Project Reality Forums

Danzic I think you missed the op's complaint. It's not about main bases or uncaps but about players attacking objectives out side of aas.

Why would anyone go to an area that is not part of the operation at the time, it is a blatant waist of man power and does nothing to help the team with the objective. If anything it detracts from the teams overall objective and will make it harder for the rest of your team to win when you are not helping flank the enemy with your squad whilst you are over there at a non-op eating sandwiches and gathering "no" points.

Really the only reason anyone would attack 'no-cap' is strictly for gaining KDR(kill, death, ratio).

If anyone has another reason for it, I'd welcome your contribution to the info exchange!

That is all!

pdxmark wrote:Why would anyone go to an area that is not part of the operation at the time, it is a blatant waist of man power and does nothing to help the team with the objective. If anything it detracts from the teams overall objective and will make it harder for the rest of your team to win when you are not helping flank the enemy with your squad whilst you are over there at a non-op eating sandwiches and gathering "no" points.

Really the only reason anyone would attack 'no-cap' is strictly for gaining KDR(kill, death, ratio).

If anyone has another reason for it, I'd welcome your contribution to the info exchange!

That is all!

Once again. Think you to miss interprited the op's complaint.

The best way to explane this IMO :
you are usmc on muttrah.
Your team is attacking northcity according to the aas.
But a squad is attacking westcity, which is also grey and would be considered the mec obj.
Westcity turns in mec favor.
Previously mentioned squad fails to adapt to the changing battlefield and doesn't relize they now need to help the team to get north before west is even an option.


Correct me if I am wrong op but that is the kind of situation you are refering to correct?

AgentMongoose wrote:Once again. Think you to miss interprited the op's complaint.

The best way to explane this IMO :
you are usmc on muttrah.
Your team is attacking northcity according to the aas.
But a squad is attacking westcity, which is also grey and would be considered the mec obj.
Westcity turns in mec favor.
Previously mentioned squad fails to adapt to the changing battlefield and doesn't relize they now need to help the team to get north before west is even an option.


Correct me if I am wrong op but that is the kind of situation you are refering to correct?

No, he got it right, he meant "no cap" as in flags you cannot take and are not the current objective.

And yes, i mean the game flags not the main bases...

everyone has their own ideas of how to win, I tend to just pick a squad to follow and support in their goals.

however when I am commander you can expect a whole team formation defending a flag until we can organise a well ordered assault. (keep defending until the enemy slacks off and hopefully brings their defenders to your flag, then use transports to send 2-3 squads to their flag as fast as possible to avoid compromising your flag)

I know exactly what the OP is saying. I mean, if you have a good team and send 1 or 2 squads out to soften the enemy or secure a no yet cappable objective, thats one thing. What usually happens is: No inter-squad teamwork, 1 or 2 squads go to the current objective and the rest of the squads basically do what the OP said...try to be "sneaky" and rush ahead into an objective you cant cap yet or create a firebase in some obscure location without communicating with each other.

What ends up happening is squads hopping back and forth between the same 2 objectives the whole game, which in the end isnt ver fun.

I think the moral of the story is...communicate with the whole team and dont be focused on your own squads well being.

Much of it also depends on the map.

Example
Muttrah: USMC sends a squad to East City Center to stop the enemy from capping, allowing the rest of the team to Cap docks and North City. Reduces the amount of worrying about docks when you can defend North City. If MEC caps, the squad should definetly pull back unless North City has been capped by friendlies.

L4gi wrote:Much of it also depends on the map.

Example
Muttrah: USMC sends a squad to East City Center to stop the enemy from capping, allowing the rest of the team to Cap docks and North City. Reduces the amount of worrying about docks when you can defend North City. If MEC caps, the squad should definetly pull back unless North City has been capped by friendlies.

But what really happens is that

a) MEC attacks with full force, mows down the squad without any problems and advances forward...

b) MEC rushes to docks, leaving city empty and uncapped and US rushing to the city while leaving docks uncapped...


Id say, send out 1 or 2 guys, for recon, not the whole squad just to waste a logi truck and a fob and tickets...

In rare cases the rushing squad makes at least decend FOB, but then also ruins it when they keep comming from it trying to stop the attacking force, instead of waiting in cover/retreat to defendable objective, to let the FOB be useful when attack occurs...

I think the success of sending someone to the enemy flags is somewhat about who you send. You cant put randoms to do the mission, but some experienced vets who know what they are doing. You dont necessarily have to shoot people, just hide.

Even if you do get a good squad you know would pull back in a losing fight, they build a fob down there and everyone else will go 'Oh look a fob down there, lets spawn on it' next thing you know you have a bunch of smurfs running around where they shouldnt be.

Thats why pubbing tends to suck.

Did not agree with everything said.

The stuff about not using choppers for AA or tanks for AT, sure.

But I got the impression the OP wanted to devolve tactics in PR back to the use of line infantry and muskets, with agreements as to where the battle will start, and taking turns to act and the like.

I am all for the entire spectrum of tactics, and that includes pushing security forces ahead of the main body to delay the enemy, or to allow an advantage in capping speed.

[R-CON]Rudd wrote:(keep defending until the enemy slacks off and hopefully brings their defenders to your flag, then use transports to send 2-3 squads to their flag as fast as possible to avoid compromising your flag)

I agree - rushing blob beats pretty much all, and once you have retaken the first flag, the enemy cant respond quick enough to defend the others effectively. Its hard to get a pub team to do it though.

Truism wrote:Did not agree with everything said.


But I got the impression the OP wanted to devolve tactics in PR back to the use of line infantry and muskets, with agreements as to where the battle will start, and taking turns to act and the like.

Im just saying tha battle should be centered between two flags, from then on you can use whatever tactic you want.

Centering the battle on two flags is more WWI than musket combat, but my point stands.

AAS is not a measure to stop teams from using more advanced tactics, it's merely there to limit the effectiveness of those tactics by forcing them to be used more like their real life counterparts:

IE. you can't capture things behind the line of engagement, but you can use them to inflict delay, neutralisation, destruction and the like.


War is pretty much never centered on static lines or points anymore. Forces must be more diffuse and mobile than ever in the history of combat due to the increased lethality of weapons systems.

I join in on Truism on the open warfare stance

Can we please stop referring to rushing as "advanced tactics" because it just isn't. I have played many many online games fps, rts whatever and rushing is prevalent in all of them.
It doesn't take a genius to charge up the map with the most powerful weapon you can find and blow half the team away as they are getting set up, for me this spoils the whole immersion thing.

Also and not naming names, but you know who you are. The guilty culprits usually only do it on certain maps and on certain sides.eg: It's much easier to rush with tanks to nth vill on kashan as mec and camp it than it is to rush sth vill with abrahms and do the same.
I'm sorry but the majority of people who do this are playing for themselves and their selfish little egos. I've also seen many many times the same people who when failing at said rush and lose their asset rage quit straight away, leading me once again to the conclusion that they're inherently selfish.These are also the same people that consider themselves far better players than most when sadly the truth is that they just look for the easiest way to get kills and increase their army of 15 yr old fanboys.

If you think about it, rushing against a team who know what they're doing is the worst thing you can do, and here's why: Everyone is alive at the start of a round, all armour is up and running, all HAT kits are available, so basically everything that can kill your rushing tank/apc/FAV whatever is on the map and ready to take you out.

You have done zero recon, all you have done is charge up the map because you know what direction the majority of the team is coming from. This can be done by simply looking at your map........... So please enlighten me, where is the tactics in that? How much great thought went into knowing a good spot to camp them as they emerge from main? Apart from seeing someone else do it, which is where most of the so called "rushers" and "great tacticians" get their ideas from.



Finally as has been stated before a good side will always beat a rushing side because as far as i'm concerned that's what this mod is all about and rushing/camping/baseraping etc is for vanilla.

I have used this strategy a couple of times. NOT just rushing carelessly but moving as an entire squad behind enemy lines, building a forward outpost flanking the 'next' flag and thereby preparing ahead of the coming assault.
While standing by we scout enemy movement before they engage our troops.

smiley wrote:Whahwhahwhah

Rushing = full on attack.
Camping = full on defence.
Bounding Overwatch = combination of the above.

Whatever people say, there isn't a whole load of tactics to use in PR - they basically boil down to the 3 tactics above. What you seem to be saying is that PR should be confined to a single tactic to be used on every single round, due to you being butthurt at not fighting the enemy on your terms. ??:

User received infraction for insulting other users.

I dont have an army of fanboys.