Results 521 to 540 of 1932
22-02-2013, 02:15 AM #521
Comms discpline for command chat in the STRATGIR system
We talk too much. For me, the most significant experience I have on these nights is being part of a squad that works well together - this is something I miss on regular nights. What detracts from this is constant chatter in command, and I don't think it needs to be this way. Of course newer leaders will talk more since they are not as experienced and want to keep an active presence - that is to be expected and new leaders need time to adjust.
But, those of us that have led quite a while now - you all know what a mind shattering mess a chatty squad and chatty command channel overlapping can be, and I don't think it needs to be like that.
Command chat should consist of three things - sitreps, requests and short discussions if the PL wants/needs it. Longer discussions/talks should be done at downtime
Squad leaders need to be much better at sitreps and give them in a timely manner. When the base is overrun it is too late - a reinforcements request after two minutes of an enemy platoon arriving could have saved you time or got us the cap.
Requests for orders, reinforcements and such should be phrased as short statements. "Delta here - We need backup from one or two squads at Esamir Munitions to hold" is enough. Notice how both squad and currrent deployment was in there. Your PL will love you for this. The PLs response should be to check with the others and say yes/no and tell you to redeploy if PL does not have another assignment.
Sitreps should be concise and be given by the SLs - not by request of the PL. This needs to improve. Sitreps should be given in short bursts and at three crucial stages: we have arrived, we are capping/overloading with no resistance/we need backup over here and finally target is capped, where to? or target is overrun with no way to save, awaiting new orders.
Squads should be fairly independent. This is what saves the PL a headache, and I do not think we have anyone that really does care THAT much about a squad going to the next logical target before PL has said so. Say Delta sees enemy squads on The Traverse. Only bravo is there. A short question solves this "Delta here - we could go to The Traverse if needed to backup bravo, our target is capped".
Keep your PL updated with IMPORTANT recon information. A huge platoon of BRTD is such a thing. A ghost cap is not. It will be dealt with.
And finally, another nice thing to say is "we are moving out". This lets the PL know that you are on your way for backup etc, and the other SLs know as well.
For a seperate thing PLs should all talk to everyone quite a bit as this helps to know what others are doing.
TL;DR - talk shorter, faster and more concise.
22-02-2013, 11:27 AM #522
I think the only problem with the spec ops team was when our smoke grenades decided not to work, we need a new supplier, preferably one that isn't a TR or NC spy.
22-02-2013, 11:32 AM #523
Mine have been broken as well. Sometimes they smoke up after a few seconds, like they need to arm or something.
22-02-2013, 02:50 PM #524
- Join Date
- Feb 2013
- Stockholm, Sweden
I played in the flying squad yesterday and wanted to post some thoughts about what we did.
First of all, I have to say that I had a blast. The enemy air yesterday was crazy, but it seemed like we managed to hold them back pretty well with just three scythe pilots. Especially when we coordinated and attacked as a group. I have a very fond memory of taking down a liberator in around 3 seconds.
But there were a few things that I think we can do better next time. To start with, we had a separate squad, i.e. we weren't part of the platoon, which made it very hard to know what the rest of the outfit was up to. It felt like we didn't know where everyone else were for most of the evening and therefore didn't provide as much assistance as we could've done. So it might be good to have the pilots as parts of normal squads (even though that means less infantry in each squad) to make coordination easier.
Communication was kind of a problem. Icetrance (who was SL) mentioned several times that it was hard to keep track since there were two conversations going on at the same time. So pretty much what Ridebird talks about above. Is it better if BL have a separate channel with the flying squad? Is it to much to keep up with for the BL? I honestly don't know. What do you veteran BLs think?
I also wonder what kind of stuff ground-people want the air-people to do. My original intent for the evening was scouting. Going ahead, trying to see where the enemies were at, etc. But the squad turned into an air dominance-thing. Which isn't bad mind you. I had a blast doing it. But it's always good to know what's expected of you (also, I might be a curious person by nature). So what do you want? Scouting? Precision air strike (perhaps as a way of help squads in need until they can get reinforcements)? Shooting down those pesky mossies? Or a more flexible unit that can do all of the above, depending on situation?
22-02-2013, 02:59 PM #525
99% of the reason why you didn't know what was going on was because IceTrance was in the wrong channel for quite a while (to talk to command) and his PTT to command wasn't setup correctly in the beginning. He couldn't hear us and we couldn't hear him til I checked Mumble and told him to move.
We kinda still need air to be it's seperate squad to have a air SL that can set waypoints and give orders. But yeah, it would probably have been much smarter for us in the spec ops squad to be seperate and you guys be in. The squad was kinda small and was organized pretty swiftly. What I want from air squad is recon and precision bombing runs on designated targets. Since we cant laze targets or such SLs need to pop smoke or describe well where the dudes that need taking out are. Air superiority is another task - but then the squad needs to be 12+ imo.
Regarding comms -the first time you do it you will lose your mind. You do not know how to filter that. It takes a good three-four times to not go insane over it. But yes - as I wrote, we gotta talk much less. The situation is the same for everyone though, and seperate channels is something I have been thinking about. One seperate just for air will just be very confusing.
Maybe we should do that though? This is The Enclave way of doing comms and I do believe it does work better. Then the PL needs to be relaying stuff constantly though and have 5-6 PTT buttons, but hey, the numpad would do that job well! The way they run things is that squads call in. Say I'm leading - here's a conversation:
"Lead this is Alpha"
"Go ahead/gimme a sec"
"Base is secure, new target?"
"Join bravo at freyr"
End of conversation. Swift and smooth, and perhaps a lot less confusing for PL? Shall we try it out? We can still have the regular comms chat for just discussions about where to go etc.
22-02-2013, 05:50 PM #526
Could work. I wasn't sure at first but upon reflection I realised that I usually zone out other SLs during ops anyway so I doubt there would be much to lose and everything to gain. Also, that post about comms discipline was spot-on. It might be somewhat difficult and/or take some time to get it drilled in, but it should be the ideal we judge ourselves by.
22-02-2013, 10:39 PM #527
Yes yes yes.
I personally think that we should delve a lot deeper into the mumble side of things in general.
The current command channel, as an example, has all SLs hearing each others requests and sitreps to the PL (as well as sometimes SLs issuing oders to their squad but having pressed the wrong button). Which is great for me personally, as when i am a SL i feel the benifit of hearing what other squads are up to. What isn't so great though, is whilst all that is going on in command channel, you have about 4 or 5 people from your squad channel doing the same. What they're saying could be important, but you'll more often than not miss it, because of, ironically, something completely irrelivent to your squad. I personally find it really annoying that i have to ask my squad members to repeat what they just said, due to a squad leader on the otherside of the continent giving a sitrep to the PL over the top of them, and i'm sure they do to.
That, for me at least, outweighs the former benifit. I would much rather not know about what the other squads are doing in order to focus entirely on my own squads performace. (Then if the PL gives me drips and drabs of info on the other squads, i can always just piece things together from there).
One way to alleviate that is to dilute the command channel down, so that only direct comm links exist: PL-SL, SL-PL & SL-Squad. Seeing as there is no actual benifit of all SLs being in the same channel together we may as well stop doing it, whilst it may be informative on a platoon scale, it sure as hell has lead to confusion in the past... Infact, i would go as far as to say that having my proposed 'more direct' set up would lead to a cleaner and easier experience for SLs new and old.
This, coupled with Ridebirds example of how a conversation on comms should perhaps go, would make being a PL even easier also!
To elaborate, you're a PL. In your own PL channel, seperate from any other channels. Youre sat in peace and quiet. Youre mulling over the map thinking of the next move and then you hear a SL sign in: "Lead this is Alpha". At that stage, youre at liberty as PL to reply when you want, perhaps youre still thinking deeply about the next move, you simply need to say a "standby Alpha" or something... For all Alpha Lead knows youre currently already talking to another SL, regardless, he/she will just have wait till you say "go ahead". And if he/she doesnt, then youre not to blame for missing any information. This could perhaps help prop up a flagging PL, having to worry about only talking to SL when you want to or can, might mean there is less stress for PLs, whilst also making that SL use their own inititive and decide for themselves what their squads should do till the PL says "go ahead Alpha", encouraging small scale "PL thinking".
Individual numpad PTT keybindings for their respective channels is a great idea, i think. It will take getting used to, for sure. It may even benefit to write them down close by so you dont forget. But that's no biggy is it? That for me, would be a perfect setup if i were to PL again on StratGir nights. I need that quiet order in comms to think clearly and formulate plans better. Also, for those PLs that have a 2nd moniter, you could have this up and running and be able to play properly at the same time!
Why dont we have a "Sythe Squad" channel in Mumble, set up similarly to SpecGir and StratGir. If it complemented StratGir last night then why not set it up some time? Also, Liason Officers could sit in the PLs own channel. That way they could directly relay any information they get from other outfits, without having to ask to talk to the PL. (Arguably more important to hear about outfit co-op information)
For those who are wondering:
Public Platoon was fine, though not really very "public", we were mainly composed of non strat desiring RPS guys. Though as ive mentioned before, the public platoon needs to have been up and running for an hour or so before the outing, in order for it to gain effective numbers. Whether its popularity earlier on in the week was due to it rolling on Indar or not, is arguable. I still stand by it's potential though. [Reference my last post on this thread for more info]
Last edited by NickWhite; 22-02-2013 at 10:59 PM.
23-02-2013, 12:07 AM #528
I personally found the current setup very pleasing when leading the platoon three weeks ago and also when leading a squad last week. Maybe comms weren't quite as busy then? I would not like to have each SL on a separate PRT key because that means I'd have to relay all information to all SL's myself, right? As I see it, information relay is key to everyone's enjoyment of the game and to our effectiveness as a group.
I certainly see your point, but I don't think that setup would work for me, personally.
also, posting from an iPhone is a pain in the backside..
Last edited by EsotericReverie; 23-02-2013 at 12:10 AM.
23-02-2013, 12:52 AM #529
We could have, say, 1-4 on numpad bound to a specific squad channel in case we split up and need to give orders to a particular squad.
Similarly, key 9 perhaps, could be set to only talk to PL, so that split up squads could speak to PL and not bog down command chat when we arent all at the same place.
tab (or your keybind) could be used when we are together or want all squads to respond.
23-02-2013, 03:49 AM #530
- Join Date
- Jan 2013
it's pretty easy to make this pretty simple, actually. For the PL, nothing should change. He always speaks to all squadleads to either ask stuff or discuss or whatever. squadleads can have two options: talk to everyone in command channel (what we do now), and only talk to the PL. that way SLs can give detailed, location specific, reports when necessary without cluttering up the comms too much.
ridebird's last post is still the best solution though. Precise, concise, and quick responses, suggestions, and questions are the best way to go (as opposed to discussing stuff over command at length, which can be done when the strategy needs to shift, but should probably be avoided in general).
23-02-2013, 06:25 AM #531
Reducing the number of people in leadership positions who are not involved in leadership-level discussions is a bad idea.
Even if the SL needs to say something got the PL that seems to have no bearing on oher squads the level of awareness of 'what's going on' from listening to that discussion is necessary for other SLs.
If the problem is that the amount of chatter is getting confusing then just be less verbose.
Also, I'm gonna tweak Mumble next week to make those Relay Stations do something. Plan: One single channel to 'shout to' that all commanders (across stratgir, platoon 1 & 2, specgiraffes and friends) use rather than the long list of SL & BL channels we use now. It can be done, it's just that Mumble is poorly documented.
(One day someone is gonna create a voip system that uses a 'frequency' system. Where you can just elect to listen to and talk (or not) over various frequencies. Channels shouts and whispers be damned.)
Either Wed or Thurs about 1/2 hour prior to normal roll out I'll get in and sort that. I'll have a chat with people about how command comms needs to be setup then (and if anything needs changing beyond "All PLs and SLs can talk to each other")Originally Posted by CROCONOUGHTKEY
23-02-2013, 09:38 AM #532
And that's why we keep the old channel for discussions.
We need to reduce command chatter as it has been pretty crazy the last few stratgirs. The redcution needs to be something like at least 80% less talk. I don't think that's possible.
I really don't care about 95% of the discussions going on in command chat if I'm SLing and missing 5% with the trade off for MUCH better squad leadership is well, well worth it imo.
23-02-2013, 02:22 PM #533
I dont think it's a bad idea. I think its a really good idea. The PL, when giving you your direct commands can always advise you to what other squads are doing if he/she thinks that it's relevent, or even ask you directly for any ideas on what to do next. Directly. Sequentially. 1on1s are always better than talking in a group because you have the time to actually get out everything that you want to say.
It's the PL who ultimately makes the decisions, so the need for a group huddle isnt great enough to outweigh the cons of it all, for me anyway... The PL should just relay the phase of his plan to the SL that it concerns. If i'm a squad leader all i want to hear in command comms is stuff that is relative to my squad. It means one less thing for me to think about. Three or four less voices that are liable to interupt me/my squad at any time. I dont really want to have to hear the PL issuing orders to all other squads as well as my own. I'm not saying that the current system is horrendous, i've seen the benefits of being able to hear what other squad leaders are going through on the battlefield. But to me, perhaps that information should just be relayed through the PL.
Also, take a step back and try to see how effective that system would be for a new SL to grasp. How much simpler. The game is complicated enough as it is. So why not just have the one voice that actually matters talking to you, plus those of your squads. I feel that it would allow SLs to actually get stuck in a lot more and enjoy playing, rather than stopping to think and carry out waypoint changed and map scanning.
23-02-2013, 03:13 PM #534
And again, if we need to discuss, we do have the standard channel, which could be good for more plans and stuff like that. I think this system also encourages the PL to talk to all more as its the easy way to relay changes of plans to all.
23-02-2013, 06:43 PM #535
Alight, I sha'nt be unreasonable. I'm ready to try, but I have my reservations, as previously mentioned, since I find information transfer to be one of our major weaknesses. Let's see how it works out sometime.
24-02-2013, 01:39 AM #536
This is what ive been saying. We would still have the pl to all sl chat, but if we ALSO have specific pl to each squad comms, we can make a judgement on which method we use at the time. Sometimes its necessary to talk to ALL squads, but sometimes it would help to just talk to one. Odds are, that if i want to talk to another squad or get a report/help from them, ill just ask them at the time, so theres no need for me to already know what they are doing.
I agree with nick that the less info the better when you are focussing on a split objective. Obviously if we are all at the same place though, we need the group PL-SL comms.
As i suggested, why not have each SL leader channel bound to 1-4 on the numpad, and PL bound to 9....
This way, we can keep our regular group leader chat button, but also have a way for EACH sl and pl to communicate with each other.
For example, say im in delta, and i need backup, i can use my tab key (talk to sls and pl) to ask who is available to help soonest. Then; say alpha lets me know they are busy, but bravo is available to help... Well then i can use button 2 on the numpad to talk to ONLY them, and this chatter, which is irrelevant to the busy bravo, doesnt bog down comms. Then, we can either let the main channel know of our plans, or just relay directly to PL on the 9 button.
Cooper: I dont think we need to switch our mumble channels around, because the current system lends well to possible solutions already. What I am suggesting is essentially like a frequency system, because "freq" 1 - 4 is squad 1 - 4...
EDIT: the only thing we would need, is a new channel that could act as platoon leader channel only, so that we could bind a key to talk to only PL. Also, I while i know this isolates them from general chat, I dont think PL should necessarily also lead alpha.
Last edited by BasicPauly; 24-02-2013 at 01:49 AM.
24-02-2013, 04:08 PM #537
I will sort this out next week. We can have a chat about what system we use then.
Edit: moved discussion to http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/foru...awesome/page31
Last edited by Cooper; 24-02-2013 at 05:07 PM.Originally Posted by CROCONOUGHTKEY
24-02-2013, 04:22 PM #538
- Join Date
- Feb 2013
- Stockholm, Sweden
24-02-2013, 04:34 PM #539
1. Inter-outfit organisation. Where we stand, where we want to go, how we can get there.
2. Related to the above, retaking Indar. We should start pushing for a more a-priori and not ad hoc approach to inter-outfit ops, so we can finally get there.
3. In relation to your post in "Giraffes - Our allies" and the statistics of membership participation, I'd like to point out that the outfits with the greatest participation (DWG and MDK) also host drill sessions. We have generally skilled players, and strategically I think we show the greatest insight out of all VS outfits, but we are somehow lacking in organised tactical teamplay. Cortosis' exercise "see how long we can hold C in the Crown" and Ridebird's Delta Force are good foundations upon which we should build.
24-02-2013, 05:07 PM #540
Note: Moved post to outfit organisation thread. Didn't realise I wasn't posting there!Originally Posted by CROCONOUGHTKEY