The NCO and the Officer...

[TheN00b]

Originally Posted by Firefly

Stop calling me sir.

Gotcha', Firefly, si... Goddammit!

[Mag-Mower]

Originally Posted by Lartnev

My eyes!

[Cauldron Borne]

I'm using the military definitions of Tactical and Strategic.

Tactical: within the area (about an SOI i guess).

Strategic: Global or in a WIDE area (continent/ global - CR5's and outfit leaders are the only ones who can really do this.)

And LF doesn't chose it's SL's based on Outfit rank, either. It is more of whom ever started the squad. During Operations we may designate an officer for squads, but that's mostly because the officers were given that rank because they showed they had experience in leading squads effectivly.


So that is why I say that a squad of 10, imo, cannot effectivly affect the strategic areas of this game. If, as you said, the squad is pulling a support roll, it would have to depend on how effective it was at affecting a wide area of troops.

[Onizuka-GTO]

Originally Posted by TheN00b

Gotcha', Firefly, si... Goddammit!

Keep saying that, TheN00b.
I think he secretly likes it.

[Firefly]

Originally Posted by Onizuka-GTO

Keep saying that, TheN00b.
I think he secretly likes it.

No. I hate it. The enlisted-Army in me hates it, and the part of me that's getting old hates it.

[TheN00b]

Originally Posted by Cauldron Borne

I'm using the military definitions of Tactical and Strategic.

Tactical: within the area (about an SOI i guess).

Strategic: Global or in a WIDE area (continent/ global - CR5's and outfit leaders are the only ones who can really do this.)

And LF doesn't chose it's SL's based on Outfit rank, either. It is more of whom ever started the squad. During Operations we may designate an officer for squads, but that's mostly because the officers were given that rank because they showed they had experience in leading squads effectivly.


So that is why I say that a squad of 10, imo, cannot effectivly affect the strategic areas of this game. If, as you said, the squad is pulling a support roll, it would have to depend on how effective it was at affecting a wide area of troops.

It really depends on what you call tactical and what you call strategical. In my opinion, a tactical decision is one that needs to be right away, and will have an immediate, nearby effect: For example, an under-fire formation change. Strategical seems to be a more slow-paced, global understanding and application of multifarious tactics that fcan be utilized simultaneously for great effect.

[OptimusPrime]

"Like it or not, the aggressor makes the rules. You must play by them, or you will surely die by them..."

[Cauldron Borne]

N00b: You just said what I said using more words.....

[TheN00b]

Originally Posted by Cauldron Borne

N00b: You just said what I said using more words.....

No I didn't. You specified area in your definitions, whereas I feel that area has no place in finding the distinction between tactics and strategy. For example, under your definition, a squad going to an enemy-locked continent and draining a base is a tactical maneuver: That is, it is in an area smaller than a SOI. However, I view this as strategical, because it would force enemy commanders to redistribute troops on a global scale.

[Ducimus]

>>The NCO and the Officer...


The officer is responsible for having something done.
The NCO is responsible for doing it.

[TheN00b]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

>>The NCO and the Officer...


The officer is responsible for having something done.
The NCO is responsible for doing it.

Mebbe. I view it more as:

Officer: Decides plan of action
NCO: Gets all of Officer's grunts to follow the plan of action.

[Firefly]

Good Officer - does what the general/colonel says, tells the NCOs what needs to happen. Sits in vehicle and stays the hell out the way.

Bad Officer - gets guidance from on-high, tells sergeants how to do their job, tells privates how to do their job and how to listen to sergeants, claims to be pro-sergeant, forgets that West Point is a college and not a leadership school, ends up getting fragged by the sergeant or a smart private.

Sergeant - hears what officer says, nods, salutes, says "Hooah sir", then ignores it and does it his own way. Gets no reward except the satisfaction of a job well done (which is all we need, airborne!)

Notice there is no bad or good for the Sergeant.

[Lonehunter]

Originally Posted by TheN00b

An interesting viewpoint, Cauldron. A potential problem with it is that I've been with Liquid Force, and you guys don't use the ranking system that both the military and The Black Widows use; that is, you guys have the squad leader, and then the rest of the squaddies.

That is what you may think Noob, but my self and other Officers always thought as you as one of the problems, you rarely listened. As for, "Squad leader, and then the rest of the Squaddies." With us, the SL IS the Boss, it is his Job and his duty, if the Outfit leader is in this Squad and disagrees with the SL's decision, he's gonna have to live with it. Now if the OL, knows that his own way is best, he'll let that SL learn after he makes his mistake. But Noob I hope you found an outfit family that suites you well.

As far as the main topic, the main construct of working well as a team is discipline, once the whole team has achieved that, anything is possible. In Planetside, that can be hard to achieve for most.


Edit: Great post Optimus

[TheN00b]

Erm, Hunter? The last time I checked, during the time I was in Liquid Force, you weren't there... Cifer was the acting commander...

[Firefly]

Originally Posted by TheN00b

Erm, Hunter? The last time I checked, during the time I was in Liquid Force, you weren't there... Cifer was the acting commander...

That's who LoneHunter is. At least that's what I had been led to believe.