Jump to content

Today's TvT - Gauntlet vs Gauntlet (GvG)


Ryko
 Share

Recommended Posts

I enjoy the concept of this a lot. In fact I think if we had servers and players to spare, this could make it on its own server.

 

However, as TvT dictates it, organisation is thrown out the window as soon as the lobby opens. The first round on OPFOR's side, we had an Su-25 on CAS, some nondescriptive heli and a whole five guys in Anna when I joined late - no ASL. We waited 15 minutes for transport, then resorted to the long drive to the AO in a BMP because we heard talks about Bradleys and armed Littlebirds. Without air transport, the way to the AO is not enjoyable.

 

What I think could remedy this is an infantry + limited motor pool spawn closer to the AO, an FOB with just the minimum to get going. Any heavy assets such as APCs and IFVs are deployed from where they are now (meaning OPFOR, haven't played BLUFOR yet) so that their power is balanced by distance travelled. Infantry gets to go to the AO quickly without having to have air standing by, air can in turn do less transport and more scouting / light CAS. Give OPFOR a Littlebird equivalent for that purpose (is there an armed Ka-60?).

 

Would love to see GvG become a thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I joined, had a small talk with skull before he disconnected and after a few minutes confirming exactly what he said, I also disconnected.

 

I guess that the problem here is that people assumed that GvG was the same as PvP and used everything that was available, maybe have the same asset restrictions as in normal Gauntlet?

Also, the distance of AOs is indeed too big (also I think that BLUFOR is closer - at least for that mission that I saw), Skull's idea could indeed work, even set mainbase closer and a FOB with "bigger" assets further away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, SkullCollector said:

We waited 15 minutes for transport, then resorted to the long drive to the AO in a BMP because we heard talks about Bradleys and armed Littlebirds. Without air transport, the way to the AO is not enjoyable.

...

Infantry gets to go to the AO quickly without having to have air standing by, air can in turn do less transport and more scouting / light CAS.

Well I played only the first round (don´t know if after the first two AOs you started another TVT Gauntlet) and I didn´t saw the distances as a problem. For example we BLUFOR guys went to the first AO with an APC and a Humvee instead of doing air transport and that worked out perfectly well. Our pilots were doing CAS/spotting in the meantime instead. So for us it wasn´t a problem but instead benefited us since we than had the bradley at the AO to lay down heavy fire on enemies and and the Humvee to support grunts and then just "Rush B, no stop, cyka blyat" the objective wich worked perfectly fine (at least with this Humvee-rushing-tactic we managed it twice to get me on the objective, pop smokes and win the obj. that way for our side). Only to the second obj. we got inserted by air since everyone except me and Stan was dead at the previous AO and we just had no more usable vehicles there. But even after we got inserted all other reinserts were done by land-vehicles I think. So no problems with the vehicle/spawn concept on BLUFOR side => I guess it was just like it was for you guys because you had no ASL.

 

31 minutes ago, Lost Bullet said:

I think that BLUFOR is closer - at least for that mission that I saw

Was only for that mission. The first one was exactly in the middle, the second one was closer to BLUFOR and the third one would´ve been closer to OPFOR.

 

 

Overall I also liked it but it seemed that dumb rushing was (obviously) too effective. This could maybe be cutted down by increasing AI skill a lot so that you can´t just rush through them, pop smokes and save the obj. like we (as described) did. Also I like the idea of setting the bases a bit closer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think if we run this again I'm just not going to push the mission through until ASL slot (or whatever command element) is filled on both sides.

 

I'm also going to remove the jets and possibly the armed helicopters - they're just to effective, and various aspects of the modded jets we use are broken. We can revisit air support when RHS has updated to make itself compatible with 1.70.

 

The missions spawn dynamically but are limited to an area in between the two bases.  Since it's random some AOs are going to be unfair for one team compared to another: if I made it so that the AOs always spawned equidistant to both bases, the missions would always tend to spawn in three places.

 

As for rushing the objective, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that - it should encourage the teams to get themselves supplied, and moving out quickly.  There are definitely AI troops deployed around the objective, so whether or not it's a factor depends on how much you want to make it a factor.  In regular Gauntlet, players seem to delight in executing every AI enemy before moving in to complete the objective: if you want to complete the objective without engaging a single AI, that's your choice.

 

Quote

Overall I also liked it but it seemed that dumb rushing was (obviously) too effective. This could maybe be cutted down by increasing AI skill a lot so that you can´t just rush through them, pop smokes and save the obj. like we (as described) did. Also I like the idea of setting the bases a bit closer.

 

Actually I did increase the AI skill in that op but I could set it to maximum.  The bases can't realistically be moved closer because then the area where the missions spawn will be made much too small.

 

Lastly, I think this mission type will only work if there is strict interpretation of the rules - Command shouldn't allow Alpha to take a tank, it should be filled by a Hammer or Torch team.  That said we could allow for some latitude in slot restrictions, in that Hammer could be slotted without a full Alpha, given that we'd need a server of 40 players to get to a point where Hammer is feasible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

19 minutes ago, Ryko said:

As for rushing the objective, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that - it should encourage the teams to get themselves supplied, and moving out quickly.

Absolutely like that. But should be harder.:)

19 minutes ago, Ryko said:

Actually I did increase the AI skill in that op but I could set it to maximum.

sounds like a good plan since I was able to rush onto both objectives even with a LOT of AI around. But since they were not that good at shooting and basically stoped shooting at me when I made a "ninja-defuse" like smoke wall.:wacko:

7 minutes ago, Ryko said:

The bases can't realistically be moved closer because then the area where the missions spawn will be made much too small.

Fair point.:wacko::)

 

7 minutes ago, Ryko said:

I think this mission type will only work if there is strict interpretation of the rules - Command shouldn't allow Alpha to take a tank, it should be filled by a Hammer or Torch team.  That said we could allow for some latitude in slot restrictions, in that Hammer could be slotted without a full Alpha, given that we'd need a server of 40 players to get to a point where Hammer is feasible.

Not sure about that one since it brings a new tactical aspect to the table that you have to guess what the other one is bringing to the battle and how to use the assets. Since if we restrict things like in usual gauntlet it is easy to adjust everyones loadout to the given situation and it comes most likely down to individual skill but when it´s allowed to also let Alpha bring tanks you can´t read your enemy that good what offers more of a "counter-strat" playing from one AO to the next one (like rounds in competetive games) wich means that each AO you´ll have to again try to read the strat of the opposite faction and try to set up a counter. Of course this then goes far beyond realistic things but I´d say this will be more fun, more of a challange that not just comes down to gunplay and it´ll be more competetive in terms of strats.:) Also this would then offer an even more different style of gameplay when compared to usual gauntlet.;):)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Statistics

    11.1k
    Total Topics
    66.3k
    Total Posts
×
×
  • Create New...