The Party "Invites" you to help test FAXORBAT-4B!

Party-approved discussion of ArmA 3
PhilFlame
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 11:56 am

Re: The Party "Invites" you to help test FAXORBAT-4B!

Post by PhilFlame »

Eagle_Eye wrote:I could be completely wrong here, but does a 6-man fireteam not have a similar loadout to the FAXORBAT one, except the grenadier and FTL are merged into one person?
Yes, but more importantly red and blue team are similar and equally capable (both contains AR, AAR, R/AT) - no fixed blue = base of fire / red = maneuver nonsense. For maximum adaptability.
Eagle_Eye wrote:I don't think one person per team will make that much of a difference,
Well, it's a compromise. Personally, I'd prefer being in a 5-man fireteam considering group VON and cohesiveness. But I get why, from a leadership standpoint, you'd want more hands, eyes and firepower in a group.

I guess it al comes down to how effective the leadership envision a fireteam should be at independently applying Fire & Maneuver...?

User avatar
Kefirz
Posts: 440
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2012 11:44 am

Re: The Party "Invites" you to help test FAXORBAT-4B!

Post by Kefirz »

A 5-man fireteam would be really painful at the vehicular aspect of Arma 3.

I would leave the fireteam as it is now (4 man strong), but only have 2 FT's in a squad.
Essentially, this would equal 1 section.
The CO really wouldn't have problems controlling 4 Squad leaders, because his orders shouldn't be very detailed in the first place.
You would also gain more medics per capita.
This would also make squad leading a bit easier and FTL'ing/Section leading less daunting.
''I am not going against tanks'' - Tryteyker, MAT gunner.
''Downboated so much, it's an u-boat now.'' - Boberro.
''Sorry, I meant hon hon hon baguette baguette Eiffel Tower'' - Mabbott

User avatar
Sparks
Posts: 545
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2015 9:50 pm

Re: The Party "Invites" you to help test FAXORBAT-4B!

Post by Sparks »

Ahem. I thought of a problem. This is not an AAR-writer-friendly ORBAT.
Seriously, my fingers are cramping just getting the section lists/roles in the right order.


And I'm getting confused between SQL and SCL. I may wind up calling you guys Squid and Scampi after all.
guns.ie ● stochasticgeometry.ie ● weak.ie

Don't tell mom I'm a pilot, she thinks I play piano in a whorehouse

Aqarius
Host
Posts: 413
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 9:28 am
Location: Hobbiton, The Shire

Re: The Party "Invites" you to help test FAXORBAT-4B!

Post by Aqarius »

Sparks wrote:And I'm getting confused between SQL and SCL. I may wind up calling you guys Squid and Scampi after all.
I use CO(Ptn), SL(Sq), and SC(Sn).



Which is also my proposed alteration to the current template: rename Section Leader to Section Commander:
ARRSEpedia wrote:Section Commanders should be kept in locked boxes marked "To be used only in times of War" but sadly can't.
[/allegedly]

User avatar
Ferrard Carson
Posts: 565
Joined: Sun Aug 12, 2012 6:08 am

Re: The Party "Invites" you to help test FAXORBAT-4B!

Post by Ferrard Carson »

Good feedback all around - suggestions are being noted, though we'll continue testing FAXORBAT-4B to see how feedback changes as people become more used to it.

One key thing I wanted to note: Do not labor under the assumption that a Shack Tac style 6-man fireteam is symmetrical. Check the relevant TTP3 page here or Dslyecxi's two latest long-form videos here and here and you'll notice that the 6-man fireteam is a USMC-style 4-man fireteam with two hangers-on.

It appears that in the Shack Tac style 6-man fireteam, AR and AAR are arranged into a color-team and RAT and the two spares are arranged into a second. Sometimes it's another AR / AAR pair, sometimes it's an RAT and a spare rifle, it changes from mission to mission. A 7th person, usually a spare rifleman, shows up fairly regularly, presumably similar to how our session host tends to slot themselves in as a very junior-rank afterthought.

Aside from that clarification, I would suggest that we give Blue and Red teams a little more time and continue to feed ourselves more data - even though the Blue/Red asymmetry exists in OrBat-2012, we're not used to this strong an asymmetry, and it will take some refinement in tactics to get full use out of them (e.g., in urban combat, stick Blue Team outside locking down streets and providing security while Red Team does the building clearance).

One thing I do not care to hear about is comrades rejecting any aspect of FAXORBAT-4B out of hand simply because it is unfamiliar. We intend to get a full accounting of FAXORBAT-4B before we reach any decision of any sort.

~ Ferrard
"Take a boat in the air you don't love, she'll shake you off just as sure as the turnin' of the worlds. Love keeps her in the air when she oughta fall down, tells you she's hurtin' before she keels... makes her home."

PhilFlame
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 11:56 am

Re: The Party "Invites" you to help test FAXORBAT-4B!

Post by PhilFlame »

I stand corrected. My apologies - I was overcome by enthusiasm.

(My execution by 'disciplinary squad' in the [Sun] 17 May 2015 (Bushwhacking) Citadel run feels strangely like precog-karma)

User avatar
fer
Posts: 1586
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 8:16 am
Location: Emotional wreck

Re: The Party "Invites" you to help test FAXORBAT-4B!

Post by fer »

Thanks for your feedback, comrades. FAXORBAT-4B will not be adopted, but it has inspired Party Scientists to work on FAXORBAT-4C, which is being tested even as we speak.

:science101:

Locked