What if there is no public record available? What if the SAS units chute-in like ninjas to hook on a passing-by skyliner, drop some terrorists down and save the day? Or chute in right in middle of a village filled with terrorists and civilians and do their thing swiftly and silently? never say never
The SAS were named so forth, to confuse the Germans in 1944. The plan was always to go in on the ground. But the danger was the artillery; by finding out that an 'air service' was coming; those gunners were looking at the sky...not on the ground, where those vehicles destroyed so much.
That's a typical turtle response. "If you don't like it, go somewhere else". When all I said was, for the ---- thousandth time is "This is what you can change to actually make it tactical and not seem like a bunch of headless chickens with no clue". I can take from that, that you did NOT read what I put and obviously put a lot of emotion into stating what you THINK I put.
It's not being "brave" Wiz to join a clan. I've already submitted an application and started my phases but I stopped. Because I wasn't getting taught anything productive or that I actually see used in game and from the sessions I had it seemed like a disorganized atmosphere with no good channels of communications for "outsiders". It proves your point by your closed minded and egotistical approach to a common statement and the fact that you can improve but would just rather decide to listen to yourselves. You "ain't that bad", right, from the members I met they're OK, but this isn't the way to go about clan-improvement or at least listening to another persons opinions.
So, again, no I haven't got a problem with your clan. You obviously think that having a problem with the way people do things is a problem with a whole clan, which therefore means you aren't going to listen to any kind of constructive criticism no matter what I discuss, even if it does happen and can be worked on. Some ARMA clans have been going for quite a number of years, does that make them good? Infact opposite. USEC for example do not have their tactics squared away yet have been active for a long, long time. TIME HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS CONVERSATION.
And also having a good time does not correspond to observing and commenting on untactical gameplay to a standard of which you're not used to and you wanted some spotlight on. Of course I've had a good time, and met some good blokes but I'm sharing some thoughts on improvement for those regulars, mainly the late night US Gamers because that's what they are whenever I've been on. If you wrote the SOP's, then how do you know and assess whether they are being used and to what level of productivity and quality they are being used? I can teach blokes the simple buttonhook on a doorway and throw in some SOP's, right? But then does that mean they'll do that to the quality of training again and again... Not always. And if one has a misconception or wrong-doing, it'll tumble.
So, to take a productive statement as an attack obviously shows the lack of patience and understanding here. And to then try one-up with your statements is just stupidity at its finest but that's what someone gets when they don't read but instead jump into a conversation with all mouth.
If you're going to reply to this, reply after reading all my posts. SAS can improve by ways of actual planning, of conducting actual entries, of using controlled formations, kits, assigning TL's and 2IC's. Tactical isn't walking in a room, shoot a few tango's, ego stroke, keep going. Tactics are maneuver, maneuver based off knowledge, experience, the art and science of warfare.
Foul language will not be tolerated, thanks. --SAS_West
All that "training" on the field doesn't teach you modesty, eh Ryan?
It's easy to get inflamed during an argument, it's worse to patronize people and act as Mr. Know-It-All, that basically throws all of your valid points down the drain.
So, step it down guys, and speak level-headedly and non-superciliously. It's more productive and heads won't have to roll down.
Oh yeah millen, then look one page back at the comments I've received. I'm trying to be productive, you can't be modest or humble to a brick wall of opinion. You can't break down ego. I'm not insulting people, I'm insulting the feedback I've received for some simple gameplay points. I don't respect being insulted, millen.
So nice of you just to single out me. I'm not a Mr Know it All and I don't know where I've stated anything of the such: I've just stated where you could improve if you wanted to improve, everyone has their perception and that is mine. If they want some productive feedback then they can read my posts and stop replying about such egotistical and useless commentary that does not give feedback to those exact points I made but more is defensive towards their whole clan as if it was an attack, then they make personal attacks and try to one-up so to be honest I do not care for it because they do not care to read a whole page of information. It's not my problem anymore.
I think people can understand when I say that I didn't single you out, you did so yourself.
Both of the involved parties have faults in here (misinformation and whatnot), don't get me wrong. So the best course of action would be to leave it at that and wait until the SAS Clan decides on making a thread about the SOP for ARMA (if they haven't done so already), then you can try again at suggesting improvements. Either that, or try clarifying things in a serene, neutral manner. Using provocative language is not going to help what you have written up until now.
This applies to both parties: don't make things worse, please.
Whoever said ARMA SOP's didn't read my posts which only talked of occasions when SAS played untactically, one of which was in ARMA. I'm talking RVS too. No plan, no assignments, no roles, etc. It's all just dynamic but not in a good way. The only people I've played with who have discussed such things is Random and Ez and they try put it on another level but it's not always tactical and it skips a whole lot of things that would be sweet to both see and hear done in the SAS.
I'm not the only one with the same thought process, as discussed in the beginning of this thread. It's just obvious that the others were by some 12 year old kids with no clue or some people who just did things differently. I'm not saying "don't do that type of stack, micromanage", I'm saying "You're missing the basic this, fill it in and give it a go, love to see it and you might like it too".
But if you want to make ARMA SOP then great. I've played the game for 4 years and been apart of clans and communities nearly all that time, I'd love to help on that.
So, to take a productive statement as an attack obviously shows the lack of patience and understanding here.
Yea, either that or it shows the lack of necessary respect in the statement. In my opinion a visitor should pay a lot of attention to his words, especially when offering criticism.
I'm talking RVS too. No plan, no assignments, no roles, etc. It's all just dynamic but not in a good way. The only people I've played with who have discussed such things is Random and Ez
Well, I have seen a lot more SAS members making plans, pretty good plans infact.
I agree that RvS is sometimes played without planning on SAS servers, even if 1 or 2 SAS members are present. But sometimes you are simply not up for developing and explaining a plan although you are member of a clan, just want to play (at least that's the way I feel sometimes). Furthermore not all SAS members have admin permissions, which makes it hard to handle rambos.
If you join the server (btw: a free, public server) during such rounds, you have 3 options:
a) take it and have fun
b) leave the server (no one forces you to play there, and you pay nothing for it neither you contribute in any other way to the clan, do you?)
c) develop and explain a plan yourself, I'm pretty sure every SAS member around will follow it with pleasure
[d) ask an SAS member to make a plan, usually they do if they see that tactical minded players are around]
From my personal experince a lot of SAS members don't like to discuss tactics. I have a different attitude about this issue, simply because I love to discuss tactics.
But that's their call. The clan offers a great game experience for tactical minded players, they even offer access to protected servers for known players. So if they don't want to waste time by explaining and discussing their tactics over and over again, that's fine to me.
Mb it would be a good idea to open the tactics section in the forum for friends (with TG/TS access), at least with reading permission so we can learn a bit more. (And this, my friend, is a productive and respectful statement in my eyes ).
I'm all for improving. I try to use my experiences to play better each time. I'm always teaching people basic tactics and how to think for themselves how best to apply those teachings to the next mission.
If there is one thing to start with that you think we don't do, identify that one thing and let us know what you believe we do improperly. Then we can discuss it in detail.
We always listen to the opinions of others, but you have to understand that most of what you would have to say has already been discussed at some point over the past 12+ years.
Well, that's up to the recipient on how they took it on. If the sender has stated it was with respect and as a productive outlook rather than past comments they speak of with no productive outlook and a rather subjective one then so be it. But it's honestly for a productive outlook. I can tell by many of the recipient's feedback that they didn't read it in the same light and took it as a threat, which if you knew me you'd know was exactly the opposite.
But then again forums are for passive-aggressive talk. I'd prefer to chat about it on TS.
I talk on the AST forums too, Raptor. I have a chat with your guys about tactics, it's very open minded and it's like "Nah we prefer this", "Cool have you ever tried this?". "That's not 100%, you're about 80% the way you do that, to bump it up you do this". Try, test, work or not is up to the individuals of the clan. But that's a different kettle of fish.
Yes I have TG/TS access, I've been to their training grounds servers, so on. Maybe it's the late night gamers who just want to chill out but from my point of view there's things that could be made tactical, which would stop others saying it wasn't because you could explain it. I.e. adequate education and explanation, but again that leads to tactical discussion which you state they don't like to do. So all that's really left is people criticizing, which is a shame because that's not promoting yourself in a very good light.
Random--
From when I have played. No entries have been mentioned. No proper formations or movement plans. No roles assigned. No TL's or 2IC's assigned. That simple stuff I thought you guys would do.
For instance, have you guys ever said... "For this room, we'll use the strong wall and wall flood it".. Then you wall flood the room, the right tactic for the right room and situation. Instead of walking in and just shooting tangos.
im sry if it looks like i try to insult u ryan.
it wasnt my plan to blame u!
i spended alot hours to train myself and make myself better with our paperwork in the left hand and the mouse in my right hand.
maybe u can understand me that im also feeling insulted when u say that we dont play tactical.i know the problem when u join the server and u wants to play it serious and some guys only wants have fun(SAS or non SAS)
ok then its bad luck for me this day.
but u cant say we play all the time that way only because there wasnt the right ppl on the server or theyr just wants to play without getting involved in teamwork. maybe u had not the right ppl on the server mate ? and i think it is normal that we go offence when u say it is ALL the time not tactical
Nah mate I say that sometimes when I play it doesn't seem that tactical, all perception by all costs. No drama's. I'll try get on at a crazy Australian time zone for the right people then.
From when I have played. No entries have been mentioned. No proper formations or movement plans. No roles assigned. No TL's or 2IC's assigned. That simple stuff I thought you guys would do.
For instance, have you guys ever said... "For this room, we'll use the strong wall and wall flood it".. Then you wall flood the room, the right tactic for the right room and situation. Instead of walking in and just shooting tangos.
Ryan, are you talking about Swat 4 TSS here ?
I don't know man, but I give proper formations, assign roles and also make movement plans, before a round.
When I'm a leader, we play tactical and in SAS style.
I don't see a problem here.
You're misunderstanding this one. In fact, you haven't played with us ( specially me ) Swat 4 TSS in the past months.
And talking about tactics on room entries. Isn't that a memory play ? We play as realistic as possible, means, we try to play it as the first time.
Yes, in the past, I did play by memory, but now, I'm reducing it to minimum.
—
SAS_Magnum Lance Corporal SAS 22nd Elite Virtual Regiment.
I dont know there Ryan, I think there are quite a few that make alot of plans, You ought to catch Nick while he is on, He is an Awsome planner Evertime he gets on and that just one, Plus when We are on we get some Mighty fine stuff goin, We do make alot of Plans. I am only on RVS by the way.
..."For this room, we'll use the strong wall and wall flood it".. Then you wall flood the room, the right tactic for the right room and situation. Instead of walking in and just shooting tangos.
What's the difference? In my view the end-result counts --> Mission accomplished.
We have entry drills, PoD's, roomclearing SOP's, formation, detailed loadouts and more...
...and we use them regular - it's second nature.
When you say "walking in and just shooting tangos" it's very simple spoken and it does not match our gamestyle. I see you tried to compare something, but before we make a drama at every door, "we just walk in and shoot tangos". It's up to you to call it this way - I can live with this very well. Comparisons are not always easy...
On the other hand, we don't need to announce another entry method at each door, we play OUR GAME according OUR STYLE and SOP's, we have lots of fun and it works
Come to SWAT and convince yourself If I should ever spot chickenrun, lonewolfing, teamplay disturbing idiots, I'm gonna release the Power of the DARKSIDE.
Tactical gameplay, in my opinion is pretty much like Magnum put it playing with smart tactics (Shoting everything that moves is a tactic but not a smart one :D). All clans have theirs tactics, somes are not so diferent from other but we all have something diferent, even in SAS we have diferent type of tactics depending on the EL, the number of players and lots of other aspects. Thats why we cannot say "this is not tactical", it might not be your tactical gameplay but if it works and the plan is good then its tactical gameplay and thats what we do on SAS!
So in my opinion tactical gameplay is no more then a smart plan, experience and individual skill and team work, tactical gameplay is this in my opinion, thats why it can change from clan to clan, from player to player.
But some people do not realise that, still the ones who realise it can easily enjoy any type of tactical gameplay, those are the players who can bring Swat RvS "to the next level".
You might call it a wall flood, we just call it clearing that particular room the right way. Either way, it's the same. In our SOPs and training classes we cover and execute button hooks, criss-cross, wall floods, doors near room corners, doors in middle of the wall, strong side and weak side stacks, covert and overt movement, angular search, slicing the pie, failure drill, reload drills, hostage exfil, protecting the wounded man, covering drills, rubberbanding, leapfrogging, peels, echelons, fire and move, various room entry and clearing techniques with and without explosive breaching, flash, gas, frag and clear, coordinated assaults on go codes, proper generic placement of tacaids, stairwells, hallways, T intersections, 4 way intersections, etc and so on and so forth I can go on all day...
If you have a print of a room, there is nothing wrong with deciding how you will attack the room ahead of time, but you will most likely lose half the noobs in your element before you get to that room, so it makes those types of plans a waste of time. :oops:
Big differences exist between how we play in mixed company with non-SAS in the server and how we play when it's just us. We tend to be far more complex when it's just SAS.
For the record, and a history lesson
SAS were never, and still are not an airborne regiment 
Lt_Col WIZ, VC, MiD (Ret)
What if there is no public record available? What if the SAS units chute-in like ninjas to hook on a passing-by skyliner, drop some terrorists down and save the day? Or chute in right in middle of a village filled with terrorists and civilians and do their thing swiftly and silently? never say never
Speed, Precision, Experience, Endurance. General System Tweak Guide
The SAS were named so forth, to confuse the Germans in 1944. The plan was always to go in on the ground. But the danger was the artillery; by finding out that an 'air service' was coming; those gunners were looking at the sky...not on the ground, where those vehicles destroyed so much.
Lt_Col WIZ, VC, MiD (Ret)
Haha! That's class, so basically the unit's name was simply given so it could be an elaborate ruse? Brilliant.
That's a typical turtle response. "If you don't like it, go somewhere else". When all I said was, for the ---- thousandth time is "This is what you can change to actually make it tactical and not seem like a bunch of headless chickens with no clue". I can take from that, that you did NOT read what I put and obviously put a lot of emotion into stating what you THINK I put.
It's not being "brave" Wiz to join a clan. I've already submitted an application and started my phases but I stopped. Because I wasn't getting taught anything productive or that I actually see used in game and from the sessions I had it seemed like a disorganized atmosphere with no good channels of communications for "outsiders". It proves your point by your closed minded and egotistical approach to a common statement and the fact that you can improve but would just rather decide to listen to yourselves. You "ain't that bad", right, from the members I met they're OK, but this isn't the way to go about clan-improvement or at least listening to another persons opinions.
So, again, no I haven't got a problem with your clan. You obviously think that having a problem with the way people do things is a problem with a whole clan, which therefore means you aren't going to listen to any kind of constructive criticism no matter what I discuss, even if it does happen and can be worked on. Some ARMA clans have been going for quite a number of years, does that make them good? Infact opposite. USEC for example do not have their tactics squared away yet have been active for a long, long time. TIME HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS CONVERSATION.
And also having a good time does not correspond to observing and commenting on untactical gameplay to a standard of which you're not used to and you wanted some spotlight on. Of course I've had a good time, and met some good blokes but I'm sharing some thoughts on improvement for those regulars, mainly the late night US Gamers because that's what they are whenever I've been on. If you wrote the SOP's, then how do you know and assess whether they are being used and to what level of productivity and quality they are being used? I can teach blokes the simple buttonhook on a doorway and throw in some SOP's, right? But then does that mean they'll do that to the quality of training again and again... Not always. And if one has a misconception or wrong-doing, it'll tumble.
So, to take a productive statement as an attack obviously shows the lack of patience and understanding here. And to then try one-up with your statements is just stupidity at its finest but that's what someone gets when they don't read but instead jump into a conversation with all mouth.
If you're going to reply to this, reply after reading all my posts. SAS can improve by ways of actual planning, of conducting actual entries, of using controlled formations, kits, assigning TL's and 2IC's. Tactical isn't walking in a room, shoot a few tango's, ego stroke, keep going. Tactics are maneuver, maneuver based off knowledge, experience, the art and science of warfare.
Foul language will not be tolerated, thanks. --SAS_West
My idea of CQB is running in with a sword.
All that "training" on the field doesn't teach you modesty, eh Ryan?
It's easy to get inflamed during an argument, it's worse to patronize people and act as Mr. Know-It-All, that basically throws all of your valid points down the drain.
So, step it down guys, and speak level-headedly and non-superciliously. It's more productive and heads won't have to roll down.
Oh yeah millen, then look one page back at the comments I've received. I'm trying to be productive, you can't be modest or humble to a brick wall of opinion. You can't break down ego. I'm not insulting people, I'm insulting the feedback I've received for some simple gameplay points. I don't respect being insulted, millen.
So nice of you just to single out me. I'm not a Mr Know it All and I don't know where I've stated anything of the such: I've just stated where you could improve if you wanted to improve, everyone has their perception and that is mine. If they want some productive feedback then they can read my posts and stop replying about such egotistical and useless commentary that does not give feedback to those exact points I made but more is defensive towards their whole clan as if it was an attack, then they make personal attacks and try to one-up so to be honest I do not care for it because they do not care to read a whole page of information. It's not my problem anymore.
My idea of CQB is running in with a sword.
I think people can understand when I say that I didn't single you out, you did so yourself.
Both of the involved parties have faults in here (misinformation and whatnot), don't get me wrong. So the best course of action would be to leave it at that and wait until the SAS Clan decides on making a thread about the SOP for ARMA (if they haven't done so already), then you can try again at suggesting improvements. Either that, or try clarifying things in a serene, neutral manner. Using provocative language is not going to help what you have written up until now.
This applies to both parties: don't make things worse, please.
Whoever said ARMA SOP's didn't read my posts which only talked of occasions when SAS played untactically, one of which was in ARMA. I'm talking RVS too. No plan, no assignments, no roles, etc. It's all just dynamic but not in a good way. The only people I've played with who have discussed such things is Random and Ez and they try put it on another level but it's not always tactical and it skips a whole lot of things that would be sweet to both see and hear done in the SAS.
I'm not the only one with the same thought process, as discussed in the beginning of this thread. It's just obvious that the others were by some 12 year old kids with no clue or some people who just did things differently. I'm not saying "don't do that type of stack, micromanage", I'm saying "You're missing the basic this, fill it in and give it a go, love to see it and you might like it too".
But if you want to make ARMA SOP then great. I've played the game for 4 years and been apart of clans and communities nearly all that time, I'd love to help on that.
My idea of CQB is running in with a sword.
Yea, either that or it shows the lack of necessary respect in the statement. In my opinion a visitor should pay a lot of attention to his words, especially when offering criticism.
Well, I have seen a lot more SAS members making plans, pretty good plans infact.
I agree that RvS is sometimes played without planning on SAS servers, even if 1 or 2 SAS members are present. But sometimes you are simply not up for developing and explaining a plan although you are member of a clan, just want to play (at least that's the way I feel sometimes). Furthermore not all SAS members have admin permissions, which makes it hard to handle rambos.
If you join the server (btw: a free, public server) during such rounds, you have 3 options:
a) take it and have fun
b) leave the server (no one forces you to play there, and you pay nothing for it neither you contribute in any other way to the clan, do you?)
c) develop and explain a plan yourself, I'm pretty sure every SAS member around will follow it with pleasure
[d) ask an SAS member to make a plan, usually they do if they see that tactical minded players are around]
From my personal experince a lot of SAS members don't like to discuss tactics. I have a different attitude about this issue, simply because I love to discuss tactics.
).
But that's their call. The clan offers a great game experience for tactical minded players, they even offer access to protected servers for known players. So if they don't want to waste time by explaining and discussing their tactics over and over again, that's fine to me.
Mb it would be a good idea to open the tactics section in the forum for friends (with TG/TS access), at least with reading permission so we can learn a bit more. (And this, my friend, is a productive and respectful statement in my eyes
I'm all for improving. I try to use my experiences to play better each time. I'm always teaching people basic tactics and how to think for themselves how best to apply those teachings to the next mission.
If there is one thing to start with that you think we don't do, identify that one thing and let us know what you believe we do improperly. Then we can discuss it in detail.
We always listen to the opinions of others, but you have to understand that most of what you would have to say has already been discussed at some point over the past 12+ years.
I await your comment. Thanks.
SAS_Vet_Random
Lt. Col (Retired)
22nd [SAS] Elite Virtual Regiment
Well, that's up to the recipient on how they took it on. If the sender has stated it was with respect and as a productive outlook rather than past comments they speak of with no productive outlook and a rather subjective one then so be it. But it's honestly for a productive outlook. I can tell by many of the recipient's feedback that they didn't read it in the same light and took it as a threat, which if you knew me you'd know was exactly the opposite.
But then again forums are for passive-aggressive talk. I'd prefer to chat about it on TS.
I talk on the AST forums too, Raptor. I have a chat with your guys about tactics, it's very open minded and it's like "Nah we prefer this", "Cool have you ever tried this?". "That's not 100%, you're about 80% the way you do that, to bump it up you do this". Try, test, work or not is up to the individuals of the clan. But that's a different kettle of fish.
Yes I have TG/TS access, I've been to their training grounds servers, so on. Maybe it's the late night gamers who just want to chill out but from my point of view there's things that could be made tactical, which would stop others saying it wasn't because you could explain it. I.e. adequate education and explanation, but again that leads to tactical discussion which you state they don't like to do. So all that's really left is people criticizing, which is a shame because that's not promoting yourself in a very good light.
Random--
From when I have played. No entries have been mentioned. No proper formations or movement plans. No roles assigned. No TL's or 2IC's assigned. That simple stuff I thought you guys would do.
For instance, have you guys ever said... "For this room, we'll use the strong wall and wall flood it".. Then you wall flood the room, the right tactic for the right room and situation. Instead of walking in and just shooting tangos.
My idea of CQB is running in with a sword.
im sry if it looks like i try to insult u ryan.
it wasnt my plan to blame u!
i spended alot hours to train myself and make myself better with our paperwork in the left hand and the mouse in my right hand.
maybe u can understand me that im also feeling insulted when u say that we dont play tactical.i know the problem when u join the server and u wants to play it serious and some guys only wants have fun(SAS or non SAS)
ok then its bad luck for me this day.
but u cant say we play all the time that way only because there wasnt the right ppl on the server or theyr just wants to play without getting involved in teamwork. maybe u had not the right ppl on the server mate ? and i think it is normal that we go offence when u say it is ALL the time not tactical
Nah mate I say that sometimes when I play it doesn't seem that tactical, all perception by all costs. No drama's. I'll try get on at a crazy Australian time zone for the right people then.
My idea of CQB is running in with a sword.
Ryan, are you talking about Swat 4 TSS here ?
I don't know man, but I give proper formations, assign roles and also make movement plans, before a round.
When I'm a leader, we play tactical and in SAS style.
I don't see a problem here.
You're misunderstanding this one. In fact, you haven't played with us ( specially me ) Swat 4 TSS in the past months.
And talking about tactics on room entries. Isn't that a memory play ? We play as realistic as possible, means, we try to play it as the first time.
Yes, in the past, I did play by memory, but now, I'm reducing it to minimum.
SAS_Magnum Lance Corporal SAS 22nd Elite Virtual Regiment.
Like you say I've never played with you. I'm talking RVS. You sound like the dude I should be playing with.
My idea of CQB is running in with a sword.
I dont know there Ryan, I think there are quite a few that make alot of plans, You ought to catch Nick while he is on, He is an Awsome planner Evertime he gets on and that just one, Plus when We are on we get some Mighty fine stuff goin, We do make alot of Plans. I am only on RVS by the way.
I'll make sure I drop-by.
My idea of CQB is running in with a sword.
What's the difference? In my view the end-result counts --> Mission accomplished.
We have entry drills, PoD's, roomclearing SOP's, formation, detailed loadouts and more...
...and we use them regular - it's second nature.
When you say "walking in and just shooting tangos" it's very simple spoken and it does not match our gamestyle. I see you tried to compare something, but before we make a drama at every door, "we just walk in and shoot tangos". It's up to you to call it this way - I can live with this very well.
Comparisons are not always easy... 
On the other hand, we don't need to announce another entry method at each door, we play OUR GAME according OUR STYLE and SOP's, we have lots of fun and it works
Come to SWAT and convince yourself
If I should ever spot chickenrun, lonewolfing, teamplay disturbing idiots, I'm gonna release the Power of the DARKSIDE. 
"What's the plan?
Track'em, find'em, kill'em!"
Tactical gameplay, in my opinion is pretty much like Magnum put it playing with smart tactics (Shoting everything that moves is a tactic but not a smart one :D). All clans have theirs tactics, somes are not so diferent from other but we all have something diferent, even in SAS we have diferent type of tactics depending on the EL, the number of players and lots of other aspects. Thats why we cannot say "this is not tactical", it might not be your tactical gameplay but if it works and the plan is good then its tactical gameplay and thats what we do on SAS!
So in my opinion tactical gameplay is no more then a smart plan, experience and individual skill and team work, tactical gameplay is this in my opinion, thats why it can change from clan to clan, from player to player.
But some people do not realise that, still the ones who realise it can easily enjoy any type of tactical gameplay, those are the players who can bring Swat RvS "to the next level".
I have tatics in my mind
. And I have my mind. I dont grenade rooms that Ive been in already and i dont wedge doors cause I have great memory 
.
SAS "New York Rent Boy" Rev - Neutrino's Lover
NCO - Non-Commissioned Officer
22nd [SAS] Elite Virtual Regiment
Decapi, Fluffy, Neutrino, Sniper, Carter, Blako, Bobby, Walker, West, Grom, Eve <3
You might call it a wall flood, we just call it clearing that particular room the right way. Either way, it's the same. In our SOPs and training classes we cover and execute button hooks, criss-cross, wall floods, doors near room corners, doors in middle of the wall, strong side and weak side stacks, covert and overt movement, angular search, slicing the pie, failure drill, reload drills, hostage exfil, protecting the wounded man, covering drills, rubberbanding, leapfrogging, peels, echelons, fire and move, various room entry and clearing techniques with and without explosive breaching, flash, gas, frag and clear, coordinated assaults on go codes, proper generic placement of tacaids, stairwells, hallways, T intersections, 4 way intersections, etc and so on and so forth I can go on all day...
If you have a print of a room, there is nothing wrong with deciding how you will attack the room ahead of time, but you will most likely lose half the noobs in your element before you get to that room, so it makes those types of plans a waste of time. :oops:
Big differences exist between how we play in mixed company with non-SAS in the server and how we play when it's just us. We tend to be far more complex when it's just SAS.
SAS_Vet_Random
Lt. Col (Retired)
22nd [SAS] Elite Virtual Regiment
Pages