First let me state that I am not a good leader. I am more of an assassin but I do follow orders well under good leadership (sometimes, sadly, even under bad leadership).
I am always studying the group psychology of the battle field teams. There are two things I am aware of: Natural Pack Cooperation and Managed leadership.
Pack Tactical Thought
Years ago in 1997 while playing online in multiplayer Quake One, in the old Team Forts, I was always amazed at how 8 people, often strangers to one another, who could only type to communicate, would in heated fighting, where typing was impossible, coordinate complex tactical moves in a matter of just a few seconds of sizing up the situation. Some of these players may have sat in the same computer lab with one another, but in most cases I knew that this was not the case. Certainly I was alone and yet I meshed perfectly with these operations. There would be cases where we would face a stairway in a large room that was guarded by two robot machineguns backed up with player guards up above. And yet with out any communication, with only a few seconds of us sizing up the situation, we would execute a complex set of moves where one player would draw fire from the enemy defenses while the other players would use rockets and grenades to take out the robot guns and push back the human guard.
I had always known that wolf packs coordinated complex attacks on large moose or elk, and that scientists would often wonder how it was they were able to communicate between one another to bring off such attacks.
In Red Orchestra and like games this kind of activity still happens a great deal, although not as often because the battlefield is usually more complex and people tend to use the microphone a great deal. But it does still take place, especially in tight confined zones. Obviously in sports this kind of ‘pack thought’ exists and teams that encourage and excel at it, do splendid things on the field.
Of course this kind of group thinking exists only with players who are not newbies. It reaches a perfect crescendo (like a perfect storm) only among players who well understand the aspects of the map and game. I believe this kind of pack thinking is a form of what scientists call Swarm Intelligence - http://www.sce.carleton.ca/netmanage/tony/swarm.html . What I find interesting about it in games is that we cannot even display much body language or any facial expressions – and yet somehow we tend to know what our fellow soldier standing by us plans to do. It’s like in an instant (usually during heavy firing, explosions, and action) we step into each other’s boots and say to ourselves, “If I was that guy I’d do ‘this and this’ to really help our situation. So I’ll join in this action and do ‘that and the other’ to complement his actions.” Yet it all happens in a second. If the player quickly fits in, you know in an instant: ‘this guy is an old timer’, but if he wanders off the path and trips up our operation, you think, ‘He’s green’.
Of course this kind of Pack Thought does not fair too good over a wide battlefield where everyone has lots of time and where the enemy is formed in a well tested team with excellent communications and leadership. But even in the best teams, simple Swarm Intelligence or Pack Thought must be fully available and operational if the team is to rise above other teams. The pack thought is used a lot in maps such as Snowy Forest.
Red Orchestra Commanders
A bad commander is one who, like a little Hitler, tries to micromanage everyone and everything, and who like Hitler, when this style of command fails (which it often does), begins to scream and abuse his fellow players through his microphone. When I am in that kind of team and we are facing another team, I usually know that we are going to lose.
Generally even a sloppy team led by a near idiot can beat an enemy who are a mere mob with no leadership coordination. I have seen this happen many times in Red Orchestra. Of course at times even a team-rabble can win when they have one practiced asymmetrical player who manages to upset the managed enemy team. Generally those kinds of individualistic players can only bring off such an upset if they can break apart the enemy’s planning with unpredictable asymmetrical attacks in his rear designed to delay or distract the enemy. This can sometimes allow one’s own rabble-team to gain the time to finally get it together and take the important objectives. But that outcome happens only rarely.
A well led team usually has a leader that I describe as ‘cool flowing water’. Cool under action, not a hot head. Flowing – always active – constantly inspecting the map, the clock’s time and the hot spots. And like water, he fills up the needs of his team in a smooth way. I am not such a guy since I avoid using the microphone and tend to work alone unless a good leader asks me to fill a need. But I have seen such men in the game (and also in real life). They are usually soft spoken, calm, and they don’t tend to micromanage – except in extraordinary situations where players need detailed instructions. They tend to simply make a lot of suggestions (the right ones) as they flag points in the battle that need coverage. They do at times become excited, with a concerned voice, in certain emergency situations, but they never go out of control and they tend to come through the battle sounding like ‘cool flowing water’. Such leaders are really like team servants. When I am in a team led by such a guy, I usually know that we are going to win.
I am always studying the group psychology of the battle field teams. There are two things I am aware of: Natural Pack Cooperation and Managed leadership.
Pack Tactical Thought
Years ago in 1997 while playing online in multiplayer Quake One, in the old Team Forts, I was always amazed at how 8 people, often strangers to one another, who could only type to communicate, would in heated fighting, where typing was impossible, coordinate complex tactical moves in a matter of just a few seconds of sizing up the situation. Some of these players may have sat in the same computer lab with one another, but in most cases I knew that this was not the case. Certainly I was alone and yet I meshed perfectly with these operations. There would be cases where we would face a stairway in a large room that was guarded by two robot machineguns backed up with player guards up above. And yet with out any communication, with only a few seconds of us sizing up the situation, we would execute a complex set of moves where one player would draw fire from the enemy defenses while the other players would use rockets and grenades to take out the robot guns and push back the human guard.
I had always known that wolf packs coordinated complex attacks on large moose or elk, and that scientists would often wonder how it was they were able to communicate between one another to bring off such attacks.
In Red Orchestra and like games this kind of activity still happens a great deal, although not as often because the battlefield is usually more complex and people tend to use the microphone a great deal. But it does still take place, especially in tight confined zones. Obviously in sports this kind of ‘pack thought’ exists and teams that encourage and excel at it, do splendid things on the field.
Of course this kind of group thinking exists only with players who are not newbies. It reaches a perfect crescendo (like a perfect storm) only among players who well understand the aspects of the map and game. I believe this kind of pack thinking is a form of what scientists call Swarm Intelligence - http://www.sce.carleton.ca/netmanage/tony/swarm.html . What I find interesting about it in games is that we cannot even display much body language or any facial expressions – and yet somehow we tend to know what our fellow soldier standing by us plans to do. It’s like in an instant (usually during heavy firing, explosions, and action) we step into each other’s boots and say to ourselves, “If I was that guy I’d do ‘this and this’ to really help our situation. So I’ll join in this action and do ‘that and the other’ to complement his actions.” Yet it all happens in a second. If the player quickly fits in, you know in an instant: ‘this guy is an old timer’, but if he wanders off the path and trips up our operation, you think, ‘He’s green’.
Of course this kind of Pack Thought does not fair too good over a wide battlefield where everyone has lots of time and where the enemy is formed in a well tested team with excellent communications and leadership. But even in the best teams, simple Swarm Intelligence or Pack Thought must be fully available and operational if the team is to rise above other teams. The pack thought is used a lot in maps such as Snowy Forest.
Red Orchestra Commanders
A bad commander is one who, like a little Hitler, tries to micromanage everyone and everything, and who like Hitler, when this style of command fails (which it often does), begins to scream and abuse his fellow players through his microphone. When I am in that kind of team and we are facing another team, I usually know that we are going to lose.
Generally even a sloppy team led by a near idiot can beat an enemy who are a mere mob with no leadership coordination. I have seen this happen many times in Red Orchestra. Of course at times even a team-rabble can win when they have one practiced asymmetrical player who manages to upset the managed enemy team. Generally those kinds of individualistic players can only bring off such an upset if they can break apart the enemy’s planning with unpredictable asymmetrical attacks in his rear designed to delay or distract the enemy. This can sometimes allow one’s own rabble-team to gain the time to finally get it together and take the important objectives. But that outcome happens only rarely.
A well led team usually has a leader that I describe as ‘cool flowing water’. Cool under action, not a hot head. Flowing – always active – constantly inspecting the map, the clock’s time and the hot spots. And like water, he fills up the needs of his team in a smooth way. I am not such a guy since I avoid using the microphone and tend to work alone unless a good leader asks me to fill a need. But I have seen such men in the game (and also in real life). They are usually soft spoken, calm, and they don’t tend to micromanage – except in extraordinary situations where players need detailed instructions. They tend to simply make a lot of suggestions (the right ones) as they flag points in the battle that need coverage. They do at times become excited, with a concerned voice, in certain emergency situations, but they never go out of control and they tend to come through the battle sounding like ‘cool flowing water’. Such leaders are really like team servants. When I am in a team led by such a guy, I usually know that we are going to win.
Last edited:
