2010-09-13, 08:45 | #11 | |
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 377
Germany
Location: LakeOfConstance
|
Re: CO questions related to the victorious PR team?
Quote:
64 (using the numbers of your example) players to choose from doesn't automatically mean you will have the better team. It`s all about skill. First: Team skills: If the 32 players are used to play together, know what they are doing and react faster and more effective they will win - even if they have only 25 players. Second: Individual skills Given the team skill level is comparable and both bring 32 players to the battle. Having 64 individuals to choose from will give you an advantage. You can now have a look on the individuals skills and create units according to their deployment. (I.e. a defensive unit full of patient players) And more important - you have more possibilities to deploy troops due to more possible combinations of good unit groups. Meaning you can have best choice players in (i.e) a good defensive unit and a good armored unit. Whereas having 32 players will mean little to no choice - with a small chance that your 32 players just have the needed variety of skills. But in most cases your good defensive Squadleader will be a good armor player too (i.e.) and you will have to choose where to deploy him. | |
2010-09-13, 14:51 | #12 | ||
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,189
Denmark
Location: Project Reality Frontline
|
Re: CO questions related to the victorious PR team?
Quote:
I agree that individual skills are paramount to a great deal of things on the victorious team. Collective skills are in essence part of those individual skills too. I believe that the CO is responsible of how well trained the players are on a team, since the logic's from the CO is forming the logic' the units bring into play. The squad-leaders are a vital component in that process. Climate is very important to creating a victorious team. Also, not an easy thing to create with the overall present PR material. Thus still a challenge today, maybe a historical lesson tomorrow? Who knows how PR will develop in the next few years to come? Any micromanagement from the CO must be founded in a solid reason. Cause as you point, it can go wrong when deploying that type of leader-style. On the other hand, when not doing so in a needed situation, it can go wrong too. Its a balance. Micromanagement require as minimum that the CO carefully explains why it is being done. I have several times told people on my two teams, that I would deploy micromanage should they not follow orders. Not once has it been fun for me as a player, to say that to the other players on the team, filling out other functions than I did. A good climate between players, -regardless of rank, is to me manifested as everybody respect every-body. Respect their personality, their opinion and freedom of speech on the team. Except, however, when it comes to personal related stuff like people being bullied by others, due to for instance their nationality, their race, their age, their specific PR experience or lack of the same, and so forth. As PRT CO i have experienced players, or groups of the same, being bullied with all of the above and more. I don't agree it is necessary for any one on a team to know each-other fairly well. I agree that i often is a bonus, but not that it is necessary in any way at all. In my army, here in Denmark their is a saying, that I as a soldier must be capable of team working with any other soldier. Period. Such a principle require that people can behave and deploy empathy, thus an emotional skill, also being the big tabu-word in these PR forums. In regard to shutting up, well, yes and no. In general nobody should shut up as I view it, but instead respect when someone has his or hers speaking-time. Interrupting is not that way forward. However there are situations, in battle mostly, where there is no time to debate stuff, but only to follow orders. Those situations are though rare. Fortunately. In the end, when experiencing a situation where a squad-leader simply should shut up, it is the commanders responsibility. Nobody else's. Commanding in real life or in Project Reality is not easy at all. Creating the victorious team, is also not easy. Cause change is the only constant factor. Quote:
In other words, does size only matter when the skills are equal on both sides in the battle? Like 16 players versus 32 players, all having equal skills? | ||
Last edited by Michael_Denmark; 2010-09-13 at 15:04..
|
2011-08-01, 22:21 | #13 | |
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,070
Canada
Location: Vancouver
|
Re: CO questions related to the victorious PR team?
Quote:
As for size versus quality. I have one anecdote that can speak volumes about this topic. In the last and utterly idiotic campaign of the PR World Cup I was an SL on Team Canada and we were fighting against Team USA in a scrim on Muttrah. We had lots of attendance issues while USA had full attendance. Numbers for teams were something like: USA: 32 Canada:12-16 You would think that we would have had our asses handed to us. However in the course of about 2 hours our team, with average coordination but generally a high level of motivated squad level play, managed to wipe the floor with USA. Reasons for Success - Canada: We were on the same page. No squad was behaving ignorant of the other, the CO had us geographically operating in such a way that we could be mutually supporting but not overlapping and making ourselves easy targets. Reasons for Failure - USA: As I understand it poor level of individual squad leadership by an experimental Platoon Leader system, their squads never seemed to hit with a unified punch. Their armour was careless and easily destroyed by man operated AT. Notes: This was far from a PRT level affair. The overall quality of both teams was so low by PRT standards that the only thing that can be gleaned from this is to say that numbers are irrelevant to overall team performance as a decisive indicator. Numbers at this level do not matter. In theory a good squad of 4 to 8 could annihilate a team of 32 under the right circumstances. As others above have said individual skill matters as well as the leadership of the team's overall strategy. If squads are sent piecemeal into action team size has no bearing because the individual firefights are between units of 6 to 10 and at this level individual skill of squads and soldiers and the small unit leaders makes all the difference. In addition to this there is also the negative effect of poor local level leadership, ie. an organizing force like the PL, which as I understand it from conversations after the scrim was a part of the issue. The only time numbers would make any difference is in terms of units larger than 32. A single platoon of say 32 players against a Company sized element of 150 would be a much harder situation, but even then historically there are indications of small units holding off bigger ones because of quality of leadership, skill level of participants, and terrain and situational advantages held by the smaller unit. | |
2011-08-02, 15:12 | #14 |
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,189
Denmark
Location: Project Reality Frontline
|
Re: CO questions related to the victorious PR team?
Copy on your anecdote Pfunk.
|
2011-08-02, 17:39 | #15 | |
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 628
United States of America
Location: Pittsburgh
|
Re: CO questions related to the victorious PR team?
Quote:
What defines a victorious team? -Teamwork, cooperation, efficiency/skill and most of all desire. How do you create this team? -No matter what you can't create the team. You shape it but the people in the end are what create it. For me, in my organized scrims, I slowly found out that you can't just place anyone in any role they wish, they have to be good and you need to know that. For me I know a good deal of the people who are on TG. I always play with new people and try to keep a record of what I think they excell in. Basically though I decided that I would just pick my squad leaders and allow them to hand pick their own squad based on the role I gave them. The most important role the CO has in shaping the team is the Battle Doctrine and initial planning stages. He must communicate his plans with his troops, specifically his SLs (who then can communicate it to his troops), explain the roles expected of these troops and relay that he needs absolute professionallism in it. Basically, the CO must look at a Battlefield and create a plan around it, the assets, and the specialties of his troops. For Shijia Valley I saw a map with few assets and a good deal of shelter for the infantry. I interpreted this to mean that Armor would play a smaller role and that Infantry, more specifically Mechanized Infantry due to mobility, would have the most success. However, realizing that I wouldn't be running many Tanks and that could be a weakness if the British used them aggressively I also created a small specialized squad whose sole purpose was to stalk out enemy armor with a VN-3 and H-AT. These two decisions are what I feel are the most input I had in the victory, the rest was my troops tireless devotion to gaining back our land! (As an aside, one reason I am a TGU instructor is to be able to pick up and seek out the best of the best or at the very least be able to teach possible troops enough so that three tanks don't lose against one at the enemy's last flag which was nuetral {my only loss}) | |
2011-08-05, 10:31 | #16 | |
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,070
Canada
Location: Vancouver
|
Re: CO questions related to the victorious PR team?
Quote:
The squad is scared. Don't fuck with your SLs unless you have to. Then its the hardest job a CO has to bin one. | |
2011-08-05, 10:53 | #17 |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,307
Netherlands
|
Re: CO questions related to the victorious PR team?
I always like to be outnumbered. Gives you more targets. The other team will be busier looking for your men while you have more to shoot at You can disapear more easily. However, when they have pinned you down than you will notice the difference in manpower
|
2011-08-05, 12:39 | #18 | |
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,070
Canada
Location: Vancouver
|
Re: CO questions related to the victorious PR team?
Quote:
I think the rule is generally in all combat to never be the one fired at first, always strive to be the one who observes the enemy first and who initiates the engagement on your terms, meaning terms which denies the enemy the same advantages you have. That universal means for a smaller squad that you don't shoot stuff you can't kill and you use that smaller size to achieve faster movement and more stealth cause you have fewer guys to be spotted and you can make crossing much faster or fit into small spaces without being nade bait. Its a toss up! But I do always like the effect of having two squads near each other shooting in the same direction. 2 m249s lighting it up with 10 more rifles firing, its pretty sexy while it lasts. | |
2011-08-06, 20:23 | #19 |
Server Administrator (A-N)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,093
Finland
|
Re: CO questions related to the victorious PR team?
|
2011-08-07, 04:00 | #20 | |
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,070
Canada
Location: Vancouver
|
Re: CO questions related to the victorious PR team?
Quote:
Now the second sentence... I will neither do the first nor agree to the second. | |
Tags |
questions, related, team, victorious |
|
|