I'm trying to explain that your acting alone, flanking the guys without getting shot is because the bad quality of the other team in terms of teamplay and leadership.
You don't need to tell me the quality of the opponents is poor. That's what I have been saying all along. I can do it on my own because the enemy sucks, not because the game does. You can do it when they are good too. In fact flanking is a basic military tactic known for thousands of years because it really works.
In RL they use squads because ONE standard soldier could not make the difference (if you don't have a LMG or an AT gun at least).
If the enemy isn't expecting him, he can. The smallest unit the SAS uses is 4 men. They may be hundreds of mile behind enemy lines. They have to be able to survive, even on their own if they get split up.
A sniper might head out into enemy territory, or a squad leader might scout ahead on his own. The prototypical charging of the machine gun nest that wins so many medals, is often carried out by a single man on a rampage.
When the enemy is looking for dozens or even hundreds of enemies, sometimes one or two can slip in and do the job and get back out again unnoticed. If you have ten men and you need a distraction to cover an assault, you might send one man out to harass the enemy, making as much noise as possible, simply to get the enemy focused on him.
You may simply get separated from your unit and have to fight your way back to them. It happens.
Don't take this to mean I am against squad based play. I've never said or even indicated any such thing. I am saying that what a lot of people think is "working with a squad" is not even remotely close.
There are fire teams for a reason. A fire team will be divided up into two combat pairs. That is the basic unit. You always want at least one friendly with you, to cover your back. That is a preference though, not a necessity.
So what you guys are doing posting screenshots about your kill and how much "awesome you are" is useless.
There is another thread here where I have a 157m head shot with the DP-28. People act like that that can't be done. I do it and can prove it. What's the problem?
You can't demostrate that a tactic is valid in that way: post me a video of you entire action and MAYBE I can take your "Rambo" tactic seriously and say "Good one" to you... it's been a bad idea workin alone but at least I have to admin that you are a skilled player.
I can go one better. I can tell you WHY and HOW it works in the REAL WORLD. No game mechanics, but real world physiology and so on. I seriously doubt you'd understand what you're seeing, even if I showed you. You don't believe it when I explain it, and its easier to explain than to show.
How am I supposed to show you a video of how someone is thinking? All I can do is show you a screen shot of a kill, and explain how I got it. The video would show nothing more than the screenshot. I ran across from spawn to the Allied end of the field. I started moving around that area looking for things you never even think about. So how would you know what I'm looking for unless I tell you?
Basically, what you're saying is I'm a liar and what I'm saying happened, didn't happen. You have nothing but your own wrong feeling to support such a wild accusation, but you'll slip it in subtly anyway.
In real life a single guy don't even start thinking about flanking enemies alone (in this case 4 of them).
You spend a lot of time talking to soldiers? Or playing with plastic ones?
If there are 10 guys, then at some point you are going to have to send out one or two to do something apart from the body of the squad. In fact the gunner and second gunner are off 100m away most of the time. I have screenshot of me killing an enemy in the cap from 157m. My squad was about 10m from him. That puts me about 150m from my squad, on my own. That does happen. That's the best place for the gun to be, and sometimes you can;t spare more than one soldier to man it.
Only Rambo could do this. I hope you understand this, that a real soldier has ONE life and the only way to fight and stay alive is to work as a team.
No ****, Sherlock? Soldiers aren't immortal? They are soldiers though. They are trained to fight wars. You don't fight wars by hiding. In fact that could get you shot by your own team. No one likes a coward when everyone is fighting for their life.
Look I'm a guy who play IL2 full switch (most realistic settings on) since years and the first rule of my squad is "Don't die! Never!". Because of this we learned to act as a team.
When have I ever said anything else? Running and gunning is not about going lone wolf, its about using movement to position you and your squad in the most effective and safe location to engage the enemy. If there is no cover, the safest place is somewhere else. You don't get there by camping.
A lone wolf is not the same thing as a run and gunner. they are not synonymous. A sniper that camps all day is a lone wolf, just as much as Rambo deep behind enemy lines by himself is a lone wolf.
I've never once said teamwork isn't important. It's just that it can be done on an ad hoc, as the need arises, basis. And it happens all the time. Two guys heading in the same direction come under fire. They will both do the same things which is an element of team work. They don;t have to talk about it, they just do it until the threat has passed and then move off in their separate ways.
So I'm totally against an irrealistic way to fight like the way you are defending here.
You don't know what is realistic. I'm not joking. I can quote medal citation after medal citation to show you than lone wolf run and gun happens FOR REAL. Many heroes are seen for the last time by friendly eyes running off into the smoke, alone, murder in their eyes. It happens.
Player's skill > team work => CoD style.
Are you saying that skilful players should be limited so that you don't feel like a loser? It sure reads that way to me. You seem to be saying that if the players skill has more effect than teamwork, then the game becomes CoD. What I hear is "if the game doesn't prevent people from doing realistic things and killing me, I hate the game."
I can easily be one of your victim if my team is doing wrong. Many times I die because playing with casual teammates I can't communicate with them. I saw one of my guy covering the right flank, so I have faith in him and I advance ignoring that side
There is your mistake. You are meant to be covering him. How can you do that if you don't know where he is? You should be looking at him constantly.
There is no VOIP on the battlefield. War is loud. You can't hear yourself think. That's why people learn the techniques I told you so they don;t HAVE to communicate. Everyone knows what everyone else should be doing, and is doing it themselves. When you are constantly checking to see where he is, he should be doing the same things. If he sees a threat he waits until you look at him, and then he indicates somehow, either by firing at it to mark the target, or hand signal.
That's what I mean by you not knowing what is real. You actually think people can hear each other in the middle of a battle. You can't. So if you are losing because you can't talk to people, it's because either you or they or both don't know what you're doing. Proper tactics require minimal communication to carry out. Everyone just does them.
Then you flank me on that side and I die, only because the guy on the right has not done his job. Damn but probably it's because you're more skilled than me.
If I killed him, then you, then yes. Probably. If he ran off and left you exposed and I manoeuvred to take advantage, then yes probably. If you had no idea at all what was about to happen, then DEFINITELY. Just by watching where you look, I'd be able to tell you what would happen.
Even if your team mate was doing his job perfectly he could be killed and you'd never even know it, because you never even looked at him.
Anyway until you objective is not clear (enemy want to retake it) somebody have to stay behind on the last one, and move only when the objective is ours 100%. Above all the slow LMGs.
Not really. The enemy doesn't spawn in the objective if you are assaulting it. We all know how hard it is to spawn on a squad leader because of this. So when you team enters the objective and kills the defenders, you have a small window before they come back.
This is the time to grab as much territory as possible, not sit on the territory you have waiting for them to come back. They will have people further back covering too. The assault guys want to stop briefly to gather stamina and reload and bandage and whatever. They need those covering enemy to be dealt with. The guys who were covering the assault before should already be pushing through to deal with them.
The new objective is to secure the approach to the objective, not to secure the objective you have already secured. You should be assaulting out of the objective towards the next objective before the defenders who were killed can respawn, while the assault troops cover you. That will then put you in position to cover the assault troops as they move to attack the next objective.
The enemy is on the back foot, why give him time to reset his defences?
Do you know that riflemen's job there to advance until in effective reange of their weapon, under cover of the MG, and when wrest fire superiority from the enemy? If your enemy is in range then you fire!
The infantryman's role is to close with and kill the enemy. You can't kill him if you can't hit him. It's easier to hit him if you are closer. It's pretty obvious really.
Of course... all my post is against the "aggressive defence" concept.
If you are attacking you have to move (supported) and advance.
Consider this scenario. You are trying to hold a house, but it is being assaulted by the enemy and they are outside the door to your room preparing to come in.
Passive defence is when you get as much cover as you can and then you wait for them to come in. An active defence would be to try and prevent them from even coming into the room. So, what to do? Simple. Treat the hallway as the room, and YOU assault THEM.
They will usually be bunched up, maybe reloading etc, and the last thing they expect is you to come out and fire a high velocity bullet straight at them. I get one / shot two kills that way quite a lot.
I'm turning the tables and doing to them what they were trying to do to me, but I'm doing it first. I have taken the initiative, won the element of surprise and spoiled their attack before it even began.
You might call it Rambo, but I call it the smart option.
Its because the map design, the ridiculous bendage system, the quantity of semi and auto weapons, the inaccuraracy of MGs and their bad suppression feature, ect.
I can post a screenshot of a 157m head shot on a German hiding behind a wall with an MkB that I did with the DP-28. if you think the MG's are inaccurate, it's because you don't know how to use them.
Just flush them out!
