Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Rambo2

UO Infantry Basics part 6: Urban Combat

Recommended Posts

I'm just going to end this conversation right here

 

How to clear a room

 

[pictures of grenades]

 

When in doubt burn em out!

 

Yeah that's fair. Everyone says that in every CQB topic ever but... :biggrin:

 

How do you decide when to use it? Can't do it every room or you'll run out of grenades. So what SOPs are you following?

Then what about when a grenade doesn't clear the room? What's the follow-up?

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah that's fair. Everyone says that in every CQB topic ever but... :biggrin:

 

How do you decide when to use it? Can't do it every room or you'll run out of grenades. So what SOPs are you following?

Then what about when a grenade doesn't clear the room? What's the follow-up?

 

 

 

1: There are two ways to decide when to use a grenade 

 

a ) If you are clearing a building "red" you should be putting a grenade into every single room

b )If you suspect an enemy presence in the room (you have some prior indication of enemy presence)

 

2: In most missions you have 2x grenades per man, with an 9 man squad that gives you 18 grenades, counting PLT HQ that gives you 62x grenades (assuming you dont have any attachments or a 4th squad)

That is enough grenades to clear 90% of towns in Arma. Most missions also incorporate some form of resupply that 9/10 includes grenades aswel.

 

3: SOPs in what sense?

 

4: Even if you grenade a room (or any position for that matter) you should always assault it as normal. A grenade dosen't replace the assault, it just precedes it.

Edited by Fox D

Share this post


Link to post

I give +1 for the grenades. And its true, I am still not using grenades due to the bad experiences i made with them years ago :D I shoudl learn to use these more often.

@SadGuy: Yes I was talking about the speed after the initial parts that can be seen from the door were cleared and we tried to get as many guns into the room as possible in the shortest amount of time.

I thin to add a combat pace in vanilla was a great idea by BIS. We should use it more often in appropriate situations.

Share this post


Link to post

I give +1 for the grenades. And its true, I am still not using grenades due to the bad experiences i made with them years ago :biggrin: I shoudl learn to use these more often.

@SadGuy: Yes I was talking about the speed after the initial parts that can be seen from the door were cleared and we tried to get as many guns into the room as possible in the shortest amount of time.

I thin to add a combat pace in vanilla was a great idea by BIS. We should use it more often in appropriate situations.

 

More guns does not necessarily mean a better clearance. Most rooms will require only 2 men to clear. 90% of the time any more than this and you will just get in each others way

 

keOpi's video is an excellent example of what not to do when clearing a building/room

 

Its a room... not a clown car

Share this post


Link to post

Grenade answers snip...

That answered all my questions. In nearly all entries I have made a grenade does the job. There are three schools of thought: 1. Grenade goes off, make entry ("shock" arguments, effectiveness of grenade arguments, etc). 2. Grenade goes off, limited entry or "wait-out" before immediate entry (safety arguments, confirmation of grenade effectiveness, dust clearance arguments, etc). 3. Grenade goes off but there is still obvious enemy activity e.g. shooting at the doorway, then pull out and make a decision, i.e. blow the room sky-high (risk vs benefit arguments, barricaded "fixed in place" arguments, stand-off attack arguments, etc). You lean towards 1.

 

I suppose it all depends on context. I mean yesterday I was messing around on a CQB template map and multiple grenades in the room didn't always stop enemy. Why? Rooms can be big and full of barricades like half-walls or interconnecting rooms. As long as people don't see it as a "fix-all" solution then all good. Some of the buildings with little projections poking out are notorious for this on the vanilla maps. If you take cover in those little areas you can survive grenades for the most part. This happens so much on modes like KOTH it's frustrating. I also have a real-life example of this if anyone is interested but I'd rather stick to ArmA only.

 

More guns does not necessarily mean a better clearance. Most rooms will require only 2 men to clear.

keOpi's video is an excellent example of what not to do when clearing a building/room

 

Exactly this. More people in the room can equal more people dead. Half the time by the time third man gets to the entrypoint, the threat has already been killed. In some cases pointman has already killed the threat. Triangulation of fire in this aspect is not always seen.

 

There is no golden rule around how many enter a room. For the most part entries that look to get as many people in the room as possible are known as floods. You may hear this term with room floods, wall floods (strongwalling), etc. Law Enforcement have different terms like threat swarm, swarming, etc, if you have heard of it any different. Flooding a room is done for a reason. Therefore it isn't always the go-to method.

 

What matters more than any bullshit "golden rules" is understanding the concepts, the normal entry process, the way entries work when they meet resistance and human behaviour. There are not a lot of instructional videos out there to tell you about any of this and looking at real-life videos will only give you snippets of information - often confusing people as to why it is used and in what context. The biggest example as I have mentioned before is stacking. Everyone thinks you stack everywhere. Then you get people stacking in a contested hallway or street. They're mowed down. Eek.

Share this post


Link to post

What matters more than any bullshit "golden rules" is understanding the concepts, the normal entry process, the way entries work when they meet resistance and human behaviour. There are not a lot of instructional videos out there to tell you about any of this and looking at real-life videos will only give you snippets of information - often confusing people as to why it is used and in what context. The biggest example as I have mentioned before is stacking. Everyone thinks you stack everywhere. Then you get people stacking in a contested hallway or street. They're mowed down. Eek.

Can not confirm.

Having the concept explained to me and then looking at real life examples (which we are trying to simulate to some certain degree - shouldn't forget this) who are trained to use these is, at least for me, very helpful to understand these concepts and their place in the greater good. Indeed there seem to be many ways units out of different branches would clear structures (f.e. law enforcement vs us marines vs special forces for hostage rescue) but why should one concentrate on SF or LE examples? We are simulating (mostly) regular Army or Marines. Who then greps videos with material displaying a completely unrelated branch has his problems elsewhere I presume?!

 

F.i. I thought it was interesting to see the second video and how the remaining forces currently not clearing any structures were covering every direction and place around the building being cleared. I think that would be a way of thinking and acting that we should def. adapt for use on the primary as we usually do way to less cover than our actions actually require. Often our ways to cover others are also badly implemented.

Looking at the new AAR tool we got you can see how most of our losses are caused by:

a ) bad security (flank cover etc.)

b ) bad or no existing cover for moving elements

c ) bad habits and tactics in urban combat (i.e. use of vehicles, clearing, individual skills, etc.)

d ) need for speed when attention and security is needed

e ) hesitation when speed is needed

 

It would be cool if we somehow could change that until 2016.

 

 

Kind regards

Pax

Edited by Pax'Jarome Malues

Share this post


Link to post

Can not confirm.

Having the concept explained to me and then looking at real life examples (which we are trying to simulate to some certain degree - shouldn't forget this) who are trained to use these is, at least for me, very helpful to understand these concepts and their place in the greater good. Indeed there seem to be many ways units out of different branches would clear structures (f.e. law enforcement vs us marines vs special forces for hostage rescue) but why should one concentrate on SF or LE examples? We are simulating (mostly) regular Army or Marines. Who then greps videos with material displaying a completely unrelated branch has his problems elsewhere I presume?!

 

F.i. I thought it was interesting to see the second video and how the remaining forces currently not clearing any structures were covering every direction and place around the building being cleared. I think that would be a way of thinking and acting that we should def. adapt for use on the primary as we usually do way to less cover than our actions actually require. Often our ways to cover others are also badly implemented.

Looking at the new AAR tool we got you can see how most of our losses are caused by:

a ) bad security (flank cover etc.)

b ) bad or no existing cover for moving elements

c ) bad habits and tactics in urban combat (i.e. use of vehicles, clearing, individual skills, etc.)

d ) need for speed when attention and security is needed

e ) hesitation when speed is needed

 

It would be cool if we somehow could change that until 2016.

 

 

Kind regards

Pax

 

TL;DR We lack discipline and aggression 

 

Unfortunately this has always been a thing and will probably always be a thing. All we can really do is try to pass on the knowledge of those who know to those who don't.

 

If your leading an element try to make sure they do the right thing, if your lucky some of them may take notice and try to keep up the practice.

Share this post


Link to post

TL;DR We lack discipline and aggression 

 

Unfortunately this has always been a thing and will probably always be a thing. All we can really do is try to pass on the knowledge of those who know to those who don't.

 

If your leading an element try to make sure they do the right thing, if your lucky some of them may take notice and try to keep up the practice.

Thats the answer we always get, but nobody actually does it.

That is really frustrating to observe.

Share this post


Link to post

Pretty much all of UO CQB training revolves around clearing the room. Clearing the room is the last step of a very complex and difficult process. There are many other things that need to happen and be in place before you can put that 2 or 4 man stack into the room, and skipping out on that stuff generally gets your stack killed.

Share this post


Link to post

Thats the answer we always get, but nobody actually does it.

That is really frustrating to observe.

 

Do a CQB course. Thawk's was a good success. I don't see why not.

Share this post


Link to post

 

beta: and skipping out on that stuff generally gets your stack killed.

Yes. One can observe this regulary on the server. Instead of watching their sectors, they all stare at the door like it'll let gold coins rain on them. Same with simply covering alleys when crossing them or being there longer as a view seconds. Pretty much nobody does the small stuff that is actually quiet necessary.

 

 

Do a CQB course. Thawk's was a good success. I don't see why not.

If someone would provide a course I would happily enlist as long as it is in my timezone, if I understood you correct.

Edited by Pax'Jarome Malues

Share this post


Link to post

Playing on the server tonight during The Raid on Zargabad and a technical (or ********) rolled up on the security element outside the gate and proceeded to gun them all down at point blank range

 

Actually to be 100% accurate the 2nd technical gunned them all down, the first did a drive by and everyone kept looking in the direction it had disappeared in, the 2nd one then rolled up and gunned them all down.

 

Moral of the story? Watch your arcs! This could have been avoided if someone had of just watched up the street like they were supposed to!

Edited by Fox D

Share this post


Link to post

[...]

 

Actually to be 100% accurate the 2nd technical gunned them all down, the first did a drive by and everyone kept looking in the direction it had disappeared in, the 2nd one then rolled up and gunned them all down.

 

[...]

 

Off topic: To be even more accurate, the first technical dropped me as part of the northern security element/ blocking force. Just before Jimbo managed to drop the gunner. But the timing was perfect... We had engine sounds coming from the north and were expecting contacts to move right around the northern corner when that technical appeared from our six out of nowhere (engine sound was covered by the trucks closing in from the north).

 

I would agree with the above said. Although this is not only applicable to the CQB portion of the game and thus it might be kinda off topic, but watching and covering ones arcs and the area you are responsible is really missing on the server most of the times. Usually people just watch the direction of the confirmed enemies so that they won't miss out on shooting them. Hardly anyone sticks to his corner when nothing is going on there for a few seconds. You also rarely see someone watching the rear of the friendlies (situation dependent of course).

 

@Rambo2: Nice video! Keep making them if possible. Those videos combined with more active trainings again would definitely be a step in the right direction to improve gameplay.

Share this post


Link to post

If someone would provide a course I would happily enlist as long as it is in my timezone, if I understood you correct.

 

I'm happy to provide content. I have got a lesson plan for room entries and teaching different CQB concepts. I'd rather let one of the official UOTC guys teach.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm happy to provide content. I have got a lesson plan for room entries and teaching different CQB concepts. I'd rather let one of the official UOTC guys teach.

Glad to hear you've finished your lesson plan.

Great stuff

Share this post


Link to post

Pretty much all of UO CQB training revolves around clearing the room. Clearing the room is the last step of a very complex and difficult process. There are many other things that need to happen and be in place before you can put that 2 or 4 man stack into the room, and skipping out on that stuff generally gets your stack killed.

Walking in front of the window of an uncleared building to stack at a door is a particular favourite of mine.

Share this post


Link to post

My general rule is a two person pair clearing the room/building with 2 people outside covering corners/exterior. More then two people becomes a problem with confined spaces, desync/lag, or poor communication.

Edited by Darksidesix

Share this post


Link to post

Walking in front of the window of an uncleared building to stack at a door is a particular favourite of mine.

 

Bonus points if it is the building you are going to clear - and they stack up in front of the window.

 

Yes, this happens. Far too often.

Share this post


Link to post

AFAIK the previous CQB courses focused on room clearing whereas the MOUT courses focused on approaching a building, street clearing which were the missing steps you were talking about.

Share this post


Link to post

@paxjarome

 

my comment on the speeds are referred to 7:37, in which people rush a room in crouched stance and not the way with the least resistance of the room,  which would have been forward for the 1st man to enter.

IRL you would move, crouched with 1 or 2 km/h and couldnt aim for shit.

 

to defend my video post:

 

I dont know how anyone could say that the slowest way is the best way or the fastest way is the safest.

For me it is all depending on the context.

Additionally when you train it the fastest way you can execute it, you can always switch in between speeds if necessary.

If I only train it the slow way, mistakes can happen when I have to adjust to the situation.

( pieing slowly into a dark hallway in which somebody is sitting in will get you killed, because he has the visibility advantage )

 

 

I should never run into a building that I am clearing, unless for some rare reason I am covered by somebody,

but normally I have to provide my own security.

 

the bigger the room the more rifles I will need in the room.

the bigger the room the faster I will need to move into it and to the points of domination.

the worse the layout and the knowledge of the room is the faster I will move.

the better the visibility, the simpler the layout and the better the knowledge of the room is, the slower I move.

 

If I suspect enemies in the room I will clear it with grenades or flashbangs or smoke grenades.

 

and still all this has not belong for every individual running into the room, speeds will change

depending on what is in front of them in the room, e.g. a dark hallway in a room.

 

It is difficult in arma to simulate two men going through a doorway at the same time, better to simulate that

after each other, which is still not good enough for small rooms, because you will be at least 1 m apart

when IRL it is maybe 30 to 50 cm.

 

If I could move into a room simultanously with a buddy and I know that it is too small to become fixed by enemy fire in the doorway,

I would choose the slow way, especially when it is unlikely that they heard me or know that I am close.

 

If I can expect enemies inside, pointing at the doorway, I have to rush in, after flashing or fragging.

If I do it slow, they will see my weapon earlier than I see them, because I dont know where they are, but

they know that they have to watch the doorway.

 

Here is another interesting video with some mistakes, but I especially like the fluent outer corner pieing at 14:10.

 

Edited by kOepi

Share this post


Link to post

I liked your video, Rambo and AC, but we could still use some more knowledge on building clearing as well as planning considerations for MOUT. Especially because big buildings are not just rooms, they are also hallways and stairs, each requiring their own technique.

 

I'd love to see your take on platoon-sized MOUT and points to consider all the way from the platoon leader to the rifleman.

 

Also, aren't you supposed to cover towards the window when you pass in front of it? At least thats what I saw Polish SF doing on their CQC training.

Share this post


Link to post
Here is another interesting video with some mistakes, but I especially like the fluent outer corner pieing at 14:10.

 

[VIDEO]

This is a great video. It shows many points that I have been trying to put out there.

 

You see some major issues throughout that are good to note. Failure to clear an entire floor before moving onto the next. There WAS a guy in that tunnel and they left him. He could have easily shot them through the doors or as the go-pro guy attempted to close the doors. He could have moved around the room once they headed upstairs. Even with rear security they could have been splat. It is a good thing they recleared it.

 

If you notice when they start hitting the fourway with multiple opposing short corner-fed rooms, they begin to clear from the door instinctively rather than move in. You see this happen consistently and it goes in the face of conventional '05 year dogma of "push through the fatal funnel", "never stop in the fatal funnel". It is a much preferred method to fight from outside the room or from the door rather than enter immediately against prepared immediate threats. There is no such thing as these "Golden Rules" or "rule-based errors" in reality if it works!

 

At 12 minutes 30 seconds that failed philosophy is seen. They immediately enter a one-floor target building with a known combatant. The chick engages three members of the entry team, hitting multiple within a few seconds. They are not prepared for it, they are slow in countering it. The go-pro guy even shoots through the door gap to engage her. That would have been three people injured or dead. At 15 minutes 16 seconds you see the problem with immediate entries that are not supported (from outside) or do not provide rear security, and just before this you see buttonhooking against the weakest side of the room that has ALREADY BEEN CLEARED from the doorway. This is bad tactics.

 

Small errors done consistently get people hurt in the long run. Small actions by the enemy lead to large consequences in such a confined environment.

 

I dont know how anyone could say that the slowest way is the best way or the fastest way is the safest. For me it is all depending on the context. If I only train it the slow way, mistakes can happen when I have to adjust to the situation. I should never run into a building that I am clearing, unless for some rare reason I am covered by somebody, but normally I have to provide my own security.

 

  1. the bigger the room the more rifles I will need in the room.
  2. the bigger the room the faster I will need to move into it and to the points of domination.
  3. the worse the layout and the knowledge of the room is the faster I will move.
  4. the better the visibility, the simpler the layout and the better the knowledge of the room is, the slower I move.

 

If I suspect enemies in the room I will clear it with grenades or flashbangs or smoke grenades. and still all this has not belong for every individual running into the room, speeds will change depending on what is in front of them in the room, e.g. a dark hallway in a room. It is difficult in arma to simulate two men going through a doorway at the same time, better to simulate that after each other, which is still not good enough for small rooms, because you will be at least 1 m apart when IRL it is maybe 30 to 50 cm. If I could move into a room simultanously with a buddy and I know that it is too small to become fixed by enemy fire in the doorway, I would choose the slow way, especially when it is unlikely that they heard me or know that I am close. If I can expect enemies inside, pointing at the doorway, I have to rush in, after flashing or fragging. If I do it slow, they will see my weapon earlier than I see them, because I dont know where they are, but they know that they have to watch the doorway.

 

You have some really good thought processes.

 

Basically what you are saying is stop defining things in black and white. Close Quarter Battle is a huge contextual grey area. I agree.

 

Do you always cover a window? No. Sometimes you bypass or blow-by it. Why? It depends on context i.e. compromise, enemy-orientation, open/closed window.

Do you always go full left when you walk in the door? No. Sometimes you cannot. Why? It depends on context i.e. room structure, center/corner-fed, heavy/weak side.

 

 

What is a bad habit of getting into is differentiating the entries by slow versus fast. This emphasizes that you have to be fast, in all entries, to be successful is highly untrue. It works primarily in surprise-driven entries or when the enemy is fixated on something other than your entrypoint. The rest of the time it gets you hurt and it can wipe out a whole team. You walk into a muzzle, into a door ambush, into a killzone, into a boobytrap. You're shot dead within the center of the door, you cannot "push through".

 

There are situations where you adjust or inherently you have different speeds for the tactic or technique used:

  • Running the rabbit, as pointman you burst into the room at emergency speed.
  • Near-far, as far guy you have to be quicker to get around near guy and take up your arc.
  • A turn-off/cover-and-hold where you are completely static for a few seconds.

 

Speed matters but not necessarily to get into the room or through the door. Sometimes speed can just get your dead-er faster.

 

So looking at your points:

  1. Entirely true but most entries require only two people. More is just a farce. Most entries require people outside the room to be doing different jobs like covering an exit, covering the hallway, etc.
  2. Not true. You may take out all the threats in that room from the door or as you move towards your Point of Domination. You do not necessarily have to be faster to it. Bigger rooms tend to have more obstacles, more dead space and more exposing angles for you to get engaged. Moving quicker does not equal safer in these environments.
  3. That's up to you. Personally if I do not really know what I'm walking into, I'd rather not walk into it. I'd assess from outside. I'd use different reconnaissance concepts for urban warfare, such as an External Structure Analysis, to try and work out what is inside the room. People often "pie" the unknown but you are saying go fast into the unknown, that's an interesting perspective.
  4. Same as above, now you have a known you're saying you can be slowly. It's an interesting perspective. I suppose you can because "speed through the fatal funnel" is now not an issue to you but I do not believe in this concept against waiting threats trained on the doorway.

 

Either way it is good that you are planning to grenade target rooms. Moving in after a grenade or flashie is entirely situation though. Grenades or flashies can be overcome in multiple ways and they do not stop someone working a trigger. Therefore always remember that you may still have a denied entry occurring with a large volume of fire at the door. Do you really want to "rush" into that? You're rushing to your death. Do you want to "rush" into a linear area like a hallway? If so you're buggered. If you do it slow and they see your weapon first, i.e. you lead with the weapon instead of muzzle/eyes, you're doing it wrong. That is called telegraphing or flagging beyond concealment. It's bad news. There are ways to avoid this and to make a slow-to-fast targeted approach to the room.

 

Let me give you a really dodgy example. Which one is safer?

lOTMbC2.png

I used Paint if you can't tell.

Who is safer? The guy running through the center of the door. The two guys on either side of the doorjamb.

Half the guides would tell you the guy in the center is safest. He's doing the "right" thing. Do you really think so? I don't.

An Advanced CQB course should begin to teach these concepts. All our CQB TvTs ended up in the entryteam dead for that reason.

 

It is also good to adjust depending on what the room/terrain analysis is telling you. This is the true definition of dynamic. You determine on the fly what you are going to do for your best benefit. This takes into account the structure, lighting, enemy, etc, as you say. METT-TC, OCOKA, OODA loop factors are all in play. The distance between people entering, the space gap or gap of dispersion, can be minimized in ArmA with a bit of practice. I got people down to half a second between each other, less than a meter. It is not the best you are right but it is certainly possible to iron that out. When we first started they were two seconds and above - really bad.

 

I really think you have a good ability to reason with things tactically. I hope you do become a UOTC instructor and begin to design better courses for CQB/MOUT with better, newer concepts that work for the game.

Share this post


Link to post

Fighting in Urban or built up areas will always be a shit sandwich we are forced to eat. As stated there in the vid, there will always be multiple angles and areas to scan. So much so that it is near impossible to catch everything. Someone somewhere is going to miss something, or just become overwhelmed with the amount of potential enemy firing positions looking at them. A frag coming over the wall, or a sniper hidden deep in a room with a perfect angle, or a bunch of hostiles occupying multiple windows or other fighting positions and are able to fire on you all at the same time, or areas where hostiles (including vehicles) blend in good and you don't know what that is until it tries to kill you. The killzones, ambush points and fatal funnels are damn near infinite which can make it a very stressful environment, and even more so when the casualties start to add up and you become overwhelmed and stretched thin. Don't get me wrong though, this can also create amazing and extremely intense gameplay that will put you to the test.
 

One thing I would like to focus on and state based on my own personal observation, is while doing an immediate entry in a corner fed room / building / compound, that lets say has 2x hard corners to the left (so the room or building is more or less rectangle shaped), and you already know the corner to your front and closest to the door is clear, knowing that I have people coming in with me,I personally as the first man in like to go straight to the far corner and quickly turn towards the far left hard corner and deal with a threat there, and then scan over to the other left hard corner. The second man in, right away turns towards the near left hard corner and takes the threat there, and then if need be hit the far left hard corner. If there's a third man he kind of trails the first and watches center to take on however needs to be shot, and fourth man kind of trails the second man and takes on whoever needs to be shot as well. I believe this is called cross hook entry but not sure.

 

The reason why I like to do this, and this is dependent on the situation, it's not just a hammered in do it all the time thing, is because it allows me to draw fire away from the door, that fatal funnel, and if the contact focuses on me and tries to shoot me, as that is usually the case because 99% of the time, the enemy will shoot at whoever they see first to enter, it will allow the second man to come in without taking a round that may be aimed at me instead. You will notice in the vid in OP at the 7:35 mark, that when entry was made and the first man in went right away to the left hard corner, he got gunned down and the second man to make entry took a round that was probably not intended for him. For a split second the hostile had enfilading fire on both troops, and would have also been able to keep rounds constantly hitting right near the door. If someone had a PKM or RPK or even a SAW with 200 rds in the drum, he could have kept on firing right towards that door and people would just rush right into a wall of bullets.

 

Also in first person shooter games you will notice a habit that works well that people pick up on and do when possibly in a 1 v 1 situation and no one is behind cover. They will constantly move lateral towards the sides trying to get out of the line of fire, making it harder for the enemy to hit a moving target, and if the enemy is static, it will be easier for the one moving to hit the static target. In the specific example above, the first man was easy to hit as the enemy did not have to move his rifle to fix on the target as the target moved right into his iron sights, right into his line of fire, and as the target made entry and moved left right into the hostile, the target was trying to fix his weapon on the hostile who already had him lined up.He may of gotten away with it if the hostile was unaware of the entry and got caught by surprise.

 

If the first man in moved straight in to his front corner drawing fire away from the door while turning to acquire whatever targets may be to his left, the second man would have been able to immediately hit that hard left corner and kill the hostile while the hostile was shooting at the first guy. You may have had 1 dead friendly instead of 2, as it would have given the hostile multiple targets to shoot at once, and when faced in that situation with multiple targets, usually the last thing that goes through your mind prior to the bullet, is "oh shit".

 

Of coarse all this as always depends on skill of the player and how quick their brains can understand if that's a hostile or not, and then react to line up an accurate shot and take it before the enemy does. Also I would like to mention, if you obviously know that the corner to the front is clear, right away as you make entry, you can start to turn your weapon towards the hard left corners and engage before you hit that front corner your traveling to. You do not need to keep your weapon fixed on the front corner until you hit it, and then turn your weapon. The corner is clear, cleared corners no longer require rifles pointed at them even if your moving towards it, they are not going to shoot you, the hostile in the other corners however will.

 

Immediate entries in center fed rooms more or less remains the same with one goes right the other left or vise versa to check the hard corners to the sides while the others in the stack go right and left as well. Again dependent on the situation but it fairly remains the same in an empty squared or rectangular room. Where as in an immediate entry into a corner fed room, there can be a bit of confusion or debate on whether to go straight, or immediately take the near hard corner.

 

I have tested both ways in multiple games and for me, in most situations, going straight to draw fire away from the door, the fatal funnel, for the second and third / fourth man to make entry has given me better results and allowed us to dominate the room.

 

Now keep in mind, these immediate entries are and will always be dangerous and risky, there's always a risk, and these methods are not a 100% guarantee that you will have no casualties whatsoever when executing them against a foe who may or may not be aware, it is combat of the virtual kind in this case, and anything can happen, but the tactical dilemma is how to best deal with these situations without taking casualties. You have options you should explore.

 

Options such as your limited entry, breaching, frags, flashbangs, gas, explosives, hit at a distance with rockets, airstrikes, arty, 203 / GP rounds, 50.cal / HE / AP rounds from vehicles, tank shells,heavy caliber MG's or rifles depending on whether you can penetrate the walls and doors or not, or in some cases, some buildings have windows everywhere that you can actually clear a building or room without even stepping foot in the door, or even the room itself , and multiple entry points etc. It's just a matter of picking the right option at the time based on equipment and the threats around and in front of you.

 

Personally I like doing the limited entry when I can, and pie off the room / compound as best I can before hand, but sometimes an immediate entry in game needs to be done, and simply put, sometimes it is just plain fun. Also I am a fan of just completely leveling the hostile building, or hitting it with something before making entry, but hey, sometimes you don't have those options.

 

These are things I have observed, and feel like sharing.

Edited by Militant

Share this post


Link to post

 

I personally as the first man in like to go straight to the far corner and quickly turn towards the far left hard corner and deal with a threat there, and then scan over to the other left hard corner. The second man in, right away turns towards the near left hard corner and takes the threat there, and then if need be hit the far left hard corner. If there's a third man he kind of trails the first and watches center to take on however needs to be shot, and fourth man kind of trails the second man and takes on whoever needs to be shot as well. I believe this is called cross hook entry but not sure.

 

I have tested both ways in multiple games and for me, in most situations, going straight to draw fire away from the door, the fatal funnel, for the second and third / fourth man to make entry has given me better results and allowed us to dominate the room.

 

Options such as your limited entry, breaching, frags, flashbangs, gas, explosives, hit at a distance with rockets, airstrikes, arty, 203 / GP rounds, 50.cal / HE / AP rounds from vehicles, tank shells,heavy caliber MG's or rifles depending on whether you can penetrate the walls and doors or not, or in some cases, some buildings have windows everywhere that you can actually clear a building or room without even stepping foot in the door, or even the room itself , and multiple entry points etc. It's just a matter of picking the right option at the time based on equipment and the threats around and in front of you.

 

Personally I like doing the limited entry when I can, and pie off the room / compound as best I can before hand, but sometimes an immediate entry in game needs to be done, and simply put, sometimes it is just plain fun. Also I am a fan of just completely leveling the hostile building, or hitting it with something before making entry, but hey, sometimes you don't have those options.

 

That was a really good read! I have a PowerPoint in the works that talks about these concepts. I will post it on here when I'm done.

 

This is a targeted approach to room clearing. The core way I believe in, there are too many known unknowns in other approaches.

 

This entry I have heard named:

That is a cross-hook working together.

 

On the other hand going straight and running the long wall, or running the wall to draw fire...

I have heard called numerous things depending on how it is done:

Maybe even a near-far or other forms of limited entry. For example it is very similar to the High Threat Limited Entry by HTS LLC.

 

Edited by Rye

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...