|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Oxskull Duncarino
Shadow Company HQ
181
   |
Posted - 2013.03.17 17:50:00 -
[1] - Quote
Vermaak Doe wrote:Heavies, a support platform.. how off base could you be? It would be reasonable to call it an Av unit, because it can use the forge gun but the best description of it's role is as a defense oriented assault suit.
I think Rei's head is stuck in some other games where a large magazine machine gun means support. The Dust heavy is very much a massive war machine meant for short movement heavy fire power tactics that tear apart frontal assaults. At the moment, until damage mod stacking has been properly implemented, the heavy is becoming more useless and even with logi support, cannot put up with more than one high spec. assault. I'll stay playing heavy, but as has been said already, at the very least the higher heavy suits need to be worked on. |
Oxskull Duncarino
Shadow Company HQ
181
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 18:10:00 -
[2] - Quote
Rei Shepard wrote:Vermaak Doe wrote:Heavies, a support platform.. how off base could you be? It would be reasonable to call it an Av unit, because it can use the forge gun but the best description of it's role is as a defense oriented assault suit. Hey, seems like you only know Rambo movies..... but heavy suits & weapons are always used in a Support role..and i doubt that it being in the future changes that... And ....Really ...a Defense oriented Assault suit that's your best comeback ? It is either Defense or Assault, not both, and AV troops are by default in a Supporting role .... Quote:according to U.S. Army regulations 320-5 (AR 320-5) "heavy weapons" are all "weapons such as mortars, howitzers, guns, heavy machineguns and recoilless rifles which are usually part of infantry equipment."
As with most support units in any army, the size of a weapons platoon is generally smaller than that of its light infantry equivalent. For example, a typical light infantry platoon consists of 30 to 40 men divided in three or four squads (or sections) of 9GÇô13 men, whereas a weapons platoon substitutes the squads with smaller groups for mortar teams, machine gun crews, anti-tank teams etc.
Some platoons also include the assault element of a company. A company's weapons platoon will carry portable support weapons by sections, but also include a fast-attack light-infantry specialist squad of soldiers trained for breaching, raiding, and close combat.
A heavy weapon platoon is generally used as a support group to a number of other platoons in the immediate command area/zone in question. A ratio of one heavy platoon to three basic infantry platoons is the accepted number, anything above or below this may result in a specialised "company" such as a rifle company, or a long-range support company. The addition of a HWP (heavy weapons platoon) can greatly increase the chances of victory in a combat zone, due to the unique specialist abilities the soldiers in that group can offer to the company.
In more modern times, the application of heavy weapon support groups has been on the up. The ability to provide covering fire, and the suppression tactics of the heavy platoon mean that it is better equipped to give cover, and forms a vital component to the overall success, supporting the bulk of the company as they advance. Unlike in previous years, with the advancement in troop transportation, re-locating heavy weaponry and large quantities of ammunition is less of a problem.
Hahaaaaaaaaaaaa. Did you just quote U.S. Army regulations in relation to the use of a massively armoured walking miniguns and railguns. LOL I'm all for using real life to inform as to how the futuristic weapons might progress, but seeing as powered exoskeletons are only starting to look as if progress is being made, these are very limited and slow, SO, lets not use modern tactics for something we have never used or dealt with. |
Oxskull Duncarino
Shadow Company HQ
181
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 18:16:00 -
[3] - Quote
If we were going to use modern military doctrine on heavy weapons then firstly CCP will have to increase HMG range beyond that of the basic assault rifle. Not something I see happening |
Oxskull Duncarino
Shadow Company HQ
181
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 18:21:00 -
[4] - Quote
calisk galern wrote:meh I'm not saying you're wrong the heavies proto suits are weaker then other suits, and it's been stated MANY times already. I just don't feel like agreeing with that point anymore, the OP was a whine thread about not being able to kill proto suits AR's and shotguns, which is BS because plenty do.
you are already getting new suits, and weapons in the coming release, their is zero chance they are going to modify the heavy proto suit before then, and at that point standard suits will probably be obsolete to the faction suits.
you're impatient, and the only valid point being that proto heavy suits are weaker then other proto suits is incredibly old news.
Yep, until the new suits come out, heavies just have to put up with limbo. It's not fun but as ya said, CCP aren't going to change anything before then. |
Oxskull Duncarino
Shadow Company HQ
181
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 21:46:00 -
[5] - Quote
ISuperstar wrote:This is just a QQ thread at this point. Anyone who disagrees with Lance gets a generic ~
"Wow, stfu scrub, you obviously never played any L337 proto assaults and scouts, which really are just players better than me in terms of all skill and gun game and not really anything to do with their suit. Your butthurt because we heavy's raped in you in the beginning with our easy mode suit. I'm right your wrong, BUFF ME!
lol what a joke.
Cop on and actually read the last few pages. It's actual proper debate in the main, with only a few douches acting up and talking bull. Lance is getting peeved and showing it, what with the trolls or idiots that have been posting here, but the point that he's trying to make is valid. He just needs to take a break. How about you join in with your own well though out argument. Or is the above your best contribution. |
Oxskull Duncarino
Shadow Company HQ
181
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 22:00:00 -
[6] - Quote
ISuperstar wrote:Oxskull Duncarino wrote:ISuperstar wrote:This is just a QQ thread at this point. Anyone who disagrees with Lance gets a generic ~
"Wow, stfu scrub, you obviously never played any L337 proto assaults and scouts, which really are just players better than me in terms of all skill and gun game and not really anything to do with their suit. Your butthurt because we heavy's raped in you in the beginning with our easy mode suit. I'm right your wrong, BUFF ME!
lol what a joke. Cop on and actually read the last few pages. It's actual proper debate in the main, with only a few douches acting up and talking bull. Lance is getting peeved and showing it, what with some of the trolls and idiots that have been posting here, but the point that he's trying to make is valid. He just needs to take a break. How about you join in with your own well though out argument. Or is the above your best contribution. I've had my say-so in this thread already and was given same the generic butthurt Lance rebuttal like everyone else who disagrees with him. lol Good luck getting your buffs. I'm sure this thread is exactly the convincing push CCP needs to give you what you want. 
Well, about the only thing is that the thread has been moderated, but that might be all the attention it gets from CCP. Hopefully luck won't be needed, but any luck is better than no luck. Anyway, as has been said already, until the new dropsuits and dropsuit tree have been introduced, we may just sit on our hands and wait. |
Oxskull Duncarino
Shadow Company HQ
181
|
Posted - 2013.03.17 22:17:00 -
[7] - Quote
Rei Shepard wrote:
Please inform me how this makes you an expert and why current tactics shouldnt work, isn't everyone thats playing not using human tactics?
So basically what you guys are saying, the Heavy needs to be The Better Assault +1 ?
At no point have I said I'm an expert. But having a basic knowledge of epochs in battlefield history would show that use of a tactic that was valid at the time against a newly introduced weapon system or just a basic mechanic, resulted in the deaths of those using those tactics. So, using present, 21st century, military weapons doctrine as an example of how weapons from 20,000 years in the future should be dealt with, is massively flawed, as I pointed out. Fair enough, I pointed it out while laughing at you, but it's still valid.
If you have an interest in this kind of stuff then you should look into the effect of the following things that changed combat. Any of the metal changes and smith evolutions. Phalanxes and heavy spears. Saddle stirrups and mounted combat. Coordinated longbows against mounted plate cavalry. Low level training for crossbows against plate armour. The last one is funny as hell for how the church responded to it. Cannon against fortifications. Muskets. Rifled barrels. Repeating firearms. The Lee Enfield is an excellent example of the last. One of the biggest, machineguns. The Battle of the Somme being one to be looked into for the machinegun and the tank. And of course, nuclear bombs. Luckely, the tactics for the last one have just consisted of insults and posturing without any actual battlefield use beyond WW2.
|
|
|
| |
|