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

[Lumituisku]

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.

Ahahaha, that is actually hilarious thing. I guess that can happen as well.    Not so much in DOW, I guess.

When Cougar said about that Repeat thing,  I felt strike at my heart. I use this Repeat so often   and well... I understand the point why you would use Say again, Affirm, and negative. I just better to learn to use them. Before I didn't think that it would have that much....  impact. Now its quite different when I actually think of reasons.


Thank you Cougar for pointing this out and Cupcake too    

Fort Benning tank platoon SOP.

This link seems to very promising! -  Erm... well with exception that I'm not able to load that page for some reason. >.<

[Cougar11]

Lumi the page is a PDF document. It could be your connection, the fact that you are overseas and it is a military sit website, or you do not have a PDF version that is compatible would be my guess.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[Cougar11]

Thank you Asid for passing the communication SOP. It brings to light the other thing that can be iterating for me. Long drawn out replies to information requests. An example would be 3A this is havoc six sitrep "situation report" over. Many times the CO will get " I'm currently at bp 2 engaging tanks " with no other information which requires further questions as to where and what the enemy is doing. Other responses include "I'm at bp 2 engaging tanks, I took a few hits to two tanks, one of my tanks are destroyed, one is damaged, I think I killed three but I'm unsure, I lost sight of them, but maybe they were immobilized, I have backed down and can no longer see the enemy, ahhh, currently reloading". I don't think I need to say that this is too long, too much unnecessary information, many times all this happens over a couple minutes and the co does not get any of that information until they ask for it. I personally would like to see as soon as there is information to send that the section or plain leader (which ever is lead depending on situation like operating in a section or platoon) send it to their higher whether it be there section leader the plain leader or the co and that info makes its way up to the highest level quickly. Example 32 sees a platoon of tanks, calls on platoon net contact platoon of tanks (identifies type of possible) tanks West 2500 meters, moving south to north, and if they are engaged that they state they are engaged so the CO knows if they have been seen or not, and then give the course of action whether it be holding, observing, engaging, retreating, etc. This then would be sent up to the next level like the CO. Same format but would change it from a tank is doing this out sees this, to the platoon sees this, and this is what I'm doing about it.

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

[TamKay]

Thanks Asid, I did not know that was the info we were talking about, all clear now and wilco. 

Wow Cougar thanks for that brilliant link! So much for developing an own handbook, clearly no need to reinvent the wheel there.

Lumi, if the problem is indeed overseas or military I've put a copy for you here:

https://copy.com/M8epZ2ugZKMXiCqt

[Lumituisku]

Lumi, if the problem is indeed overseas or military I've put a copy for you here:

https://copy.com/M8epZ2ugZKMXiCqt

OH WOW! THANK YOU SO MUCH TAMKAY!  


Also. I very shortly spoke with Assasin yesterday, about using artillery TRPs, for chokepoints in the map, during the missions. He thought it would be an good idea.

I mean, that we would identify possible places where we might need artillery even before its even needed. Also - Having those TRPs perhaps even named some easy way. So calling would then be easier.  - Thought I guess trouble would be that we already use a kind of markings in the map, and even with those calling artillery has been troublesome. - What im trying to think would be better for us is that we would try to identify locations for Artillery Already before, and think before hand where we would need it...  like  where enemy is most likely trying to ambush, attack or what are narrow paths, choke points for enemy movement, where Arty would be most effective. Also...  how to use Arty for defence...  calling smokes, and such. Having a dedicated person...  lets say.. call sign 7 ...  for Arty?

[Asid]

Also. I very shortly spoke with Assasin yesterday, about using artillery TRPs, for chokepoints in the map, during the missions. He thought it would be an good idea.

I have played missions with TRPS. This works well

[Cougar11]

Standard TRP abbreviation is usually something like this "AB001, AB002, etc." This is for fire missions only, and are pre-plotted targets. Usually used for likely locations of enemy.