What Manuals Don’t Teach About Infantry Tactics
Вставка
- Опубліковано 20 тра 2024
- Squad Tactics Discussion. Explaining REAL-Life Infantry Tactics (Pt. 5)
Previous discussion videos:
Suppression: • Explaining REAL Life I...
Assault tactics: • Explaining REAL Life I...
Communications: • Squad's Secret Sauce
Defense tactics: • Explaining REAL Life I...
Room clearing tactics: • CQB Isn’t What You Thi...
Join the 7th Ranger Regiment: / discord
Join my channel’s Discord community: / discord
#gaming #milsim #squad #tacticalshooter#squadgameplay #joinsquad #playsquad #geforcenow #macgaming
00:00 - Real Life Tactics?
01:06 - Battle Drill 2A
02:24 - Example 1
05:40 - Battle Drill 2A's Weaknesses
08:46 - So is Battle Drill 2A Useless?
09:55 - Example 2
15:17 - Three Fireteam Organization
17:13 - Example 3
20:25 - What's the Point?
21:20 - The Limitations of Squad Tactics
22:15 - Recap - Ігри
with 600hs+ in squad mostly as SL (played since alpha) There are a couple of things missing on this video, first is that you don't have to start surprising the enemy right away. You can wait for your other fireteams to get closer to the enemy to then engage when the situation is even better. There is no point on telling the enemy your entire squad is there. In example 2. Is perfect, you don't have to engage the enemy from the hill if they don't see you yet. you can send your second fireteam to sneak the enemies at close range even before the entire squad is detected. Starting suppresing fire just because is pointless. Suppresing fire should be executed when all other ideas are already discarded, executed or failed.
Another thing is that if you are not moving, you are dying. Holding a position will get you killed, holding a position with your fireteam will get your fireteam killed. So after engaging the enemy, you need to move and redeploy fast. You can't expect to hold a fire position for more than 1-2 minutes, if you do, all your initial advantage is long gone and you are already fighting in either a disfavorable or best case scenario a attrition scenario than you don't want to be part of.
The more you desive your enemy the better. you can leave one man behind holding the fire position and then having the rest of the fireteam redoploying on another angle. The enemy 99% of the time would still think you guys are still on the initial position so they wont be thinking you are out already.
Still excellent video!
Yeah really good points! When you have the initiative and you’re undetected there are many more options such as an infiltration and such.
The battle drills typically assume direct fire contact, and thus the firefight has already kicked off. I touched a little bit on how being undetected plays to your advantage in example 2B
Thanks for the great comment!
@@HaebyungDance glad you like it! There are Two sentences i hace repeated over AND over in as SL. Hold your fire until the enemy detect us AND drop smoke hahaha
Patience is bless. I remember that once I was hiding withing some bushes. At that time I didn't have a mic, so I couldn't communicate to my SL that I had strong suspicion that an enemy squad had to be flanking our position through south-west. So I decided to go completely solo.
So I waited on a path I knew the enemy had to cross to reach our position. And then I saw 1 guy, but decided to wait. Then in a couple.of minutes I had 7 enemies walking through the area I had predicted they'd be.
I waited for them to get closer together and killed all of them with my AK. I felt like fucking Nostradamus
Biggest takeaway here is that Battle Drills as a concept are tools that provide answers to directives imposed by Doctrine. They're the What and the How, and Doctrine is Why. None of this is a particularly novel concept, the pitfall of studying from the bottom up is that you run the risk of missing the big picture. Battle Drills exist to provide a repeatable and learnable tool at the smallest possible tactical unit level for training purposes and even doctrine dictates that the smallest *real* element one can expect to employ Fire and Maneuver in the field is a Platoon sized element. The universal knowledge of such a drill allows a leader to provide direction at all levels of hierarchy without complication and the unit can execute with good synchronicity and minimal confusion in the face of "friction" in the field.
In a video game, it's important to ask the same questions that doctrine answers. What are we trying to accomplish? If we wish to impose our will upon the enemy, what is the most effective way to do this? For a video game developer, this is the level they need to start in order to isolate variables that lead to doctrine responses like suppression and fire support element organization. Squad took a long time to develop suppression into a valid game mechanic and most games do not and simply miss a key element of realism that leads to suppression becoming a key element of success: The enemy must fear for their lives or, for a video game, fear the consequences of being struck by fire in whatever form that takes.
The MCDP defines the fundamentals of Warfighting to be Speed and Focus, Surprise, and Boldness. More recently, this has turned into the tenants of CQB: Speed, Surprise, and Violence of Action. It's a common mindset that all forces must share in order to achieve success. In the world of video games, a simple core of tenants as this is all it takes to align a group who understand the mechanics of the game to apply those mechanics as teamwork.
We all have those friends that shoot at the first enemy they see or the one who runs off on their own without support and doesn't communicate it. Those are the people who do not understand these traits and are not effectively applying them, thus cannot work well with the group regardless of how well they play. You can teach them how to fight but you must also teach them why they must fight that way. If everyone understands the same rules, then that friend that pushes out will communicate "Pushing left" and the nearest squad members who also understand what this player is now trying to achieve will collapse and follow suit, providing the much needed support to drive a flank rather than a lone wolf searching for easy kills that will be promptly eliminated.
is it only me or does 600h since (alpha) at least 5 years seem pretty low
“plans are worthless, but planning is everything” - Eisenhower
I feel like the biggest thing in a game, whether video games or airsoft, that breaks real world tactics is the fact that you won't permanently die. Real life tactics aren't very effective when the enemy has no sense of self preservation. You can see the real life effects of this with suicide bombers in the middle east or kamikazes in Japan. That is hard to defend against because your only option is to stop them before they stop you.
Yeah it’s the biggest limitation of gaming and even training. Sufficiently punishing respawn mechanics can mitigate this, but obviously it’s not the same
@@HaebyungDance Even in extremes such as Tarkov, people still tend towards CoD rushing tactics. I'd say the ICO actually achieved its goal there, because Squad had the same issue of very game-y tactics before (especially the peak advantage), but it's much harder to pull off the acrobatics now
Have you tried or analyzed any one-life events?
I’ve played one-life events but then it reaches the realm where the adherence to realism starts to detract from the fun I’m trying to have while playing a game. Same reason I don’t play Arma milsim ops and just stick to Squad.
TLDR: The next step for milsim players need to take in order to achieve IRL realism is to strap their balls to a taser that can be activated upon ingame death.
I remember reading a Japanese journal paper about applying (physical) punishment to players that resulted in more cautious, realistic gameplay. The game they chose was Call of Duty MW2 (2009). They did this by making the players wear a haptic device that would transmit a mild electric shock to their arms upon taking damage and a stronger shock upon getting killed in the game. The PvP matches suddenly became similar to paintball games with people doing suppressing fires, snap shooting, and recon by fire. Most IRL tactics take loss (and pain) into consideration, w/o that, they don't usually apply in games with no or low level of punishment.
It's definitely important to understand that this is a videogame, and so real-life tactics won't always apply 1:1 like you said, but using the wisdom of these tactics does make a tangible difference. Squad is primarily a game about communication, despite all the guns, and even more arcade-y shooters like CoD play better when you are able to communicate with your team effectively. I think I've had more fun losing engagements in Squad than I have winning in other games, simply because it felt like I was working with people that were giving it their all just like I was. I can't tell you how many end of match screens I have been in after losing where I say "good attempts, good playing from you all" to my squad, and they all start complimenting each other and getting excited about the near misses and highlights. Thanks for your content as always!
I agree - there are principles that are definitely applicable.
Real life tactics don't always apply 1:1 to real life either. An enemy could even anticipate your next move if they know your doctrine, or even hope you do exactly that; e.g., ambushing the expected flanking assault by feigning inferiority in fire or numbers.
Even taliban and other insurgents occassionaly did/do this, mostly against known QRF.
Ahh yes, the good ol' flank and spank.
I was a machine gunner in a squad that did this. At the start of the match he gave us basic instructions. He had both machine gunners in Charlie FT with a rifleman or medic, bravo was mostly medics of riflemen with a grenadier. He told us from the start that if he tells FT charlie to suppress, he would mark the area with a move mark and told us to fire one at a time, so when one MG is reloading, the other was firing. Bravo team was the flank and CQB team.
It worked great, we suppressed and bravo would flank and move in and clear tree lines or buildings.
Great video
That’s a WW2 Wehrmacht tactic.
I've played Project Reality since 2006 and Squad since 2015, we ran into these issues and asked the same questions. We found that these tactics work BUT, only in specific servers or events where only pros are. The reason for that is simple - you can expect enemy squads to stick together, and where there is one person, there are more. You can apply group vs group tactics and even if the enemy knows what they are doing and your assault element gets wiped, you CAN hold yourself responsible for not planning well.
Meanwhile on public servers you are constantly fighting a swarm of bees, random lone wolfs shooting you from random directions, spreading confusion and making the whole ordeal more annoying than fun, even if you execute a tactic perfectly, it just wont work.
It made sense why the US had so many casualties against insurgents in all the wars it has fought, while it excelled at fighting conventional armies.
Also been playing PR since 2006 (what a run!) and yeah, the thing that works the most is very simple: having SQUADS and everyone following a decent commander. Even if your commander was meh, if you didn't have one, you were going to lose. Aside from that, squads that held good positions and were able yo keep them supplied were going to be highly successful.
20 years of multiple front war: estimated 7,052 US military combatants, over 8,100 US military contractors and more than 14,800 US-allied coalition troops are estimated to have been killed in the wars as of 2023.
VS
~20,000 to take Iwo Jima.
Or are you talking a more recent “conventional” war?
Tell me your an infantryman without telling me your an infantryman
Edit: Talking guns gave me the final info I needed
You got me
By not being able to use the correct "you're" 😉
@@TheJubiter ouch
@@HaebyungDance Brotherhood of the Bayonet! I'm loving the content bud, it's very nostalgic to have someone go back over the basic battle drills again!
I didn’t hear him call for “1 every 3” lol
Great presentation, as I've come to expect from this channel.
I have probably 800+ hrs in squad as a squad leader. I've found that the 3-man 3-fireteams runs into some pitfalls.
The main issue is that it's only 3 guys. Squad usually consists of a wide range of players with varying experiences. Rarely do you get a squad full of pros in a pub. This usually results in most of your squad being inexperienced or otherwise under-performing.
This can results in one or more of your 3-man teams having a wide range of ability, from match to match. Sometimes those 3 guys can easily wipe out an enemy squad themselves, and sometimes they are utterly incapable to kill a single guy. This makes the 3-man team unreliable for most tasks by themselves.
In my opinion, 3 players often are not enough to achieve any meaningful impact against an enemy, unless they achieve total and absolute surprise (and exploit it well). More than likely, a 3-man team will get quickly wiped out.
Now, I primarily ran the 3-man teams set up when I was a newer squad lead, so perhaps my inexperience led to it's failure, but more recently I've found better success with the 4-man charlie and bravo teams.
Another note I had in the video was the issue of battle drill 2A assume a complacent enemy. While in reality, a bold assumption, in Squad I find it's often safe to assume a fairly complacent enemy. People do not like to leave the HAB or it's nearby buildings. In your barn example, if the enemy HAB is near to that barn, or inside of it, it is highly unlikely the vast majority of players will leave the building or the immediate area if they are being fired upon. This makes flanking maneuvers and surprise an even more powerful tool, in my opinion.
Really good points. It’s interesting that ultimately it comes down the quality of the players - as in real life it comes down to the quality of the troops. I guess as the squad lead you really need to “know yourself and know your enemy” to be able to pick the right strategies.
I think the solution to this is to communicate with another infantry squad to perform the same maneuvers with a full squad each, rather than splitting your squad--although it is not always easy to get on the same page in command chat.
aaand thats the last 2 minutes of the video I hadn't watched. Amazing Dance.
Haha thanks for watching man - glad you enjoyed!
My go to strategy is Alpha is SL and a medic. Bravo is generally a 3 man assault group, and Charlie is a 4 man support group (or the other way around). Alpha is more flexible and can be where we need the firepower, but it isn't a full 3x3x3 either. I think I picked this up from something my realism unit did in my ArmA days, but I don't fully remember. It's a good flexible method though where SL obviously is making the calls anyway, so they know where they should be, and the medic in Alpha might be needed somewhere anyway.
Getting blueberries to listen to the SL and do this is the single hardest part of these tactics.
Make friends, create bond, and play together. Squad is a great game when your fellow squadmates listen and move together :p
This can be a yes and no. If you are a good squad lead you're squad will listen.
I’ve found it’s a two way street. There’s definitely a leadership skill component to it, but you need squad mates that are cooperative too.
@@HaebyungDance well how would you make people who won't want to listen play? See that's the thing there is maybe a small % who are truely brain dead munchers. If you can actually be a leader and grain respect from them is the difference.
@@BertoDeMampor play on the same server, once people know you enough from constantly being on your squad and such, it helps build trust.
LUL i watched all episodes prior and kept saying to myself "but these tactics are just too much for randoms to do" and now with this video you hit the bullseye. Well played for the good content
Thanks man - glad you enjoyed!
@@HaebyungDanceUA-cam needs more content creators like you for squad really
Depends on the way you lead your squad. I've been successful with randoms by just telling them to stick together as fireteams and telling one fireteam to go hold a position and the other to go to another
edit: Under my rule there is no democracy. You do or boot.
That MG suppression/HE area kill shot concept will be great to apply to how I usually split bravo Charlie teams by AT, 40m, and carbines/reddots for bravo - and MGs/ARs, DMs/optics in Charlie
Yeah that’s exactly how I typically setup my squad too!
Most important thing in casual play is that everyone understands the squad leader's intentions. If you get a squad that AT LEAST is aware of these tactics, you can give them general orders, and they'll figure out a way to carry them out. It's usually enough to beat most of the disorganized squads, and deter any squads with only 1 clan.
Now, the thing that infuriates me the most whilst playing Squad is when players move in columns one after the other and basically "get in line" to get killed.
>Guy sees team mate get killed ahead.
>Guy goes to same place to "check out where enemy is".
>Guy gets killed by same bush wookie.
>Guy takes same route after respawn.
Literally the "meat wave" brute force tactic to kill enemy.
Also, the amount of players who don't use their grenades is just ridiculous. That's why I'd rather have 4 riflemen than 1 HAT kit. Which brings us to the next problem: people think their squad can anticipate EVERY SITUATION. You gotta specialize your squad, not expect it to do EVERYTHING. If you run into armor: hide, report it to armor squads. Problem solved. I'd rather have a squad that can do 1 thing well, i.e., rifleman squad good at holding positions and killing infantry, than a squad that can only half-ass killing infantry and armor. It just doesn't make sense to me. That's why SL's also hate snipers. They should be a separate squad with 2 people. That's it.
Anyways, thanks for the video. Very good.
Great thoughts - and thanks for watching!
Good SLs hate bad snipers. Effective snipers/marksmen are better than ARs. But the kit attracts the shittiest players, and has earned a bad reputation.
@@morgan3688This is true in every game. Somehow teammate with the most God awful aim is always drawn to the sniper rifles like a moth to flame
@@HH-bi8dt Nothing to do with aim. Everything to do with positioning, game sense, following directioms, commitmeny to teamwork, understanding of the kit, etc.
@@morgan3688True, these things also hurt them, although the aim also factors in as well.
From what I've seen, players that gravitate to snipers are usually off on their own, as far from the OBJ as possible, AND on top of that, they happen to be whiffing 90+% of their shots, so they don't even help by thinning enemies either.
So a major part of army doctrine is to have 3-1 advantage in manpower. So your one squad in real life wouldn't attack a superior force, instead you would break contact. Unfortunately short of very short staged withdraws, its not fun gameplay. The useful bits are 360 security, even just having guys doing some sort of security. Recon instead of yolo the logi into the point. Lots of ranger tactic is based on fear and surprise, everyone knows there is going to be in a fight in the game, so not as effective.
Yup - and you’d be shocked the difference even a small number advantage makes in game! Just 1.5 to 1 can make this work where 1 to 1 is difficult.
Numbers advantage is cool and all, but some things are just too huge of force multipliers, making one soldier cost a dozen. For example, artillery is a real god of war, so in 2A "suppress and flank" situation, I'd rather be in a smaller force supported by two good mortars that communicate with boots on the ground, than in 3 times bigger group that has to fight under barrage of shells that suppress, injure and make KIA's every second of a firefight. Same goes for working with vehicles, creating fortifications, establishing logistic lines, having good recon, proper CAS, and etc.
@@HaebyungDance Its all about that react to contact, too many times ive taken a covered and concealed position when it starts only to find a few mins later im the only player alive, everyone else is dead. I'm at the same time getting good kills, but i cant watch everything. I get good scores every game because I watch likely avenues of approach and am pulling security waiting for that enemy logi full of guys to try and bum rush the point. Civillians dont do ITTP, they fight the way the ruskies do, just throw bodies at it, they get the knife in the teeth easy and get sucked into frontal assaults, nobody pulls security and everyone is bunched up. But to get a bunch of civies to use actual military tactics is really hard because it took years of practice in the military go get the skills down.
It’s all part of the same ecosystem. They are not mutually exclusive. @lovepeace9727
Your example 3 is the same as Vietnamese basic team and squad level inf tactics
Our 9 man team divide in 3 cell build around a main weapon (LMG / Marksman , RPG, Grenadier cell)
Our manual recommend keep the combat engagement close range, short and keep 3rd cell in reserve for a bit to see how the situation change
3rd cell stay in position where they can prevent enemy flanking and move in to help assault or suppressing fire or withdraw
That’s interesting! I’m not familiar with the Vietnamese squad so thanks for sharing.
It split the elements into assault elements and the support element. Depending on the situation, rpg and grenadier attach to the assault while marksman and lmg attach to the support, based on the effectiveness of the fire power.
In general the VPA infantry squad is 11-15 men. Can split into 3 fireteams and 1 support fireteam. 2 fire team with assault rifle for the assault, 1 fire team is for the preserve and support element.
Medic is attached to a company so 3 squads only have 2 medic.
The basic infantry squad tatical doctrine of VPA is very simple as it focusing on platoon and company tactic more.
Infantry squad tactic is always keep the engagement close to minimised the effectiveness of the enemies fire support elements and due to the limitation of hardware and experience due to the conscript doctrine as well as the lack of optical magnification on basic infantry weapon. Engagement is keep bellow 300m for the assault.
Assault elements are usually grenadier and rpg attached to these 2 fireteam to against enemy at close range while support element with high volume of fire power like lmg and high precision like marksman to attrach enemy firepower and supress enemies fire power.
Assault formation usually is L shape or v shape to apply flanking maneuver.
The problem with these tactics usually don't work in game well because the objective and the time in the game is not designed for a squad tactic level. So trying to apply a squad tactic to an objective that requires a company or even battalion to achieve.
And if we strictly apply these tactics into a game, then it will kill any fun game designed to be.
But as you said, being able to use these tactics will give some advantage over a normal squad without any tactic.
I'd also like to add that you don't always want to COMPLETELY commit to a plan, as in the 2A battle drill you explained.
What do I mean? You don't actually have to tell you squad to "flank and kill". What you can do, is implement the flank in steps, see how enemy reacts, then implement next step. Sometimes, that means ordering your squad to move to an intermediate position before moving in for the flank.
Sort of like a game of chess, you make your move, then wait and see your opponent's move, then you make your next move. If you commit to your plan too early, the enemy will be able to figure it out and adapt to thwart it. That's why I usually don't recommend firing your gun so often. Suppression is good in Squad, but it also draws unnecessary fire. It gives information about how many people are shooting. I'd rather keep the enemy in the dark about troop presence until people are in a good position to overwhelm them.
Basically, you want your enemy to commit to his strategy BEFORE you commit to yours. If you figure out his' before he figures yours' out, you'll have the advantage.
Hope it makes sense. Cheers.
If you wait for the enemy to react you lose momentum witch will probably turn against you and you'll die.
You also lose surprise which the enemy will gladly take and use it against you.
Speed, Surprise and Violence of Action factors are used to render the enemy useless and shit their pants while the only one making the moves is you. The enemy should not be allowed to make a move.
What you say works only in turn based games.
@@mikejeffsteelNot waiting for the enemy to act, waiting turns, but giving yourself the ability to react. Breaking down your (squad's) actions into smaller steps and reassessing the best move forward at each, rather than potentially over committing.
That's why I got from the comment.
Yeah this makes sense, a lot of times irl when I was in we would insert squad or even platoon level “phase lines” for a lack of a better general term, that were internal to us so we could assess and even just take a quick 20-30 second breather before you get to your tentative assault pos. We would use them to also shift or cut fire’s depending on the route that was needed, maybe call in for a few handheld 60s rounds and shit like that. Just fill the gap between the attack pos and the assault pos because sometimes terrain dictates different routes and sometimes the best attack pos is a good distance from the assault pos. Of course irl you can reach out and touch people from farther than lots of folks can in squad, or at least me I can’t shoot for shit in squad lol
Me and my super high speed sigma tactical milsim airsoft team routinely turn the tables in the plebian Battlefield servers lol. But jokes aside, we spent years drilling regularly for milsim airsoft events and had the luxury of learning directly from veteran on the field. We were able to seamlessly translate our team experience into online gameplay. We'd jump onto a losing team half way through the game and almost always bring our team back to victory just by having a baseline understanding and drilling experience in things like base of fire, prioritizing objectives/targets, suppression, observe and report. We were successful on the individual level using small unit tactics like react to fire, breaking contact, bounding overwatch, infiltration and ambush tactics, room clearing etc. All with the advantage longer ranges and better accuracy facilitated in the game. We are half bad on the airsoft field either because that sprint to slide translates from the game to airsoft too lol
Unit cohesion is the name of the game!
For Squad purposes, as long as you have people following you in a group and spotting enemies you have 90% of your job done. The only reason this stuff works IRL in combat arms is because they train this 24/7 and have planned for every contingency.
Sure but we’re not worried about minimum standards in THIS channel.
More seriously, you’re right. But the point here is that tactics give you an advantage. So all of this is about how to get an advantage over others.
"Train this 24/7" lmao more like SHARP/EO/350-1, computer certs, admin, details, layouts, change of command/responsibility, maintenance etc.
We only do check the block training. Real training does not take priority.
I feel sorry for the next generation of troops.
You sir definitely earned a sub based off your realistic view of training battle drills to just be a fixed, choreographed, script rather than a guideline to build off of based on a thinking reacting enemy. Love it
Been sharing all of your videos to my many buds who have picked up squad since the ICO. There's a lot of new players out there with a lot of enthusiasm. Thanks for the solid work.
I appreciate it man - hope you guys have fun!
11B and probably 2,000+ in Squad including Kickstarter Pre-Alpha days. A big problem is cohesiveness in each individual squad. It's hard to maintain organization, players tend to lose focus on the objective and wander, sometimes kilometers away, regardless of what the squad leader says. Squad leading is more like playing clash of clans because you're just dropping spawn points for the one single squad member that actually got in the truck with you to dig, rather than doing any real leadership.
Overall, the best strategies in this game involve gathering a big blob of players and concealing your advance either by terrain or artificially with smoke and/or completely overwhelming the enemy team with concentrated firepower from artillery, CAS, indirect and vehicles with heavy weapons and closing with and destroying what's left of the enemy at close range, which requires a good amount of coordination in itself, but is often simplistic enough for other players to understand and get onboard with.
A big problem between the squads themselves is effective communication and reconnaissance. A forward element, a commander drone or even a helicopter should be in place before an attack just to peek at where the enemy is, how many there are, do they have support, where are they concentrated, what are they doing, do they have static emplacements etc. If this can be communicated BEFORE and attack, other squads preparing an offense on that objective can more effectively maneuver to deal with or avoid strongpoints and call in accurate fire support.
That said, when I have MY guys and not a handful of blueberries, we tend to have a lot more success in small unit tactics, even when we are outnumbered, outgunned or have a disadvantageous position, simply because we have played together long enough to automatically know how to communicate, being sure to not oversaturate the radio with callouts, and what our experience based SOP's are in regard to reacting to contact.
I don’t even play squad anymore but getting some basic info and the mindset of infantry is both appealing by itself when presented as well as you do and also very useful for planning tabletop sessions and how competent opponents should act and react to player actions
The branding is Squad, but I try to keep the principles broadly applicable!
Xcaa@@HaebyungDance
Thank you for touching on the inflexibility of infantry choreography. It's not that it's just predictable, it just makes the game boring and frustrating. It's not fun when every infantry squad is basically doing the same thing and using the same strategies every game. Squad should not have a "Meta"
Suppression is the most underrated tactical element in squad. It's easy and effective. As a squad lead you can explain a suppress and maneuver tactic for 2-3 fire teams. Sometimes it only takes small movement of one fireteam while the other suppresses to gain a tactical advantage such as a better field of fire or getting into grenade range.
I play Invasion almost exclusively and the #1 way to gain assault advantage is speed. When you have the speed advantage over the defending team, then you are primarily dealing with smaller elements of enemies, thus a coordinated assault using suppress and maneuver on an enemy position with your entire squad will (almost) always win - assuming you have both medics not leading the charge, and everyone isn't drunk.
So yeah, the #1 tactical advantage in Squad is not having drunk squad-mates.
It is amazing how true this video is to real combat, not only in tactics but also the logistics that in every conflict, each side is going to some limitations in the quantity and quality of trained combatants. And tactics are going to greatly adjust to that fact.
Personally, I arrange my squad into 3 fire teams. It is just more flexible for me for most ingame situations. Enemy vehicle spotted? I send my Bravo team, which is just lats and hats with one rifle man. I am setting up a risky attacking hab on Mutaha - sending my Charlie to reckon the district first. And as you mentioned in most situations, I dont need 4 people to suppress/cover. The more people I have in an attacking element, the more chance we won't get obliterated. But i see the benefirs of the 2 formations.
This is the first video I’ve watched and I’m hooked!
This type of creative thinking is why our real-life military works and why playing these games is so interesting!
love videos like these, is so neat to see how experience from virtual space still somewhat translate to viable means of thought in possible real world settings.
Ive played arma, squad, and tarkov; But tarkov is the one game where thinking about how you react to contact after the fact plays a big role in whether you will live.
its interesting to see how things translate regardless of the game. Like the time limit of a gun fight and how long you can wait before your opponent have either left or attempted to reposition, moving to fast or waiting to long (or not waiting long enough) can hamper your options or completely remove your ability to attempt a counter ambush.
Great video.
Thank you for your wisdom brother 👍🏻
Often times without the support of the platoon especially any hope for coordinated support in a squad public match. The three fire teams makes sense. Having just an extra fire team to be flexible can help alleviate the stress having such a small element to work with. As stated in the video alot of infantry tactics are designed with a full platoon in mind and adapting to more of the combat scenarios youre most likely to encounter in squad definitely makes alot of sense. But honestly I've found any level of coordination is extremely lethal in squad. I definitely agree with remembering to put on your thinking cap as opposed to falling into the desire to perform battlefield choreography is an extremely important point. Great video keep it up!
really love your videos. me personally i like to split into 2 teams with both teams having at least an AR but depending on the situation ill change it so one of the fire teams is the designated SBF team (switch all AR and MG to that team). I wish squad leaders worked together more because as you said some of the stuff we try to pull off is platoon level. Seeing weapon squads and rifle squads work in coordination would be epic
It really would be epic!
Good content. Context of the situation is paramount, it's important to understand hows and whys and apply them with flexibility.
I have related experience in airsoft team, you could call milism. We had couple of military personnel there and friend proposed to use this exact tactic aside of few others.
I noticed the issues given our typical engagement range up to 50m and typically in complicated terrain like dense forest, rocky hills or other micro terrain preventing two big fire teams effective mutual support. I always pushed the idea that each member must know the principles and be able to apply them on individual pair levels based on what he sees, which is often man on his left and man on his right roughly.
Good thing was we were able to voice and critique new suggestions, try them out and see how it works in real (to our circumstance) conditions.
My personal leadership approach was relatively lesser micro management and more about coordination and deciding the intent for given situation and only micro manage what needs be. I invested in explaining the principles, trying them out so that the implementation at individual level is organic and malleable to situation without too much intervention.
That being said, in SQUAD that would require a very stable team you can train and deploy consistently.
Good stuff dance even tho I already know all this always fun to see other peoples takes on the blueprint and how they use it
one of the biggest issues with the 2A drill in squad is fear of death, irl the base of fire element with the squads LMG would be able to suppress most forces into ineffectiveness, even at ranges where actual incaps are unlikely, this is where many of the pitfalls are with simple fire and maneuver tactics in video games, the punishment for being killed is rarely significant enough to encourage the risk averse behavior they should be taking
It’s a good point. It’s partially mitigated by the respawn mechanics, but the role of suppression in squad isnt just m to create fear of getting hurt/death but also to throw off the enemy’s ability to see and shoot with blurring and flinch, which are significant in game.
Where did you get that BS from? A cereal box?
I'm surprised I haven't subbed to you a while ago lol
Really good video bro :D
Awesome video! I wish I had this for my ROTC class.
Good to see your videos be popular, as always Dance. Keep it up!
Thank you brother!
Outstanding video.
Holy shit. You perfectly described my issues with battle drill training when I was in the army.
You should do a summary video summarizing all of the take-homes so far! I have watched all of your videos and often return to them, but it would be very useful to the community to be able to get a quick review.
That’s an interesting idea - I’ll start thinking about it how I can do that
Great video, keep up the amazing work ❤
Thanks man!
Liked and subscribed!
I started playing this game 2 days ago and it's such a treat, the game itself and the community of regulars. So nice!
I have been SL through most of the games I have played with my friends, so these videos have been more than helpful for me as a guy with no military background and such. My buddies and I are finns, so some of our squad is composed of people with FDF basic training. It is something I find massive help as theyre easy to lead.
Hardest thing in Squid so far has been the comms. It feels like I pass inaccurate and non-comprehensive info from the battlefield to other SLs and the commander. Thick accent and lack of vocab doesn't help either 😂
Anyways this playlist is super helpful and informative, thank you Marine!
For comms - best thing is to use your SL mark on the map and just say “enemy tank on Squad 2’s mark!” Makes it much easier lol
great video, I try to teach my friends these tactics so we can use them when we play. Good having you in our squad the other day!
Hey Darkfire! Thanks for the comment - I had fun playing with you guys!
In Squad especially, wide flanking and angling is extremely effective. Depending on circumstances edge of the map 5min of flanking can win matches.
Skill level is also so varied that it is feasable to send a marksman/medic medic duo into the enemy rear and occupy/wipe squads(plus recon) while the rest of the squad assaults an objective.
On the other hand I have seen seasoned SLs and real life service members fuck up so badly that the only winning move was to do the exact opposite of what they wanted.
I never thought I would be reminded of DS. Edwards and his mandatory informative battle drill classes
By the way, can you make a video about building of fortifications, placement of fire support measures and etc.
Very interested in strategy on how to set up wide defence, where to place FOB, HAB, tactics of positioning with it and so on.
I’ll definitely consider it - but it’d vary so widely depending on terrain it might need to be map specific lol
@@HaebyungDance I second that request!
You earned a sub with this one boss, great content!
Thanks!
Dude, you are the best content creator on this subject, I am following all your videos.
Thank you!
Excellent presentation.
Thank you
@@HaebyungDance You are welcome. I really liked how you took an idea and showed what could happen in the real world.
Thank you.
Excellent discussion!
Thanks!
Great content bud! I'd like to see you go over some buddy team and individual tactics/movements like bounding and cloverleafing. I was able to get me and one other person to hold off a whole advance by using careful positioning and cloverleafing immediately after engagements to catch people off guard (naturally, I had to tell the blueberry to follow me so that I could teach the concept, but it was INVALUABLE). Also having something on Mechanized infantry tactics and, a personal favorite of mine considering I was a light infantry scout, recon and effective use of screens
Great suggestions man! I’ve also been thinking about individual moving techniques and just general awareness while moving - trying to out it into a format that’s teachable in 20 minutes though! lol.
Don’t worry I’ve been playing a lot more mechanized infantry - never did it in real life so I want to make sure the Squad game theory is solid before I make a video.
Thanks for the comment!
At the section level, the main battle drill employed is the frontal. With that said you need to WIN the firefight before you approach. Flankings are taught at the section level for further implementation in platoon raids and company attacks.
Yeah agree - the reason why flanking is emphasized here is because in the environment of Squad, it’s much more relevant.
+1 on the point about platoon and company attacks. Something that I touched on at the end of the video and plan on expanding on later.
Often they don’t work. Bc there isn’t really a fear for dying. So simple supression often just doesn’t really work. Or that’s what i experienced when u suppress enemy’s and let ur team push
Suppression in this game is simulated with the blur and scope flinch. Effective suppression in this game has to be accurate and sustained, much like in real life. It’s often hard to appreciate how much suppression impacts the enemy, but think about all those times enemy suppression stopped you from shooting effectively.
And there is no way to simulate it, and will never be a way to simulate it. So kamikaze tactics especially kamikaze sniper who exist only to take out the most amount of enemies before getting taken out will always be a thing in tactical shooters.
Thats the problem with Squad.
People cried, and they just nerfed the suppression greatly. Just when everybody was getting used to it.
They should seriously add back the suppression that MG's do instead of rifles. People hate weapon sway, not suppresion bruh.
@@HaebyungDanceMaybe you could do a short video showing suppression from both perspectives simultaneously, I think it'd be very useful to get an accurate visual on how effective suppression is and what tempo you need to sustain it. The difference between a SAW and an LMG could also be something worth exploring.
That’s a very intriguing idea. Thanks
This was very interesting and makes me wish I had a PC capable of playing Squad.
I played it a little many years ago and enjoyed it then. Seems like it's only gotten better since then.
9:18 "Surpress and flank battle drill is a good tactic to use, but only when you understand that it's mainly a starting point to adjust off of as circumstances change".
Well said... As soon as the attack starts, squad leader decisions become an 'if that, then this' flow chat of actions.
Not only do good SL's make the best decision they can, but their squad needs to be listening and executing to the best of their ability, even if it means taking action that goes against SL orders, as long as the squaddie understands and anticipates the SL's end goals and intentions.
If you're a squaddie and go against SL orders, make sure you aren't missing information their decision was based upon so that you're helping and not hurting.
I think there's a few things. I've been playing since the Project Reality days and using real tactics only ever works some of the time.
People forget that this is a game. A lot of real world tactics rely on suppression, and as much as there's a (I think pretty good in the context of a computer game) mechanic in the game for suppression, you still do not have actual bullets, rockets, grenades, etc. flying at you, your friends are not dying screaming in the mud, etc., and ultimately dying is at best a minor inconvenience.
The scale of combat in Squad is also really out-of-whack. In Squad, the team sizes are somewhere between overstrength platoon and understrength company-sized elements. If you take into account the fact that not everyone is in an infantry role, it's really closer to a platoon-sized element. The maps, assets, objectives, etc. are really far too big for that scale. More to the point, the elements of each team are far too scattered, uncoordinated (even when teamwork is good), and under-strength to employ real-world tactics properly. You would not have squad-sized elements running around on their own or operating as independent elements like they do in Squad, which is the case even when people are working together. This means that when a squad comes up against an enemy element in the defence for example (more on that in a bit), they almost never have the numbers required to actually make an effective coordinated assault in line with real world tactics, so everything devolves to the micro-level.
These matches take place in a timeframe between 20 minutes to maybe an hour or so. In reality, these engagements would take much longer. They're also not part of a wider battle, everything is happening in a vacuum. What this means is that people run around the map trying to get into the fight as quickly as possible, they don't do things like sit in defensive positions waiting for the enemy to advance, there are no clear lines of battle, and everyone plays rigidly to the cap order (which of course you have to do to actually play the game). The incentive is to sprint around as quickly as possible, and engagements often end up as two squads bumping into each other by chance, and whoever happens to have the most advantageous position usually wins. These behaviours ultimately produce an inability to reliably predict where an enemy might be, either for attacking or defending, except right on the cap point. At that point it's just an assault between two small elements who don't really have the proper manpower to effect real world tactics.
Lastly (and sorry for the essay), the ultimate problem is that even if there were the numbers and gameplay mechanics required for these kinds of tactics, you're playing with random people who are not all on the same page with this stuff. Even if you have a clan/group, that's typically only going to make up part of your team.
Great points - thanks for the comment!
In video games my squad of ten tend to smoke the enemy positions to create a space the enemy has to push thru or weave around in order to attack us.
Specially if we are in a retreat during fire.
The solution of the tactic 2A I found is using APC. Nobody uses it anyway so I get all of my mens in APC, drop them at locations where I suspect enemies will pop up, Them place ralley, make APC suppressing one area while rest of infantry push straight to the point or flank. This solves a lot of problems associated with 2A. First, our already limited squad does not have to split which creates more fire power and due to the resilience nature of most APCs to rifles, you can tons of firepower. The distance is also covered by hot dropping via APCs. It also provides smoke cover and ammunition which keep the flow of attack longer. And lastly, it is very simple most of times, due to the overwhelming firepower, you tend to only worry about where to push as you already posses more firepower than normal infantry squads. Its not prefect, but when it works, it works.
Did 8 years in the light infantry. There's some tacticians that play these games that blow my mind with decision making capabilities.
I honestly thought this video was going to be about the practical differences between video games and real life. How developers need to change some things to make things fun.
But honestly the video about the complexity of theory applied to real life was great.
You touched on the information management of battle tactics, (fog of war). I'd honestly be really interested in seeing a video specifically focussing on that ^-^ jf possible
Anyway keep up the good vids man
Thank you!
Good video :) These tactics also work in a more simplified way in Escape from Tarkov based on my experience
It can all be broken down to just 2-3 players, or any number really.
This is pretty awesome.
Thanks!
Another excellent vid, thanks, Dance. A Command video would be great...tactics as commander, and some live Command play.
Thank you - and thank you for the suggestion!!
Instructions unclear, I ordered a bald flanking maneuver instead of a bold flanking maneuver. The sun was reflecting on our shiny scalps and revealed our position.
Basically, a 3-team organisation puts more of the micro into the hands of the SL. Which might be good if his team is inexperienced or disorganised, but also requires the SL to be the brains of almost everyone in the squad. A 2-team organisation allows the squad leader to better think of the bigger picture, as his team leads now take over much of the micro; however, the teams have to be more experienced and cohesive.
The French and Russians use the smaller teams to account for their mass conscription models (at least as their tradition from the past), where a relatively large cadre of officers and NCO's would have to command a relatively poorly trained, inexperienced conscript army. The advantage, strategically, being that you can balloon your army to 3 times its size in 2 weeks.
good stuff
Thanks!
3 fireteams works better because it is closer to how a platoon works (but in a smaller scale)
This is why we were teached that any offensive actions can only be done by platoons and above
Squads are limited to "meeting" contacts, holding or defending a single point after a contact
Every single offensive actions that ensues must be done at platoon level.
Since a platoon is articulated in 3 or more squads, that's why 3 fireteams squads seems to work better since they are more flexible and can cover more "angles" (fire hallways)
As an 11b, i want to do this in squad so bad. Yeah i do it irl, but i feel like playing with a full squad of 11b’s would be so fun
Yeah for some reason doing it in a game is a roaring time lmao
real world scenarios always end up burning way more ammo and taking far longer, than training routines do. I'm def a fan of larger 12/13 man sections these days to increase fire power and ammo, manage all the extra gear modern teams carry, and add overall flexibility.
Totally agree. It lets you carry more enablers and ammo for them without sacrificing bayonet strength too, like a proper MG, AT, or precision rifle.
It’s a mission in itself to keep the squad together and cohesive without having guys spawning in the middle of nowhere or ended up with Rambo in your squad who thinks he’s the main character who can 1v1 the entire enemy team
Awesome video. Thanks for putting out great content. This makes me wonder why the USMC switched from a 13-man squad with three fire teams to something more akin to the army (two fire teams per squad). Any thoughts on this?
Yeah a couple of thoughts. First the whole Force Design 2030 and IBX experiments are still ongoing, the main source for the two fireteam layout I’ve seen is Task & Purpose, who I don’t trust as an accurate source. Things are likely in flux. But let’s assume that the marine rifle squad switched to having two 6-man teams instead of three 4-man teams.
First this would only apply to the littoral combat regiments, not the entire Corps. And this change probably reflects the Littoral Combat Regiment’s mission as more of a maritime land-based screening force. 6-man teams are popular with recon units due to the added flexibility it gives at the team level; which is now able to divide into three 2-man buddy teams.
Second there is a lot of merit to the simplicity of a two fireteam structure, especially if those teams are larger and more able to sustain casualties. Because the rifle squad is so big compared to others. With the 6-man teams, each USMC fireteam already has more men and firepower available to it than most others, such as an Army 4 man team. This would let it be much more effective in general.
@@HaebyungDanceawesome. That makes so much sense. Thanks! You’ve gained a loyal subscriber 😊
Thumbs up
with my experience from Squad is that people rarely use real life military tactics maybe on a individual level but never really seen on a Squad lavel or higher but it kinda make sense since everyone in the squad have to understand the fundametals of how the diffriendt military maneuver work in order to actually be able to be used in such a game. You are never gonna see that happening while playing with randoms on servers unfortunately. But i am preatty sure a Squad using real life military Infantry tactics would be the most effective squad on the server/game but thats properly the highest leve you are evergona get Platoon sized tactics would be extreamly cool to see in Squad but its requrest cordination notsomthing a ordinary squad player/squadlader have in squad.
Man, I know I'm old when the battle drill numbers have changed.
Ahem back in my day....
That’s why I went by nicknames lol!
The enemy always gets a vote. Good vid. ECN 343
Everyone knows that US Army manuals and drills are a ruse to make the enemy think we are going to use a particular set of tactics to fight. In reality, we're going to wing it, and wing it very well. That's why our leaders know better than to try to tell subordinate HOW to do something. Just tell an infantry platoon WHY they need to do something and it'll get done in some way and fashion, likely not pretty or polished, and you may even get a little more than you asked for.
Neffex songs used from the UA-cam free audio library for anyone who is looking for that stuff.
the last clip was some michael bay sht
think I'll sub
It was a special one for anybody who stuck to the end lol
"Suppress with one group and flank with another" - ahh yea, i see the creators of Battle Drill 2A been playing the first 3 Brothers in Arms games.. great games for their times indeed, great games...
Pretty good, but you're missing the most important thing. 3x rule. You do not assault anyone unless you outnumber them 3 to 1. So you would only perform the flank assault with a two or 3 person outpost. If you think it's a squad in that tree-line you would simply break contact and either setup an ambush or you would call in another squad or two to help you. Hope that helps. Never attack unless you outnumber 3 to 1. Pretty simple really.
Shhh I’m saving that for the next discussion 🤫
Love your videos. Would you happen to know any community who knows these drills and likes to use them? I'd like to put buddy team bounding into practice. Sure it's slower than shift+w and thus a little situational. But if you are not in a hurry you can just maul your way through enemies. In my mind this would give the biggest leap with least amount of learning. All you need to get through your head would be "one of us must always be ready to shoot at bad guys". And by ready I mean full stamina and stationary. In practice it's a lot harder because you gotta take into account a lot of things, but in principle it is easy to understand and can be applied everywhere.
First, thanks!
Second, I’m part of a group called the 7th Ranger Regiment. Discord link is in the video description. We’re a very diverse group with a range of play styles, but ultimately we are more geared towards milsim. You’ll find a lot of likeminded players here.
@@HaebyungDance is it hard to become a member ?
*It's called tacticS not tactic.*
If someone is an effective tactician they weave strategies together to make an effective patchwork to cover the situations that you'll encounter.
Its also really important for individuals to have fire discipline in your company.
People sometimes forget that to suppress an enemy, you can't burn all your ammo in 2 seconds.
People like to shoot at full auto and go hard but if the enemy has effective cover you've just wasted your ammo.
I'm reminded of the effective use of drip rifles shooting occasionally but that was enough to scare the enemy from advancing and the WW1 soldiers were able to get away.
I understand full auto can be really effective when you just need to correct your aim by a bit to get on target but it's too often used to burn up all the ammo and then people get into trouble when they're dry.
The two bars above the compass indicate aim stability in case you didn’t know
Army bro here.
Something completely missing from this video and ... most games overall. Is the US Military doesn't fight fair.
Aside from distances, terrain, weapons etc... the entire foundation of our attacks is on the premise that we are fighting the enemy on a 3:1 advantage. If we are the ones choosing the time of engagement.
Obviously in real world we often fight at a numerical disadvantage so our next advantage is the overwhelming use of our weapons.
Video games tend to be even, both in weapons and numbers.
Yes! It’s an absolutely critical factor but one I left out as I wanted to focus on squad level maneuvers.
The art of gaining local advantages and conducting attacks with concentrated, superior force is something very applicable to Squad, but which needs to happen at the team level rather than the squad. Thanks for the comment!
A good sidepoint is that if you have a group of guys who are experienced, DONT follow this doctrine, and know about it enough to counter it, yall can be a fucking nasty thing to deal with
I play vr tactical fps competitively esports level and execution of these tactics is really hard communication and timing and distance is the hardest part
Ah yes, real life tactics are peak squad, I will admit. However, they're really only possible with players who know each other to a certain extent. Ie, people who aren't randos, but like discord buds or something. You don't even need a whole squad, just three to four guys will suffice in most cases since everyone else will be at a significant disadvantage - playing with randoms. That said, I have played some of those "Holy grail" games when randoms absolutely stomp a discord server of a clan who play a lot and have a certain amount of training or whatever. It's like all the random SLs are on the same wavelength and you get the perfect randoms in each squad. One squad for supply, another for armor, one helo, and your two crack squads that are amazing at fucking with the enemy. Usually one targets their fobs while the other does all out assaults. I'm telling ya, spawning and dying can drain the shit out of some players, but some are built different. In reality, it's really all the other squads supporting the two assault squads. Communication on these "holy grail" lobbies is pretty good since every SL knows their role and executes to a "t" with their respective squads. In random lobbies, support commanders are usually the best, but on clan discord lobbies, an attack commander with proper logistics is king. Of course, haven't played in a few months, so perhaps strategy and tactics have changed. These are all just observations I've noticed after playing the game for who knows how long.
These tactics require full teamwork. Also, teammates who will restrain themselves to keep from trying to be Rambo and get better stats and scoree.
12:17 Do you think it is a good tactic to just move away from the range of that elevated position, and to find another position that would be advantageous against the enemy if they dare to leave that pile of rocks and go down hill?
I noticed that just behind my original location, there is another rocky hill. Also, there is not a lot cover near that rocky high ground the enemy is occupying. Perhaps my team can stay as one and keep adjusting our position according to enemy's movement. Be patient and launch our attack if the enemy ever gets impatient and move to a bad location?
I am a newbie to military, and I would really like to know the opinions from a more experienced guy. Thanks!
Yes that’s a solid option. You could opt to try and break contact instead of engaging, drop a rally, and try and fight from a better position.
Actually strategically it might be best to just do that and dig down the radio at that point. Trust your own judgement, as it depends on the bigger picture.
@@HaebyungDance Thank you! I am glad that I found your channel. This is really interesting!
Man learning all of these and memorizing them sure would come in handy in Minecraft
The ultimate milsim sandbox
@@HaebyungDance yessir, these would apply well to a server nearing civil unrest in Minecraft
3 fire teams for the win baby
Jury’s still out for me but I’ll be trying it a lot more!
Awesome video. I'm not sure if you've played any Escape from Tarkov, but it also runs into this issue where real life tactics are often inapplicable. Would love to hear your thoughts on it.
Never played EFT sadly :(
You would think that a tactic as old as a flanking manuvour would be understood better by people. It's always been highly situational, relied heavily on the environment and typically needed either an ambush or a distraction to execute effectively.
I think the biggest flaws in tactic games are no logistics, no food, no fear, no adrenaline and usually no randum issues. Noone is jamming, slipping, fixing coms, pooping etc.
I think I want to try making a series of missions in arma kind of trying to recreate scenarios in which these tactics would be useful
That sounds like a fun exercise
Kinda funny. My natural instinct is always to assume that if someone wants me suppressed, they're going to send someone around to come get me, ergo, I should either get un-suppressed or move within concealment/cover. I'm not sure who sees suppressive fire and *doesn't* expect one or multiple units coming around to finish them off.
The enemy always gets a vote...
Just one thing. desire to live.
Idk if anyone will see this but if you’ve played Squad and Hell Let Loose is it worth switching from HLL? It seems like people might be more likely to communicate and try in this.
Never played HLL but I do know that Squad has a lot more communication and teamwork, but experience will vary by server.
Good video but honestly in the heat of battle things always fall apart and those tactics are very limited, nothing beat a well trained and experienced player