A million times this!!!

People are so focused on KDR that they don't realize that the real game is about dominating objectives not clones. Once we have to pay 120mill isk for the MCCs we lose in PC it will change the fundamentals of the game.

Basically, you can take advantage of an objective in only 2 ways:

They could have a full squad or more at that objective defending it. You are successful if you can force them to expend clones vs. your losses at around > 2.5:1 K/D rate vs. the assaulting squad.

Once we have PvE people will start realising this. I do it on occassion. Would love for more people to as well.

This IS a real difficult thing for new players to get though.

They spend a few weeks figuring out fitting and the gun game. Then there is getting the feel/understanding of maps and map flow. Only then can they get to the point where they can see when and what needs to be attacked.

Yeah I like using nomenclature like this to classify strategies. I think 'baiting' needs more clarity because it can be pretty broad.

I think a really specific form of 'baiting' could be called 'siegeing' Where you basically turn a defense against an enemy. The point isn't to capture the objective, but force them to either give it up, or just farm kills from their commitment to defend. Its much easier to siege open points rather than closed points. You can tell a committed defense by the amount of equipment, logis, and heavies present.

I still like the 'baiting' term and it could fall under the tactic of giving up a point to draw out a larger squad in order to orbital all of them in order to enable a stronger counter-attack.

How else would you play buffer tanked Caldari if its not guerrilla? It's like, game design or something.

But blueberries are dumb.

Guerilla like really, boyo guerilla warfare is something more than dampeners and scout suit with shoty or be a lonely wolf isnt guerilla warfare atal.

You can teach em tactics all day, but if a person doesn't have the will to win, they will always suffer ultimate defeat.

Because in a skirmish match you need to actually take and hold the objectives?
I mean really how is that not obvious, guerrilla tactics fall apart in an objective based game mode and they wont work in ambush due to tank spam

Methinks you don 't know what your saying with guerilla warfare.

Vietnam example doesn't really work because DUST doesn't simulate real conflict. Real conflict has other less concrete objectives like "secure this area", "make this population bend to our will", "deny enemy resources and resupply", etc.

In Dust you have set conflict points in the objectives, and the only way to win is to either kill all the enemy, (direct conflict) or capture and hold the objectives, which due to the fundamentals of gameplay forces you to fight SOMEONE head on at some point.

Its not Vietnam, where you could threaten locals families to antagonize the opposing force, or harass their supply lines and cut down on their morale, or pick off isolated patrols, or set traps, or simply run away to fight another day.

In DUST you can't do that. There is no reward for running away. You can't force assymetric engagements with timers and lobby sizes. Theres no civilian aspect. You can't "set a trap" and wear an enemy down so much they quit in 10 minutes. And if you do, they simply respawn and attack you directly.

In a game with little long term consequence to death, no economy, no persistent world, fair sides (roughly) its impossible to use guerilla tactics as they are truly used. You can use flanking tactics and feints, but thats not guerilla warfare.

Guerilla warfare only truly works in real life when death IS final, and using time and exhaustion and confusion as your ally you can wear down an invading force. There is no confusion in DUST. There is no such thing as civilians you can blend in with. You can't hide and kill only one or two people a match.

Simply put, the best, and the ONLY way to win a DUST match is to be better at facing your enemy and killing them head on. To be able to flank and use terrain advantages and local number superiority to overwhelm. In real life, the easiest way to keep yourself alive is often to run away. In DUST, the best way to stay alive is to outkill the opponent.

I agree that on a micro scale, you can use deception to gain a tactical advantage. But guerilla tactics is using indirect methods of making war, or to force open conflict to be so biased in your favor that you will invariably win... And through these methods you achieve a strategic goal.

/armchair general

guerrilla warfare isnt possible most of the time with scanners being to potent

"Baitfending", if you will, is a great tactic. Just last night I played a match on the map with the one central tower, the bridge, and the 5 objectives. I died twice trying to mess around in the middle of the map, bailed to objective C (at the top of the map, nearest the reds' MCC), captured the CRU, the supply depot, and the objective, then just hung out and cleaned up as the reds tried to retake it. Even got a couple more hacks in when I lost the CRU/SD because they were trying to double team me!

They were most likely thinking, "Cool, there's no action at the objective by the MCC--think I'll spawn there and go get some WP!"

There was no action cuz I killed everyone!!!

Theres a world of difference between "We are getting farmed, everyone scatter" and "We know before hand that the enemy is larger so we attack their supply lines with a couple REs and then run away"
Not to mention that having to hold these objectives runs counter to guerrilla tactics by forcing you to stay put and keep the enemy from retaking them lest you lose the match

Its like I said before, objective based game play like this precludes the use of real guerrilla tactics and poor balance makes unfit for ambush
Now dont get me wrong Id really like to see them become viable but at the moment they arent, not really