrough style gamemode with the CO assets serving as those ace cards. It dedicates one team to attack, and the other to defence just like Desert Storm plays. I'm hoping that by doing so, it will make capturing of flags much more intense as there will be much more focused engagements. With the way it is now, squads are just going back and forth, east and west, north and south to try and take the next flag. Normally, by the time you reach the flag you need to attack you meet little to no resistance. It's not until you cap the flag that the opposition starts falling back.

I wanted to change that by making it so that most of the team would focus their efforts on one task of defending and the other on attack. This way, when your storming what's suppose to be a heavily guarded military installation, you find more than just a single squad trying to defend the place, you may very well find the entire team defending the flag.

The Blitzkrieg actually only opens up the next CP group, whether it be a single CP or two. We'll take EJOD for example. Say if the MEC are defending the city. Right now, the U.S must attack Ruin, and the MEC must defend it. The MEC cannot make an attempt at capturing Gas Station without the Counter-Attack effect being triggered. If the U.S use the Blitzkrieg function, they can make an attempt at taking the East and West city. Though, they must still attack and secure the Ruin flag before moving for Gardens.

Now... there may be several ways this can play out. Say the U.S take and hold East City, but never capture the West and the blitz effect times out. They still have to take Ruin before advancing on West City, then onto Gardens. The MEC can intiate a Counter-Attack giving them the oppotunity to retake East City, but not the Gas Station in this case. If the U.S holds the East City and cannot take ruin, they can use the blitzkrieg function again (when it reloads) and attempt to take West City. Should they succeed, the Blitz function cannot be used again in the same manner (meaning the U.S can't attempt to take Gardens without first securing Ruin).

[ReaperMAC]

I like this idea

One of the more better suggestions.

[Long Bow]

Thanks for the clarification Terranovoa That makes sense to me. I agree that a more focused fight would be nice. With the new maps being so large sometimes the fighting is very sporadic at cp when it should be an all out brawl.

I do really like this idea and would love to see it fleshed out somemore. However it's going to need to be very clear as how it works becasue if it is overly complex and conviluted the public servers may never play this great game mode. People are still struggling to figure weapon caches and civi's

[Aljen]

Wow this is a great idea Terranova. I believe that people on public servers would be able to adapt to it (it just need some time until more and more people have RTFM).

The MEC can intiate a Counter-Attack giving them the oppotunity to retake East City, but not the Gas Station in this case

I do not understand why should MECs attack East City with valuable Counter-Attack perk as that flag can be capped normally (they control Ruins) or am I mistaken?

names:
Blitzkrieg and Counter-Attack are more like Flanking maneuvers in a bigger scale. I think Blitzkrieg means something different (Fast attack at the weakest point in enemy line with huge force). In your concept it is more like you are circumventing enemy lines and attack flag behind the front line.

[[T]Terranova7]

Wow this is a great idea Terranova. I believe that people on public servers would be able to adapt to it (it just need some time until more and more people have RTFM).



I do not understand why should MECs attack East City with valuable Counter-Attack perk as that flag can be capped normally (they control Ruins) or am I mistaken?

names:
Blitzkrieg and Counter-Attack are more like Flanking maneuvers in a bigger scale. I think Blitzkrieg means something different (Fast attack at the weakest point in enemy line with huge force). In your concept it is more like you are circumventing enemy lines and attack flag behind the front line.

Thanks...

On that note, it's still an idea at this point, but you may be right and that could be subject to change (WRT the Counter-Attack function). I couldn't think of a better title for the whole Blitzkrieg function. It's German for lighting war and the reason I choosed it can be gathered from this quote on wiki.

Bltizkrieg (German, literally Lighting War or flash war) is a popular name for an offensive operational military doctrine which involves an intial bombardment followed by the employment of mobile forces attacking with speed and suprise to prevent an enemy from implementing a coherent defense.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blitzkrieg

The part in bold is where I drew similarities. Though at this point it's just a name so it could subject to change from a better suited one.

[Aljen]

I used this one
"A military strategy used by the Germans at the beginning of World War II to achieve victory through a series of quick offensives, especially in Belgium, Holland and France. After an initial bombardment, armour and motorised infantry were mobilised rapidly to break the weakest parts of the enemy line."

[<1sk>Headshot]

Similar to 'Frontline' game mode on POE2 mod. It wasn't played very often by the community though for some reason..