Post by sasha on Dec 31, 2012 18:19:51 GMT
Guys, i read some info on fireteams in wiki, tactical manual of Shacks, and when i compare it to what we experience i get frustrated:
1. Typical team is 3-4 riflemen + 1 mg gunner. But, according to our experience in games this universality is crap.
When you need covering fire you better have all mgs in one team, while in assault and clearence you need team of riflemen and dont need any bulky mg for close combat.
2. In attack it appears senseless to split up squad to same composition teams and send them different direction (it appeares really senseless) - they usually end up battling separately with cohesion hardly possible. Infantry squad is better to stay together to my mind - by this way we have maximum guns per target.
Idk but it is my experience in latest missions - no sense to split squad (of course a full 3 squad platoon has to be split because too many ppl impossible to control and no sense in being crowded).
3. When team has a sniper they can cooperate but then this would not be a team really - they need special situations to be effective (and maybe 1 sniper could as well support a whole platoon then just 4-men team).
4. So probably there is more sense in making different teams in a squad. Like this: 1 professional squad should have 3 teams - 1 mg team, 1 assault riflemen team, 1 special purpose team (AT,Sniper,Spotter,Medic,Commander).
In all ordinary situations squad will try to stay together in a formation similar to of ordinary infantry squad. But when situation require squad would split into a specialized tactically efficient units - Fire Support MG team, Assault, and if needed AT and sniper.
I am starting to believe that such squad of different-porpose teams would be more effective then the one made of standard unspecialised teams.
What do you think?
1. Typical team is 3-4 riflemen + 1 mg gunner. But, according to our experience in games this universality is crap.
When you need covering fire you better have all mgs in one team, while in assault and clearence you need team of riflemen and dont need any bulky mg for close combat.
2. In attack it appears senseless to split up squad to same composition teams and send them different direction (it appeares really senseless) - they usually end up battling separately with cohesion hardly possible. Infantry squad is better to stay together to my mind - by this way we have maximum guns per target.
Idk but it is my experience in latest missions - no sense to split squad (of course a full 3 squad platoon has to be split because too many ppl impossible to control and no sense in being crowded).
3. When team has a sniper they can cooperate but then this would not be a team really - they need special situations to be effective (and maybe 1 sniper could as well support a whole platoon then just 4-men team).
4. So probably there is more sense in making different teams in a squad. Like this: 1 professional squad should have 3 teams - 1 mg team, 1 assault riflemen team, 1 special purpose team (AT,Sniper,Spotter,Medic,Commander).
In all ordinary situations squad will try to stay together in a formation similar to of ordinary infantry squad. But when situation require squad would split into a specialized tactically efficient units - Fire Support MG team, Assault, and if needed AT and sniper.
I am starting to believe that such squad of different-porpose teams would be more effective then the one made of standard unspecialised teams.
What do you think?