Project Reality Forums

Wicca wrote: And Suppression fire in PR is something i rarely see, i only see covering fire, so that statment is false.

Incorrect, shoot the enemy, cause the suppression effect on their screen to stop them from aiming properly. Presto, suppression fire.

The british army went for 3 fireteams in a section during the falklands war, it was a mistake, and theyve reverted back to 2 fireteams. So basically, as a leader you need to make things simple so you can be effective, if you overcomplicate everything youll spend more time thinking and talking that acting, and its really the acting its all about.

This statement contradicts your one below. Was reverting to three a good idea? If so, why 'doesn't it work, why it slow, and confusing' as you said below..

I have had the 3 buddy team system myself, it doesnt work, its slow, confusing and just bugs you down.

And I'm an avid enthusiast of KISS. I don't know how idiotic your pubbers are in Europe but I'm sure they can count to 2. Simple, right?

Anyway this is going nowhere, we're juxtaposing our individual tactics which both seem to work pretty well. Agree to disagree.

manligheten wrote: The only thing you need to counter that is a LMG. With a lmg, you got as much firepower as a squad, some what.

Yeah that is true to a certain extent, but the thing with an LMG is it can't be looking at 3 places at once. Splitting into three teams, lead team (medic/SL), AR team (AR/specialist for grapples up high) and Assault team (Ideally RF/RF or RF/grenadier) can cause the LMG to discriminate, letting the other two teams having a go at him.

Unless the LMG has a 10 000 DPI mouse and he can look everywhere quickly

Fenrir07 wrote: The famous Chinaman Sun Tzu said:

"Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat".
Fits the concept of lone-wolfing very good IMHO.

The current AAS mode requires attrition and more attrition, so strategy goes out the window anyhow.

manligheten wrote:PR isn't much about objectives it's more about attrition. Thus lone wolfing is very effective.

I disagree, on both counts.

The organised team will outfight, outpace and outmanouver any number of lone-wolfs.

Also, in the attrition battle the squad is superior to the lone-wolf.

Hunt3r wrote:The current AAS mode requires attrition and more attrition, so strategy goes out the window anyhow.

it only becomes attrition when both teams are equally well organised and armed, as they block eachother's countermoves

all other times one side outfights or outmanovres the enemy opening up strategic as well as tactical options.

Hunt3r wrote:The current AAS mode requires attrition and more attrition, so strategy goes out the window anyhow.

Attrition is a strategy, albiet a crude one.

It is often said that the prime example of attrition warfare is the western front of WWI.

Sun Tzu was not a big fan of attrition warfare, btw.

Fenrir07 wrote:I disagree, on both counts.

The organised team will outfight, outpace and outmanouver any number of lone-wolfs.

Also, in the attrition battle the squad is superior to the lone-wolf.

Not entirely. There are many squads that are highly organized but their objectives or tactics are also highly ineffective.

Skill has a lot do with your success.

You need a combination of skill, tactics, and teamwork to be truly effective. One of these doesn't always trump the other.

Fenrir07 wrote:Attrition is a strategy, albiet a crude one.

Well its pretty much the general strategy for insurgents


but in AAS as much as its crude its also a tactic thats that much recommended due to the fact that you will either stretch out too much or your squad is not experienced enough (ill use the term "experience" instead of "skill"...)

Wicca wrote:Actually, its since people has started beleiving so much in the Team, that people stop thinking for themselfs under firefights, they just watch their bearing.

But it is possible to have a squad of lonewolfers, or wolfpack, that can actually do some serious damage and follow orders at the same time, its just practice practice practice.

That gives me an idea, I'll make a squad of lone wolfs... but Instead I will have every body communicate and instead of just attacking all as a group... we will spread out and attack a single point from multiple directions.

Fenrir07 wrote:I disagree, on both counts.

The organised team will outfight, outpace and outmanouver any number of lone-wolfs.

Also, in the attrition battle the squad is superior to the lone-wolf.

I love how your avatar is a.... wolf.


I've seen lone wolfs sneak into positions that would be very difficult to do with an entire squad and take out multiple squads.

TBH, you don't NEED the firepower of an LMG. A single rifle on semi-auto is enough to be VERY effective, as long as you play smart and you do the divide and conquer strategy to split up a squad.

Play as if your life is at stake.

Strategically, PR's AAS is all attrition. You slowly grind and kill your way across the map, eventually winning. Tactically, it's a toss up.

Lone wolfing is very effective, especially with the rally point changes now. All you really have to do is be sneaky, track, and than ambush a squad and once you take out their medic, SL, or a couple of their guys, they are screwed since they can't spawn close to them anymore. So lone wolves can be pretty effective in breaking up squad coordination. Since everyone pretty much spawns off of FOBs too, its real easy to lone wolf if you have a lot of FOBs on your team.

Its most effective on Insurgency though. Not only can you disguise yourself as an insurgent as an OPFOR, but its real easy to sneak past insurgents and ninja caches by yourself. I'm pretty sure that if someone kept track, that lone wolves or 2-3 man squads destroy more caches than full 6 man squads or multiple squads attacking one cache. Being alone is easy not to get noticed either if you know what you are doing. And when insurgents go lone wolfing, they can take out FOBs so easily it is silly.

Fenrir07 wrote:I disagree, on both counts.

The organised team will outfight, outpace and outmanouver any number of lone-wolfs.

Also, in the attrition battle the squad is superior to the lone-wolf.

No way. All a lone wolf has to do is take out 1-2 members of a squad to screw over a squad. If he can permanently kill or stop someone from reviving, then the lone wolf will have pretty much split the squad up in two as their priority will be regrouping with the other squad mates now than attacking (usually).

For an organized team to be really effective against lone wolves requires extreme teamwork, as in everyone moving together and staying close. The further a team is spread out, the easier it is for a lone wolf to do damage.

Well, i think lonewolfs are quite healthy if they voice their oppinions.

Ive seen squads repeat attacks over and over at the same spot, even several squads repeat attacks on positions, that is just suicide, and in their mind, IF WE DO IT AGAIN WE WILL PUSH THROUGH.

People stop thinking for themselfs, they just "Play"

Now lonewolfers, might be outcast but atleast they are trying a different approach, so what im saying is, dont let the individuality disappear in the seemingless endless men that die with no reason on the PR battlefield, think smart, act quickly. Never make the same mistake twice.

Like Patton says "If we are all thinking the same thing, someone isnt thinking" Or he said something like that.

The reason why Lonewolfing might work, is the size of squads in PR, the confusion of organizing 6 people, i mean sure i can do it, but its babysitting, having 4 guys i know is better imo.

Small teams are more stealthy more easy to control, and gives you a better tactical advantage in a fight if you are able to kill or supress the enemy from more than one angle.

If a soldier is cappable to think for himself and say, hey this is what is best for the squad, if i throw this grenade and flank, obviously he communicates this.

And all the other squadmembers identify their position and their best angle of approach and how they can fight through.

So, what im saying is, having 4 sharp and quick people, is better than 6 sheep not able to understand what is going on and who is fighting who at what direction.

Tactics are good, and mindless walking in lines are not.

What im saying is that to win firefights, you dont need to be better at aiming or stronger than the enemy, outsmart him and outwit him, with your squad.

Also, the 3 fireteam system is quite hard to push through since you have 3 different teams to watch, and imo simple is better, and thats why i like 2 fireteams since its less. And less is more.
But i guess we can agree to disagree.

Am I the only one who really thinks lonewolfing is contradicting the reason to play this mod?
I mean, sure, people have various reasons to why they like this mod and play it but the one main reason I play this is because I know I can get some good teamwork going every round. I can bunch up with 5 (or more) more or less random people and have a good time with laughs and stuff.
I also like how I can take my time, observe the situation, have a humm of where the enemy is, make up a plan and not have to worry that some random dude will hop up around the corner and kill my squad in two seconds (unless I play insurgency that is)
And yeah, I care if my team wins or looses, since that's one of the major goals in a round. But if I get to have a nice squad and good teamplay, a loss doesn't really affect me that much. What I don't care about is kill count. Sure, most of the time you need to kill to win but it's not that necessary. And also, I know that most of the time, there's someone with a bigger gun taking care of the random killing for me (ie a tank or AR or whatever) I should rather focus on what role I might have.
And if I were to lonewolf and kill people behind enemy lines and stuff, what would I achieve? Sure I'd kill someone and waste a ticket for them but it doesn't really help my team to achieve the objective they have (unless you are hit'n'running caches which is just boring when people do), objectives should really be worth more tickets.

The fun isn't in taking out objectives - it's the way of getting there (just like maths )

And if I wan't to rush around, lonewold, kill for the sake of killing there's plenty of other games for me to do that - vBF2, CoD, TF2 to name a few. Let PR be played the way it's meant to: with teamwork and tactics!

I really like having a scout in a squad. This is the player that is stealthy, patient and able to defend themselves. They go ahead of the group or flank, communicating with the rest of the squad on where targets are so the other 5 members can focus their attack or defense. I also love playing this position.

Radio comm discipline takes care of the issue of too many people talking in squad chat. Clearly state when silence is required and only spots are to be called out, and when everyone can chat (like during a ride to a location or in a defended area).

I don't like the term wolf packs, that is just an informal squad. Lone wolfs by common usage don't work with the team, they should be referred to by another term, like scout.

The only time long wolf should be allowed is in INS maps for planting IEDs...

But having 6 sappers plant minefield seemed much faster and more productive.

Solid Knight wrote:Not entirely. There are many squads that are highly organized but their objectives or tactics are also highly ineffective.

I have never encountered a highly organised and at the same time highly ineffective squad. I doubt it exists. I'm sure there are squads and squad leaders that are pure fail, but I strongly doubt those squads are highly organised at the same time.

Koroush47 wrote:I love how your avatar is a.... wolf.

Google "fenrir"...

Koroush47 wrote:I've seen lone wolfs sneak into positions that would be very difficult to do with an entire squad and take out multiple squads.

Could you describe the circumstances in more detail, because it sounds quite fantastic..., especially the part about "taking out multiple squads"...

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:For an organized team to be really effective against lone wolves requires extreme teamwork, as in everyone moving together and staying close.

I disagree on the level of teamwork needed. It is usually fairly easy organising a squad to a half-assed standard, enough to make lone-wolves a mere speed bump. I do recognize that the word 'extreme' is relative and what you consider to be extreme might not be the same as I do...

snooggums wrote:I don't like the term wolf packs, that is just an informal squad. Lone wolfs by common usage don't work with the team, they should be referred to by another term, like scout.

I don't like the term wolf pack for a collection of stragglers either. The wolf pack is team work, the opposite of the lone-wolf....


....but the lone-wolf on their own (not working with the team) might be best described as a 'skirmisher'..., or maybe 'deserter'...

A wolfpack is meant to focus on having the individual think and act for themselves, and not be dependent on the squad to accomplish the objective, but they stay relatively close to each other.

A lonewolf is good for wreaking havoc when your team has a firebase close to the action.

A wolfpack is meant to focus on having the individual think and act for themselves, and not be dependent on the squad to accomplish the objective, but they stay relatively close to each other.

which is a strange choice of words given that wolfpacks are one of the prime example of teamwork and co-dependancy in the animal world....

[R-CON]Rudd wrote:which is a strange choice of words given that wolfpacks are one of the prime example of teamwork and co-dependancy in the animal world....

Strange choice of words, but the idea is basically just lonewolves staying together.

Hunt3r wrote:Strange choice of words, but the idea is basically just lonewolves staying together.

Ahh, yesss, for sure, a group of individuals staying together, yesss, makes absolute sense. How about call it a squad? Cause that's exactly what you describe! I rarely see succesful lonewolves, especially not like this:

Lone wolfing is very effective, especially with the rally point changes now. All you really have to do is be sneaky, track, and than ambush a squad and once you take out their medic, SL, or a couple of their guys, they are screwed since they can't spawn close to them anymore. So lone wolves can be pretty effective in breaking up squad coordination. Since everyone pretty much spawns off of FOBs too, its real easy to lone wolf if you have a lot of FOBs on your team.

If you'd try this BS with my squad, maybe you'd kill 2 of us, the rest will go hunting for you, and you'll be quickly dealt with. If you shot the medic, now, it's not that big of an issue, is it? The kit stays for five minutes, as will the wounded comrade. Your outcome will just be one ticket lost for your team, none for mine, and you wasted two minutes of my time. That's all.

And it's an absolute foul behaviour to come in a squad, grab a special kit and leave again!