The Regiment from Kuju, have you played it?

I've heard about it before, there's a thread on it here actually.

Checked out a gameplay video and didn't really stand out to me, maybe it was just the annoying voice acting, if other people have it as well I'll take a look.

I played it aswell but it disappointed me a lot...the AI of the suspects is almost useless and there are just 2 commands that you can give to your officers: Assault (Open&Clear in SWAT game) and Grenade Assault (Open, Bang & Clear in SWAT) where YOU and ONLY YOU can deploy the grenade...and this is not enough for a good tactical shooter especially based on SAS.

You can't choose the equipment for yourself and for the team during the briefing and this is another reason why it can't be considered a real tactical shooter, seemed to me like an "arcade tactical shooter" actually.

Beside these things, you'r right Maven, the training section is well made but unfortunately this isn't enough...at least for me.

Anyway i really liked the mission at the Iranian Embassy, even if it's not realistic at all (too many suspects and they are so useless...i never died even at Simulation difficulty) and i really appreciated the unlockable movies with John McAleese speaking

I would suggest this game ONLY at people who want to have some fun and pass some time, but of course not at a tactical minded player.

The game itself is very enjoyable. The problem is that it was rushed. Konami bragged and bragged about this game, which was in direct competition with the ( then ) upcoming R6:Lockdown and for a while there was a little war of press releases, concerning release dates for each game. In the end, neither game was; imho what either deserved.

A shooter, not a tactical game. By based on tactics they mean based on tiny spurts of information giving but not covering any real room drills what so ever. The only real reinforced point they got across was room and hallway dominance.

Hmm, sounds interesting.

Count me in if my version of TR works online.

http://youtu.be/O8Tl8FIEt0g

http://youtu.be/O8Tl8FIEt0g

Why do you crouch walk and stop in the middle of the doorway?

The vid was to demo the game, not generate an oscar

No it was a serious question. I see you guys do it in RVS too.

wow! it looks like RVS and Swat 4 combined! I definitely going to try that.

The main reason for stalling in the doors of TR is that it offers most cover. In the video above, you see me stalling to take accurate shots, rather than in S4 and Rvs, where you would methodically take the room.
In the Regiment, you do not have the time. I cleared that map in just about 3.5 minutes...I failed. The video was the first map on easy mode. It is genuinely a very hard game to progress in.
Wild...You are correct, it is like S4 and Rvs on acid, it also uses the same engine, therefore it shouldnt be too hard for a reletive expert to export the maps into our beloved games.

I have played it, it's very much a dynamic game. Very fluid. No time to stop. Optiwand? No thanks, that's for deliberate-ville SWAT 4. But I can't compare it to RVS, no way, RVS is very poor in my opinion - I mean at least on The Regiment you can aim down sights. But you're right, it's one of those systems where you have the options. Use the doorjamb as cover, but still I've never understood crouch walking - ever. I've understood stopping in the FF, because sometimes that is an option but I've never seen crouch walking as an option - I find it to be an RVS thing. I've seen some guys use it in ARMA and laughed my jocks off; they'd be killed instantly in PVP.

Welp, looks like my version of TR doesn't support Internet MP, and I don't blame it.

Oddly enough, LAN looks functional. I wonder if Hamachi would work.

I think hamachi does work

Ryan, the reason why we crouch and walk in the other games is because it allows the man behind you to cover you. If you get rushed by tangos and you are crouched, you get 2 guns on 1 target, without the risk of being shot in the back of the head by an over-eager team-mate

Yeah I know what a high/low is, still never understood in entry form is what I'm stating.

So how exactly do you do slow/stealth entries in games, Rey?

It's Rye. Well, as stated by Wiz that going crouched isn't for stealth - it's for accuracy in this case. Because as with RVS and other games with very poor "accuracy scripting" they model it unrealistically. There are no ballistics, there's only a dispersion pattern for distance and weapon. For example you could be one meter away and point the muzzle line directly at them, even if your weapon was zeroed to a short range and you have no chance of missing, the game would apply "dispersion" values to it, which means you could miss. And not just miss by going over or under but to the left or right! It makes it virtually impossible to apply skill or instinctive shooting to a game. You can die because you engaged but dispersion values said "Nah, you miss". Now I don't think this is the case for TR, from what I can remember - correct me if I'm wrong. Games with "Aim Down Sights" tend to limit the dispersion, unless they are games like Call of Duty which still have hit markers and dispersion settings.

SWAT 4 has this, which is exactly why I play SSF mod with it because it limits those dispersion values. You can take one step forward in SWAT 4 vanilla and the dispersion will go from 3 inches to 10000000000 inches. You'd miss the side of a barn.

With those who I play with, which is on ARMA, we stick to select entries which work in that game but are also used in reality (which limits them) - most are for convenience. For example, you're not always going to stack, you're not always going to have a fireteam going with you. Sometimes it's just going to be a buddy team; especially for outhouses. So a simple buttonhook will do. Stealth in this setting does not mean anything different in terms of entry, but in terms of probably speed but also discipline. In ARMA you can press "W" then stop, stop and go; this creates no "sound file" so you literally can't be heard which works very well in TVT/PVP. This isn't real-life so a lot of information does not transfer, and it changes for games due to the way AI and the engine works.

You take your time up until a breaching point, target room or compromise. Once it's time to get in the room quick, you do it. In ARMA you don't crouch to move stealthily nor when entering a room. You want people in that room. You don't want point to crouch, get clipped in the face - then everyone try get in. You want guys in that room able to put up a fight, if you're pushed out or break contact then you fight from the doorway, find another MOE or use assets like grenades.

I suppose in TR, RVS, S4 there may be an (however artificial) footstep sound reduction if you crouch, but not in ARMA. Infact in COD there is no sound file for footsteps when you crouch. So, in COD it gives you the advantages of 60% of mobility in return for halving your overall target profile and being silent in all but MW3. I think this may have been where the misconception of crouching-100% silent was born.

To me crab-walking everywhere does not imply stealth. If you've ever wore a combat rig in real life, it's not stealthy to crouch walk anywhere, especially with gravel under you - plus the weight of your kit! You wouldn't do it. It would be harder to maneuver the weapon whilst remaining crouched. In game to me it is a great way to lower your ability to see over objects as seen in the video (with the desk and computer), it's slower than being upright, it blocks others coming into the room if you are working in a fireteam or at least slow them coming into the room, it's called the fatal funnel for a reason - and it will allow you to get your head blown off; forget center mass, put the muzzle line notched down and go for glory. I have found it to only be used by those who play RVS/S4/COD.

Sorry about the name, was a typo

The point of crouching is not to reduce noise. It's like Wiz said to allow the #2 to cover. If I'm not mistaken that is also done in real-life by close contact and a slightly lower body position of the pointman. Both are (usually) missing in computer games, so we (at least I) consider crouching as most realistic alternative.

To get out of the fatal funnel and inside the room fast is in my eyes a dynamic movement. You need speed to be successful, thus you'll create noise at least for a short time breaking a stealth approach.

So if it's a cover drill, it tends to be made from a static location. A mobile version of it would be slow, as expected, unless it's specific to that area like a rolling-T for hallways (which would be a modified method). High/low is done, yeah but never have I seen or heard of someone crouch walking in a room and never have I seen it in entry form unless done with a ballistic shield or in places like Ramadi where internal defenses were set-up at generally eye/chest level so some of the Marines used to crouch and peek it then move in closer to the ground. I don't believe it to be "realistic" therefore to crouch walk into a room, no. I don't believe it to be "tactical" to crouch walk into a room.

There's multiple ways of doing a high low - but they are always from a static position in what I have seen. The "true" high low taught by the Israelis is done from the doorway and leads onto their entry drill the Israeli Limited Entry, the traditional high low taught by the Americans is seen in a number of settings - T-junctions, external building corners and so on but very limited when entering because of the flaws it generates in comparison to other entries.

You create noise while crouching, but with those negatives of slow speed, limited vision and blocking. If you're saying it's a plus to have one man over the top then sure. But that would only work for a room with limited corners, wouldn't it? A corner-fed only probably otherwise you potentially have two people with their backs to a suspect. So I don't agree with it, splitting operators would be a more valuable entry, because you operators - one over the top - takes the same muzzle line to take them out of action.

So what's the problem with walking in? You still create noise, in some games for WHATEVER illogical reason they might say you create "more noise" but it's still a pro over crab walking. You may call it a change from stealth to dynamic but it's not if you're not compromised, or are you going to crab walk the whole building? A change in speed does not mean stealth is lost, if that speed is to get through funneled terrain and into a target room, then that should be done. If you still want to crouch walk, I'm not stopping you but I think it's silly seeing it done where not needed.

Hmm, I'm pretty low on real-life sources in this issue but let me try it nevertheless.

Look this vid at exactly 0:23: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFDDhNGUP94#t=23s

The 2 operators standing close to each other pointing 2 guns at the same corner. Yes, they are both standing. And it's really easy to do this in real-life because you have physical contact with your buddy.
In games however you don't have this contact. All it takes is 1 wrong step or only the smallest lag, and your gun muzzel will clip into the head or back of your pointman (even if your barrel is so long that the muzzel should actually be in front of your pointmans body...). We (at least I) can't use the real-life technique in games because of the missing body contact, it results in friendly fire far too often. The alternative closest to real-life formation is in my eyes a crouching pointman.

To enter a room this way is basically just an extention of this idea. And this guy (whoever he is...) suggests it as real-life tactic: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yci6UwpYDoE#t=3m10s
Again: we are just using it when we move stealth, i.e. we move slow and carefully looking for target indicators trying to stay unnoticed. In dynamic actions (mostly with a flash or door charge) the 2 operators split fast on entry, each one taking responsibility for one side. Btw even on a stealth approach the operators might split up after they have crossed the fatal funnel.

PS: pls note that I'm talking about AST tactics here. From my experience SAS is doing stuff pretty similar, but not 100% equal in all aspects.
PPS: I'm curious when a moderator will stop this off-topic discussion here...

Well in ARMA movement is depicted by FPS so you can't make contact most of the time and hence why stacking leads to a too large gap of dispersion between operators entering. If weapon collisions were modified, maybe they would allow for it but who knows. You can use buddy support - so it could be possible in future editions. It could probably be possible in SWAT 4 with some serious scripting. That first video is a high/low - they're not pointing their guns into a corner though, they're outside a building, you don't tend to do that from the doorway into a corner.

Notice later in the video their entries. Buttonhook and straight (modified) entries. That is room clearance.

Those guys on the second video virtually using cross-cover (slightly modified) to enter and clear both hard corners. Because it's a center fed room. Obviously having one crouched clears the others muzzle line but usually in a cross-cover they clear as much of their partners AOR before turning in and clearing their corners moving into the room.

Yeah I know what a high/low is, still never understood in entry form is what I'm stating.

If you get rushed by tangos and you are crouched, you get 2 guns on 1 target, without the risk of being shot in the back of the head by an over-eager team-mate

Seems pretty easy to understand, I think. Especially when doing a stealth entry (with gas) or dry entry, with tangos inside the room. 2 guns are better than 1 (without the risk of being shot in the back of the head by the coverman), and the door can be used for cover by point (in swat, all the doors open inwards). Then, once the fatal funnel is cleared, normal room clearing procedure happens.

Generally we have point choose to go one way, then cover goes the opposite direction, etc.

You're saying I don't understand a simple concept? Mate I'm not dumb. I understand that two guns in an arc of fire is better than one but I also understand that two guys in the enemies arc of fire is worse than one. Triangulation of fire at the end of a movement is the purpose to having multiple guns on threat, as are immediate threat drills. As stated, cons come with pros - and there are a tonne of cons around it.

So once you've cleared the fatal funnel - how do you clear the rest of the room?

Notice later in the video their entries. Buttonhook and straight (modified) entries. That is room clearance.

Sure. The guys go in and try to clear/dominate the room as fast as possible -> that's dynamic in my eyes. We call this a dry dynamic entry (i.e. without tacaids). If you have any tangos inside the room, you'll have a fire fight for sure. ( And actually if you have barricaded tangos or hostages you have a really hard entry, but that's not the point.)
On the opposite we use stealth entires to slowly check the room. We try to spot tangos or particular dangerous situations before we commit ourself to the room. If we spot anything bad, we usually switch to dynamic, deploy tacaids and go on loud and proud. If the room looks clear, we try to stay unnoticed getting closer to the hostages or other objectives.
Well, probably not really a useful approach in a military scenario when your only objective is to clear the building.

And if you did those exact entries at a slower pace - would that be stealth to you?

So you modify for stealth around slower approach, clearing from the outside, clearing muzzle of objects and any compromise (i.e. banging it off a wall). That's exactly what we do. But on target rooms or known enemy locations we don't continue to be slow and methodical unless we have a specific plan to; which is rare come nighe existent because in most cases you cannot penetrate the room without compromise (at least commonly) so you get to a transition point where you move into dynamic nature.

And yeah I'm sure there is an LE/MIL line that is often crossed - either an advantage to one or a disadvantage to the other.

The difference here is we don't crouch while moving in, we avoid it. The talk about being shot in the back of the head isn't going to happen in a center-fed room because you don't both go in the same direction. In a corner-fed, you don't have to stick to the same wall still, it's a non-existent issue in my opinion unless someone does not operate by simple concepts such as sticking to the strong wall(s).

Anyways, it's been good to get some discussion. It's been good to have people talk about what they do, how and why.

And if you did those exact entries at a slower pace - would that be stealth to you?

How should that look like? You need 2 operators to cross the fatal funnel fast and synchronized to clear both hard corners asap.

So you modify for stealth around slower approach...

Agree 100%. If we know that there are tangos (even if it's just very likely) then we switch to dynamic movements to overwhelm hostile contacts.

The difference here is we don't crouch while moving in...

Pretty good points. I guess the crouching makes only sense when you can use the door as shield: point moves in slowly to check just one hard corner using the door as cover/concealment, meanwhile #2 can provide cover for 12 oc.

Anyways, it's been good to get some discussion. It's been good to have people talk about what they do, how and why.

Yep, I like it too

You see if it's stealth, you're not compromised so you can adjust pace. Adjusting pace may be a preparation for the upcoming contact. So it's a similar concept. Aslong as what you're doing doesn't lead to compromise then that's what you do. You can adopt positions, speeds to limit compromise but remain at a constant rate. Same goes with accuracy if that's your worry - it's as simple as saying you can revert to other solutions.

No crouching. No high/low. Identify the door placement, identify the type of room. Open door, walk in (adjust pace if compromised) and clear your hard corners. That may mean you buttonhook or straight (most commonly used), it's up to you dependent on a number of situational factors. That's how we do a simple stealth entry anyway, we find it better for compromise or contact. 1. You're not blocking anyone so others can get in the room. 2. You know if you die as pointman in the fatal funnel, then second man over the top of you will likely die - then the rest of the team cannot enter because it's a locked down red zone. There are many other cons, some I've gone over but the main philosophy orientates around these two.

We find that if you're not blocking then you can get four men potentially in a room, triangulated fire before you engage - or you can get one-to-two in a room, splitting away from each other, begin to engage which allows more into the room. It also means whoever is surprised in the room will have multiple split targets to engage, and as you know with target transitions it's virtually impossible to be faster than 2-4 men aiming a muzzle at your face.

I mean I'm not saying don't crouch, I'm saying shouldn't you limit it to situation? It's quite metagaming for 70% of the situations. Crouching is used in a number of methods; most of which though have second man crouching from what I see rather than one man, because it's a different movement. Would be harder to explain and derail the topic so I'll leave it at that. #1 pet hate for me: People crouching around EVERYWHERE or in places where it's like "DUDE I'M TRYING TO GET IN THE ROOM" - bang he's dead, great!!!