Official Squads

why are you trash talking here?

I am doing some manual stuff so we can reference that for teams. Give me a bit to get this stuff down.

We normally play as fireteams and use combined tactics when we play Vortexs. Unless of course the game calls for a full out assault in which case we might just charge! We employee scouts or recon teams and usually split each team into generic squads at the game depending on the game objectives and the players loadout. I think Doug just wants to form specialty squads within the club, which I think could be valuable if we implement it properly to allow for team balancing and training requirements.

Dave, what did you think about my suggestion in the NIA mission statement thread?

give me a bit to get this stuff we talked about last night into some orderly thoughts.

What I was thinking is really close to what you have down smith

I merged those thoughts in here...thought they had more to do with the teams idea than the missions statement

Argh! Crazy merges! I get so lost...

Vortex, will you please keep game talk out of club threads. I realize that you are excited to play with us but these threads are a serious place to discuss our club activities and rules.

-Doug

Stupid Firefox keeps deleting my messages so here is an incomplete thought.

We use Canadian tactics in our boot camp, Canadian Ranks for game attendance so we may as well us Canadian stuff for our breakdown and leadership in these teams. These are a loose taking so there may be some mistakes in the wording but you get the idea.

Structure up to Platoons
Platoon-3 sections (24 players)-one designated as Master Corporal
Section-2 groups (8 players) - one designated as Section Commander
Group-2 fire teams (4 players)-one designated as 2IC (second in command)
Fire team-(2 players)-one designated as Private First Class

Rank
Master Corporal-gives orders to the 3 section commanders
Section Commander-gives orders to both 2IC’s
Second in Command-gives orders to PVT
Private First Class-gives small orders to PVT
Private-two feet and a heart beat-

In this system if we do get 24 players on each side it would be platoon VS platoon. If we get less than section VS Section, Group VS ETC.... If there are extra players on each side then a few of the fire teams can be three instead of two etc. Bigger sections and whatnot.

I would love to use this structure in every game so that every one of our games is training in teams. It'll take allot of the chaos and lone wolfing out.

The way I see teams working within this is that players with similar gear types will end up playing together anyway so just create teams from gear type and not playing style. Playing style really doesn't seem that fitting to me because our engagement distances are so close that if you do bump the Op-for then it's all going to go down really fast. Even if you fall back and call in the big guns then they are waiting and setting up an ambush. I can see making roles like Marksman and support gunner but classifying a whole Group seems odd. This would allow more diversity in each section or Group and really give players a chance to use their trained skills. IF and when we do play other teams this will allow people to join other Groups better when they are trained as a role and not as a Group.

Hortons Heros wrote:

I would love to use this structure in every game so that every one of our games is training in teams. It'll take allot of the chaos and lone wolfing out.

That is the goal, get some more continuity.

Group-2 fire teams (4 players)-one designated as 2IC (second in command)

That is the level squad training is aimed at. Mind you, with all of this, I guess it is a matter of scale. Up the scale, and you have multiple squads, or one formal group with mulitple squads.

The way I see teams working within this is that players with similar gear types will end up playing together anyway so just create teams from gear type and not playing style. Playing style really doesn't seem that fitting to me because our engagement distances are so close that if you do bump the Op-for then it's all going to go down really fast.

I disagree with you about play style. People are going to play normal until they are called upon for special skills. Having "squads" that are specialized is a great idea, they can fight normally but when a Section Commander asks that they fullfill a specialized role, they can, unlike the rest of the gabble.

What I am saying I would like to keep Call-signs, be whatever it is called. Stalkers is a great idea, specialized training is great, play normal when you don't need it but when you are called upon, you can perform it. Saying that all game play is the same is un-true, unless all game play is run-and-gun. Having a group that you can call upon to flank and they won't complain, but actually enjoy it, is valuable.

Take a spin around the internet and explore how Ontario runs airsoft. There are teams that have no field, they work under the same training and gear and go from game to game, field to field. They are specialized in what they do and add a diverse element to the games they attend. Most "teams" have very strict gear, gun, and ammo regualtions, whether the game they are attending calls for it or not (ie real cap).

-Doug

I don't really like the way Ontario is set-up...how is that more inclusive to have a team that is totally elitist? They are great within themselves but to good to play with others.

I didn't say game play was all the same, what I meant is that it is game play is always different so mixing the people with skills into each team makes the teams even more effective and useful.

Hortons Heros wrote:

I don't really like the way Ontario is set-up...how is that more inclusive to have a team that is totally elitist? They are great within themselves but to good to play with others.

I didn't say game play was all the same, what I meant is that it is game play is always different so mixing the people with skills into each team makes the teams even more effective and useful.

Yeah, and for large games where we have the numbers, you mix the squads in, squads are for large games. There are somethings that cannot be done by yourself, or trained by yourself. Cannon crews are crews, you need more than one person, if someone trains with another group of people to work cannons, mixing them up all the time does not work.

It is pretty clear that you are opposed to this idea and that you rather go with what you have. Fine, this is trashed as of now. All squad work and ideas have and will continue to take place through private email and other sources.

-Doug

Doesn't mean I am right.

This whole 5 page conversation would take less than an hour if we were in person so...I'll see you at the game. I want to figure this out...

EDIT-stop saying I'm opposed...I like the idea of teams I just want to know why we are making them a certian way.

Hortons Heros wrote:

Doesn't mean I am right.

This whole 5 page conversation would take less than an hour if we were in person so...I'll see you at the game. I want to figure this out...

Ha ha ha, that is the problem. I am not in PG all the time. It gets always out of context all this writing, it seems pointless to talk on the forum sometimes.

Seriously, I am all for shutting up. I do not live in PG currently, it is not my club, and I really should not be making stuff if I am not there to see it through. On the flip side, there are members in PG who do want to see some of this through. I think that I should phase out of this stuff and let other people take it from here.

I have learned my lesson here, I nearly became like Greylocks. Unless I am heavily active at a local level (anyone know of any decent work in PG right now?), I will stay out of the club mechanism. Sorry for causing any strife on the forum, I did not mean for it to escalate to anything of this level (which isn't all that bad, I hope ). If and when I move back to PG, I shall pick it up then.

-Doug

We would usually have a MEAT and GREET to talk these things through so I am up for planning another one sometime soon and putting this on the agenda...oh, and giant nachos...that must be on the agenda.

Hortons Heros wrote:

Structure up to Platoons
Platoon-3 sections (24 players)-one designated as Master Corporal
Section-2 groups (8 players) - one designated as Section Commander
Group-2 fire teams (4 players)-one designated as 2IC (second in command)
Fire team-(2 players)-one designated as Private First Class

Rank
Master Corporal-gives orders to the 3 section commanders
Section Commander-gives orders to both 2IC’s
Second in Command-gives orders to PVT
Private First Class-gives small orders to PVT
Private-two feet and a heart beat-

sorry dave but the rank system is kinda messed up

Structure up to Platoons
Platoon-3 sections (24-30 players)-leader is Lieutenant; 2ic of platoon is warrant officer

Section (8-10 players) - one designated as Section Commander(Sergeant); section 2ic is a master corporal
Group-2 fire teams (4 players)-sergeant takes one fire team and the master corporal takes the other
Fire team-(2 players)-one designated as Private First Class

Rank
Lieutenant-gives orders to platoon 2ic
Platoon 2ic- gives orders to the 3 section commanders
Section Commander-gives orders to anyone below their rank
Section 2ic-answers to section commander and carries down order to any body lower rank than them


sorry..i wasn't too kean about the private first class stuff....its american rank..what do u think dave?

I made most of that up, looks way better. I figured that there was some major discrepancies in there. Thanks China

China check out the Ignore this post in the manuals section