The NCO and the Officer...

OptimusPrime · 2004-06-20, 02:31 PM

The essence of the Officer/NCO relationship is best expressed in this story...

An old major, a veteran of long service and some hard campaigns, was giving some officer candidates a practical exercise in how to lead troops. The problem involved putting up a flagpole. To do this he provided a sergeant and a detail of three privates with tools. It was up to the officer candidates to figure out the best way to do the job...

They pondered the situation carefully. Several false starts were made, solutions were advanced and tried but failed because no one seemed to be in charge. Each candidate thought only he knew the right way and competed loudly with the others to be heard...

Finally, the old major stepped in and with a gesture! silenced the babble. "Gentlemen" he said, "allow me to demonstrate how a good officer would do this job". He turned to the sergeant and said "Sergeant, please have the men put up the flag pole." Nothing more was said and within a few minutes the flag pole was up...

The good NCO knows how to get the job done. The good Officer will let him do it...

Now, apply this thinking to PlanetSide and being a Squad Leader and a Squad Member...

See you on the battlefield...

Baneblade · 2004-06-20, 03:44 PM

I would say you were stating the obvious, but I know it's not...

TheN00b · 2004-06-20, 05:29 PM

Originally Posted by Sobekeus

I would say you were stating the obvious, but I know it's not...

It's funny? Umm...

Baneblade · 2004-06-20, 08:43 PM

Originally Posted by TheN00b

It's funny? Umm...

You kinda have had to have been in the military...

EDIT: Or have had a job with a boss who has no clue...

Lartnev · 2004-06-20, 08:47 PM

My eyes!

Cauldron Borne · 2004-06-20, 11:20 PM

Interesting. And so true.

SL's: you gotta give the orders, BUT: you can't baby the troops, they can handle it, and if they can't, then they need to find help.
EVERYONE ELSE: you gotta use yer friggin judgment as to how to BEST carry out those orders. And if you don't know how to haldle something DON'T BOTHER THE SL about it. Ask a veteran. The SL's are to busy trying make sure operation go through smoothly, and can't take time away from that to help you along.

I think that sums it up nicely.

Nice post, Optimus. I approve

TheN00b · 2004-06-21, 02:27 PM

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. What Optimus is talking about is that the NCO, the second-in-command of the squad, is able to effectively command the troops in a tactical situation, and that Squad Leaders should remember that. The Squad Leader should be the overall commander, looking at the big picture, contemplating and assigning targets, and organizing groups. He should delegate certain responsibilities, like commanding squad fire-teams in combat, to his NCO(s).

Cauldron Borne · 2004-06-22, 11:44 AM

I would, then, have to disagree. When all you have is ten people to work with at maximum, you can only focus on the tactical. There isn't a lot of strategic things a squad leader can do with a max. of ten soldiers.

Now if you had a platoon, the PL would be in the officer's position and the other SL's would be your NCO's and ensure the platoon functions at the tactical level while you (the PL), handled the strategy. This is how LF currently works.

That and i'm not sure what LiquidForce has to do with this conversation, anyway. What I think and what you saw of an outfit four months ago are, apparently, different.

Indecisive · 2004-06-22, 11:48 AM

The yellow text burrrrrnsss ussssss

Firefly · 2004-06-22, 01:07 PM

Originally Posted by Cauldron Borne

There isn't a lot of strategic things a squad leader can do with a max. of ten soldiers.

No.

Unless your squad leader is inept and cannot handle ten people properly. Factor in various levels of text and voice communication, up to four or five voice channels alone, and it gets more difficult.

As far as what other outfits have done or can do/used to do- that's not our concern, N00b. We do what we do and we do it well, that's why we are what we are. And we can leave it at that.

Cauldron Borne · 2004-06-22, 01:46 PM

You disagree? Then perhaps you are doing something the rest of the world is not/ have access to resources we don't. Please enlighten us, if anything it will allow the TR to better combat our enemies.

Anyway, I believe that if the SL is not focused on what can happen in his tactical moment (as a leutenant in the military also should), then he isn't fulfilling his requirnment as a leader. I am not saying that he shouldn't be aware of the strategic goals, as that has a lot to do with the tactical decisions he has to make in order to best suit the squad and the strategic goal.

That and I believe you are confusing Squad Leader with, perhaps, Outfit Leader, which has access to imencly(sp?) larger resource pools.

I DO agree that there are things that an SL can do that involve strategy. I am not sure that is what he should be doing, though. Leutnenants do not try to control the operations of the Army, though they have a large roll in carrying them out. The Same as Generals do not bother with the small tactics of his squads, as it would detract from his seeing the big picture.

SO: I think SL's should stick to the Tactics at hand using the resources availiable to their extent. He should be aware of the strategy that is going on around him, but should not try to delve too deeply into that, as that is not his job and could adversely affect his leadership ability.

Platoon Leaders, Outfit Leaders and CR5's who know what they are doing are the ones who should delve into the stragety in this game. They are the ones who can affect it most, and with the greatest efficiency for results.

Also, Firefly: Could you explain your answer a bit more? "No." seems to be a bit shorthanded.

*EDIT: I like this discussion. No flames, just good discussion.

TheN00b · 2004-06-22, 04:32 PM

Indeed, this debate 'tis a good one.

Cauldron, squad leaders can accomplish a huge amount of strategical missions. A single squad can drain a base, perform a lightning resecure drop, drop onto an AMS and take it out, take an important tower, at least temproarily... The possibilities are truly endless.
There is one major difference between the Army and any Outfit, even the 666th: The Army is fricking huge. As of now, I think that, for example, the US army, not including the Marines, the Air Force, etc... Has around 4-5 hundred thousand standing members. With that kind of system, the rank of Lieutenant just ain't that high, at least in the grand scheme of things; in most Outfits, however, where you can only field about 20 people on a very regular basis, a Lieutenant becomes a very important dude.

Firefly · 2004-06-22, 05:45 PM

I think you're misunderstanding what I am saying. At least in BWC, our squad leaders are not just NCOs. Anyone can lead a squad and when they do so, it's with the authoirty of an officer. We have ranks that we consider "NCO ranks", and when it comes down to it, those NCOs may be a squad leader while an officer may serve as platoon leader (and when we have enough people, a "company commander"). We also do not assign rank based on BR or CR, so it very well may be that a squad leader is ranked Corporal and is BR20/CR5. I know many outfits out there pay homeage to the almighty XP and CEP and some even say that you can't join them unless you're a certain BR/CR.

So I'd have to say, I know of instances where squad leaders had access to resource pools that other squad leaders or commanders did not- this holds true especially since this vaunted and mythical "Alliance Chat" we have been promised has yet to even make an in-concept article. I also instruct everyone in my outfit what voice channels to tune into, as we are part of several alliances/co-op groups that use voice comms. They also know which key commanders, leaders, and CRs to send intel to and ask for intel dumps. I cannot speak for times when I am not on, so when I am on if I am not leading I make sure that my team leaders and squad leaders and commanders are using the resources available.

Now strategy: how exactly does one implement and/or affect strategy, if we presume that every leader is busy leading? I believe that "lieutenants" such as squad leaders or platoon leaders (or NCOs if you lead that way) *CAN* create or use strategic plans. If you have a support squad, then you're already strategic because you're supporting the entire fight. I term "tactical" as using both tactics such as fire teams and maneuvering or using squad-based platoon tactics and also being in the immediate fight. A strategic asset/plan is one that encompasses a continental if not global scale. And simply saying to your squad, "The so-and-so empire is fighting with other-empire, we can cause a diversion on X-continent while we send the rest of the force to Y-continent" is actually a strategic statement. You're affecting strategy on a continental and global scale, which hits that at any angle you choose to define it as. If you also consider a command squad, then that's a whole 'nother aspect.

As far as lieutenants and NCOs go... in-game, they have an important place and real-world they have an important place (yes, they are valuable TeN00b).

TheN00b · 2004-06-23, 02:39 PM

Lol, sir, I know that they're valuable; they're just not as important on a realistic scale as they are in a system where the highest attainable rank is a Lieutenant.

Firefly · 2004-06-23, 04:48 PM

Stop calling me sir.