Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mission Platoon Set-Ups

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mission Platoon Set-Ups

    I personally set all my missions to how the US Army Rangers set their rifle platoons.

    Platoon Leader
    Platoon SGT
    Platoon Medic
    Platoon RTO

    [Add recon, logistics, etc attachments here]

    Squad x3

    Squad Leader

    Team Leader

    Rifleman
    Automatic Rifleman
    Anti-Tank
    Medic

    Team Leader

    Rifleman
    Automatic Rifleman
    Anti-Tank
    Medic

    Weapons Squad x1

    Squad Leader

    Team Leader (M240B)

    Rifleman (Ammo Bearer)
    Anti-Air
    Javelin
    Medic

    Team Leader (M240B)

    Rifleman (Ammo Bearer)
    Anti-Air
    Javelin
    Medic

    Further positions could be created and considered attachments. These should be added to the platoon HQ. Additionally SF/ Tanks/ Jets can be added, but with their group separate from everyone else. If you do however, decide to add all of these, a company HQ should be created. Although the M2 Machine Guns are cool, they are currently bugged, and are assigned to weapon platoons.

    I know beta wants to add difficulty in his missions. So remove some AT4 rounds/ launchers (say they were used in a previous battle). Leaving the weapons squad with 2 javelin missile rounds (or less). This would add more structure and firepower. Thus allowing more enemy troops/ armor and making the mission more fun and exciting. Also, sections like we have to too big and cumbersome. We need separate fire teams that are more mobile and can support each other better.
    Last edited by TF5-SGM.Spyder; 01-04-2009, 06:30 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Mission Platoon Set-Ups

    Originally posted by TF5-SGM.Spyder View Post
    ...
    Also, sections like we have to too big and cumbersome. We need separate fire teams that are more mobile and can support each other better.
    No reason you can't split the section into 2 x 4-player groups. That's what the 2IC is for really.

    I'd like to see some new missions of the server, if you have any that you think are playable, put them in the Mission Depot thread! Variety is a good thing.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Mission Platoon Set-Ups

      I have nothing against both set ups but I do like the fact that in a section, you are able to communicate in group channel and not disturb any other sections rather than in a squad, only team leaders and the members of that team are able to use group channel so it makes it harder for the squad leader to communicate to his team leaders without the use of side channel. UNLESS, you put them in a big group including squad leader, team leaders, and the members. Then, I have no problem.

      But I've seen missions with alpha squad leader, for example, separated from the team leaders which gives no other way than to communicate in side channel which will interrupt with other squads like bravo, charlie, etc.


      IN GAME ARMA: |TG-Irr| Lq.Snake

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Mission Platoon Set-Ups

        In my opinion, anything with 2 squads or more, each squad should be in one group. Fireteam leaders can use direct chat with their fireteams since they will be with them. This allows the squad leader to use group to inform his squad what he wants and not interfere with other squads. Whenever I see squads broken into groups for the fireteams, those fireteams end up being used as their own squad, and that doesn't work out well on a mission that is designed to be done in platoon strength. Fireteams are a part of the squad and should operate with the squad anyways in my opinion. Just easier if the squad is in one group.
        Last edited by LCpl. Soto; 01-08-2009, 03:01 PM. Reason: fix comment
        |TG-Irr|LCpl. Soto
        TGULT-Roel Yento

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Mission Platoon Set-Ups

          Originally posted by LCpl. Soto View Post
          Whenever I see squads broken into groups for the fireteams, those fireteams end up being used as their own squad, and that doesn't work out well on a mission that is designed to be done in platoon strength. Fireteams are a part of the squad and should operate with the squad anyways in my opinion. Just easier if the squad is in one group.
          You may be referring to some of the BASf or ShackTac missions which put squad leaders and fireteams into different groups. This is done because of how ShackTac organizes through VON and Teamspeak, which is different from how TG has decided to do things. For that reason, you will not be able to play those missions in the same way that they are intended to be played. Our TS/VON integration is a bit more in-depth than what seems possible to achieve with a public playerbase, based upon observations of past attempts at getting it set up as a standard on TG. I would suggest one of two things - one, deal with it the way it is and try to adapt to that structure - or two, ask for those missions to be removed. "Three" would be to adopt a more comprehensive VON/TS integration, but I don't think that's likely to happen. ;)

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Mission Platoon Set-Ups

            Originally posted by Dslyecxi View Post
            You may be referring to some of the BASf or ShackTac missions which put squad leaders and fireteams into different groups. This is done because of how ShackTac organizes through VON and Teamspeak, which is different from how TG has decided to do things. For that reason, you will not be able to play those missions in the same way that they are intended to be played. Our TS/VON integration is a bit more in-depth than what seems possible to achieve with a public playerbase, based upon observations of past attempts at getting it set up as a standard on TG. I would suggest one of two things - one, deal with it the way it is and try to adapt to that structure - or two, ask for those missions to be removed. "Three" would be to adopt a more comprehensive VON/TS integration, but I don't think that's likely to happen. ;)
            Just curious, but could you elaborate on the Shacktac system?


            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Mission Platoon Set-Ups

              Ah, didn't know that. Well for public play, requiring certain people to be on teamspeak won't work too well since it would require some non regulars to be on ts. I can see how it would work for a clan or unit since it's the same people all the time. Honestly though, I think ingame von is sufficient with squads on one group. Fireteams stay close enough to use direct comms anyways. For the time we can make due but I think it would be a good idea to start integrating maps that put each squad on it's own channel. That or start getting the main leaders required to be on teamspeak. This could be a headache with lots of people coming and going on a busy day.
              |TG-Irr|LCpl. Soto
              TGULT-Roel Yento

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Mission Platoon Set-Ups

                Originally posted by WaterIsPoison View Post
                Just curious, but could you elaborate on the Shacktac system?
                Sure.

                Here's a quote from a post I made awhile back, when we were getting VON up to functional status, talking about how we planned to use VON/TS together based on our testing experiences:
                Here's how ShackTac will be running TS/ArmA VOIP integration. We do things at the platoon level, but it applies to squad-level procedures as well.

                We will utilize TS for the following:

                - Command chat, using the "Channel Commander" functionality. This will include:
                x. Platoon Commander
                x. Squad Leaders
                x. Leaders of any special elements (ie air, armor, etc)

                - Squad chat. This will be where the entire squad is in the same TS channel. This is to be used for the Squad Leader to communicate to his squad members, or for a squad member to talk to the entire squad. There will be an emphasis on not using this unless you're a squad leader or fireteam leader.

                We will utilize ArmA VOIP for the following:

                - Fireteam chat. Because of how our organization breaks down in mission terms, each "group" is actually a fireteam. Because of this, speaking on the "Group" VOIP channel means that you're talking to just the members of your fireteam. I believe that the SimHQ template you guys use is very similar to this. "Group" chat can be potentially used to maintain control over your fireteam when you're spread particularly thin for whatever reason, or when things are loud enough that you can't rely on the direct-speaking channel. We will be experimenting with this channel a lot to see how best to utilize it in the future.

                - Vehicle chat. The "Vehicle" channel will be used for, you guessed it, vehicle-based chat. This will allow vehicle crews to be much more communicative than they have been able to be in the past, and should really help us out and make certain types of missions a lot more feasible (ie a mission where there are 10+ vehicles on our side) and less of a headache in terms of TS.

                - Direct Speaking. This is the big one. Direct Speaking is used to communicate verbally with anyone around you. This is where we have been restricted with TS - there are only a few ways to organize TS, and we basically have the best compromise possible, with things broken down to the squad level. However, that means you have 14 people in the TS channel for a squad, and since a squad can be distributed over a several hundred meter area in some situations, it can make for confusing communications if everyone is trying to talk (even in moderation). We have restricted a squad TS channel to mostly the SL and FTLs in 1.08, and 1.09 will open it up and allow us to have fireteam members talking as much as they want to anyone around them. This is huge - the significance cannot be emphasized enough.
                Here's the section from our TTP about our comm procedures. Note that it was actually written prior to VON working properly, and some of it was just me predicting how it would work for us - note that it worked as expected once it finally became usable. ;)

                http://dslyecxi.com/armattp2.html#commandcomm

                Comment

                Connect

                Collapse

                TeamSpeak 3 Server

                Collapse

                Advertisement

                Collapse

                Twitter Feed

                Collapse

                Working...
                X