Wargame Red Dragon - Diversion Tactics

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 13 сен 2024
  • Most players go for zones in a conquest match. But what would happen if you would not play for zones but create a massive diversion instead?
    How would you counter a diversion like this? Let me know in the comments!
    Want to send in your own replay? Do so here: www.stealth17ga...
    Be advised that this is the ONLY way to send in replays. Replays sent in through Steam, private messages or comments will not be considered.
    Cheers,
    Stealth

Комментарии • 55

  • @awalllen212
    @awalllen212 7 лет назад +76

    i love how skynet isnt a youtuber (that i know of) but almost everyone who has played wargame knows him because hes almost allways online shitposting in warchat

  • @GregAtlas
    @GregAtlas 7 лет назад +22

    Since he was at the top of the list he also obtained the units that the leaver had when they left as well, which usually results in a lot of losses he didn't deserve because of having to micromanage someone else's flank.

  • @gre8
    @gre8 7 лет назад +16

    This is the type of outside the box thinking that makes the game worth it. Attacking where it was not expected and putting pressure on the enemy lifeline allowed the other players to concentrate on their sectors and win the game by a huge margin. If you judge it individually, points wise, perhaps he did "tie" number against number, but since this was a team effort, his tactical foresight was instrumental in winning the game. Congratulations indeed!

    • @LordOfRage
      @LordOfRage 7 лет назад +1

      Attacking a flank is not exactly "outside of the box thinking" IMO

    • @lorcis1
      @lorcis1 4 года назад +2

      ye, this is the kind of tactics that makes me enjoy the game

  • @bIuebuIIet
    @bIuebuIIet 7 лет назад +35

    oh geez this game has skynet in it. thay dude is both thr best and the worst part about the war chat lol

  • @redhairdavid
    @redhairdavid 7 лет назад +5

    i love unusual tactics that work out, even if its not the best outcome possible, it was enough

  • @StoneCresent
    @StoneCresent 6 лет назад +2

    An old tactic from days of European Escalation; it is good to see it is still valid.

  • @williams9618
    @williams9618 7 лет назад +24

    Lose 1 leclerc? Unfortunate
    Lose 2? Maybe need to work on your tank work or not deploy there with expensive tanks
    Lost 3? Just bad play sorry. Maybe consider AMX40 as the majority of opposition are infantry and transports which they can deal with.
    Yes his idea was good (i guess) but sacrificing teammates and then going about it in a pretty terrible way just leads me to conclude that it wasnt worth it. A few legion 90 and a mistral or two with some commandos para would have done just as good a job, maybe some amx 10s to bait out some tanks

  • @yousuck785why
    @yousuck785why 5 лет назад +1

    These replays are great material for writing!

    • @marza339
      @marza339 4 года назад +1

      No kidding, right!?

  • @HenryElfin
    @HenryElfin 7 лет назад +4

    Oh, so this is Mr Skynet

  • @HNKhan016
    @HNKhan016 2 года назад

    Perhaps we saw a real lack of work distribution for redfor. Dedicate one player to secure south of foxtrot spawn, dedicate 2 to secure foxtrot and standoff, dedicate one to prepare offensive on the west side of the highway. We didnt see offensive actions on the west side of the highway much. Communications weren't made. Sectors were not divided. Even if there is a concentration of forces outside the main sectors, stretching the front and diluting forces, it's true for both parties. The only failure node here is if redfor thought of neutralizing south of foxtrot spawn, assuming this will result in no further contact, then moving on to other sectors, we can expect redfor to assign more and more forces "temporarily" to fox spawn, buying time blufor to establish local superiority in strategic sectors like south of foxtrot. Redfor could have succeeded in this attritional fighting if the scores were at least neutral. But it wasn't. That should have been the first priority, therefore justifying a player's singular attention, particularly west of the highway. as a result, since more blufor was dying than redfor, redfor just needed to buy time and let blufor bleed faster than redfor.

  • @Schizopantheist
    @Schizopantheist 2 года назад

    As a total newb to this game it looks like the answer to this would be to fully commit to that map edge as an avenue of attack and push them right back to start threatening zones from the flank or rear

  • @parallelmorpher9830
    @parallelmorpher9830 7 лет назад +16

    This is a badly executed karagoth tactical drop.

    • @Maxcraft12
      @Maxcraft12 7 лет назад +1

      Parallel Morpher well i did not know kargoth when i did this game, just found out aftee and yea he is way better.

    • @parallelmorpher9830
      @parallelmorpher9830 7 лет назад +1

      Praise and worship our god karagoth.

    • @Maxcraft12
      @Maxcraft12 7 лет назад +1

      i will o.O

    • @hellfiremissle4907
      @hellfiremissle4907 7 лет назад

      xD.... I'm not the only one who has encountered Karagoth and his wall of flame... right?

  • @1011340
    @1011340 7 лет назад +2

    26:38 would have been nice to see that airstrike to the blue spawn

  • @MrMirandy
    @MrMirandy 7 лет назад +1

    From Redfor side of this map u need to dedicate 1 player to push echo from the field and that will always be enough, becase as was mentioned another team's resupply rout is very long. If u play smart u kill all initial push force that overextend, than u can take echo ez. Plus u have a cliff, so u can always throw enemy from the cliff.
    If somehow enemy gets to spawn zone first, u just need to spawn some units from hotel and take it back in numbers, instead of just getting into small and constant exchanges in units, which dont really allowe to use the proximity of reinforcement spot.

  • @mitchelljetten982
    @mitchelljetten982 7 лет назад +13

    Hey Stealth, please do me a favor and do 1v1 against @SaucyNetwork (BoltSauce)
    Would love to see how that turns out.
    Andddd now back to watching this video :-)

    • @caxopog
      @caxopog 7 лет назад +1

      Totaly agree! The 2 casters i regularry watch)
      Or they can play 2v2 or 3v3 in same or opposite teams

    • @bc7291
      @bc7291 3 года назад

      3 years later, but i wish it could happend !

  • @insertpienow
    @insertpienow 7 лет назад +1

    Good post Stealth........cheers......
    PS........are you still playing ships / torping the smoke........?

    • @ongjunhong
      @ongjunhong 7 лет назад

      Ahh yeah! I wonder what he and Spect are up to on World of Warships

    • @Stealth17Gaming
      @Stealth17Gaming  7 лет назад

      No I haven't played Warships in about 2 months now.

  • @macaronisalad3038
    @macaronisalad3038 7 лет назад +2

    i have a challenge for you for red dragon it's called the zerg rush where you can only use units up to 50 and down but only use the 40+ as supports and not the main force and spam the -39 out and rush them like the zerg

  • @MrTylu1906
    @MrTylu1906 7 лет назад +1

    i rember this tactic from airland battle ;)

  • @Maxcraft12
    @Maxcraft12 7 лет назад +3

    hey, im on youtube yay

  • @gelatinoussire7772
    @gelatinoussire7772 7 лет назад

    So the white arrow on the map is North, right?

  • @soyad9840
    @soyad9840 2 года назад

    cool

  • @operationaltactics1006
    @operationaltactics1006 7 лет назад +3

    I simply cannot believe Eugeen haven't fixed this idiotic problem with the units from quitters. They made 3 fucking games and never delt with this problem. It was one of the major reasons I left the game after 2000+ hours. That and the server issue. The game isn't won in battle but in the lobby. First team to fill up is 99% of the time the winner...

    • @parallelmorpher9830
      @parallelmorpher9830 7 лет назад

      After 2000 hours you should know that the game shines in 1vs1, 2vs2 with some rare good 3vs3. The rest is simply a clusterfuck. Stick to the good modes and have fun.

    • @ineednochannelyoutube5384
      @ineednochannelyoutube5384 7 лет назад

      You mean NATO always wins? I only saw Pact fill up first about 1 in 20.

  • @Crimethoughtfull
    @Crimethoughtfull 6 лет назад

    Why did Team 2's score never go up?

    • @hedgie9823
      @hedgie9823 4 года назад

      It wasn't destruction

  • @KalashnikovPaouzzi
    @KalashnikovPaouzzi 7 лет назад +3

    good game but i was disgusted by the people playing it. Last game i played was a 4v4, 10 second before the end of the deployment phase 2 member of my team leave the game, i dont have to redeploy to cover their flank or compense for the fact that i will have to fight 2v4. On top of that the enemy team come in with a dumb helicopter rush..... didnt play multiplayer since that shitty game.
    I always wondered what kind of moron enter a game but leave 10 second before it begins leaving his team in a very bad spot.... thats why i m no longer a big fan of multiplayer.... too many horribly dumb player.

  • @Loafed_Beans
    @Loafed_Beans 7 лет назад

    lmao is that the same skynet everyone shits on in the wargames menu chat?

    • @Tommygun557
      @Tommygun557 7 лет назад

      Adam Graves yup

    • @GregAtlas
      @GregAtlas 7 лет назад

      No, I don't believe so.

    • @Loafed_Beans
      @Loafed_Beans 7 лет назад

      Paul Jacksonson I remember a friend of mine and I planned to play wargames one day but ended up spending an hour&1/2 shitposting in that chat

  • @Spectification
    @Spectification 7 лет назад +2

    KARAGOTH CHEESE!!! :D Somebody has to learn not to cheese :D And they play 4v4 on a 2v2 map, so they can use a full player outside conquest zones... What a joke :D Of course, he doesnt play for zones, since he doesnt have to :D Id love to see him somewhere, where he actually has to capture terrain

    • @alemko94
      @alemko94 7 лет назад +2

      Really? REALLY?! Opponent had +1 player for most of the game and could dedicate one player to defend the flank. His move was excellent and valid. Why are you so jelly?

    • @Spectification
      @Spectification 7 лет назад +1

      :D Excellent? Badly executed Karagoth? :D Ok, whatever mate :) Just the fact, that the enemy team couldnt push left flank, which was virtually defenced by stranded inf. groups is enought for me to know, they couldnt pose a serious threat :D Im just pointing out, that the strategy of his is bad, puts unneccessary stress on his teammates and is easily counterable by competent player, since it can be spotted easily with cheap recon helo, or ASF (and since its 4v4, lack of innitial recon is a gross mistake). Also, why spawn units there? Bring them from main base and bomb his whole force with 2 bombers. Once stunned, spawn 4 SFs and the game is up and blue player wasted all his points for nothing. So again, pointing out the flaws in this strategy, because it can only work on people of lesser skill :)

    • @alemko94
      @alemko94 7 лет назад +1

      Eduard Zubo who won? with -1 player?

    • @parallelmorpher9830
      @parallelmorpher9830 7 лет назад

      To be fair, there are hints that red side was pretty noob.

    • @Spectification
      @Spectification 7 лет назад

      Since he won only because the enemy team was much more inferior? (Loosing 3 Leclers? come on...) Nobody cares ;)