Thoughts of things we have lot of improve in gaming as VU

[Lumituisku]

Last summer we played this sadly famous mission "Taking back Suomussalmi." - I had asked Rotar to record it, and as well Asid. - Now when I'm watching these videos again a lot of thoughts pop up.


It seems, that same troubles we had back then, - we still have.

 - Most importantly, our communications. - I just cannot help it but to think of how much more clear communications would be if...
       1 Players in same platoons would have whisper list. - Would communicate platoon movement in that whisperlist.
       2 Platoons would have actual leaders, stepping up taking up their role, not only in platoon but as sections as well. Platoon has two sections, in small maps, section 
          leading is essential! And knowing, who takes the lead if platoon leader dies.
       3 Better communications inside platoons. (Inside platoon whisperlist.) Units would actually ask platoon leader, already in the briefing of their task, missions, what 
          platoon leader wants them to do.
       4 Reporting... Status, movement etc...  Lead tank in platoon starts..  then fourth then second and then third. - If vehicle is busy, vehicle commander has to announce it
          somehow...  othervise it would be assumed either Radio damaged, or disabled vehicle in the platoon. Really...  If platoon leader tells 4 and 3 to move to lets say...
          objective Iron. (As apparent.. section.) 4 would take lead, and make sure, 3 is able to move, and once 3 reports being on the move or able to follow. 4 reports to
          platoon leader that (1 this is 4, moving, out) Or so.
       5 Platoon leaders to know, - CO,s intent, and vehicles in platoon to know, platoon leaders intent. (Such as... are they to stay for long.. or is it just..  small task at hand,
          and that what would possible be next thing to...  prepare to do.  - While of course, focusing at the current job.

 - We really need to work with co-operation, that things happen at the moment they are planned to - If for example 1st and 2st platoons are to engage same time... it should really happen same time. And even so that... all vehicles in platoons are to engage same time. - And that Artillery... would land to where its needed, when it is supposed to.
- NOT that smoke barriage lands, and some of our units still ask CO to repeat their orders.

And that... if Unit is to told to advance in the open to a safe place... it would keep advancing to a safety, even if it notices something that it has not yet really identified as true danger.

And yeah this reporting...  I'm starting to wonder, does CO really have to know every troop and single tank location. - Makes me think that would it be more essential, to understand COs intent...  like if advancing trough defile, or even doing breach there and that it would be only way. Intent would be to keep breach / advance safe? Platoons would automatically engage enemy infantry, and armor. - First contact of enemy would be reported, of surrounding a areas (CO, this is 1, contact enemy armor south of defile), especially if endangering COs intent (CO this is 2, contact enemy fortified positions, east of objective) (CO, this is 1, enemy armor assault towards our positions detected). All changes that endanger this intent would be crusial to report. Instead of the current. Style of some players (inc me) where basically anything of enemy is reported. And that these things... these minor things, contact another squad of infantry. Contact 2 more pcs, contact tank hull down position at left side of hill... would go to platoon leader instead. - Truly basically....  Platoon leaders should be only ones to report CO, and from the things that affect company. Not from things that...  affect tank or platoon. And yeah..  tank leaders.. should report to platoon leaders of things that affect platoon leaders intent. Not from things that tank leaders are able to deal themselves Like moving around a tree, having gunner facing right direction. (thank god were not this helpless... are we?)


And...  really... I think we truly need a dedicated person to take control of the artillery. One who knows how to call it as priority target (in 30 seconds) and how to turn and adjust it properly, and to time it, even multiple strikes at once if necessary.

And we need, to have more clear knowledge of sectors of fire, knowledge of choke points, where to call artillery... and exatly... when.

    1 With Sectors of fire I mean, that, really. Vehicles would be watching where platoon leader wants them to look at. Not to location where vehicle commander things he   
    should cause of mutual feeling. And that Vehicles.. would be actively scanning the operation area... instead of just sitting there and waiting AI to spot. (AI has 80% or less
    change to spot enemy. Every 5th enemy or more is not noticed at the area where gun is not pointing directly)
   
    2 With Choke points I mean crucial locations, where enemy contact is expected or located to. - These areas should be named so that communications work, and that
    most importantly, artillery or air support could be directed to these areas as well. - I think we really need to be able to identify these locations, already before or at least
    when we see enemy. - To name them and to create TRP (target reference point) to these locations

-

We have lot to improve with Map markings as well.

I have seen many kind of map marking techniques, even on same mission. And honestly... I do not know what we should as a VU use. Lets take a example.

How we mark hill tops? Some use TRPs, some small text, some large text.  It is not that much of an issue, but how about when we have to mark enemy location? TRP again? Or red text? Or... big text? Or perhaps circle to suspected contact area?

This leads to question... 

Does CO have to be able to see every location or eny units spotted. Or would it be more important to mark just areas of contact. For example.. Tanks this area, and red circle around contact area... (And this would be posted to company.) while...  tanks in platoon and platoon leader would post exact locations to just Platoon instead? (TRPS to company of course)

[Lumituisku]

Comments please... anything thoughts, feelings, ideas. Go for it and write it up! Its important!

Or is this just whining, coming from one who sucks most.

[Colebrook]

You are right  Lumi, but the things you want are very difficult to do,especially this:"We really need to work with co-operation, that things happen at the moment they are planned to - If for example 1st and 2st platoons are to engage same time... it should really happen same time. And even so that... all vehicles in platoons are to engage same time" and this " With Sectors of fire I mean, that, really. Vehicles would be watching where platoon leader wants them to look at".
I dont think we can do this unless we start again the HAVOC style missions.

[Asid]

Hi Lumi

Great post. Some really good points.

Remember this was a Sunday mission with some new players so it will always be different from Saturday missions. It is more pressure and harder for a new player to work as a team.

Regards

[Lumituisku]

Remember this was a Sunday mission with some new players so it will always be different from Saturday missions. It is more pressure and harder for a new player to work as a team.

This?

Mission that I spoke of is the one that Conn renamed as "live, die, repeat" Taking back Suomussalmi from me...  and it was Saturday mission, thought I spoke as in generally too.

Yes I know Sunday is different. - It reads in the mission description as well. Sunday by default is and should be more relaxed and allowing for new players to join.

As for Saturday. We seek for immersion. Do we not? - How immersive it is, when team work just doesn't work out.

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

You are right  Lumi, but the things you want are very difficult to do,especially this: ---
I dont think we can do this unless we start again the HAVOC style missions.

Well yes it is difficult especially if members are not ready to put effort at what they do. If peoples are here just to look to go to front line and to have as many kills as possible...  how much team work there can be? Or, if they just want to drive with tank and blast enemies...  and don't care at all what company and platoon actually should do? - They might be able to keep up with platoon task... for a moment but get lost when they see first enemy. - Sights.-   

Yes I agree, with you. We need more devotion from all members to even DOW missions. Closer to what Havoc is. - Thought I think that e could make this step, by taking step by step. Introducing and using new tactics. - Like for example Defile Drill. Would be very useful at Finland. A lot of narrow areas there.  introducing, making members to understand these at the start of mission, would take some time. But my point being. After that we would know it, and we should use it frequently, when ever such would be needed. Training makes master.

[Asid]

Saturday missions should be more “havoc” type. This should not be to difficult as it is long term SB players.

This will only really work with very small unit numbers. 1 vehicle each or multi-crew.

[Renders]

problem is number, number of people ready to put all their effort in making the mission similar to reality. (and so maybe one day i have to drive even if i don't like etc).
We usually do those kind of mission in max 1 tank platoon, but just 1 vehicle cause is difficult to have all the right people, all together and so much..
That's why havoc existed . Tanks gamey, DOW serious, Havoc most serious.
So many events and stuff happened, and we put those at a halt.
effort is the thing, and I am one of those that unluckily can't put all the effort he wanted cause of my weekend job.
I'm totally up to feel and try to think how nearly as possible as it can be a real exercise in tanks with the help of the military guys, but i agree with colebrook and I know only time and patience will give us small shots of what we are looking for.

[Lusik]

       1 Players in same platoons would have whisper list. - Would communicate platoon movement in that whisperlist.
       2 Platoons would have actual leaders, stepping up taking up their role, not only in platoon but as sections as well. Platoon has two sections, in small maps, section 
          leading is essential! And knowing, who takes the lead if platoon leader dies.
       3 Better communications inside platoons. (Inside platoon whisperlist.) Units would actually ask platoon leader, already in the briefing of their task, missions, what 
          platoon leader wants them to do.
       4 Reporting... Status, movement etc...  Lead tank in platoon starts..  then fourth then second and then third. - If vehicle is busy, vehicle commander has to announce it
          somehow...  othervise it would be assumed either Radio damaged, or disabled vehicle in the platoon. Really...  If platoon leader tells 4 and 3 to move to lets say...
          objective Iron. (As apparent.. section.) 4 would take lead, and make sure, 3 is able to move, and once 3 reports being on the move or able to follow. 4 reports to
          platoon leader that (1 this is 4, moving, out) Or so.
       5 Platoon leaders to know, - CO,s intent, and vehicles in platoon to know, platoon leaders intent. (Such as... are they to stay for long.. or is it just..  small task at hand,
          and that what would possible be next thing to...  prepare to do.  - While of course, focusing at the current job.

    1 With Sectors of fire I mean, that, really. Vehicles would be watching where platoon leader wants them to look at. Not to location where vehicle commander things he   
    should cause of mutual feeling. And that Vehicles.. would be actively scanning the operation area... instead of just sitting there and waiting AI to spot. (AI has 80% or less
    change to spot enemy. Every 5th enemy or more is not noticed at the area where gun is not pointing directly)
   
    2 With Choke points I mean crucial locations, where enemy contact is expected or located to. - These areas should be named so that communications work, and that
    most importantly, artillery or air support could be directed to these areas as well. - I think we really need to be able to identify these locations, already before or at least
    when we see enemy. - To name them and to create TRP (target reference point) to these locations

It's a good post Lumi. I would also like to be as realistic and possible and effective at the same time. I think I've noticed overall improvement in communication even since my short with DOW. Maybe we could focus on these gradually and introduce improvements one by one. I would like to have briefings done by platoon leaders shortly after the main company or battalion briefing. It should foucs on particular movement and engagement elements such as what to do when we are under fire and and sharing scan sectors between sections or individual vehicles. That would limit micromanagement and make us a more effective fighting unit.

When a had chance to command a company during out T.A.N.K.S. session I noticed how important it is for a commander to receive contact and engagement reports. I had lost w hole platoon before I noticed it on the map. That was a Sunday mission but it may be a good example of how important communication is to build a proper battlefield picture.

[Lumituisku]

I want to point out this post that, I had lot troubles to find...


If we could do, and follow this post that would be an huge improvement.

http://dogsofwarvu.com/forum/index.php/topic,297.0.html

[TamKay]

An excellent post Lumi and many good points in reply. I will post my two cents as a newcomer with no military background who likes his missions to be as immersive as possible.

Baby steps seem most reasonable to me on many of the suggested improvements. Focus on the players who want to better their playing style and give them an opportunity to learn. Different people learn best in different ways. For players who learn by reading you could possibly start a thread on operational procedures eventually resulting in a handbook. Personally I prefer to learn in-game with someone giving me instructions as we go along. That first short mission Don and I played with Renders as TC was brilliant and I feel I picked up more from those few minutes multi-crewing than watching/playing a complete mission on (essentially) my own. Also, I feel the Saturday/Sunday missions are not the most efficient moments to learn new things. For me missions should be the time to put into practice what one has learned in training!

So what to train, who trains who and when? All DoW members I have met so far have one thing in common: they all immediately offer to help in any way they can. So no shortage of trainers there! One can of course always make individual requests to members or plan seperate training missions (as I understand there were seperate training missions for Havoc in the past). But maybe it would be an idea to have a standard timeslot (say starting from 30 minutes before every mission) for a short open training session? That could just be enough time to learn something new that you could then immediately apply in the game following that night. The idea would be that experienced players could teach others how they think and act in preparation of and during battle and why. I would love that method of training.

You could also possibly make a thread where members list what they would be interested in teaching. That could also make it easier for members to know who to ask for a personal training session on a specific subject.

Oh and yes, as a newbie I can't open that last link posted. Can someone please copy its content into this thread? Thanks!

[Asid]

I want to point out this post that, I had lot troubles to find...


If we could do, and follow this post that would be an huge improvement.

http://dogsofwarvu.com/forum/index.php/topic,297.0.html

The post is in several places on this forum as well as our website.

[Asid]

Oh and yes, as a newbie I can't open that last link posted. Can someone please copy its content into this thread? Thanks!

Hi Tam

Limi posted that link from a part of the site which is not visible to you at present.

However you can find the same post here (point 13) : http://dogsofwarvu.com/forum/index.php/topic,256.0.html

Hope this helps

Regards

[Cougar11]

One big thing that bugs me is the use of "REPEAT"!!!!! repeat should ONLY be used for calling for fire, and if you need something to be re-transmitted that you should say "SAY AGAIN".

[Cougar11]

Fort Benning tank platoon SOP.

[Cupcake]

One big thing that bugs me is the use of "REPEAT"!!!!! repeat should ONLY be used for calling for fire, and if you need something to be re-transmitted that you should say "SAY AGAIN".

My wife and daughter are so sick of me using "say again?" anytime I can't understand them.  That and I also use "negative and "affirm" (ay-firm) quite often.  I think they just get used to it eventually.