Winning the game at all costs?

**sc1ence** · 08-24-2009, 02:29 AM

Something happened to me today while squadleading that was a bit shocking. I had a respected TG community member refuse to follow an order, and then leave the squad because of the disagreement.

The map was carebare, we were down 15 tickets mid round and the enemy held roadblock and command. We were on the lower part of the western hill, the enemy held the high ground and was raining death down upon the rest of my team assaulting roadblock. There was no commander. We were the attacking team and had stopped bleed.

We comfortably held on to church and southtown, but were slowly dropping behind in tickets. It was clear at least one other squad was pushing on roadblock repeatedly. That's when I ordered my squad to take the western hill from the entrenched enemy.

I felt we could accomplish this goal if we had some well placed rockets and a decent push. It made tactical sense, and importantly, it looked like it would be fun. If we could get that high ground I felt it would give the rest of the team pushing on roadblock the cover they needed. We are on the assaulting team, the enemy was holding our territory, and we wanted it back.

So I give the order and have a TG community member refuse to comply and then leave the squad because he did not want to follow the order.

I assume he did not want to follow the order because he did not want to hurt his kill to death ratio. If he thought leaving our squad would somehow help our team win then his thinking was fundamentally flawed. Regardless of his motivation, it feels like I get this attitude from some of our elite players far more than I care for.

I bring up this example to illustrate my main point, I fear too many TG players are focused on winning without thinking about the process. I play the game to have fun, I play it in a near simulation mindset and I play it to win. When I am leading a squad, I try to make the environment a near simulation for my squad, I make sure I pick interesting and fun goals for our squad and I try to help our team win.

I understand that you may think your squadleader is making a bad call, but it is their call to make. Leaving the squad smacks of immaturity and this "winning at all costs" mentality really irks me.

This is the closest I get to a rant.

**Fruvous** · 08-24-2009, 03:37 AM

I had the same thing happen to me..
A "Riiiiiigggghtt" on carebear. I had to prioritize defending church from immediate enemies, or stopping a push. I decided take care of church quickly (we were there) and head for STC (it looked like they could hold out for a while).

On one hand, it's better than staying in the squad and doing their own thing at STC. To some, winning is the fun - competition gets the adrenaline running more than casual play could ever achieve. Afterall, 'Tactical' gamer pretty much screams competitiveness.

I think your fear might be a little unfounded though. While I generally don't agree with leaving a squad midgame, it never hurts to see the other person's perspective. He's more comfortable following a different set of orders. If he's more comfortable, he'll have more fun - which is pretty much your philosophy on games: do things that are fun.

One person's fun doesn't always equate to your fun.

That said, I love your philosophy - play to win and to have fun. Camp Gibraltar rocket wars? Not fun.. I don't want to spend 200 loooooong revivable tickets lobbing grenades.

**Eroak** · 08-24-2009, 04:46 AM

Preemptive admining: Lets make sure this stays on track. I dont want to see anyone called out of this incident. Lets make sure the focus is how we handle tactical choices and how it effects our game.

**Zhohar** · 08-24-2009, 05:40 AM

Science is talking about me, so let's clarify the situation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sc1ence

I had a respected TG community member refuse to follow an order, and then leave the squad because of the disagreement.

I followed the order to assault up the west hill. In fact, I died following it, and I wasn't revived because my body was covered by a machine gun. There was an EU squad high above us on the west side.
Half of our squad died, in fact, before I said:

"I don't think this is a smart idea. The fight for Roadblock is the one we can win. They've already got people high west."

Science repeated the order.
Someone else said something to the effect of "this is not a good idea".
Science then said "Excuse me -- I'm the squad leader here, follow the orders."
I said "No offense science, I don't think this is a good idea. I'm out of here," and left to join another TG squad.

Why did I leave?
For one, I don't think your order was fun. It felt suicidal, to be honest, and there was a better alternative -- to fight from behind cover betwen STC and Roadblock.
For two, and more importantly, after I and someone else had said in pretty neutral tones that what we were doing wasn't a good idea, it didn't feel like you had even bothered to listen -- you had a goal, and our comments were just pesky whining. I didn't really want you to agree with me -- just listening is enough.

Maybe I misinterpreted your tone in the heat of the moment, but those two combined ... well, it wasn't the way I wanted to spend time.

I am a competitive player, and I do play to win. At any cost?
Hmm ... well. I'm 21, and I do lose sight of the bigger picture. I've said and done things that would be better fitting someone much younger than me.

But I've never had genuine intent to win at any cost. And the urge to win certainly wasn't why I left your squad: I didn't think your order was fun, and I didn't think you were listening to what we were saying.
That's how I saw it.

BeSiege82 · 08-24-2009, 05:59 AM

Let me say this, I have been guilty of back seat squad leading before and it has gotten me nowhere. I find it hard to communicate firm advisement versus rebellion...

zew45s · 08-24-2009, 06:17 AM

Sorry guys, I'm just passer-by, but.. SL is a SL, he/she makes a decision what to do, follow orders if you're SM or.. leave. It's a game, not a real life where you simply have no choice.
Both are right in my opinion.

**LordKelvin** · 08-24-2009, 11:08 AM

I was playing in this same round last night in Reaper's squad, and it was an absolute bloodbath. Between being swarmed at STC, Roadblock and Command while on offense, and having to cope with pings of up to 250 spiking into the 700s (my normal ping is 20), I was dying so much that it was unreal. I ended the round with 17 deaths... I don't remember the last time I've had a deaths per round that bad. But nonetheless we ended up winning because I stuck with the SL's orders and concentrated on healing and reviving instead of shooting, and ended up saving the same number of tickets that I had lost by dying. The end result was a PAC victory 1-0.

I place no blame on Reap for leading me into deathtraps... when I am not the SL, I place my complete trust in my SL. He is the one giving me the orders, and unless the SL is genuinely stupid or uncommunicative (whereupon I would leave the squad), it is my duty to follow his orders without question.

Shane · 08-24-2009, 11:19 AM

I agree, to a degree, lets step it up 1 though, I always play to have fun, winning is second, but sometimes orders seem a bit silly, and others downright idiotic. The other day I was SL on belgrade and CO was sending us back and forth following the whole team, even after the whole team sat on a flag, he still sent us there. Did not make much since but an order I had to follow, and as SL I could not ignor and could not just leave. I always try to make sure my squad is having a good time with tactical smarts helping. Some pubbie CO's have TG mentality they do not. Regardless I follow the order to the best of my ability, if he called for an attack on pond and we are against the whole team as a lone squad because he sent the rest of my side to monorail I would try to find a way to attack while keeping my squad alive and try to have a good time doing it. That said it is the SM choice to leave to another SL if they feel like it, I have had them leave my squad for following silly orders givin to me by the CO, All I can do is say " hey these are CO orders lets go, if you dont like it find another squad " I take no offense if they leave and most dont. Prove yourself a good SL and people will follow no matter how strange the order. But dont take offense, some just have a certain style of play and fit better running with other SL's, lol for instance I am sure my SL is a bit too slow for Zho, but I always enjoy SM with him cause I feel like I am raiding an auction house lol, just have fun people

**austforbeer** · 08-24-2009, 11:26 AM

I've had issues with squad leaders in the past where at least one incident was reported and I was 'spoken to'. In that conversation it was explained to me simply that if I have an issue with the squad leader, simply leave. Staying and getting aggravated will only make a bad situation worse and it doesn't help anyone. I happen to agree with this philosophy and I think it's anything but immature.

I squad lead often and will deal with people who want to leave or do their own thing. Alot of people don't like the way I squad lead and that's fine with me.

Some people like the competitive nature of teamwork and that's why they play. Others just want to have some fun. I don't see how not wanting to run into a bad situation equates to winning at all costs. The reasons why we play don't matter, the important thing is that we follow the rules.

**Zoraster** · 08-24-2009, 11:33 AM

To me this thread has little to do with "winning at all costs." I think it's mislabeled.

It's about the extent to which a SM can disagree with a SL's tactics and then, if he does disagree enough, to leave the squad because of it.

When I SL, I expect my members to speak up if they see something wrong with my orders, but ultimately it is my choice to make. The weakest SLs are those who vacillate and can't make up their minds. If it's early in the round, and it hadn't been clear we were going to have opposing viewpoints, then I'm okay with the guy leaving my squad. As a SM, I'll pretty much immediately leave upon hearing "I'm going to place a beacon..."

But if it's in the middle of the round, I expect my SMs to stay in my squad and not leave in a huff. Maybe my order isn't the best one, but if I've decided it is, that's what's going to happen. If you've made your views known, I've listened to them. If I reject those views, that's my prerogative, and I don't think you have any business leaving the squad because of it.

To my mind, leaving a squad at that point seems to be akin to disobeying a SL order. It's never something I'm going to report to an admin, of course, but it does violate the spirit of the chain of command.

**Crux** · 08-24-2009, 11:55 AM

I'd agree with Zoraster it does seem mis-labeled. Maybe "preserving KDR at all costs" would be better

**PM07SNV** · 08-24-2009, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eroak

I dont want to see anyone called out of this incident.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zhohar

Science is talking about me

Brilliant!

----------------------

I've done this a few times as well, and I think Fruvous' example may be me. I joined half way through a game, and no-one was defending our best flag, which at the time was South Town. Church is of no importance to me, other than being a great killing ground, so my choice was to help the team another way. I'm not disobeying an SL's order if I'm not in his squad anymore, and I created my own squad and new orders, allowing our team more options, which soon filled up when more people joined. All I know is we didn't lose south town.

**Catman1975** · 08-24-2009, 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sc1ence

Regardless of his motivation, it feels like I get this attitude from some of our elite players far more than I care for.

I bring up this example to illustrate my main point, I fear too many TG players are focused on winning without thinking about the process. I play the game to have fun, I play it in a near simulation mindset and I play it to win.

I understand that you may think your squadleader is making a bad call, but it is their call to make. Leaving the squad smacks of immaturity and this "winning at all costs" mentality really irks me.

Welcome back to 2142 TG and what it has become.

This attitude has been swimming around the 2142 for awhile now, if you want to see how badly it's been look back through and see how many teamstacking/imbalance threads there are.

The elite TGers only want to play with other elites and love to see the round end in a blood bath, they're competitive and incapable of playing just for fun and simulation

TG rules state, "follow your SL orders" you have every right to question them, but to leave, is no just immature, it's childish, that person thought they knew better than Sc1 and couldn't stand taking the orders he was given and thought you weren't elite enough to know how to assault and left your squad. Yes I realize who this person was and although leaving his name out, I answered based on this.

I had Zho's response quoted and replied with a lot of things I wanted to point out, but it started to sound too much like a personal attack on Zho, which I didn't want. It sounded like a personal attack because I feel Zho and a lot of the other elite players act the same way. The elite players only want to play with each other (mostly 3rd and reaper's new IHS I don't recall the # or letter off hand) and often side up. I don't play anymore because of the attitudes of these elite players. I feel they're just rude and childish to the non-elite players. These players often play with the attitude of "we must win" and "if we win, we want to decimate the other team." That's the only way they have fun.

**frozenchrome** · 08-24-2009, 01:16 PM

While I do not find the action of leaving a squad for difference of opinion a bad thing, I find it a bit rude. One spends a greater part of a round running with a given SL only to bow out when there is disagreement with a SL decision. I am not a great SL by far. This does happen to me frequently, though generally they part in silence with no words of wisdom to guide me

. I do take in consideration the amount of SMs who are running with me when I plan out my tactics. I find it disrupts my playing and thus my SMs playing too. The best is to have some consideration before joining or, in the case of un-tested waters, join in but hold spawn to see how the SL handles themselves.

I am more in it for the fun then anything else. During moments like these, I tend to hold spawn and wait for things to change instead... as they always do

**Zoraster** · 08-24-2009, 01:19 PM

The funny thing is that we actually far prefer to play against other "elite" players. yes, we prefer to play with our own IHS, but that's pretty natural, I think. We often switch sides to try and balance things, though when we're the reason our team is winning, it's a precarious balance.

And sadly, cat, I think you're picking the wrong person to make an example of with zho. He, more than almost anyone I know, plays on the losing team without being asked. He has plenty of faults, but teamstacking isn't one of them.

But I don't think sc1ence wanted this to be another thread about teamstacking, though I know you brought this up to point out that there's this "new" trend of selfishness.