Water Warfare Codex of Tactics

Discussion of other water gun websites.
User avatar
Monsoon
Posts: 832
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2003 2:14 pm

Water Warfare Codex of Tactics

Post by Monsoon » Fri Jun 22, 2007 12:58 am

Because of a recent interest in creating a centralized website that provides information about water war tactics, I've decided that my summer project is to build a simple, yet stylish website that is easy to use, but has all the right data on all sorts of tactical information. However, I have a few problems.

First is that all websites need webspace, and a domain to run on. I don't have the money to buy webspace and a domain name....so I guess that's out of the question. What I do have is free webspace (not much...it's 10GB as far as I know) with FTP access. I don't know what to do about the domain though.

Another problem is my limited knowledge of HTML. I know enough to create a very basic and boring webpage, but that's about it. I don't know how to incorporate templates or anything fancy...even getting a picture to be where I want it to be. But that can all be learned.

Last problem is that this will have to be a part joint effort, as the articles must all be in a specific format, so they are easier to read from article to article. I'm going to have to ask the original writers of the article to rewrite them in a format, which is going to have to be developed as well.

Aside from all the technical issues, I think that this website would be a success among water warriors. Although it won't draw as many people as iSoaker and SSCentral, it will be the online encyclopedia of tactics and battle information, which would be useful for anyone. However, it's going to take a lot of work and dedication....so it probably (make that definately) won't be done this summer, and it's development and creation will probabaly take until summer 2008 at the very least.

Post if you have any comments, I would very much like to be more involved in the water warfare online community this year
Do not underestimate the power of stupidity in large groups

User avatar
Alberio-Zomada
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 5:27 pm

Cool

Post by Alberio-Zomada » Fri Jun 22, 2007 1:29 am

ok, good idea but have you heard or "piczo". its like a free web site "ish" builder thing... if you want i can make one and then give you the user and pass (because i own at making piczo's :cool: ) any way i can right now, and the name could be like "enSoakpedia" or "soakFAQ" or "SuperSoakerTactics"
(SST) something like that, but if you want i could be done by tomorrow. but i do need info for the web site, or possibly i could give you the user name and pass word and you could edit the "tactics" part of it... but its just and idea
and also it may not be a "REAL" web site owned by you but it will be a web site with info...but after you got the info down and people coming then you upgrade. so yea just a thought
Cheers mate, Alberio~
SUPER SOAKER! Damn i stepped in a puddle...
IM BACK! and im ready to set some tut's up! IS SSC READY FOR WATER GRENAIDES?

User avatar
C-A_99
Posts: 1502
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:09 pm

Post by C-A_99 » Fri Jun 22, 2007 2:02 am

http://www.fateback.com

I believe DX recommended this a while ago. I have an account there, but never go to figuring out how to use the FTP, file uploads, etc. (I'd always get random error messages)

mutuhaha
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 11:23 am

Post by mutuhaha » Fri Jun 22, 2007 8:12 am

Unfortunately, I can't help much in the way of technical support. I have a few specialist articles I wrote in the past, which I'd like to contribute. Of course, to do that, I'd need to bring up the specifics of the new format. Just to open the discussion, I'll suggest a few things to include in the article:

Maybe for a basic manuever type tactic (like a flank):
1. Title (of course)
2. Scale of tactic, e.g small-scale tactical, moderate-scale operational, and large-scale strategic (though this is only according to my personal classification, definitely need more input for this)
3. Practical usage: has it been used a lot, just a few times or purely theoretical? (mainly to give some weight to tried and tested stuff and to highlight new ideas)
4. How to use: as objectively as possible, how to execute the tactic.
5. Author's notes: author's thoughts, mentions from experience and things that the user may want to watch out for.
6. Individual manuever? Team tactic? Roughly how many people needed?
7. Author

As this would likely be a more objective work, the style should be at least semi-formal and the main body should be edited after writing for ease of understanding by the community, spelling and etc.

Of course the list of stuff here probably isn't complete or has left something out, so, input and discussion please!

daishii
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 8:20 am

Post by daishii » Fri Jun 22, 2007 8:47 am

New here, but I've been lurking around soaker boards and sites every now and then. Now on to the post.

On this website...what format is it following? A regular website with links, or perhaps like wikipedia/MediaWiki? I would suggest the latter, since everyone in the soaker community can directly contribute that way, and the site administrators just have to watch for things going out of hand. In the case of a website, the admin will have to do all the work of reading through, determining if it is good enough and putting things up. Which means if the site admin are too few, or there are too many real life commitments, the site would probably suffocate that way. Considering that there's a somewhat established soaker community on the internet, getting people to help that way would be useful in taking up some of the load.

As for the format and such, once it has been determined by the admin or community, most of the work would be writing the articles and ensuring that it fits the format. And since quite a lot of soaker info is based on opinion, a non point-of-view format would hardly be useful. Perhaps it could be a repository of water warfare articles as you have mentioned, and the wiki format of the site could be used to sort it into categories. Searching categories like "urban tactics" or "aph" will give you the relevant articles. Of course, it would be useful to have a main page for a particular category. For example, searching wikipedia for "Military ranks" gives a list/category, as well as an article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Military_ranks). Something like that to give people a general idea before digging deeper into other people's articles. That can follow the non point of view format.

As for hosting, design and site creation. A commonly used (and free) wiki based software is MediaWiki. Aside from the fact that much more info can be found here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki, I do not know much about creating websites. Sorry. You may also want to look at this: http://www.wikia.com/wiki/Start_a_new_Wikia. There's this organization that provides free hosting for wikis, but under conditions that there are enough people to maintain and develop it.

Well...just a suggestion. Good luck.

User avatar
DX
Posts: 1780
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 1:00 pm

Post by DX » Fri Jun 22, 2007 5:56 pm

The most amazing free host in the world is http://www.110mb.com/ They've got better features than many paid hosts and allow you to install a good site builder.

As for articles, I'll be willing to write hundreds/as many as necessary to cover all the tactics I know of.

Format should be taken care of ASAP. I share mutuhaha's concerns about specifics. Personally, I believe that there are two types of tactics - small basic building blocks and larger complex ones, such as a certain flank, rush, and ambush being part of a defense. I also believe in quite a few unique strategic tactics that are nothing more than combos in theory, but became actual tactics because they worked well.

While I haven't actually written up any of the hundred-or-so tactics on my compiled list [was scared of my enemy taking a leaf from my book], I'd probably write them very formally and in more depth than most readers might want...

Another thing is with theoretical tactics. How much weight should be given to a tactic that has never been tested? Now normally, probably very little. But the thing is, I've been fighting for so long at the current level that when I've made tactics from thin air, I've been pretty damn good at figuring out how the enemy would react every step of the way. The Swinging Pendulum Defense, for example, did exactly what it was supposed to do, and even spawned a couple more tactics based off it. I'm not saying to fully trust an idea, but I do think that they should be considered with a bit more weight than usual.

My last concern regarding format is about noting what a tactic is for. Now personally, I don't believe that a given tactic can't be used for something unless proven otherwise. For example, an outnumbered tactic can be used against an outnumbered team, and a flank can be done from 10ft away or 100. I don't think tactics should be limited to an age range, experience range, maneuvering range, battlefield type, size, etc. unless real observations or extremely obvious common sense say so. Opinions are often not a good way to limit the scope and function of a tactic.

But those are all just personal things. Don't set the format off on a weird tangent because of those. :rolleyes: Since you were last active, I've taken a liking to the mechanics of fighting, the ways in which variables, factors, feelings, etc. work in wars and why. My speciality in fighting wars has become everything there is to know about wars.
Mess With the Best, Get Soaked Like the Rest!

2004 Red Sox - World Series Champions
2007 Red Sox - World Series Champions!

User avatar
Monsoon
Posts: 832
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2003 2:14 pm

Post by Monsoon » Fri Jun 22, 2007 6:54 pm

Thanks for the ideas guys...I think the format should be very simple and easy to read....like Mutuhaha's idea with sections. That way there's nothing new and strange to expect on the next article. As far as practical/few time use/theoretical tactics go, maybe they should have their own sections on the website? And thanks for the link for free webspace DX. The 110mb page only accepts signups at certains times though (I've already tried signing up and I'm forced to wait two days now).
Last edited by Monsoon on Fri Jun 22, 2007 7:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Do not underestimate the power of stupidity in large groups

User avatar
DX
Posts: 1780
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 1:00 pm

Post by DX » Sat Jun 23, 2007 4:55 am

An example of a tactic article that I literally just typed up for the Tactical Theory. It is very informative, though probably not very user-friendly. It also refers to several other tactics that have totally no documentation yet.

Fluid Line *v1.0.0

- Written By: DX/Duxburian

Subject Type: Strategic Tactic

Difficulty: 5/6 [Advanced]

Complexity: 4/6 [Fairly Complex]

NP Levels: Progressive, Hardcore

PP Levels: Standard, Advanced, Hardcore [All]

Battlefield Types: Natural, Semi-Natural, Suburban

Battlefield Sizes: Small, Medium, Large [All]

Degrees of Cover: Semi-Open

Game Families: OHK, OHS, OSF

*What is the Fluid Line?*

The Fluid Line is an improvement and more potent form of the angled line and related tactics, such as the swinging v and swinging pendulum defense. It may contain any of those within itself, being a more complex tactic. The Fluid Line is extremely useful for fighting enemy teams with more numbers and/or more firepower. While this tactic is defensive in nature, it takes a very aggressive form if well-executed [and if desired]. The Fluid Line depends on speed and agility to function effectively. Lack of either may cause it to fail. This tactic is rather daring, so the wielding team must be willing to take risks and be able to keep their cool in dangerous situations. With big risk comes big reward. This tactic is one of the best defensive - offensive punches there are, especially for an outnumbered team. It is an integral part of the Outnumbered Defense and a way to beat seemingly impossible odds. The enemy may come in with more players and better guns, but you may still come out with a lead and/or dyer players.

*Using the Fluid Line*

This is usually part of a defense, as the offensive part of the tactic is initially hidden. This tactic requires at least 2 people to use and works against enemies that outnumber or match you. The Fluid Line is not necessary when you outnumber the enemy.

To start, take up a neutral or defensive position in a semi-open area. This tactic tends to be weak in the open or in an area with dense cover. That makes sense, for too dense = not able to move fast enough, too open = the enemy can push you back. You don't want to be in a fort or base; you need to be able to change positions rapidly. Upon enemy contact, take different actions based on numbers and firepower:

*Fluid Line against an outnumbering enemy*

Take cover and let the enemy fire first. Shoot only when necessary, and tap-pump if you have no chance of hitting enemies, even in a soakfest. There's no point in wasting water if you can't kill or soak the enemy. Most enemies will attempt to flank you with their larger numbers. When this happens, protect the threatened area by swiftly changing positions. If one guy moves forward and right, for example, the rest of the line should shift or not shift depending on what the enemy does. With the right cover [such as trees or walls], a single teammate may be able to hold two enemies. That significantly helps to stop the enemy from flanking. However, if that doesn't work, there is another way to hold two enemies without requiring experience or skill.

When the enemy presses in, you can bend your line in by moving the flanks forward and slightly out, making sure every teammate is within supporting distance. Say you are on the left, holding a single enemy from behind a tree. Another enemy wants to advance on your center, but can't, for they could be hit by front/flank crossfire created by you and your center. This enemy won't be able to advance. Thus, you can hold two enemies, even if you don't have direct fire placed on one of them. If that enemy player decides to fall back and press you with the other enemy you are holding, simply shift your position. The rest of your line should then shift accordingly. Once this happens, you can reform the center bend and hold the enemy team again. You can bend a flank in or out at virtually any time. You could even reform the bend while shifting positions.

You may reach a brief period of stalemate. It could last a minute or ten, depending on the guns involved and how aggressive the enemy is. They might continue to try and flank you, in which case, you can keep changing positions, absorbing enemy advances and flank attempts. When you hit a stalemate or come into a very dangerous situation [such as being backed up against a wall or out of bounds line, you may want to use the Fluid Line's offensive capabilities.

The most effective way to break out from encirclement is a screen and killing rush. Here, split-second communication is critical. You need to warn your teammates of an immediate move without letting the enemy prepare too much for it. You then need to execute said move without being shot. Basically, in order to break out, you want to stack up your numbers on a single enemy or a couple of enemies on either their left or right flanks. You need at least one teammate to screen the move by dishing out covering fire across the entire line. When you yell to go for someone/some flank, your team has to move ASAP and put all their weight against that target. That target should end up soaked and/or dead. If not, they will most likely be forced to flee, which is not a bad thing. Your covering player and all others must get out in an instant, that is the most important part. Once out, you can spread to face the enemy, this time, you have the whole battlefield to your back. When the enemy breaks off their pursuit, they will hit a Fluid Line again, as if nothing happened.

You need not wait to be cornered before rushing a flank, however. You may do it anytime. It is just less risky when the enemy is not moving. You have a good head start if you go for a guy on the flank while the enemy is not doing anything. If you stay alive/dry and maintain enough energy, you can keep repeating this process, systematically racking up kills and/or soaks, one or two guys at a time. In a soakfest or OHK, you could actually soak or eliminate enough enemies to match or outnumber them. In a OHS, you could gain enough points to easily take a commanding lead. But if you are out of energy, you can break the Fluid Line and simply run away. If you take losses and still have energy, keep going. Your odds of victory may fall dramatically if you leave down in score or players.

*Fluid Line against an enemy with even numbers*

With even numbers, you can take your time and shift positions with less urgency. You should still move quickly when necessary. You also do not need to bend your line to absorb an enemy/multiple enemies, though it may be advantageous to do so. With even numbers, your killing rush against an enemy flank is much safer, especially if multiple enemies are being held by single teammates. However, an astute enemy may fall back and reform when you attack, absorbing your attack. You might be better off with a mirror-style tactic. If you mirror the enemy positions, you could slowly draw one or more of them farther away from their center. When a player is isolated enough, stack up on them, using the same blazing speed you'd use for Fluid Line positioning changes.

*Countering the Fluid Line*

What if the enemy uses this tactic against you? Well, there are several options for counters. If you outnumber the enemy, mirror their speed. Stack up against a single enemy before that player can shift. If the enemy bends their line, don't put anyone in the bend. Simply put pressure somewhere else with that player. Be ready at any moment for the enemy to rush you somewhere along your line. Make sure your flanks know of the danger and that they can move quickly. When the enemy makes a killing rush, match their running speed, if possible. If you can out-sprint fleeing enemies, you may be able to nail them in the back.

If you and the enemy are evenly matched, do the same as if you have more players. You won't be able to flank the enemy very easily though, unless you use your own Fluid Line.

Now here's the reason why an outnumbering enemy can't use this tactic. If they did, the outnumbered team would simply not attack. They could withdraw and set up their own Fluid Line, or an ambush, much better options. The outnumbering enemy would just stand there with a regular angled line and wait. An angled line can not become a fluid one until fighting begins.

*A note about firepower*

The above descriptions assume that both teams have roughly even arsenal power. When there's available cover, an outgunned, but agile enemy may be able to absorb the impact of better guns. However, having more range and/or output will certainly affect the effectiveness of the a Fluid Line. If outnumbered and outgunned, you'll need some serious cover and serious speed to put this tactic into action. If outgunned with even numbers, you've got a better chance. Likewise, if you outgun the enemy, you may be able to break the tactic easily. If you are the ones executing it, you might be able to push the enemy back and begin using an offense. There are just so many variables. If you notice that one enemy has a very weak gun, that player would make an excellent killing rush target. If a teammate has a very powerful gun, they may be able to hold three enemies simply by keeping them all out of range. The terrain impacts the shape of your positions, what cover you can use, how much ground you have to work with, etc.

-Join the Revolution and Soak On!
Mess With the Best, Get Soaked Like the Rest!

2004 Red Sox - World Series Champions
2007 Red Sox - World Series Champions!

mutuhaha
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2006 11:23 am

Post by mutuhaha » Sat Jun 23, 2007 2:39 pm

A format like that should do fine, except without the TT indexes like NP/PP in the global version. Also, maybe complexity and difficulty could be reduced to an author's note rather than a empirical standard. Some people may find it extremely difficult while others may find it very easy. Other than that, the main body was easy for me to read, though not up to academia tone standards (which I don't write or expect anyone to write in anyway).

Now that I've finished talking about the format, a counter to the fluid line. One of the strengths of having only a rough axis/nucleus/etc would be the ability to respond to enemy movements while retaining more or less the same area of influence, conforming to the most advantageous shape to deal with opposing moves. However, like a rubber band, if stretched too long, it will break.

Hence, the idea would be to try and spread the fluid line out as much as possible. Attempt to flank both sides of the line. If they respond by extending the line, then strength has to wane somewhere, which can be struck at. If they fail to extend the line, then a regular flank and encirclement can be carried out. Of course, if the fluid line responds with an offensive motion on finding itself in danger of overstretching, for example striking the centre of the line attempting to flank, or any flank, depending on the location of attack, a counter movement can be made. To attempt to break out or even put pressure requires the influence of players. Correspondingly, their influence put into offensive would have to drain from elsewhere, which is what the counteroffense could utilize. Since the fluid line doesn't actually give speed to the users, matching speeds and good communication for both sides would probably go without saying.

User avatar
DX
Posts: 1780
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 1:00 pm

Post by DX » Sat Jun 23, 2007 6:10 pm

For "difficulty", I use basic and advanced rather than easy and hard. For example, "Highly Advanced" doesn't necessarily mean that a tactic is hard. Likewise, "Very Basic" does not always mean that a tactic is easy.

However, for submissions, I definitely will strip the Tactical Theory terms out and instead describe difficulty and the such within the context of the article. I could rewrite the tactic in a highly polished textbook style, but seeing as I have over a hundred more of these things to go, that may be a waste of time. I know how long it would take to give an article a fully-neutral and fully encyclopedic tone - way too long. :rolleyes:

The success of said tactic really depends on the users on both teams. Last war, one of my guys got shot because of mis-communication. He didn't get out fast enough when we went for the enemy left. It is indeed dangerous when stretched too far. However, there is a natural limit to how far out you can go. At a certain point, the enemy will press your guys and the line will shrink when they shift back. If the enemy is able to flank the formation, then you better go for someone quick. :p
Mess With the Best, Get Soaked Like the Rest!

2004 Red Sox - World Series Champions
2007 Red Sox - World Series Champions!

User avatar
Monsoon
Posts: 832
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2003 2:14 pm

Post by Monsoon » Sat Jun 23, 2007 7:02 pm

That looks like a good rough idea for the format of the articles. But yes, it needs to be slightly easier to read (maybe each article will have a template pattern)
Do not underestimate the power of stupidity in large groups

User avatar
Monsoon
Posts: 832
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2003 2:14 pm

Post by Monsoon » Thu Jun 28, 2007 5:20 pm

Pardon my double post, but I'd like to see more interest in this idea before I go through with it. I already have a busy summer lined up, so I don't want to be wasting my time on something no one is going to use. Does anyone have a simple template that might work for the site that I could see?
Do not underestimate the power of stupidity in large groups

daishii
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 8:20 am

Post by daishii » Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:30 am

In response to DX's Arcticle:

I've edited it once over, I suppose this should qualify as more like a textbook writing style. Hope you don't mind.

Fluid Line *v1.0.1

- Written By: DX/Duxburian
- Edited by daishii

Subject Type: Group level tactics/Team formations

Battlefield Types: Natural, Semi-Natural, Suburban

Battlefield Sizes: All

Amount of cover: Semi-open ground

Game Types: OHK, OHS, OSF

Introduction – What is the Fluid Line?

The Fluid Line is an improvement over other line-based team formations, and like its namesake, its fluidity allows it to switch between various formations. Thus, it is a useful defensive tactic against opponents with greater numbers or firepower. While this tactic is defensive in nature, it can take on an aggressive form if well executed.

This tactic requires speed along with quick responses on the part of the team members in order to function effectively. Lack of either may cause it to fail. Because of this, the Fluid Line has a higher risk attached to its usage, and the players involved must be able to keep their cool even in dangerous situations. However, the greater risks involved is paid off by the reward, as this tactic gives you the option of offense even when defending, and is a way of beating seemingly impossible odds.

Using the Fluid Line

The Fluid Line is used in defence, with the offensive part of it initially hidden. It requires at least two people, and works against opponents equal or greater than your strength, and is not necessary when you outnumber your opponent.

To start, take up a neutral or defensive position in an area with some degree of cover. Overly dense or open areas are to be avoided, as dense cover restricts the mobility of your team, and open ground allows the opponent to push you back with ease. A fort or base is also to be avoided, as the Fluid Line relies on the quick changing of positions.

The following actions are to be taken based on numbers and firepower.

Against an opponent with larger numbers

Take cover and let the enemy fire first. Shoot only when necessary, and tap-pump if you have a low chance of hitting opponents, even in a soakfest. Most opponents will then attempt to flank you with their larger numbers. When this happens, protect the threatened area with a quick change in positions.

For example, if the opponent is moving towards your right flank, the line should shift according to the situation. Should there be cover on the right, and one or two opponents, a single teammate may be able to hold them off. However, if there is less cover, more opponents or both, the line will have to shift to the right.

If that does not work, a simpler alternative when your opponent presses in is to bend the line by moving the flanks forward and slightly out, making sure every teammate is within supporting distance. Opponents advancing in will be hit by the crossfire in the center, thus preventing them from pushing you back. This way, two groups of opponents moving in from the front and either of the flanks can be held off. If a group falls back into the other one, change your position, with the rest of the line shifting accordingly.

There may be a brief stalemate, which can last up to ten minutes, depending on the firepower on both sides, and the aggressiveness of the enemy. They might continue to do flanking maneuvers, in which case, the line formed by your team can keep on shifting to absorb your opponent’s advances and flanking attempts. In the case of a stalemate or having backed up against a wall or out-of-bounds line, you may want to use the Fluid Line's offensive capabilities.

The most effective way to break out from encirclement is a screen and killing rush. Here, split-second communication is critical in informing your teammates of an immediate move without giving the opponent a chance to prepare for it, and the said move should be executed without getting shot. In order to break out, stack up your numbers against your opponent’s flank. On the signal, the entire team has to move towards the specified flank, and concentrate their firepower on it. One teammate is needed to provide covering fire along the line during this movement.

The targeted flank should be taken out in this movement. Either that, or the opponent may be forced to retreat, with both outcomes reducing the opponent’s hold, and gives you the opportunity to regroup. When this happens, the important part is to get your team out fast enough to spread out and face the opponent, this time with the entire battlefield to your back. The opponent will then have to face the Fluid Line again.

However, rushing an opponent’s flank need not be limited to such situations. It is only preferable as the opponent is less likely to react to your move when they are not on the move. If you stay dry and have enough energy, this process can be repeated, systematically wearing down your opponent’s strength one or two people at a time. In a soakfest or OHK, it is possible to match or outnumber them, and in an OHS, it could give enough points for a lead. But if the team does not have enough energy to maintain this process, the Fluid Line can be broken to allow the team to retreat and regroup. If you’re taking losses yet have enough energy, keep going. The odds of victory may fall dramatically if you stand down while at a disadvantage in terms of scores or players.

Against an opponent with equal numbers

With even numbers, the risks involved are lesser, as the shifting of positions need not be as rapid, which reduces the chance of costly errors made by team members, and the rushing of an opponent’s flank is well supported. The bending of the Fluid Line to absorb attacks and swift movements are advantageous, but not fully necessary.

An astute opponent may employ similar tactics, falling back and reforming to absorb your attacks. By mirroring the opponent’s position, you might be able to draw one or two of them further away from the center. When a pArcticular opponent is far enough from his team, stack up firepower against him, using the same speed as changing positions for the Fluid Line.

Countering the Fluid Line

What if the opponent uses this tactic against you? In such situations, there are several counters against the Fluid Line, and it would be beneficial to recognize possible counters in case of the opponent using these counters as well.

When the opponent is outnumbered, mirror their speed, and stack up firepower against a single opponent before they can shift. If the enemy bends their line, do not go for a frontal attack, but simply put the pressure somewhere else. Be ready for the moment when the opponent rushes your lines, especially at the flanks. Should the opponent make a killing rush, match their running speed, and if your team is able to out-run them, it will be possible to mail them from the back. When evenly matched, similar tactics apply. Flanking the opponent will be harder though, unless your team forms a Fluid Line as well.

An opponent with greater numbers is unlikely to use this tactic, because the outnumbered team will go on the defensive. Better options for the outnumbered team would be to withdraw and set up a Fluid Line or ambush, while the opponent is positioned in a regular angled line, waiting.

Now here's the reason why an outnumbering enemy can't use this tactic. If they did, the outnumbered team would simply not attack. They could withdraw and set up their own Fluid Line, or an ambush, much better options. The outnumbering enemy would just stand there with a regular angled line and wait. An angled line can not become a fluid one until fighting begins. (This is the original paragraph)

A note about firepower

The above tactics work on the assumption that both teams are relatively equal in terms of firepower. When there is available cover, an outgunned but agile opponent may be able to absorb the impact of better guns. Range and output will also affect the effectiveness of a Fluid Line.

If outnumbered and/or outgunned, speed and cover are vital in putting this tactic into action. Likewise, the opponent is the one that is outgunned, you may be able to push them back and begin playing on the offense. Many variables come into play here. A pArcticular opponent with a weaker gun will make an excellent target to rush, or a teammate with a powerful gun can keep off more opponents at the same time. The nature of the terrain also changes the shape of your positions, by limiting the amount of cover or ground you have to work with.

-----

For the italicized portion, the point it is driving towards isn't very clear. Could you clarify it? Also, the last sentence above introduces terrain right at the end, under notes for firepower, which is not very relevant. Perhaps it would be better to make the last section something like general notes on the usage of the Fluid Line?

On the whole, the Fluid Line tactic is put forth somewhat coherently, enough to understand, but it's not very "user friendly" as you've mentioned. And some of the points could be elaborated on to give a greater scope to the Arcticle.
Last edited by daishii on Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Clearing off repetition in a sentance

User avatar
isoaker_com
Posts: 458
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 12:00 pm

Post by isoaker_com » Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:27 pm

My 2.617 cents... :p

If you want to build a tactics-based website, that's great! But you have to want to build it and be willing to create a good amount of content for it (unless, of course, DX is willing to write 100+ Arcticles for it, though I'd find that odd for DX to be writing for another site and not using the material at SoakerMedia).

Now, the statement that bothers me is:
I already have a busy summer lined up, so I don't want to be wasting my time on something no one is going to use.

There is no way to predict how many or how few people will actually end up using a pArcticular website. For water-warfare-based websites, I find it really ends up on the shoulders of the site-creators to look for ways to generate interest or just be happy running their little niche of the web even if only a few actually read their pages. You should not be building a website with the desire for "x" number of people to use it; you should be building a website that you enjoy making and that you believe will help others. How many it ends up helping depends on others, but you should have fun in creating it. If it is no fun for you or if it is only fun if it has a lot of visitors, I'd advise against building the site. Sites are only doomed to fail when the webmaster is not having fun building it. The only time I'd advise building a website that isn't fun to build is if you're being paid for it (and being paid a good amount of money, not just pennies :p )

:cool:
:: Leave NO one dry! :: iSoaker.com / iSoaker.net ::

User avatar
Monsoon
Posts: 832
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2003 2:14 pm

Post by Monsoon » Fri Jun 29, 2007 10:15 pm

I didn't mean it to come out that way....I just wanted to gauge whether people here would use it or not. I'm going to make it nonetheless. It just might take longer than this summer to do it :cool: If more people were interested I'd speed it up on purpose. As far as content goes, I'd write my own (obviously) as well as take submissions. I'd set up a separate email and whatnot to take submissions.
Do not underestimate the power of stupidity in large groups

Locked