Re: Thoughts about commanding

**asch** · 07-31-2006, 05:08 PM

For those who feel uncomfortable reporting players that don't follow orders..... those people who can't follow orders don't belong our on servers. The rule is plain and simple about following orders.

It's not up to the grunt to disobey the SL because he feels it's initiative the same way the SL should not disobey the CO because they feel it's initiative. Initiative would be to confirm the action with the CO first and then proceed upon confirmation. There have been times when I've CO'd that a SL has left their defensive position to take another flag. They may have thought it was initiative, but I thought of it as blowing my whole strategy. The SL never even begins to think that maybe I didn't want that flag or I was trying to position my squads for something else.

Disobeying orders are not to be taken lightly. I'd even go so far to say repeatingly disobeying orders is a bannable offense.

**Nikolas** · 07-31-2006, 05:54 PM

My point wasn't that SLs should take off and not notify the CO. I never said anything of the sort.

My point is that I'm not going to run to an admin to have someone kicked from the server because they disagree with my order. I'm going to be a man and handle it myself.

**asch** · 07-31-2006, 06:21 PM

Originally Posted by xTYBALTx

My point wasn't that SLs should take off and not notify the CO. I never said anything of the sort.

My point is that I'm not going to run to an admin to have someone kicked from the server because they disagree with my order. I'm going to be a man and handle it myself.

Hopefully the CO and the SL can work it out and the CO should make the attempt to get the SL back on track. However, if the SL still cannot follow orders, then this should be reported.

It's not a matter of cowboy-ing up..... the admin team does not want these players on our servers. So by continuing to allow players to run around that don't follow orders, we're doing the community a dis-service.

**SassyOne** · 07-31-2006, 06:37 PM

Tybalt, maybe you misunderstand. This is not about someone disagreeing with an order. Maybe I can give you a scenario to make it more clear.

CO: Squad 4, please defend the Refinery. (CO places defense marker)

(2 minutes pass, CO clicks back on squad 4 and they now have a new marker to assault the Power Plant and are almost there when the Refinery flag falls. They make no attempt to return to defend it.)

CO: Squad 4, what's going on? We lost the Refinery.

SL: Yeah, we just went out to hit the Power Plant. (A flag the CO had no intention of holding)

CO: Oh... okay, could you just let me know next time if you want to change it up?

SL: Sure thing.

(Wash, rinse, repeat.)

I think I got from the responses so far what I needed to know which is, report it. But I did want you to understand what I'm talking about, Tybalt.

**NorCalRoach** · 07-31-2006, 06:44 PM

For BF2, the CO/SL chain of command was, and still is, the core of what separates TG from other servers for me. Yes TG BF2 server has tactical play and uses more VOIP as well, but the true value that I appreciate is being able to rely on CO's to respond and give directions, and SL's that respond and take direction. While tactics, strategy and communication can be questionable and subject for discussion, the CO/SL chain of command isn't and I hope this type of behavior does not continue. Please continue to report rogue SL's.

**Drizzid** · 08-01-2006, 02:04 AM

Being a good SL is following the orders of the CO no matter how good or inexperienced the CO is. Now there is a right way to take initiative as a SL. If I am asked to defend I am going to defend that flag until otherwise notified by my CO. But if it is slow and there isn't much going on I will keep my eye on nearby flags and see if I can send a fireteam to assist another squad or try and turn a flag long enough to distract the enemy. But I will always be on the objective my CO gives me as a SL. A SL I feel doesn't need to notify a CO if he is sending a fireteam out becase I am still defending the objective. JMHO

**Rick_the_new_guy** · 08-01-2006, 02:31 AM

Nice thread.

I started one on Tac Mod SL and CO tips and communication if anyone wants to add some stuff.
http://www.tacticalgamer.com/battlef...ips-sl-co.html

**asch** · 08-01-2006, 08:35 AM

Originally Posted by Drizzid

A SL I feel doesn't need to notify a CO if he is sending a fireteam out becase I am still defending the objective. JMHO

This depends on what that fireteam is going to do. I will often leave an CP in the enemy hands on purpose. When the number of CPs that the enemy has is reduced, they concentrate their forces both in spawning and assaulting. That can be a bad thing.

Another reason to check with the CO is that if you do have a fireteam free, the CO may have a better use for them.

**BigGaayAl** · 08-01-2006, 11:09 AM

Originally Posted by JMJ

Being an SM (paying member) doesn't give you the right to abuse the rules that are in place. I encourage you to report anyone who is not following the rules. I suggest you type into chat something like "Admin, squad 5 is not following orders at all". We can see who the squad leaders are in the admin tool and take action accordingly.

Ok thanks I'll tink Ill do that, cautiously though. I do believe TG is the only place where being commander can be fun, and I'd like to see it stay that way. I think taking orders lightly is one of the causes we see a lack of CO's. I myself have quit quite often from co position because I just didn't have the ability to influence the battle at all.

On Tacmod CO is alot of fun though and discipline is up a notch.

**Acid** · 08-01-2006, 11:58 AM

Iwould think that it would be ok for the SL to continue along an attack pattern, or mabey send a lone guy off to cap some back flag while you were defending, as long as you can defend. That would only happen though when the SL has informed the CO about their intentions.

Thread Tools

Display