Thinking in tickets

[Michael_Denmark]

Tickets...those very basic aggravating mathematical factors on the screen, always going down and typically in the end of that downed round, disallows you - the Commander - to organize that final "Massing in the open" attack which obviously would have turned the tide for your 150 tickets-behind brave and only slightly less focused team.



Tickets…




Questions

When playing Commander, how often do you actually think in tickets?

And if you do...then how?


Is it like?

Okay, West Beach and East Beach defence will cost max. 20 tickets each, but the Dam that’s more like 50 to 80 tickets, cause the MEC team still control those surrounding hills with what seems to be 2 full squads supported by at least one firebase and a AA gun somewhere. And these squads seem really skilled too.

Or is it like?

Until we cap Factory and City we need to gain an advantage of at least 50 tickets in order to have enough to cross the river before the final assault. But where do we gain that?
Which flag/position/area on the map can be used to gain that necessary advantage?

Or is it in some other way you think in tickets?

In a way where you focus on the enemy teams tickets before your own team?




---


Mike

[Doom721]

I don't command often ( rarely )

Though I do think in tickets, its obvious sometimes when you know your team, whether being commanded or not is sending waves and waves of troops into the enemy losing tickets.

Effective K/D ratios for infantry, effective use of armor/vehicles, and effective TACTICS ( What flag will cost more to take, and is it really worthwhile )

The above is kind of a choice you have to make as a team subconsciously..

Is it WORTH the lives to take a certain asset - or should you rather stay back until you have a more effective strategy?

( Wait for the armor, wait for a squad to sneak into say..... 7 gates citadel flag undetected etc. )

I think... thinking in tickets is a good thing, sometimes on maps like Jabal if you play it right as USMC and manage to funnel to one place and defend it, the MEC will burn through more lives trying to "defend" the flag they once owned.

My ... 5$ and 2 cents.

[Doc_Frank]

I think in tickets in the way that it defines the strategy: attack or defend. Counting how much tickets would a bridge's crossing cost is a pretty long shot and can easily be inaccurate. But I definately care about it. If one squad is about to attack a strong enemy CP I rather order them to wait for armored support or other squads to prevent the loss. The outcome of the round usually depends on the efficient work of one single squad anyway, so I try to support those "elites" as best as I can.

A tipical map could be River Qwai. It's pretty balanced, and big enough to require good teamwork. But making guesses there about the ticket ratio is nearly impossible. The strategical placing of the bunkers and firebases decide there.

[torenico]

Obiusly

[Masaq]

I do it in the following kinds of ways:

If we can take and hold the next flag whatever the cost in assaulting it doesn't matter if we're 50 behind because that one extra flag is enough to put the bleed on them, and one flag is easier to defend than two

and

We're 50 behind and they've only 120 points anyway. I could place a bunker at this CP but it'll cost me more than it's worth at this stage.

and even

Shit shit shit shit shit no-one's bloody doing what I say and the squad leaders are all refusing to use VOIP and the map looks like a colour-blindness test card and it's all going to hell and we're 160 tickets behind and we've only got 15 left and I've given sound instructions all along and the only squad that followed them have more points than the other 5 squads put together and quite frankly there's no bloody way I want *my* name on that scoreboard as our commander in 2 minute's time when the scores come up so sod this, I'm resigning

[Michael_Denmark]

Seven out of fifteen say they think in tickets when commanding.

Maybe i need to make the next related poll public, cause i haven’t seen that many players, squad-leaders or commanders playing like if they were thinking in tickets, except from the main stream "Lets Cap until they bleed" ticket mentality. Besides of that i have only on rare occasions experienced someone mention tickets as a factor for a battle decision. But it’s probably just me, the old fart, being a bit X up in the head here...


Is it possible that some of you Yes-Guys could post the server name where you play often?

I wanna learn

Thanks


Mike
Static command is intense command.

[Wasteland]

You rock Michael . I remember the first time I had you as a commander in 0.3. That was inspiring. And C5 was even better.

I rarely think in terms of tickets, to be honest. I only command on asymmetrical maps such as Al Basrah, where I can organize creative approaches consisting of squad-specific mutually supportive operations (Merlin support squad, long range fire support squad, mechanized infantry squad, VCP defense, etc.). In these situations I apply a general strategy and it usually works, but I never think in terms of tickets really.

Apart from this kind of commanding, I don't like to command because it's just too complicated. In an asymmetrical map, if you apply really good strategy and caution, there's little the insurgents can do against you. In a regular map, your strategy is only as good as you adapt it based on the opposing force's actions. That kind of on the fly thinking, all the while dealing with logistics, is just too complicated for me to have fun with. Maybe one day I'll get there.

[Outlawz7]

I usually build, when there's a CP, that's secure. Most of the time, CPs don't last for 5 minutes, until lost again and if you start building there, the entire thing goes to hell, when the enemy overruns you and blows everything up.
Especially, when you're losing/having ticket bleed/slaughtered (Gulf of Oman springs to mind), those lost tickets from a never built bunker and destroyed commander truck can make a difference.

Also, I like to go a bit of lone wolf, when commander and search for enemy assets myself or RPs, making it easier for the team, so they can focus on something else.

[fuzzhead]

outlawz no offense but i hate commanders that go lone wolf

i love commanders that dont risk themselves and coordinate between squads, and i love commanders that relay important information to other squads, and commanders that sort out squads that are just not helping the team (going to the enemy mainbase or some CP that is not anywhere close to the frontline)

i think its important as commander to build assets wisely and not just think about assets, but rather think of the 'grand scheme' of things. if assets would help in an area, start building, otherwise if theyre not needed, dont bother.

thinking in tickets is a great way to win an overall largescale map like kashan, qwai, oman and jabal.

[Outlawz7]

Yes, but everywhere I go commander, the other team just slaughters us and my team doesn't know a thing.
On Ejod, I held off an enemy squad coming over the archway at East City with my M16 and a couple of well thrown grenades, even followed them, when they smoked everything up and their SL was hiding behind the corner, so they could spawn on him and killed 3, before I got mowed down.
Not to mention the hordes of MEC coming from all over, as the combat zone is miles away now, how am I supposed to build, if I get overrun all the time?

[<1sk>Headshot]

If you don't think of tickets then you're not going to help your team much.. The game is won and lost with tickets.

[OkitaMakoto]

I think PR needs to add MORE tickets and make the rounds last longer. I wouldnt mind playing a round that I didnt get to finish. i think rounds are too short and so people dont get to take the time that soldiers would in planning out, observing, and setting ambushes, etc

PR needs to increase tickets and get used to longer rounds that one might not get to see the end of...

Thats just imho

[Wasteland]

I think PR needs to add MORE tickets and make the rounds last longer. I wouldnt mind playing a round that I didnt get to finish. i think rounds are too short and so people dont get to take the time that soldiers would in planning out, observing, and setting ambushes, etc

PR needs to increase tickets and get used to longer rounds that one might not get to see the end of...

Thats just imho

I hear you Okita, but our idea of how PR could be played is kind of skewed by ArmA, no?

What I mean is, as long as you have two adversarial sides trying to cap each other's CPs, you're going to have that "race mentality", where each side is trying to throw as many bodies on the CP as possible. This will happen regardless of how long the match is, since a long match will just represent a longer race. Ambushes are great for more objective-based missions, which I think PR should definitely branch into.

But I'm afraid that as long as we have any kind of AAS, we won't see much of an improvement in gameplay. I think this is the success of situations found in TG or Op Real. In TG (when the TG guys are playing and there's tight administrating), your primary goal is not to win, but to follow their procedures and experience that tight squad-play with a competent CoC. In Op Real (as I understand things... I've never looked into it that much) a scenario is set up and played out outside the confines of AAS gameplay.

One thing I want to mention is that I like long rounds on good maps, but if I'm just not feeling the map, I hate waiting around for the round to be over.

[Outlawz7]

Well, one thing I do like, is that ticket bleed rarely forces you into mad CP rush, except on GoO, where those extra 50 ticket run out very quickly, before you can reach the beachhead.

One thing I always hated about vBf2, was the ticket bleed. One side controlling a flag more than the other and the other already starts to bleed (Mashtuur comes to mind)

Then again, the pace of the game is still too fast. For example, when a CP is lost, the team never realizes, that they need to defend the next flags that are in the group, and before they get back on the lost flag, the other team already captures the other CP.
IMO, there should be a delay, before the next AAS group can be captured to minimize the "k, we captured his, lets rush to the next one, since it's cappable now"

I like rounds to last about 1-2 hours, the 5-6 on open beta Kashan desert was waaay too much, literally spent the entire evening playing one round.

[OkitaMakoto]

Maybe if CP's were made even larger? Like, to cover a few city blocks or a full village? So itd be even further from the bf2 CP mentality. I know this is where PR was wanting to go with the earlier CP changes in capture radius, but I honestly think it could be extended even more to become something like Areas of Control...

amiright?

Idk...

[Viper5]

Whenever possible, I dont build any assets because I believe it A. takes troops from frontline and B. wastes tickets. Sure, that Firebase might give a spawn, but if the APC is closer and is cautious then we have a quick ticket advantage.

[Tweaky]

Always.

If the team has 100 tickets, and the enemy is above or below that, I think about not building anymore... all the time... and just use my command trucks to give the team spawns.

If I build before the 50 ticket limit, there is always a good chance that it won't be useful... and just take away too many tickets.

It is every 10 minutes that bunkers and firebases credit you 10 tickets back to your team's score right?

Even if the team has 150 tickets, I worry... because usually around that time the team is either struggling or winning. If they are struggling, I'd build... in hopes that we earn tickets in the last stages of the round. I've had some really close calls where the team was losing 7 to 12, and then a bunker/firebase gave us 10 tickets back to turn the score around to 6-3 after people were dying. End score was 3-0 our team . Have had a few of these "bunker saves the day" rounds at the end... they are always a shocker . Opponents always saying "gg" when they believe they have the win wrapped up in their favor.... then our team all laughs when we get the tickets turned around on them

Commanding is quite fun if you do it right. I am a fast commander to build and hide stuff... and I see soooo many commanders not understand a lot of primary concepts of their job. (eg, Building assets in hidden areas and NOT on the flag area, trying to not eat up tickets, using trucks as a forward spawn (also hidden), etc).

Heck, I've even built bunkers at the main uncappable base where the enemy cannot go (certain maps).... JUST so we can earn an unholy amount of tickets to win the game. Then firebases do all the work for spawns in between CPs.

[Outlawz7]

Maybe if CP's were made even larger? Like, to cover a few city blocks or a full village? So itd be even further from the bf2 CP mentality. I know this is where PR was wanting to go with the earlier CP changes in capture radius, but I honestly think it could be extended even more to become something like Areas of Control...

amiright?

Idk...

It's already like that, the cap range on North Village in Kashan is like 120 m, for example. Except on OGT, where Rhinub made the North/South Bridge cap range 3 m

[OkitaMakoto]

It's already like that, the cap range on North Village in Kashan is like 120 m, for example. Except on OGT, where Rhinub made the North/South Bridge cap range 3 m

Yeah, some are big as Id like, but some still aren't. I talked w/ Fuzz though

[Sabre_tooth_tigger]

If you didnt build a bunker at the UCB in your last game commanding I think you should answer no to this question personally.

Is it worth it? Almost certainly


With all these tactics posts, it always seems slightly hypocritical. We never apply as much thought in game that we would concocting grand plans on the forums.


Put it this way, are you a good chess player ? Maybe yes, ok prehaps. How good are your tactics in a timed game with 1 second a move, probably quite ****. Thats not your fault, who can think properly when rushed

The average FPS game we play is not tactical at all and the simplist stuff is best imo, like building a bunker