+- Comrades in Arms Discussion Board (http://forum.ciahome.net)
+-- Forum: Comrades in Arms Life (http://forum.ciahome.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: CiA Coop Nights (http://forum.ciahome.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: Discipline Discussion (/showthread.php?tid=3260)
Discipline Discussion - Watchmen - 01-24-2016
A question on formation, several times in a column formation i have seen the leader walk so far ahead ahead of his group while caught up with his leading and similarly large gaps between soldiers following behind and no one seems to make a fuss. Is this expected behavior even though technically the column formation is still in place.
Re: Discipline Discussion - Varanon - 01-24-2016
(01-24-2016, 06:03 AM)Watchmen link Wrote: A question on formation, several times in a column formation i have seen the leader walk so far ahead ahead of his group while caught up with his leading and similarly large gaps between soldiers following behind and no one seems to make a fuss. Is this expected behavior even though technically the column formation is still in place.
The expected behavior is quite simple: if column formation is ordered, we travel in a column. If the gaps get too big and someone is lagging behind, he should simply call this out and give the group an opportunity to regroup. When traveling, the spacing isn't that important, although it should not exceed, say, 50 m between two successive members of the formation.
Also, note the purpose of formations: Column's main purpose is to give a low footprint to the enemy while traveling far distances. Wedge or line, the standard formations in combat allow full firepower to the front (line) or front and flanks (wedge).
The evens-right-odds-left rule also ensure that the formation and thus firepower is balanced, and the fact that soldiers should keep their spot in the formation also ensures that no one walks into the others line of fire.
I suggest that if you think that there is something wrong with the formation, just aks the team leader, and he will act accordingly.
Re: Discipline Discussion - Evans - 01-24-2016
I also have a question on this matter.
When in wedge, and playing as medic, I like to stay a bit behind and in the middle, just to stay safe.
Is this right wrong or just simply up to the leader?
Re: Discipline Discussion - Variable - 01-24-2016
(01-24-2016, 08:23 PM)Evans link Wrote: I also have a question on this matter.That's a good initiative. Just make sure your team leader is aware of that.
When in wedge, and playing as medic, I like to stay a bit behind and in the middle, just to stay safe.
Is this right wrong or just simply up to the leader?
Re: Discipline Discussion - alias - 01-24-2016
Roger!
Re: Discipline Discussion - Stick - 01-24-2016
ok got that
Re: Discipline Discussion - Mjolnir - 02-06-2016
Just a couple of ideas I'd like to throw around here (based on both AmrA experience, and real life)
The first is that ideally, the leader shouldn't be the point man. Even with like only 5 other guys, you have far too many things to think about to be the first guy. Again, ideally you should have a preplanned route at the beginning of the mission the pointman (who should be a semi-expendable scrub ;D ) can follow, and if not, then waypoints that you make up as you go along, either on the map or using the features of the ground in front of you. It also gives someone else some responsibility, and hopefully you can trust them to choose the exact route.
Another thing is firefights. Ideally, unless the situation is dire, the leader should try and avoid shooting. You're worth more stood back in cover where you can get a bit more of an overview of both the enemy and your own troops (even 5 or 10m back can help get this over being right in the thick of the fight). A few times the other night I had to spread people out and make them cover the arcs I needed them too. People have an annoying tendency to clump.
The final thing I'd like to put out there is that it might be a good idea to nominate a 2nd in command once the number of your subordinates gets above 5 or 6. Then you can split into 2 smaller fireteams, such that you only have to directly manage a handful of guys, and can leave the nitty gritty of the other team to its fireteam leader, just giving them aims rather than orders (ie "take that positions while we cover", rather than "move into the ditch, follow it along to x, flank the position and clear it."). If the squad is big enough, you could even do it the US Marines way, and assign s or more fireteam leaders and act as a separate element yourself, easing the burden of commanding 12 or more guys.
Re: Discipline Discussion - Variable - 02-07-2016
(02-06-2016, 09:40 PM)Mjolnir link Wrote: The first is that ideally, the leader shouldn't be the point man.
(02-06-2016, 09:40 PM)Mjolnir link Wrote: Ideally, unless the situation is dire, the leader should try and avoid shooting.I have no doubt that these tactics are preferable over having the leader at the front. However, this goes against all I've been taught in the IDF, which sanctifies leaders' personal example in combat by placing them at the tip of any combat formation (up to the company level). This method was criticized through the years given the high casualty rates among infantry combat commanders but it's still the IDF's modus operandi and considered one of its core values. So even if I try, when leading, I emotionally can't send people to the front while I stay back. Of course, everybody are encourage to adjust their leading preferences to their liking, and their psychological barriers
(02-06-2016, 09:40 PM)Mjolnir link Wrote: The final thing I'd like to put out there is that it might be a good idea to nominate a 2nd in command once the number of your subordinates gets above 5 or 6.I used to do that until experience showed me that that 2nd in command I nominated might not in a position to assume control over the group when I get killed, whether because he is bleeding, far away, etc..
What I like to achieve is for the player that feels that he has situational awareness, and is capable in that point to take control, to announce that he's assuming command.
(02-06-2016, 09:40 PM)Mjolnir link Wrote: If the squad is big enough, you could even do it the US Marines way, and assign s or more fireteam leaders and act as a separate element yourself, easing the burden of commanding 12 or more guys.Yeah, my usual method is always split the team to two sub-teams - Red and Blue. In THAT case, I take one of the teams myself and assign a leader to the other one.
Re: Discipline Discussion - Alwarren - 02-07-2016
(02-06-2016, 09:40 PM)Mjolnir link Wrote: If the squad is big enough, you could even do it the US Marines way, and assign s or more fireteam leaders and act as a separate element yourself, easing the burden of commanding 12 or more guys.
Yeah, personally, I don't like big groups. If the mission maker hasn't broken it up into fireteam groups I will do that myself in the game with colored teams. Much easier to handle.