valid tactic?

[imported_deadboy79]

i was playing the other day on karkand. i started half way into the round. i was mec. usmc pushed us all the way back to our main base. their tanks and apc's where coming across the bridge without a prob and my team was having problems holding them off. we finally destroyed there vehicles so i went and c4d the bridge. why? to stop them from getting over to our base as easily. that way the only way their vehicles can get across is through the shallow water. infantry can cross the water but they are easy pickins for snipers. the problem is that my team kept reparing the bridge. i told them multiple times my intent and kept repairing it after i destroyed it. i wasn't doing this so they could have easy points. i was trying to win. to hold onto the last base we had. of course we lost that round. next round same thing. it was so frustrating.

is this a valid tactic? was is stupid for doing this or was my team just clueless. making it harder for the other team to cap you flag makes sense to me but what do i know. you thoughts, opions, etc.

[[Expletive Deleted]]

Re: valid tactic?

It's a two-way street. If you limit their ability to get in, you limit your own team's ability to get out. I think it's a valid tactic, and it seems to me like your team just thought it was an excuse to point-whore. Do you get points for blowing bridges, by the way?

[imported_Remmydox]

Re: valid tactic?

Jim, another way is to blow there side of the bridge but keep your half open. So your APC can come in. Then own them. Then there vehicles cant come across and rape you but you can do it too them :P

[Zefram]

Re: valid tactic?

pretty stupid tactic... to blow up the bridge so they can't in. Sure they won't be able to get in easily... but it prevents your team from getting your flags back.

And if you're pushed that far back... that means they have the other flags... and your team is bleeding tickets. They wouldn't even have to kill anyone else. Just sit there and your team would bleed tickets to death.

You lost that round for your team.

[Revoluti0n]

Re: valid tactic?

Zefram is correct. It is a valid tactic but you have to think about the consequences for that action.

[BigRedRat]

Re: valid tactic?

It's a valid tactic given the cirumstances warrant it.After the initial crisis was over the bridge would be needed for an effective counter offensive effort.


Did I say that?

[SpecialEdForces]

Re: valid tactic?

It is much easier to work your way out of the back base with the bridge blown up, only the completely tard out there believe otherwise, you can blow that bridge up from the beginning have your whole team just sit back there and defend and not pay any attention to the other flags and win the round, the kill tickets you take from the other team make up for the flag bleed if both teams are of equal quality, defending is way easier than assaulting yo

[AlphaCueUp]

Re: valid tactic?

it would be better, i think to blow the bridge when, and only when the enemy is on it, earning you kills as well, then let it be repaired when enemy armor is making the trip back from gas station so ur guys can get out to train accident, and/or even suburb

[Twisted-]

Re: valid tactic?

I would have agreed with you, in the situation you were pushed back to the final flag and the enemy having a tank and an apc while you only have a tank i think it's a vaild tatic.

Slightly off topic, but does anyone else think it's stupid how easy it is to repair bridges. I mean it defeats the purpose of blowing up a bridge when the enemy can repair it in less than 3 seconds.

[imported_Scarz]

Re: valid tactic?

It is much easier to work your way out of the back base with the bridge blown up, only the completely tard out there believe otherwise, you can blow that bridge up from the beginning have your whole team just sit back there and defend and not pay any attention to the other flags and win the round, the kill tickets you take from the other team make up for the flag bleed if both teams are of equal quality, defending is way easier than assaulting yo

I completely agree with Ed here. With both teams on either side of the river, its a stalemate at best, but if your commander is doing his job the defenders who sit back and stay spread out to avoid the arty will win it every time. (depending on the points before) Let them come.
Also mine the two ramps (dont remeber is there a third one way in the back?) and they simply CANT get in. Meanwhile, stat pad your resupply guys by hurling endless ammounts of nades from the bunkers on the bridge.

Anyway dude, the bottom line is this, you cant win a game all by yourself by using your own ideas. Period. Because every person in the game has his own plan and rarely do they work in cohesion. I scream until I'm blue in the face at people who can't see what I see and I'm sure they scream at me sometimes but never to any avail. Dont get frustrated by this, just go wild and kill as many as you can.

Salute!

[=IMO=PFCBerkeley]

Re: valid tactic?

Its definitely a valid tactic, and one that works well on many occasions, you just have to actually be talking to your team and they actually have to be willing to go with the plan for it to work. Like it has been said, you can actually sit back there the entire time and the bleed won't kill you fast enough if you have a decent team. It doesn't allow them to get across easily, and if you have an effective commander you know exactly where all of them are at all times, and arty helps even out those tickets.

If you really feel the need to get other bases its not that hard to get one or two guys out to one of the back flags, you just have to create as much of a diversion as possible in the oposite direction they are trying to head.

And to those that said it was a stupid tactic because it blocked you in, there are at least 2 other ways to get in and out of that back base, one of which many people aren't willing to take, but is very effective.

I think you made the right move.

[KingJungle]

Re: valid tactic?

Zefram is correct. It is a valid tactic but you have to think about the consequences for that action.

Yeah, someone is surely going to complain...but good idea to hold them off anyway.

[dpitty613]

Re: valid tactic?

I think that it is a valid tactic. I have used it once or twice myself. Just make sure that you get some of your guys to try and take some more spawn points behind them.

[PHPT]

Re: valid tactic?

On Karkand, it's not only a valid tactic but generally a very good idea if you're down to the gatehouse. Blow the bridge, then mine up the ramp, if it's not the 64-player version you've effectively locked them out.

It's much harder to mine the other side, especially with no wall to protect you from incoming fire while you lay them. Most takeback attempts involve using the side ramp to hit the square anyway, or go around to the suburbs since it lets you get there while avoiding the train accident. If they put any armor near the train accident, you can hit them with the TOW and they can't even see you.

However, you should really only do it when you're up by a healthy margin. The map usually devolves into a big sniper/medic/artillery stalemate, and both sides just keep losing tickets at a steady rate until the game ends.

[slayerdog99]

Re: valid tactic?

Valid - I always spawn spec ops and blow bridge at start of karkand. I swim across fight until killed and then spawn as engineer. Spread the mines in the water at the ford and keep them fresh. It forces them into an open space for easy pickings if the mines do not get them and your team mates will have no problem getting out.
If play as the amrican, always toss a few mines on the railroad tracks by the ford. If they try to bring their armor forward they gat a nasty surprise. It is all about killing the armor mobility and the infantry does the rest. Just like in real life.