DUST Search - Guerilla Warfare in Public Skirmishes

All Channels

General Discussions

Guerilla Warfare in Public Skirmishes

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Roy Ventus Axis of Chaos 1326	Posted - 2014.03.14 13:35:00 - [1] - Quote I know a lot of people don't like getting stomped in direct fights in Public Contracts. It's often that you're faced with a team that is hard to attack consistently and directly and on some occasions it seems hopeless to actually get into a major conflict with them. So I'm wondering why many players never go to Guerilla Warfare. I see others do it but they're few and between and when I do it, I'm usually alone. It's one of the easiest ways to turn the game around or win it if you're going against a team that shows to be too much to directly handle. Consider how America lost the Vietnam War despite it's forces and strength. Mobility and maneuverability will get you a long ways. Hiding and spawning and taking the least defended objective and then using it as bait so that you may take one of the more heavily fortified objectives. I believe we're so focused on killing that we don't consider other options. I mean even the majority of our scouts, the intel-based role, are only lightweight slayers. You can't change blueberries but you can get a squad and actually compete despite the odds. I've done it alone and came close to winning, now imagine doing it with an organized squad. Guerilla Warfare "There once was a time when there wasn't a Roy Ventus and it wasn't much of a time at all." Roy Ventus
Beren Hurin Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 2213	Posted - 2014.03.14 13:48:00 - [2] - Quote 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.
Denchlad 7 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 98	Posted - 2014.03.14 13:51:00 - [3] - Quote Once we have PvE people will start realising this. I do it on occassion. Would love for more people to as well. If you can't accept change, you will fail in this world.
The Infected One Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 1042	Posted - 2014.03.14 13:56:00 - [4] - Quote Shhhhhh! If these guys keep focusing on running headlong into things, I can keep exploding them with RE's on stairs, boxes, and walls in hallways, and get behind them to knife them. Move along, nothing to see here. Keep running in without looking around or thinking ahead. I am here to ask you one question, and one question only: EXPLOSIONS? --. . - + ..-. ..- -.-. -.- . -..
Beren Hurin Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 2213	Posted - 2014.03.14 13:58:00 - [5] - Quote 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.
Roy Ventus Axis of Chaos 1329	Posted - 2014.03.14 14:03:00 - [6] - Quote Beren Hurin wrote: 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. I'd say there's actually three basic ways to take strategic advantage of objectives in Skirmish, with of course advanced forms of these basic methods. Staging - Using objective spawn points and installations to stage attacks on other objectives. Baiting - Using the objective to manipulate the enemy. Defending - Using the objective as a protected point to slow the enemy down. Staging could be said to be the purely offensive method, with defending being the obviously defensive method, and baiting being the versatile method. "There once was a time when there wasn't a Roy Ventus and it wasn't much of a time at all." Roy Ventus
Roy Ventus Axis of Chaos 1329	Posted - 2014.03.14 14:06:00 - [7] - Quote Denchlad 7 wrote: Once we have PvE people will start realising this. I do it on occassion. Would love for more people to as well. I honestly think that even with PVE, players wouldn't realize it. "There once was a time when there wasn't a Roy Ventus and it wasn't much of a time at all." Roy Ventus
Roy Ventus Axis of Chaos 1329	Posted - 2014.03.14 14:08:00 - [8] - Quote Beren Hurin wrote: 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 but I'm actually directing my message to experience players. They know the battlefield but are jaded to risk. It's really quite funny when you remember we're immortal mercenaries. "There once was a time when there wasn't a Roy Ventus and it wasn't much of a time at all." Roy Ventus
Beren Hurin Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 2215	Posted - 2014.03.14 14:23:00 - [9] - Quote Roy Ventus wrote: Beren Hurin wrote: 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. I'd say there's actually three basic ways to take strategic advantage of objectives in Skirmish, with of course advanced forms of these basic methods. Staging - Using objective spawn points and installations to stage attacks on other objectives. Baiting - Using the objective to manipulate the enemy. Defending - Using the objective as a protected point to slow the enemy down. Staging could be said to be the purely offensive method, with defending being the obviously defensive method, and baiting being the versatile method. 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.
Roy Ventus Axis of Chaos 1332	Posted - 2014.03.14 14:30:00 - [10] - Quote Beren Hurin wrote: Roy Ventus wrote: Beren Hurin wrote: 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. I'd say there's actually three basic ways to take strategic advantage of objectives in Skirmish, with of course advanced forms of these basic methods. Staging - Using objective spawn points and installations to stage attacks on other objectives. Baiting - Using the objective to manipulate the enemy. Defending - Using the objective as a protected point to slow the enemy down. Staging could be said to be the purely offensive method, with defending being the obviously defensive method, and baiting being the versatile method. 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. Actually, I think it's better to just say that sieging is a different method altogether. Staging, baiting, and defending are pretty much related only to acquired objectives while sieging is the use of objectives acquired by the enemy. Was kinda thinking linear when I was going on about it, really. "There once was a time when there wasn't a Roy Ventus and it wasn't much of a time at all." Roy Ventus

Soldner VonKuechle SAM-MIK General Tso's Alliance 380	Posted - 2014.03.14 14:31:00 - [11] - Quote How else would you play buffer tanked Caldari if its not guerrilla? It's like, game design or something. But blueberries are dumb. If you don't understand politics or pulling triggers, I have no use for you.
Roy Ventus Axis of Chaos 1334	Posted - 2014.03.14 14:45:00 - [12] - Quote Soldner VonKuechle wrote: How else would you play buffer tanked Caldari if its not guerrilla? It's like, game design or something. But blueberries are dumb. ? Caldari are actually prone to siege warfare. Long range, good mobility, solid DPS, but suck at CQC. Also fits with their "essence," seeing how the Caldari government doesn't like using more resources than they need to, thus they would more than likely try to make their enemies run outta resources first. Minmatar are the ones who would be better off using guerilla warfare. Fastest racial suits, cheap and low fitting-cost gear, capable of dual-tanking, and are the best at hacking. They get in and get out real fast if they need to and can do it better than most. Far as lore wise, they would be best for it too and I'm more than sure their history has shown that they prefer Guerilla Warfare the most as well. "There once was a time when there wasn't a Roy Ventus and it wasn't much of a time at all." Roy Ventus
Beren Hurin Onslaught Inc RISE of LEGION 2215	Posted - 2014.03.14 14:53:00 - [13] - Quote Roy Ventus wrote: Soldner VonKuechle wrote: How else would you play buffer tanked Caldari if its not guerrilla? It's like, game design or something. But blueberries are dumb. ? Caldari are actually prone to siege warfare. Long range, good mobility, solid DPS, but suck at CQC. Also fits with their "essence," seeing how the Caldari government doesn't like using more resources than they need to, thus they would more than likely try to make their enemies run outta resources first. Minmatar are the ones who would be better off using guerilla warfare. Fastest racial suits, cheap and low fitting-cost gear, capable of dual-tanking, and are the best at hacking. They get in and get out real fast if they need to and can do it better than most. Far as lore wise, they would be best for it too and I'm more than sure their history has shown that they prefer Guerilla Warfare the most as well. Yeah. This is the essence of Minmatar EWAR of target painters and webs. They basically make it so no matter where you are, we will find you and hit you hard, up close if we want, far away if we want, but you pretty much have to hold on REALLY tight if you want to back us into a corner to kill us.
Sam Tektzby Better Hide R Die 431	Posted - 2014.03.14 15:05:00 - [14] - Quote Roy Ventus wrote: I know a lot of people don't like getting stomped in direct fights in Public Contracts. It's often that you're faced with a team that is hard to attack consistently and directly and on some occasions it seems hopeless to actually get into a major conflict with them. So I'm wondering why many players never go to Guerilla Warfare. I see others do it but they're few and between and when I do it, I'm usually alone. It's one of the easiest ways to turn the game around or win it if you're going against a team that shows to be too much to directly handle. Consider how America lost the Vietnam War despite it's forces and strength. Mobility and maneuverability will get you a long ways. Hiding and spawning and taking the least defended objective and then using it as bait so that you may take one of the more heavily fortified objectives. I believe we're so focused on killing that we don't consider other options. I mean even the majority of our scouts, the intel-based role, are only lightweight slayers. You can't change blueberries but you can get a squad and actually compete despite the odds. I've done it alone and came close to winning, now imagine doing it with an organized squad. Guerilla Warfare 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. Support - Tactician/Support Deteis - Orator/Logician BHD since MAG
Roy Ventus Axis of Chaos 1338	Posted - 2014.03.14 15:41:00 - [15] - Quote Sam Tektzby wrote: Roy Ventus wrote: I know a lot of people don't like getting stomped in direct fights in Public Contracts. It's often that you're faced with a team that is hard to attack consistently and directly and on some occasions it seems hopeless to actually get into a major conflict with them. So I'm wondering why many players never go to Guerilla Warfare. I see others do it but they're few and between and when I do it, I'm usually alone. It's one of the easiest ways to turn the game around or win it if you're going against a team that shows to be too much to directly handle. Consider how America lost the Vietnam War despite it's forces and strength. Mobility and maneuverability will get you a long ways. Hiding and spawning and taking the least defended objective and then using it as bait so that you may take one of the more heavily fortified objectives. I believe we're so focused on killing that we don't consider other options. I mean even the majority of our scouts, the intel-based role, are only lightweight slayers. You can't change blueberries but you can get a squad and actually compete despite the odds. I've done it alone and came close to winning, now imagine doing it with an organized squad. Guerilla Warfare 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. ? Did I say that's all it was? This isn't a rhetorical question, I'm seriously asking. I'm fully aware that guerilla warfare isn't simply just throwing on dampeners and being a lone wolf and actually I believe I stated it in my OP that it wasn't but at the same time performing a simplistic form of guerilla warfare isn't outside of the average experienced Dust 514 player's grasp. At it's core, guerilla warfare is about mobility and the use of a smaller force to compete with a larger force. A squad of 6 players can, in most cases, win a battle if they use guerilla warfare. It's not an easy win nor is it the perfect means but it is effective. The difficult part isn't getting suited up for it and planning but the actual field work. A squad of six could splinter off into groups of three groups of two or two groups of three and perform this feat on a five lettered map. Nothing too difficult in planning there. The hard part is effectively getting into an area, knowing when and when not to hack, which method for taking advantage of the objective you should use, what's the best escape route if needed, how much resources will be expended by taking a point and whether or not you can do it again if you fail, etc. The good thing about public skirmishes is that you really don't have to focus on the details as much because public matches lack the strategic finesse of planetary conquest. As long as you can make good decisions on the spot, you can perform with the majority of them. "There once was a time when there wasn't a Roy Ventus and it wasn't much of a time at all." Roy Ventus
Soldner VonKuechle SAM-MIK General Tso's Alliance 380	Posted - 2014.03.14 20:31:00 - [16] - Quote Roy Ventus wrote: Soldner VonKuechle wrote: How else would you play buffer tanked Caldari if its not guerrilla? It's like, game design or something. But blueberries are dumb. ? Caldari are actually prone to siege warfare. Long range, good mobility, solid DPS, but suck at CQC. Also fits with their "essence," seeing how the Caldari government doesn't like using more resources than they need to, thus they would more than likely try to make their enemies run outta resources first. Minmatar are the ones who would be better off using guerilla warfare. Fastest racial suits, cheap and low fitting-cost gear, capable of dual-tanking, and are the best at hacking. They get in and get out real fast if they need to and can do it better than most. Far as lore wise, they would be best for it too and I'm more than sure their history has shown that they prefer Guerilla Warfare the most as well. I'm with Ya man, that's how I run my buffer suit, at max RR range with a shield recharge of none to full in 13 seconds (extender 's deary penalty does become a ****) "nanoing" people most matches. It's siege warfare by your definition, while still falling under the broader title if guerrilla. If you don't understand politics or pulling triggers, I have no use for you.
Michael Arck Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu Lokun Listamenn 3436	Posted - 2014.03.14 20:34:00 - [17] - Quote You can teach em tactics all day, but if a person doesn't have the will to win, they will always suffer ultimate defeat. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Are you OUKH?
Roy Ventus Axis of Chaos 1345	Posted - 2014.03.14 20:42:00 - [18] - Quote Michael Arck wrote: You can teach em tactics all day, but if a person doesn't have the will to win, they will always suffer ultimate defeat. And that's what saddens me the most :/. I've seen some amazing stuff go down that only happened because of crazy willpower. "There once was a time when there wasn't a Roy Ventus and it wasn't much of a time at all." Roy Ventus
Bojo The Mighty L.O.T.I.S. D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 3481	Posted - 2014.03.14 20:43:00 - [19] - Quote Geurilla warfare is what distinguishes people from being bluedots. They look like blue dots, but are very dangerous. You're like Oh *** he was dampened* 68 inches above sea level...
Michael Arck Onuoto Uakan Huogaatsu Lokun Listamenn 3436	Posted - 2014.03.14 20:46:00 - [20] - Quote Roy Ventus wrote: Michael Arck wrote: You can teach em tactics all day, but if a person doesn't have the will to win, they will always suffer ultimate defeat. And that's what saddens me the most :/. I've seen some amazing stuff go down that only happened because of crazy willpower. Absolutely. Love those matches, the test of wills. Those battles are memorable. It's most unfortunate when its the polar opposite of that Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Are you OUKH?

Operative 1171 Aajli Bragian Order Amarr Empire 1548	Posted - 2014.03.14 20:50:00 - [21] - Quote Roy Ventus wrote: I know a lot of people don't like getting stomped in direct fights in Public Contracts. It's often that you're faced with a team that is hard to attack consistently and directly and on some occasions it seems hopeless to actually get into a major conflict with them. So I'm wondering why many players never go to Guerilla Warfare. I see others do it but they're few and between and when I do it, I'm usually alone. It's one of the easiest ways to turn the game around or win it if you're going against a team that shows to be too much to directly handle. Consider how America lost the Vietnam War despite it's forces and strength. Mobility and maneuverability will get you a long ways. Hiding and spawning and taking the least defended objective and then using it as bait so that you may take one of the more heavily fortified objectives. I believe we're so focused on killing that we don't consider other options. I mean even the majority of our scouts, the intel-based role, are only lightweight slayers. You can't change blueberries but you can get a squad and actually compete despite the odds. I've done it alone and came close to winning, now imagine doing it with an organized squad. Guerilla Warfare See also, Asymmetric Warfare. I like this kind of play but usually that means I'd have to take the role of terrorist using REs and jihad jeeps. I hate that play. Give me a good ol' fashion land war any day or better yet tweak movement to work better with insurgency tactics as opposed to this ballet on a merry go round flow we've got now. If we could hide and fire while behind trees et al instead of having to be completely exposed to fire or lay prone and dig tunnels then it'd work better. See Nyain San for hiding in tunnels. They do this all the time on the Gallente research node. And they are the ones that could come out and protostomp in the open. Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I read your book!
COVERT SUBTERFUGE PSU GHOST SYNDICATE DARKSTAR ARMY 623	Posted - 2014.03.14 21:29:00 - [22] - Quote Both of my merc names are about exactly that. THE GREY CARDINAL is from an idiomatic expression for one who works behind the scenes to not draw attention to himself and COVERT SUBTERFUGE is just tha; the covert use of deception to achieve your agenda. That kind of play is just a natural extension of my mindset . I'm a big fan of the indirect method and so you're more likely to see me by my lonesome somewhere out in the wops than in the fray. That's where i'm at home and in my element. I love the idea of playing an FPS but not actually playing an FPS and it's something much more rewarding to infiltrate into the red and drop an uplink that captures an objective--creating that wave of opportunity. Anyone leaving an installation is left to go on their way and anyone going towards it gets NK to the skull; often I've let red dots run off into the sunset as i go and take the point. Sun Tzu wrote: "To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting." My favorite quote and it works for war, business or life. I was so born to be a Minmatar. Proud Minmatar scout - Republic Merc 6/10 Immune to bitter/jaded vet syndrome Roll with the punches instead of QQing
Delta 749 Kestrel Reconnaissance 2658	Posted - 2014.03.14 21:35:00 - [23] - Quote 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 I'll start my own war, with hookers, and blackjack! In fact forget the war and the blackjack.
COVERT SUBTERFUGE PSU GHOST SYNDICATE DARKSTAR ARMY 623	Posted - 2014.03.14 21:38:00 - [24] - Quote Delta 749 wrote: 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 Yep, it's more like monkey warfare in dom and ambush. Proud Minmatar scout - Republic Merc 6/10 Immune to bitter/jaded vet syndrome Roll with the punches instead of QQing
J'Jor Da'Wg KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 985	Posted - 2014.03.14 21:51:00 - [25] - Quote 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 My forum forge gun has a 1000% damage bonus against stupid posts
Roy Ventus Axis of Chaos 1350	Posted - 2014.03.14 21:59:00 - [26] - Quote Delta 749 wrote: 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 ._. You're missing the point here. I'll try bringing in an example and then explaining it even more. - It's a 4 point map. We're two minutes in and Alpha, Bravo, and Charlie have been taken while the party is over at Delta as the enemy uses siege tactics(i.e. farming) to pad their KD. Your squad of three, squad two, decides that "Hey, it's pointless to defend this, it's being used to farm. We still have time to change this game around." Squad two suicide and you all reemerge at the friendly spawn point. They leave in a group and go around the commotion over at Delta, giving themselves enough space to effectively avoid being spotted. Eventually they make it towards Alpha which is the second furthest point from Delta. Quickly scanning the area, your squad finds out that it's clear of hostiles. Without hesitation, you guys hack the objective. You begin to talk as the objective is contested over. "We should sit here and defend," one of your squadmate says. Your other squadmate speaks up, "No. We need to at least take Charlie and then push to Bravo." You all agree under the pressure that the enemy realizes that Alpha has been hacked and will be mobilizing to the area pronto. Two of your squadmates go to Charlie while they leave you with Bravo. You're almost to Bravo and you realize that Charlie's been hacked by your squadmates. You throw down some uplinks and proceed to sneak into Bravo. You realize that Bravo's crawling with red and begin questioning your actions until you see that Delta's blinking in your TacNet UI. You started up a chance to win but now you gotta take it on home. Your teammates can take advantage and spawn in at the newly hacked objectives and help you or maybe you'll have to do it with only your squad. --- It's not about running around and just hacking for the sake of hacking. It's about trying to spread their team, trying to slow down MCC destruction, trying to gain some footing, and a lot more. If the enemy team can't keep up with you, your chances of winning will go on up. I've seen this tactic work wonders from both sides. Being both the "rebel" and the "imperialist." It actually pisses me off at times because it seems like even though when we always win our direct conflicts, they seem to be one step ahead of us taking another point. "There once was a time when there wasn't a Roy Ventus and it wasn't much of a time at all." Roy Ventus
Roy Ventus Axis of Chaos 1350	Posted - 2014.03.14 22:03:00 - [27] - Quote J'Jor Da'Wg wrote: 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 Yes, yes. Vietnam is completely different from Dust but doesn't change the fact that a lesser militant group defeated a greater group... Stop overcomplicating it. I understand the differences and was using it purely as an example for what could be possible in Dust and Dust alone. "There once was a time when there wasn't a Roy Ventus and it wasn't much of a time at all." Roy Ventus
Delta 749 Kestrel Reconnaissance 2661	Posted - 2014.03.14 22:06:00 - [28] - Quote Roy Ventus wrote: Delta 749 wrote: 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 ._. You're missing the point here. I'll try bringing in an example and then explaining it even more. - It's a 4 point map. We're two minutes in and Alpha, Bravo, and Charlie have been taken while the party is over at Delta as the enemy uses siege tactics(i.e. farming) to pad their KD. Your squad of three, squad two, decides that "Hey, it's pointless to defend this, it's being used to farm. We still have time to change this game around." Squad two suicide and you all reemerge at the friendly spawn point. They leave in a group and go around the commotion over at Delta, giving themselves enough space to effectively avoid being spotted. Eventually they make it towards Alpha which is the second furthest point from Delta. Quickly scanning the area, your squad finds out that it's clear of hostiles. Without hesitation, you guys hack the objective. You begin to talk as the objective is contested over. "We should sit here and defend," one of your squadmate says. Your other squadmate speaks up, "No. We need to at least take Charlie and then push to Bravo." You all agree under the pressure that the enemy realizes that Alpha has been hacked and will be mobilizing to the area pronto. Two of your squadmates go to Charlie while they leave you with Bravo. You're almost to Bravo and you realize that Charlie's been hacked by your squadmates. You throw down some uplinks and proceed to sneak into Bravo. You realize that Bravo's crawling with red and begin questioning your actions until you see that Delta's blinking in your TacNet UI. You started up a chance to win but now you gotta take it on home. Your teammates can take advantage and spawn in at the newly hacked objectives and help you or maybe you'll have to do it with only your squad. --- It's not about running around and just hacking for the sake of hacking. It's about trying to spread their team, trying to slow down MCC destruction, trying to gain some footing, and a lot more. If the enemy team can't keep up with you, your chances of winning will go on up. I've seen this tactic work wonders from both sides. Being both the "rebel" and the "imperialist." It actually pisses me off at times because it seems like even though when we always win our direct conflicts, they seem to be one step ahead of us taking another point. Well thats not really guerrilla warfare then is it, its just splitting your forces in a way that makes the enemy respond or lose I'll start my own war, with hookers, and blackjack! In fact forget the war and the blackjack.
Johnny Guilt Algintal Core 586	Posted - 2014.03.14 22:06:00 - [29] - Quote guerrilla warfare isnt possible most of the time with scanners being to potent A strange game. The only winning move is not to play.
Roy Ventus Axis of Chaos 1351	Posted - 2014.03.14 22:09:00 - [30] - Quote That's still guerilla warfare... Straight up from the wiki "Tactically, the guerrilla army makes small, repetitive attacks far from the opponent's center of gravity with a view to keeping its own casualties to a minimum and imposing a constant debilitating strain on the enemy." What you just said is pretty much the same thing. "There once was a time when there wasn't a Roy Ventus and it wasn't much of a time at all." Roy Ventus

CRNWLLC Screwy Rabbit ULC 105	Posted - 2014.03.14 22:13:00 - [31] - Quote Roy Ventus wrote: Beren Hurin wrote: 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. I'd say there's actually three basic ways to take strategic advantage of objectives in Skirmish, with of course advanced forms of these basic methods. Staging - Using objective spawn points and installations to stage attacks on other objectives. Baiting - Using the objective to manipulate the enemy. Defending - Using the objective as a protected point to slow the enemy down. Staging could be said to be the purely offensive method, with defending being the obviously defensive method, and baiting being the versatile method. "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!!! My other dropsuit is a Python.
Roy Ventus Axis of Chaos 1351	Posted - 2014.03.14 22:15:00 - [32] - Quote Johnny Guilt wrote: guerrilla warfare isnt possible most of the time with scanners being to potent Not true, especially if you have profile dampeners. I believe all medium frames can avoid ADV scanners with just two advanced dampeners on and those ADV scanners are the most common. Trust me when I say it's very possible. "There once was a time when there wasn't a Roy Ventus and it wasn't much of a time at all." Roy Ventus
Delta 749 Kestrel Reconnaissance 2662	Posted - 2014.03.14 22:17:00 - [33] - Quote Roy Ventus wrote: That's still guerilla warfare... Straight up from the wiki "Tactically, the guerrilla army makes small, repetitive attacks far from the opponent's center of gravity with a view to keeping its own casualties to a minimum and imposing a constant debilitating strain on the enemy." What you just said is pretty much the same thing. 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 I'll start my own war, with hookers, and blackjack! In fact forget the war and the blackjack.
Roy Ventus Axis of Chaos 1351	Posted - 2014.03.14 22:18:00 - [34] - Quote CRNWLLC wrote: Roy Ventus wrote: Beren Hurin wrote: 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. I'd say there's actually three basic ways to take strategic advantage of objectives in Skirmish, with of course advanced forms of these basic methods. Staging - Using objective spawn points and installations to stage attacks on other objectives. Baiting - Using the objective to manipulate the enemy. Defending - Using the objective as a protected point to slow the enemy down. Staging could be said to be the purely offensive method, with defending being the obviously defensive method, and baiting being the versatile method. "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!!! Lol baiting is extremely fun. Just sitting back as they come to you and you slay 'em down. They have the initiative to attack but somehow, someway you pull a fast one on them each and every time. "There once was a time when there wasn't a Roy Ventus and it wasn't much of a time at all." Roy Ventus
Roy Ventus Axis of Chaos 1352	Posted - 2014.03.14 22:26:00 - [35] - Quote Delta 749 wrote: Roy Ventus wrote: That's still guerilla warfare... Straight up from the wiki "Tactically, the guerrilla army makes small, repetitive attacks far from the opponent's center of gravity with a view to keeping its own casualties to a minimum and imposing a constant debilitating strain on the enemy." What you just said is pretty much the same thing. 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 It's a simplistic form of guerilla warfare. That's where we're not agreeing on. I'm not saying there's a full blown way of doing it. It's just using mobility to out maneuver your enemy and avoid direct conflict/loss of resources with a combination of other tactics. "There once was a time when there wasn't a Roy Ventus and it wasn't much of a time at all." Roy Ventus
Shattered Mirage D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 366	Posted - 2014.03.14 23:13:00 - [36] - Quote Solid idea. I'm gonna have to test it out sometime this weekend. There are no facts, only interpretations. I am a monument to all your sins


Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.