Western OPFOR in Durango Valley

[whdonnelly]

Suhir,
Here is my 2 cents as a senior NCO in the US Army.
I have to take exception to the following comment:
The Brit system tends to produce "professional" senior enlisted men, who train not only the troops but the officers.
The American system is to have "professional" officers who train the enlisted men.

In 22 years the only that has ever trained me was a uniformed lawyer who gave us "Laws of Land Warfare and Rules of Engagement" classes.
The US Army ,at least, is more like the description you have for the Brits, except that training is conducted more and more by junior NCOs or by "train the trainer" types of events where a team size element will train itself using computer based training or situational templates. All the senior NCOs do are supervise and guide the training to keep it on track. The benefit is that you get some very "out of the box" ideas from the new soldiers, the downside is that it takes longer than the alternative of "I talk, you listen."
I agree strongly with the rest of your comments.

[Suhiir]

whdonnelly said:
Suhir,
Here is my 2 cents as a senior NCO in the US Army.
I have to take exception to the following comment:
The Brit system tends to produce "professional" senior enlisted men, who train not only the troops but the officers.
The American system is to have "professional" officers who train the enlisted men.

In 22 years the only that has ever trained me was a uniformed lawyer who gave us "Laws of Land Warfare and Rules of Engagement" classes.
The US Army ,at least, is more like the description you have for the Brits, except that training is conducted more and more by junior NCOs or by "train the trainer" types of events where a team size element will train itself using computer based training or situational templates. All the senior NCOs do are supervise and guide the training to keep it on track. The benefit is that you get some very "out of the box" ideas from the new soldiers, the downside is that it takes longer than the alternative of "I talk, you listen."
I agree strongly with the rest of your comments.

Again, I did say my comments were generalizations.
Being a retired GySgt (USMC E-7) myself I also "take exception" to my own generalization *chuckles*.

[whdonnelly]

Having worked some excellent Marine Platoon Commanders that were either E6 or E7, I will say that my comments hold true for USMC also, maybe more so.
Keep up the good work.
Will

[whdonnelly]

I have been playing with the idea of a 1 game mini campaign linked to the Durango Valley map, but I have a steep learning curve. Does anyone know of a way to templatethe OPFOR so that whatever forces are selected they occupy the same positions or move to the same waypoints?
Will

[Suhiir]

whdonnelly said:
I have been playing with the idea of a 1 game mini campaign linked to the Durango Valley map, but I have a steep learning curve. Does anyone know of a way to templatethe OPFOR so that whatever forces are selected they occupy the same positions or move to the same waypoints?
Will

Well...
You could take advantage of the games limitations here I believe. Tho you WILL want to test this to make sure.

In pre made scenarios the game takes the units by unit number from the appropriate national OOB. So you could substitute an altered OOB for the nation in question and the game will take whatever units are in the appropriate unit number slot and place them in the same starting location. And since the scenario and formation is not changed it should still use the same waypoints etc.

I wouldn't bet the house on this working but I'm fairly sure it would.