Join our Discord Channels!
Join our Steam Groups! Image TacBF Mod & TacBF Event Notifications.
@CBA_A3 & TacBF updated. | Get TacBF Launcher!
Recent updates applied: @CBA_A3 3.3.1-170504, @TacBF 3.24.10. (13 May 2017)
Image $ Please donate a little, to keep server. - Read more...

After Action Autopsies

An area to discuss systems and ways of completing objectives and share tutorials.
Gunther.S
Admin
Admin
Posts: 2352
Joined: 14 Oct 2013, 02:12
In-game Name:

Re: After Action Autopsies

Postby Gunther.S » 24 Feb 2016, 00:23

However, if objectives are going to be placed in strategically impractical positions, I prefer the old capping mechanic where all you needed was 4 players to cap at maximum speed.

Thats how it is now ;) (again)
Image

User avatar
T.Mace
Community Member
Community Member
Posts: 173
Joined: 05 Apr 2015, 21:43
In-game Name:
Contact:

Re: After Action Autopsies

Postby T.Mace » 24 Feb 2016, 09:58

Good s***.
No FAKs given, they must be earned.

crayon
Community Member
Community Member
Posts: 354
Joined: 20 May 2015, 09:39
In-game Name: crayon

Re: After Action Autopsies

Postby crayon » 25 Feb 2016, 15:44

Hapless wrote:At the risk of off-topicing my own thread:

One of my personal pet peeves with TacBf is that the average mission doesn't take into account any kind of tactical reality: the objectives seem to be plonked down on arbitrary map features like castles, villages, towns and industrial complexes for no other reason than the fact that they're there.

Take Huzru- if you try to defend the villages in the valley bottom by holding the buildings then you're screwed. Like Crayon says: you can't see anything, you have no idea what's going on and you're leaving the enemy the high ground which they will use to pin you down and destroy you. Its an untenable position.

Who's in control of Huzru has nothing to do with who's actually in the village in the valley bottom, it depends on who's controlling the heights: as soon as one side has the high ground, the zone is either secure or defenceless.

So if the aim is to control Huzru village*, why isn't the objective zone up on the decisive high ground?

If the points were all in tactically sensible positions then you wouldn't have this divide between tactics and gameplay mechanics. In my opinion, playing the mod would be vastly improved if the two were combined more often.

Winds me up no end :lol:


*Come to think of it, why are either side trying to control a crappy little medieval village in the first place? Are the buildings full of gold or something? Does Huzru South have the only flushing toilet in all of Takistan? Is it where all the sexiest goats hang out?


At the risk of appearing more redundant;

Without complementary overwatching positions around that area you cannot defend it without suffering prohibitive losses, as with many areas. There has been a drive in the past month towards shoving Blufor into objective areas as a "fix-all" for Blufor losing quite regularly in the past but this simply isn't an effective way to defend anything (leaving aside that I think anyone who thinks they're going to be able to control in the long-term the way players play things has bitten off more than they can chew). You must have strong complementary defensive positions with decent lines of sight and both complementary and interlocking fields of fire which can also support troops moving forward to the next objective. The kilometer of MSR between Sultansafe and Huzru is so blatantly obvious a chokepoint I just cannot even and to have an enemy BTR manage to drive 1km through open ground into the objective without being engaged or even reported is indicative of a strategic failure of momentous proportion.

The other option is to mine the outskirts of the playable area so that neither team can outflank the other and both teams will be forced to fight head to head, in which case a separate set of SOP can be applied, but if the option to take dominant positions around the subservient objective exists this will be the natural tendency of any player with a tactical mindset.
It is highly unlikely you will find a lasting solution to a problem if you do not adequately comprehend the origin of that problem.

"an appeaser is someone who feeds a crocodile hoping that he will be eaten last"

User avatar
T.Mace
Community Member
Community Member
Posts: 173
Joined: 05 Apr 2015, 21:43
In-game Name:
Contact:

Re: After Action Autopsies

Postby T.Mace » 25 Feb 2016, 23:28

crayon wrote:
Hapless wrote:One of my personal pet peeves with TacBf is that the average mission doesn't take into account any kind of tactical reality: the objectives seem to be plonked down on arbitrary map features like castles, villages, towns and industrial complexes for no other reason than the fact that they're there.


At the risk of appearing more redundant;

Without complementary overwatching positions around that area you cannot defend it without suffering prohibitive losses, as with many areas. There has been a drive in the past month towards shoving Blufor into objective areas as a "fix-all" for Blufor losing quite regularly in the past but this simply isn't an effective way to defend anything (leaving aside that I think anyone who thinks they're going to be able to control in the long-term the way players play things has bitten off more than they can chew). You must have strong complementary defensive positions with decent lines of sight and both complementary and interlocking fields of fire which can also support troops moving forward to the next objective. The kilometer of MSR between Sultansafe and Huzru is so blatantly obvious a chokepoint I just cannot even and to have an enemy BTR manage to drive 1km through open ground into the objective without being engaged or even reported is indicative of a strategic failure of momentous proportion.

The other option is to mine the outskirts of the playable area so that neither team can outflank the other and both teams will be forced to fight head to head, in which case a separate set of SOP can be applied, but if the option to take dominant positions around the subservient objective exists this will be the natural tendency of any player with a tactical mindset.


With the current capping mechanic, all you need is 4 players in the zone to cap at maximum speed. This allows the rest of the attacking elements to stay outside the zone to cover the guys inside and fend of enemies before they get in. Not sure if the 4 man cap system was intentionally designed to allow for proper overwatch tactics but it certainly does accommodate that logic. Imo, overwatch makes a lot of sense, not only for the reasons Crayon mentioned but also to serve as a second wave of reinforcements in case the guys in the zone get wiped from something like mortars, mines or enemy fire.
No FAKs given, they must be earned.

crayon
Community Member
Community Member
Posts: 354
Joined: 20 May 2015, 09:39
In-game Name: crayon

Re: After Action Autopsies

Postby crayon » 27 Feb 2016, 16:38

The Cherno map with Skalitsky

Playing blufor on defense

We got rekt in the forests but held the last cap due to the natural obstacle (water) maintaining a standoff distance of about 150 - 200 meters.

Obstacles maintain standoff distance.
It is highly unlikely you will find a lasting solution to a problem if you do not adequately comprehend the origin of that problem.

"an appeaser is someone who feeds a crocodile hoping that he will be eaten last"

crayon
Community Member
Community Member
Posts: 354
Joined: 20 May 2015, 09:39
In-game Name: crayon

Re: After Action Autopsies

Postby crayon » 21 Mar 2016, 12:18

A&D mission on Utes where Blufor has to destroy 4 AA cannons and then capture;

Squads acted independantly to achieve everything up to airfield South. My squad was caught crossing open ground by an enemy MG but due to decent formation (line/shallow wedge) we were able to go to ground and return enough direct and M203 fire to push the enemy MG back over the hill. We popped smoke whilst firing and then were able to manuever elements forward till we were all in hard cover. Once in hard cover we were able to spot the enemy MG and marksman because they were moving to relocate and we negated them.

Airfield North was not captured. Attempts were made by 2 cooperating squads but due to approach angles being too far apart (roughly 160 degrees) the fires from squad 1 were not able to intersect with the fires from squad 2, and the enemy was not adequately suppressed/engaged. I'd suggest a 90 degree angle in future i.e. 1 squad occupying and providing a base of fire from airfield South whilst a second squad flanks airfield North.

download/file.php?mode=view&id=199
Attachments
AAR tacbf1.png
AAR tacbf1.png (40.81 KiB) Viewed 772 times
It is highly unlikely you will find a lasting solution to a problem if you do not adequately comprehend the origin of that problem.

"an appeaser is someone who feeds a crocodile hoping that he will be eaten last"

Hapless
Ranked
Ranked
Posts: 80
Joined: 24 Apr 2015, 11:21
In-game Name:

Re: After Action Autopsies

Postby Hapless » 22 Mar 2016, 09:53

Nice stuff Crayon.

Here's some timelapses. Its a pity I can't do both sides, but its interesting enough watching the little blue dots wander about.

Blufor losing on the Black Forest Map, from Blufor's perspective:


Blufor winning on the Black Mountain Map, from Opfor's perspective:

User avatar
T.Mace
Community Member
Community Member
Posts: 173
Joined: 05 Apr 2015, 21:43
In-game Name:
Contact:

Re: After Action Autopsies

Postby T.Mace » 22 Mar 2016, 10:33

Hapless wrote:Nice stuff Crayon.

Here's some timelapses.


This is awesome! Can you put the names on the map next time? Would be cool to see who's doing what.
No FAKs given, they must be earned.

Harold
Ranked
Ranked
Posts: 34
Joined: 22 Jul 2014, 19:32
In-game Name: Harold
Location: United States

Re: After Action Autopsies

Postby Harold » 26 Apr 2016, 06:23

Date: Tuesday, 26 Apr 2016 at apx 0100 hours UTC
Mission: A&D [M-20] Zavarak r12, Takistan (US vs Ins)
Role: I was the only BLUFOR squad leader of 6 to 8 players

Our first few attacks on Alpha were not successful because we were wiped out by enemies who knew where to watch for us.

I decided to use a more organized and tactical approach. I ordered the squad to use bounding overwatch. In other words, I asked them to alternate between moving and covering.

The most important effect of this was that people started to watch for enemies from covered positions. They were able to spot enemies first and fire at them, in some cases from the flanks of the enemy. We combined that with an L-shaped ambush structure, and we gradually moved in toward the objective through fire and movement.

2016-04-26_00-55-33_BLUFOR_Alpha_attack_map.jpg
The map of the L-shaped structure that closed in toward the enemy
2016-04-26_00-55-33_BLUFOR_Alpha_attack_map.jpg (147.26 KiB) Viewed 679 times

2016-04-26_00-55-33_BLUFOR_FT2_view.jpg
The view from fireteam 2 (the compound where the base of fire was positioned)
2016-04-26_00-55-33_BLUFOR_FT2_view.jpg (177.38 KiB) Viewed 679 times

2016-04-26_00-55-33_BLUFOR_FT1_view.jpg
The view from fireteam 1 (the flanking fireteam that approached from an angle that was apparently surprising to the enemy)
2016-04-26_00-55-33_BLUFOR_FT1_view.jpg (169.45 KiB) Viewed 679 times

We ended up with situations where an enemy would run forward and attempt to attack one of us, but the enemy would be shot by another soldier in our squad. Apparently at least some of the players in the squad had good spacing and lines of sight of the rest of the squad.

At one point we took fire from an enemy MG, but no one knew where he was. I ordered people to guess where the MG might be and start firing at those places -- essentially a "Mad Minute". We unloaded several magazines and apparently someone was able to maneuver in order to get eyes on the MG and kill him.

We finally made it to the walls of the compound at Alpha. I ordered the squad to clear building-by-building and then take defensive positions in the buildings until we captured the zone. There was combat throughout the zone, grenades detonating, casualties. When the dust settled we had 3 players alive in the zone and there was apparently one enemy at the north side of the zone. I ordered people to cover the people bandaging the casualties. We touched the flag when we had it neutralized and finally captured the zone. Then enemy counterattacks arrived and we lost the rest of our squad there, but it didn't matter because the enemy couldn't retake the objective. It felt great to solve a problem through the use of real military tactics.

So we shifted our focus to Bravo. We were slow to get there, and not in full force, unlike our attack on Alpha. In hindsight, two players were not able to hear us in TFR or not able to speak. One player turned into an AI soldier, which explains why he didn't respond to any of my orders. :-) Anyway, we made several attempts to attack Bravo but we were wiped out each time. The other team was massing their soldiers at the objective, while one or two enemy soldiers were roaming around and hitting us from our flanks. I tried to organize a better attack. I ordered a support element (3 players) to move into line formation in the forest and suppress the compound. Meanwhile an assault element mounted up in an RG-33 truck and drove directly into the compound. The result was that the support element was wiped out by enemies in front of them (perhaps at close range) and the assault element (2 players) arrived in the compound about 30 seconds after that and was also wiped out by an overwhelming surrounding enemy force (perhaps 8 players).

The bottom line was that we were outnumbered and didn't have good cover in our attack on Bravo. I suggested that we attack from Charlie toward Bravo because there were essentially stepping stones of cover in that path. But I had to disconnect in order to eat dinner, so I don't know how that turned out.

Credits
Senator Rocktruck was a solid fireteam leader and helped greatly with implementing each of the plans.
Spooby was a first-time TacBF player but a solid tactical fighter and flanker, dropping numerous enemies in close-quarters combat.

User avatar
mad rabbit
Community God
Community God
Posts: 2155
Joined: 24 Jan 2013, 12:39
In-game Name:
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: After Action Autopsies

Postby mad rabbit » 27 Apr 2016, 12:02

Hapless wrote:Here's some timelapses. Its a pity I can't do both sides, but its interesting enough watching the little blue dots wander about.



It is a pity because these as great! More importantly, I believe they'd be very helpful in settling a lot of tactical arguments floating around these forums.


Return to “Tactics and Tutorials”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron