Project Reality Forums

Lately,It seems I've been playing games with SL's that have little, if not any, grasp of the tactics required in gaining the upper hand for an attacking force. This post is intended to remedy this problem, giving a heads-up on a key tactic that'll probably save your life.

:d rillsergFire superiority: Key to the assault :d rillserg

In a fire-fight, the most important factor in determining the success or failure of your squad is going to be just how much ACCURATE lead your squad can put into the air at any given time. If this outnumbers the enemy in terms of force and lethality, than pretty soon you're going to either kill off or more importantly pin down the enemy force. Once the enemy has been sufficently paralyzed and unable to return lethal fire, than you'll have achieved fire superiority.

For an attacking force, Fire superiority is an major prerequisite for a successfull assault. By maintaining fire superiority, your squad will be in control of the initaitive and tempo of the fight. This can be an essential tool for breaching enemy defenses or getting rifleman within 'nade range.Generally, you'll want to have this at all times. Failure to achieve/maintain fire superiority will typically result in grevious casualities for the attacking force, something you'll undoubtably want to avoid.

A Squad that takes it's time, does not expose itself to unnecessary risk, is under centeralized SL control, and is always ready to return fire will most likely be in a position to gain fire superiority. Tactical awareness at all times is a must. Once a contact has been identified, It's crucial that all squad members return fire as a means to both surpress and kill enemy combatants. This includes unscoped infantry such as medics. Once the enemy has been pinned down, accurate overwatch on enemy positions should continue at all times to ensure the safety of advancing squad members.

If there's a situation where you don't believe your squad will be able to advance while maintaining overwatch, then you should request the assistance of a friendly infantry squad to cover your advance. There's nothing more messy than a squad having make all the noise that comes with gaining fire superiority suddenly rush down the street to be gunned-down in ambush.

Advance after having gained fire superiority, if it is required at all should either be metholodical, or it should be swift and efficent. Employing bounding overwatch and darting from cover to cover would be the recommended strategy.

A squad will fire superiority is efficent and calculated: a squad without it is unpredictable, relying on chance more than skill. Know the difference, fool.

comments?

Not sure about fire superiority, firing lot of rounds at a enemy position might help a little, but the thing about suppression is that it should not be rallied upon alone, there’s a old saying suppressive fire it doesn’t.

What you should concern your self with more in attack, is being organised. for a attack to work you need 3/1 ratio advantage over the enemy that means, you should be attacking in a organised group or have a plan that give you the advantage.



one squad these day's against a defended position really does nothing, remember they can respawn you can't they will have more of a chance of being revived they have better cover and positioning.

SO if your going to take a position then you need to work as a team to take it, it also helps to be totally brutal in a attack don't slow down keep the initiative be swift tactical and aggressive, more time you give them to dig there toes in the harder it will be to root them out.

RHYS4190 wrote:Not sure about fire superiority, firing lot of rounds at a enemy position might help a little, but the thing about suppression is that it should not be rallied upon alone, there’s a old saying suppressive fire it doesn’t.

What you should concern your self with more in attack, is being organised. for a attack to work you need 3/1 ratio advantage over the enemy that means, you should be attacking in a organised group or have a plan that give you the advantage.



one squad these day's against a defended position really does nothing, remember they can respawn you can't they will have more of a chance of being revived they have better cover and positioning.

SO if your going to take a position then you need to work as a team to take it, it also helps to be totally brutal in a attack don't slow down keep the initiative be swift tactical and aggressive, more time you give them to dig there toes in the harder it will be to root them out.

you're right about the a lot of this, but you're wrong on one count. Fast-action firefights are much are much more applicable for CQB areas. Wide-open maps like quinling will generally feature infantry miles away from reinforcements -> and with the new rally system, enemy squads are F%&*ked if they get pinned down. Overall, the calculated manuevering demanded by fire superiority is much more applicable to inter-squad operations. If it's an individual squad in the inevitiable urban area during insurgency mode, than it is all about the rush while defending against counter-attack, sad to say.

the old maxim: "Find, fix, destroy" is very applicable here. Assuming inter-squad organization, fire superiority is more than effective in either forcing retreat or pinning. It's all about getting a flanking squad in.

But still, It's not all about rushing in blind-sighted

As the Navy SEALs say, the best medicine on the battlefield is fire superiority.

nice guide, there should be a forum section that contain just guides oh wait i just remembered its the tactical section located here:
PR In-Game Tactics and Strategies - Project Reality Forums

in my humble opinion your post doesnt say anything at all
the only thing you wrote in those 30 lines were
a) shoot at enemies
b) keep shooting at them
c) always find cover
d) ask others to support
and that is no strategy at all

Very important thing is to actually recon the area of attack first, but not only that area you are planning to attack/seize but predict the chances of enemy support coming in the time that you plan and attack, and what direction they will be comming from, incase they appear.

Secondly, the firepower isnt usefull everytime. IF you're going for an object where you need to kill enemies to achieve it, fire is necesarry, but if you're going for an object of smaller scale, but wich is cruicial for further actions, you have to consider if it is worth putting so much effor on whole squad or send only a couple of guys out on a side mission.

Example.

Central village on Silent Eagle. There is an enemy squad inside somewhere, you know the approximate position. You want to cap the area, so you go in and try to kill them with the best skill you have.

Central village on Silent Eagle. There is an enemy FOB with two squads inside somewhere. You know the exact location of the FOB. You send out 2 guys to destroy the dob first, then attack with the rest of the squad and with support from IFV if avaliable.

Skull wrote:in my humble opinion your post doesnt say anything at all
the only thing you wrote in those 30 lines were
a) shoot at enemies
b) keep shooting at them
c) always find cover
d) ask others to support
and that is no strategy at all

Would be quite an accurate comment. Sorry, but it is exactly what you said but in essay form.

Yah...seems pretty logical to me that fire superiority is the key to any successful encounter.
How one gains this advantage is completely dynamic on the battlefield though, and involves more stratagem then you've mentioned in your post. If SL's can access the way the round is unfolding, maintain squad cohesiveness, adjust their tactics accordingly, and co-ordinate with other friendly squads...fire superiority falls into place. It's like the icying on the top of a cake, but if the SL doesn't know how to bake...you better have one hell of a good medic.

Kasp

I suggest reading this book for those of you who haven't done so yet.



Kasp

I think this is a marvelous OP, as the 'middle tactics' to winning firefights are often overlooked by SLs in game. Commanders will have an idea of how they want to the team to proceed as a force, and infantrymen will usually know the does and don'ts of the battlefield. It is comon for SLs to get bogged down in Policin' 'dat mostach! and the general disciplin of the squad.
Ideally, an SL would designate the most senior soldier in the squad as a sort of 'NCO' to fulfill that role, focusing on aspects such as spacing, formation, fire direction etc; allowing the SL to focus on those 'middle tactics'.


Yet, with the ever increasing detail in project reality, such tactics cannot offer their full potential at merely a squad level. Two squads organised at a Platoon level will give disproportionately better results; be it two infantry squads (assault and support), or A Mechanised INF squad with armoured (or perhaps even motorised) support.

Transaction complete:$00.02


...mongol...

KasperX wrote:I suggest reading this book for those of you who haven't done so yet.
Kasp

I don't know man. I'v never read the thing myself, but I cant see it being a necessary factor in performing well in PR. A bit overkill...

...mongol...

okay, responding to the comments:

Skull wrote:in my humble opinion your post doesnt say anything at all
the only thing you wrote in those 30 lines were
a) shoot at enemies
b) keep shooting at them
c) always find cover
d) ask others to support
and that is no strategy at all

yeah, that's an accurate comment. I was in an essay-writing mood . Just giving a heads-up on another potential tactic... in terms of other tactics/strategies it's all up the SL

ChizNizzle wrote:Very important thing is to actually recon the area of attack first, but not only that area you are planning to attack/seize but predict the chances of enemy support coming in the time that you plan and attack, and what direction they will be comming from, incase they appear.

Secondly, the firepower isnt usefull everytime. IF you're going for an object where you need to kill enemies to achieve it, fire is necesarry, but if you're going for an object of smaller scale, but wich is cruicial for further actions, you have to consider if it is worth putting so much effor on whole squad or send only a couple of guys out on a side mission.

Fire Superiority is basically just an abstract tactical concept, one that doesn't always transfer over to PR. As mentioned prior, the real effectiveness of it would be in inter-squad operations.

I'm taking most of the se suggested tactical cues from ww2-era German infantry squad composition, so many would argue that this is not taking into account the impact of speed and stealth on a battlefield. In squad-level operations, these are still very important factors.

Fire superiority is best practiced against densely fortified enemy structures (7-12 hostiles), where friendly squads are in a position of numeretical power and want to maintain it

(Note: I don't mind tactical criticism.In fact, It'll probably lead to a much more pragmatic approach to the concept)

[R-MOD]Mongolian_dude wrote: I don't know man. I'v never read the thing myself, but I cant see it being a necessary factor in performing well in PR. A bit overkill...

...mongol...

If you haven't read it...you don't know anything about it. Actually the first 7 to 8 chapters can relate to a lot of PR strategy. Overkill? Yes, if your looking for PR strategies alone. But if you're interested in strategies and don't mind reading then it is a great book. Just read the first few chapters...and let me know. I couldn't put the book down once I started reading it. If you don't like reading, pick up the audio book and listen to a few chapters before you go to sleep.

Kasp