Quote:
Originally Posted by Trev140_0
I agree, was just trying to take the easy way out.
The hard way is convincing people of the importance. I recall looking at the guys I was with in one area, dead silent in the woods, hearing some info in my ear piece, and looking at them 20 feet away drift off into the wrong direction. (they had no radios and I could not say "psst hey, OVER THERE TWO ENEMY" (and not give our position away.
kind of a pisser, but I get it, making the whole field as shit show does not fix it.
|
Even if both teams are using radios, both teams have to be using them
effectively to make a difference/make it competitive.
I've been carrying a radio since mid season last year.. and frankly it's been just a piece of equipment fluff, by and large, since some on the team that i'm usually on don't carry them, and those that do, really don't know how to use them effectively.
Your field has two teams that are lop-sided by nature - not intentionally of course, it's just the way things have run/worked out so far. Tans have learned to work as a team, with the core having very effective vocal direction, compliance, and radio discipline. The Op-for team, of which i've played on for three games (very much on the periphery) is basically a team comprised of 'others'.. all others that have attended the games, but haven't really worked/practiced closely together to make the team-mileu work. They/we might have a common goal, but my observation has been that the common goal is uncoordinated and unchanneled. The team members do go for the common goal in smaller groups, or as individuals, but there is no cohesiveness, which is a force-multiplier - of which Tan team has so effectively demonstrated. Radio comm's are simply an effective tool to the end means of cohesiveness.
In other words, i got no answers for ya, just an observation .. I'm not sure that even if all people on Op-for team got on board for radio comm's, they'd be able to use them effectively, at this point.
Still enjoy the games though!