[Poll] How many players actually use fireteams?

[ytman]

(A)

By a mile.

Of course this requires my squad to be large, willing to follow orders, vocal but able to understand comm discipline, and just willing to have a little faith in the plan.

I like fire teams because I figure that people can follow orders and work together with smaller concise groupings. Fireteams allow me to avoid micro-managing and keep my orders general and fill in the squad with the plan based on general ideas;

"Alpha-Team will be the fire support team and Bravo will move in to cap."
"If your green stick with green and blue with blue."

Right now, I feel its the best way to keep a basic order amongst desktop soldiers with no real training.

[mad rabbit]

Originally Posted by Swedge

My answer: More B then A

...a bit of a running joke actually with guys that play in my squads
...actually assigning a fireteam leader into each one and giving him the appropriate responsibilities.
...where the squad-leader says one thing, the fireteam leader says another

1)
...about 50% of my time at the map-screen and find it indispensible.
...As a squad-leader it's also just as important to know what other squads are where,
...detracts from my immersion.

2)
...Men and tasks often change depending on what squad-members are where.
...part of your job is to continually re-compose and regroup it and assign it into different tasks and roles as required.
... spend a huge amount of time continually re-colouring players into new groups.

@Swedge: I hope you'll excuse the paraphrasing above, so here's an image of me as SL to make you smile!



The running joke probably in my squads is that I spend a lot of time colouring!

I've never had a conflict with between myself and an FTL. The reluctance of people to be FTLs, let alone SLs already contributes to this in itself. Assigning an FTL is rarely necessary as well but does help when your down/away and there are new players. If I do assign an FTL it's usually because that FT is working fairly distant from the main squad but still needs to be focused by someone. I also usually end up picking the person that's most vocal. So if you don't want FTL in my squad keep quiet!

1)
I spend 90% NOT looking at the map as SL, so remind me not to drive behind you! I set my waypoint and possibly enable the GPS, position 1 FT on either side of me, and then go! Any planning above that tends to go to s@#$ anyway once the action starts, but both these FTs can be put to task immediately as required and they're already pre-grouped. Follows on from what I try to do which is to not lead from the front/rear but from the middle.

As for the radar I think it's essential. This is because of the difference between in real life where you have facial recognition, peripheral vision, situational awareness (sounds, feeling, etc.) and in-game where you have pixelated trees and everyone looks like a clone ...and that's IF you actually bother to recognize their face.

ArmA2 developers BIS also recognise this fact as discussed in other threads = zoomable vision, differences in terrain LOD shift etc.

I've said this before but perhaps I'm too much of an Lt. to your Gen. Swedge. Your acutely aware of the rest of the team, I just make my guys run long distances and pray the other squads and myself get done what we agreed. So I'm thankful that the other squads aren't on my radar as it's one less thing for me to worry about.

2)
I agree and certainly FTs get fragmented when the squad does. This is why I reassign the FTs as required. Perhaps my fault here is that instead of looking at the map too much, I'm look at the squad management screen too much? As said, each to their own. Certainly another disadvantage is that FT reassignment can be confusing for some squad members at times. In this case less is more, and it's something I'm trying to learn.

However, 50% of the reason why I assign FTs or recolour is not only for the squads benefit but for mine as well! Having to remember who is where, with who, doing what, with what kit on an individual basis is a lot harder than, "Right the AT, marksman and MG are in Bravo and their covering myself and Alpha which should contain the Engineer whilst we get this FOB".

---

My view on (1) and (2) is that it's my job to keep my job to direct my guys whether they're alive, dead or trying to ensure that the enemy dies. Being able to direct them quickly en masse with FTs in the absence of contact drills etc. is essential.

Sure formations help as well by pooling the FTs on either side of me, and FTs are pretty useless in and urban environment, but for quick no non-sense task assignment I say FTs + colouring all the way!

Originally Posted by autonomousw

...communication becomes a problem with in the squad when trying to actually get this set up working optimally.
...I am in no way shape or form asking for, suggesting, or even referencing ACRE.
...divide my squad into fire teams is to allow us to more rapidly multitask on objectives.

I have to agree on the communication front but I've found the positives of an actively talking squad to promote cohesion far outweigh the communication breakdown negatives. I mean comon', does the whole squad really need to know urgently from one person that a Chinook is flying in from to the SE ...I can barely hear myself think with it flying over me, let alone how many people carry an AA now-a-days anyway. Communication for distant infantry contacts at a set bearing to increase the volume of fire, sure ...that's about it.

Now I love ACRE but am neutral on whether something like it would be advantageous for something as fast paced as PR. If you have squad on Channel 1, FTLs on Ch1 + 2, SLs on Ch 2+3, FTLs and SLs with spatial for each channel on each ear, Ch4 for other squads, gun fire sounds, engine sounds ...I think my ears my pop!

Realistic and cool for co-op yes, useful for fast paced PvP I'm not so sure.

This is why I suppose squads in real life have radio operators.

Originally Posted by Ratszo

I've been accused of 'micro-managing'...
...In a perfect squad, everyone would know where to be because they've done the battle drills many times.
...hard to fire on, and flank the enemy.
...squads tend to melt from lack of purpose, focus.

Everyone should read and use:
Dslyecxi's ArmA2 Tactics, Techniques, & Procedures Guide

When? I don't think you micromanage!

Completely agree with the above and the link to an excellent guide. I really try to incorporate the:

Find -> Fix -> Flank -> Finish

Getting (more) off-topic but I think for FTs/squads to start to be truly successful a greater suppression effect needs to be incorporated. PR:BF2 has a really nice suppression effect.

Easy way to demonstrate this theory is how many people are dying with > 75% of their ammo not used?

The reason being is that it is more disadvantageous with the current suppression effects for anyone to give away their position by firing than to suppress an enemy position. Simple. There is no fear of dying with unlimited lives, RPs and FOBs in a pixelated world.

As such, the force multiplication of cohesive FTs/squads to create that suppressive volume of fire is somewhat diminished without these necessary effects and I think that is why we're having this debate

To put it another way, when players start to see the benefits of staying in a group, then you'll start to see the benefits of FTs. Otherwise it's understandable for players to think, "Well all you doing is making me die in a different colour SL ...thanks. *end sarcasm mode*"

Originally Posted by ytman

(A)
..willing to follow orders, vocal but able to understand comm discipline, and just willing to have a little faith in the plan.
...Fireteams allow me to avoid micro-managing and keep my orders general and fill in the squad with the plan based on general ideas;
... best way to keep a basic order amongst desktop soldiers with no real training.

Follow orders yes, comm discipline not so much. In addition I have personally found squad 'obedience', for want of a better term, is present when everyone knows and understands the plan AND you have received acknowledgement that they have. But these are other topics. FTs just make this understanding easier in my opinion for all parties involved.
i.e. Charlie's transporting, Bravos covering, Alpha assaulting. Simple.

As said above, 50% of FT assignment is for my benefit as an SL BUT that's only if you feel you and the squad benefit from it. You could have each squad member fire of 2 rounds for Alpha FT and 3 rounds for Bravo FT every 10 paces to determine FT assignment but no-one would benefit from that, except perhaps the enemy.

As for training, I think the differences in skills of each player within a squad and their ever changing role within a squad is more the determining factor. Again off-topic, but perhaps FT assignment equalizes this skill-set across several FT members set a particular task within a squad. Therein perhaps lies the benefit.

[Swedge]

Love it, Rabbit! Cool to see how you work your style mate! Just shows to go ya how different players can get a lot of value out of their own different approaches.

The squad-leader vs fireteam leader drama I described I mainly recall as a squad-member witnessing it (and it wasn't in PR) rather than actually being the SL or FTL. But its been uncomfortable to watch that dissension sometimes. With better training and attitudes, and pre-arrange SOPs, that could be reduced/avoided.

Cheers,
Swedge

[mad rabbit]

Originally Posted by Swedge

The squad-leader vs fireteam leader drama I described I mainly recall as a squad-member witnessing it (and it wasn't in PR) rather than actually being the SL or FTL.

Cheers mate! Yeah back-seat commanding is not cool, we've discussed this in other threads, and certainly shouldn't be done in-game as SLs have enough to worry about!

I've come across this a couple of times and it's usually a large squad so I just tell 'that person' to form a new squad and take half the current squad members. Nothing personal. They clearly want to lead so let them, especially if the team will benefit.

Separation like this diffuses the situation as well and multiplies the amount of RPs for the team as we discussed and you convinced me here: http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f546...fireteams.html

[Cassius]

I see a lack of more things, such as moving as a squad, communication, coordination and teamplay. On BF2 things are achieved that I dont see on ARMA 2, despite all the help you get, such as easily organizable fierteams and a pretty good ingame voip function. Then again the playerbase in BF2 is larger. In PR Arma 2 peak time means 90 players are online.

Right now I want to enjoy ARMA 2 more, with the potential it holds and the engine advantages it already has, but I just dont.

[A.Wickens]

Originally Posted by Cassius

I see a lack of more things, such as moving as a squad, communication, coordination and teamplay. On BF2 things are achieved that I dont see on ARMA 2, despite all the help you get, such as easily organizable fierteams and a pretty good ingame voip function. Then again the playerbase in BF2 is larger. In PR Arma 2 peak time means 90 players are online.

Right now I want to enjoy ARMA 2 more, with the potential it holds and the engine advantages it already has, but I just dont.

PRBF has been out how long in comparison to PR:Arma?

In addition PR:Arma is far more sophisticated than PR:BF, has far more scope. The amount of choice in how you approach situations, the distances you cover, the far more detailed logistics system all combine to provide a much more varied, richer, simulation experience. However they also present a much steeper learning curve. I personally find it much more challenging and as a result rewarding.

The population is clearly smaller and more diverse at present, as you would expect with a new mod. The initial potential playerbase is also smaller when comparing base games, ie installed BF2 vanilla playerbase vs installed Arma 2:OA playerbase.

Furthermore we have a huge spectrum of nationalities playing, which is great, but can present a further challenge with language barriers etc.

As regards the specifics you mention such as moving as a squad, I don't agree. It is exactly the same, all it requires is the SL to organise his squad. Pr:Arma does present the greater challenge of far more realistic distances therefore it is easier for individual players to get separated from the body of their squads. The easiest way to combat this as a squad is to slow down a bit and regroup more often. However, the title is new and I often catch myself charging off to the objective out of 'excited noobishness', when the obvious thing to do is slow down, regroup and get organised.

I think you need to manage your expectations and stop comparing a mod and playerbase that has been running 5 years plus with a brand new, far more complex game. The comparison is flawed and unfair. It would be equally unfair to PR:BF to compare it with RP:Arma in terms of realism, scope, scale, game engine and potential as PR:BF would suffer on those terms.

The playerbase needs time to learn, adjust and develop. As this process continues I think you will start to see some amazing progress.

@Mad Rabbit

Getting (more) off-topic but I think for FTs/squads to start to be truly successful a greater suppression effect needs to be incorporated. PR:BF2 has a really nice suppression effect.

Easy way to demonstrate this theory is how many people are dying with > 75% of their ammo not used?

The reason being is that it is more disadvantageous with the current suppression effects for anyone to give away their position by firing than to suppress an enemy position. Simple. There is no fear of dying with unlimited lives, RPs and FOBs in a pixelated world.

Agreed however another fact is that far too few people will actually suppress properly even when told to. Suppression can work as is in PR:Arma but we face the age old problem of everyone wanting to make the kill shot, on both sides. This was invariably the same in PR:BF, trust me. I used to have to bellow at my squads to put some actually organised suppression down, otherwise they simply sat there silently counting off the 'deviation clock' then moaning because the other guy 'counted faster' than them and head shot them.

Once you could get a squad to bang some rounds down range on command they started to enjoy it and they would happily about face, drop to their belt buckle and burn through tons of rounds lighting up a target. However you had to break that 'sniper' mindset first. A squads potential fire-power is a powerful tool and focused on a point target can overwhelm even a superior opponent, it is useless if everybody just sits there trying to line up the boom headshot. I have to force people to suppress visible targets and potential target locations, rounds come in from windowed structure so I have them light up window and doorways as we peel out.

As I say hard habit to break, hard discipline to teach initially but if you can get em doing it a couple of times it is possible to demonstrate it's effectiveness. Going to try and get my squads to do it more in future.

[Cassius]

I am aware of all that and I hope the mod will contrinue to grow along with the playerbase and I think it is on a good track competing in the upper 10th for the population avaiable on ARMA 2. But that does not change the status quo. Right now I am having more fun on BF2 PR because of the playerbase. Of course I could find bad server (imo) on PR BF2 but I just stick to the 2 3 servers that are to my liking.

I will continue to do stints into PR ARMA and hopefully the gameplay will pick up.

[iOGC_Aenigma]

My answer will fall under A.

There are times I have been in squads that has used fireteams effectively. Mainly however when there have been members from two communities in the same squad. The in game VOIP is a great tool to use but we tend to keep fireteam coms on TS allowing for Arma VOIP communication between either Fireteam leaders or between squad leaders.

I tend not to use the fireteams if my squad is full of the guys from our community as fireteams can be assigned on the fly over TS3.

I do agree that fire teams can be a great thing to use if done correctly and I look forward to them been used to their full potential as the player base grows and playing standards increase.