Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures for ArmA

[froggyluv 2136]

Excellent manual! Can't get through as it wets my appetite and drives me back into the game

I also wrote a DM Ranch Tactical guide and heres an excerpt from chapter 3:

"Shoot"

more to come...

[Dallas 9]

I think it's a common misconception that people are playing coop against AI, because human opponents are just too hard.

I consider using movement and cover a realistic tactic, which works well in both coop and advesary matches. I just played Hexenkessel for the first time two days ago, being pure breed coop fanatic, I did pretty good. On a +30 player server I moved  between 3rd and 5th place. The dynamics are totally different, but some basic tactics makes sense and gives you advantages.

The differense is in real coop you focus on staying alive and completing the objectives, while in advesary, you constantly have to apply pressure, respawn/reinforce positions. Probe and break through enemy lines and build up momentum to go for the flag.

Both modes rewards shooting from covered positions, advancing in stages and coordinating attacks. My experience is coop players do wellin CTF, because they take precautions to stay alive, setup kills zones and use sights to engage people from afar or locate bottlenecks and cooperate.

I enjoy coop, AI can always improve and it does with newly released patches. I've never considered the AI to be super human, because I try to maintain initiative. I engage in teams from covered positions, trying to hit them hard before they get a bead on you. If and when they light your position up, you have to take cover immediately, if you want to survive. If you get greedy, you will die. There's nothing super human about an AI squad with MG lighting your position up. If you don't get out of the rain you will get wet.

Much of Dslyecxi's guide is really just putting common sense on writing, atlease if you know basic infantery tactics. I'm not discounting the guide, infact it's extremely important to put these thoughts and learnings down on writing, to be able to communicate this knowledge on to new and less experienced recruits. Even veterans will benefit from wording backbone rutines and rethinking procedures.

It's quite a meal, food for thoughts.

[walker 0]

Hi all

As alway excelent work by Dslyecxi. Maybe some of the game magazines should do an article about this.

Hint! Hint! You know who you are.

Kind Regards walker

[OrLoK 20]

Hello

Just to reiterate, this thread was NOT about Dslyecxi's guide.

Which IMHO is a fine piece of work.

More about wheather RL tactics work in arma.

There's always two sides to a discussion, and although im all up for a lively discussion, lets keep it nice.

rgds

LoK

[Second 0]

If i remeber this right, in chess there's saying:

10 warriors can defeat 100 soldiers.

100 warriors has change against 100 soldier

1000 warriors can't defeat 100 soldiers.

Warriors are just guys who know how to use their weapons.

Soldiers knows more about teamwork and standart procedures.

it's has worked in many other things than chess by my experience... Bigger the organization then there's bigger need for organization and rules how to act and work.

And yes there has been conseguenses with laser-simulators that our finest young active-officers lose to our finest young polices or our finest young firemen when fighting with simulators in squad level (let's put batallion for both sides with simulated-artillery and such things and let's look at it again )

EDIT: Ofcourse most polices and firemen have complited reservist NCO or reservist officer training and rank, so result still would be somewhat unpredictable. But i would bet my money on active-officers (bigger the operating unit, more money i would bet)

[4 IN 1 0]

dont mean to be offencive, but what i am trying to say is that its only a matter of taste, and for the taste of CTF/DM, RL tactics doesnt seems to work well, as it only happens in a game

[dslyecxi 23]

There will be a nice PDF version of this within a week or so. And by "nice" I mean really, really, really nice.

[Average Joe 0]

Borat approved Dslyecxi, goodjob.

[Second 0]

Quote[/b] ]and for the taste of CTF/DM, RL tactics doesnt seems to work well, as it only happens in a game

And with small units... as almost all MP-forms. Understandment of basic fundamental things in ArmA or OFP is main requirement for succesful match. I don't think that RL tactics have much meaning. how well guy uses his virtual weapons and controls + which side has lady fortuna's favor has bigger impact than tactics or should it be said combat-techinal things...

[ArmaVidz 0]

Yes, thank you Dslyecxi. I haven't read the manual yet but as soon as I get clear of real-life stuff I'll be getting back to ARMA. As well, I've just ordered my N.A. copy from a local distributor! w00t.

Inline with discussion at this point, real world tactics against "CS" players tactics I believe would be "difficult" to counter. It's hard to combat an enemy that has %0 care about his life and engages his enemy in an equal disregard. However, while "Real-World Tactics" team may have casualties inflicted on them, they will be the last standing. I know the basics of combat, and there are reasons they have been developed: They keep you alive. They work.

The AI: it's pretty good. But not nearly as sinister as a human could be. While better than any game I've seen to date (I haven't seen VBS2 though), it still lacks some clear common sense. I ain't complaining, just pointing out it needs a clear dose of "little bastard" in it. For example, putting "suppression fire" on a building entrance when it's known there is an enemy located inside; while another portion of the team flanks around back.

CTF and DM while fun, are not realistic IMO. TeamA vs. TeamB and who is left standing is more realistic. Whether you retreat, or you get wiped out is your choice. The opposing team still wins.

There should be a feature where the highest ranking player (Cpt./Sargeant etc.) left alive is given a complicated trigger to "surrender peacefully," to stay inline somewhat with real-world conditions. Something to "signal" the opposing force of the surrender.

As for CS player tactics and those that use them: I think very soon I will need to join a clan. This is really the only way to avoid pubbin' it with players that bonzai etc. I plugged it out through Americas Army, through the Battlefield Series, and finally landed at SWAT4 offline play, just to get to tactical. Quite simply, I don't understand how ARMA attracts these people; it has %0 percent stigmatism of being an "arcadish FPS." I hate to be a jacka$$ about it but, I'd be plenty happy never seeing an arcade-play-style player in Armed Assault. Unfortunately, we all know this is far from the reality it will be.

I would encourage everyone who doesn't like CS/BF2 type play to join a clan. Thing is, when I was with 2ndMarine in AA, it kind of sucked because there was a clear commitment of time, though; which is not possible much of the time. You had to be there, whenever the group got together. Otherwise, it was kind of uncomfortable playin along side each other.

Offline training would be perfect to help alleviate the need to "be there" at a set time. "Missions" employing tactics. Newsletters - no matter how simple they are. Tactics developed by your mates and distributed to members so that they can "be on the same page." Of course there is no substitute for real-time play with each other, but in its absence, this could help out alot.

[dslyecxi 23]

Quote[/b] ]and for the taste of CTF/DM, RL tactics doesnt seems to work well, as it only happens in a game

And with small units... as almost all MP-forms. Understandment of basic fundamental things in ArmA or OFP is main requirement for succesful match. I don't think that RL tactics have much meaning. how well guy uses his virtual weapons and controls + which side has lady fortuna's favor has bigger impact than tactics or should it be said combat-techinal things...

Would you define a platoon (46 people in our org) as a "small unit"? 46 people working as one giant blob of uncoordinated nothingness is going to get monkey-stomped by a platoon working as a coordinated unit.

46 people vs hundreds of AI is likewise going to be the same - the lack of coordination, teamwork, etc is going to result in them getting shredded when a more teamwork-oriented and tactically-minded group is able to achieve victory.

[baddo 0]

Well I remember the OFP coops I played.

Being a part of a well-organized team which planned beforehand what to do helped tremendeously to boost the gaming experience. I hated it when the team was just a bunch of monkeys going all over the place. I loved it when the team was strictly commanded and good orders were given. People were assigned roles and tasks and sticked to them, just like in real life army training we had to do, or we got quite harsh punishments. Best gaming experiences I have ever had in my life.

[Jake the Snake 0]

So, pardon me for this, ACE is a mod, right?

[Second 0]

Would you define a platoon (46 people in our org) as a "small unit"? 46 people working as one giant blob of uncoordinated nothingness is going to get monkey-stomped by a platoon working as a coordinated unit.

46 people vs hundreds of AI is likewise going to be the same - the lack of coordination, teamwork, etc is going to result in them getting shredded when a more teamwork-oriented and tactically-minded group is able to achieve victory.

I wouldn't consider that platoon (or 1 1/2 platoon to me as i've used to smaller sizes) sized force is small... But not big either. Ofcourse lot's of things is upto "tactical" squads playingways. Is it: This is my tactic and by this i will "die". Or something that has evolved into teamwork where space is left to individual warriorism. Plus many weeks/mouths/years of playing ArmA or OFP has affect. I'd still wouldn't keep it sure that platoon sized force (not armors or choppers involved) is enough to bring team-work to so important level that it beats experince and knowhow of the fundamental things of the game.

Winning coop usually comes from many reloads and getting knowing the mission... But i don't deny your saying: AI can't fight against humanteams which practices teamworking... Which is sad and also reason why i left coop out.

[dslyecxi 23]

So, pardon me for this, ACE is a mod, right?

Correct. It's by the guys who did Wargames League for OFP.

[Jake the Snake 0]

thanks

Is it already out?

[heemle 0]

Very nice work indeed, really useful material.

Almost read it all in one reading session..

Could you please make the external hyperlinks open in a new window?

For example, "Aircraft classes" on the last page which link to fas.org

And the links related to TrackIr, should also open in a new window.

And there was a missing link for the pdf for "Marine Rifle Squad" on page 2.

[Banzai! 0]

There's not very much left of the simulation, if you spawn continually and have little or no fear of death and know exactly where the enemy spawns etc. That would make you pretty deep into the arcade. So, the discussion would probably end there.

Imagine a CTI where instead of having to conquer x towns all at once, you have to conquer a point of interest which changes every hour or so. Imagine traveling there takes several minutes "flying". Imagine you could only return there once your whole group has died and respawned.

Perhaps not until now can we start talking about actual fear of death - the kind that mainly coop players face. And perhaps first now would tactics with first priority to keep you and your mates alive, really apply in a pvp environment.

my 2 cents anyway. (and I'd really like to play this cti fashion)

Must resist temptation of TKing...

[walker 0]

Hi all

I feel sorry for Celery he has never experienced OFP or ArmA at its best by concentrating on claustrophobic predictable CTF. It is OK for a half hour blast of HexenKessel, although A&Ds like Berzerk beats CTF any day.

Death-matches don't count, as tactics requires team buddies.

Large scale PvP coops are my prefer ed forms. So Dslyecxi's writing really applies in this form where there are 20 plus players a side each controlling an AI squad, so nearly 1000 units playing with: crew served weapons, artillery, tanks, IFVs, sniper teams, logistics trains, minefields to be cleared and helicopters ferrying in fresh troops and ammo into a hot LZ or covering you open flank. This is what ArmA is made for, and it is truly glorious!

I am sure lwlooz and froggyluv will remember the 5 hour battles we used to play on Zeus. lwlooz and I used to team doing directed fire picking off enemy beyond the range you could see the target by one of us a forward observer to the others Bradley gunner giving the directions; walking the fire in from prominent terrain features.

Who can forget the "Forrest of Death" (FOD)  in Breakthrough

That one section of mission alone taught you the dangers of canalization.

I must have played through that spot 50 times in MP a thousand times with CEM. How many times did we end up fighting over hill 105 or "The Gap" north of the FOD.

We learned to leave choke points alone and why they make such great ambush points.

Kind Regards walker

[celery 8]

I feel sorry for Celery he has never experienced OFP or ArmA at its best by concentrating on claustraphobic predictable CTF. It is OK for a half hour blast of HexenKessel, allthough A&Ds like Berzerk beats CTF any day.

Don't bother playing the patronizing card to gain a +1 bonus in presence and leadership in your faction. I feel sorry having experienced the large scale coops, CTIs and such, which got me convinced to stay away from the biggest mistake in the game - the AI. So there!!! And don't think that all I do is play my own shoebox maps which are not meant for serious playing anyway.

I don't know what bashing PvP gives to some people, but in this topic it all comes down to that real life techniques (other than using common sense) seldom give an advantage over intuitive fighting in a fast paced human fight. Leadership and team structure hardly have much to do with formations and suppression fire, so you can scrap any comments about CTF/C&H teams being a clueless bunch of "warriors". You can kick and scream all day about how such game modes aren't good enough for real tactics anyway, but there is a reason why different modes are played the way they are. One would have to be stupid not to play in the most efficient way.

This wasn't a poll to ask who hates which game mode the most and I gave my answer to the original questions from the perspective of a CTF/C&H player. You can PM me if you want to tell someone of your antipathies toward PvP or its players - write it where it counts!

[the unknown 0]

Nice work.

However did you wrote these tactics in a PvP or PvAI view?

[Heatseeker 0]

Atm im feeling more "scared" of battling a.i. than human players.

The a.i. can pull a large amount of acurate fire from the distance faster than the human player since some gameplay "mechanics" dont apply to them (recoil).

Anyone who claims Arma's a.i. to be bad problably doesnt understand it or ever loaded the editor with the purpose of assembling a sp/coop mission, there is more to it than throwing an a.i. infantry squad into the editor expecting the world...

As for RL formations and tactics what you use will depend on the game mode. If you are playing spawn fest CQB in a walled in arena you will still use some basic mout tactics, cover, supression, etc.

[MrZig 0]

thanks

Is it already out?

Neg.

Awesome work Dslyecxi!

[trini scourge 1]

Great work m8, the amount of time and effort you put into this is mindblowing

I am also part a team that puts military tactics and procedures into good use in games like ArmA (JSF 223rd), and the level of detail in this 'guide' is unmatched anywhere else.

You can always drop by the site some time: www.223rd.com (if you have the time that is) your input is more than welcome!!

[dslyecxi 23]

Nice work.

However did you wrote these tactics in a PvP or PvAI view?

I wrote them based on the missions we play as a group, whether they're adversarial or cooperative. They're applicable to both.