Capt Hart

Note the word choice: Not a protest. This would be for the breaking cities and people causing harm type things.

Cpl Turk: Oh we got six times promotion points?!? That makes me so hard

Re-evaluating the definition of realism and ITC structure I think are all good things and we should look into. That all said, while I very briefly mentioned the FTX cycle in my original post as it tied in directly with the other things I was saying in a more present term, I believe this discussion, if left to continue, will become solely about that singular paragraph as opposed to the massive wall of text that basically says the same thing: Please don't cause drama and try your best to be the most helpful, caring, and supportive person you can in this unit. As all of the criticism about the FTX cycle I have seen is frequently described as "Fucking" something or stupid or idiotic or shit or whatever else, that is not being helpful, supportive, or benefiting you or the unit at all. Describing it that way, and combating it as dramatically as it has been combated, is doing one thing. Causing Drama. Which is exactly the opposite of what this essay was about. STOP DOING THAT. Request and suggestion up the CoC? Good. Suggestion containing a beratement of those creating the idea and the idea itself? Not good. Defending your point? Good. Defending your point by attacking others and their ideas? Very Bad. If you fail to see how those things are problems I would encourage you to remove yourself from the bias of this situation and think a little about human nature. And for those still intent on doing what I have just warned against again, I will again quote my previous statement: "Stop it or get out." As the last two sections of discussion have become based on personal grievances rather than the idea I stated above, I will be locking this topic. At this point I fear this has caused more drama than it has solved, which was the exact opposite of my intention. So for those of you that got succored into that, I am sorry. For those of you who genuinely participated positively in the discussion I thank you. To re-itterate my main point for the 10000th time. And if you have not cared to have read anything I have said over the last day or so, read this: We are All imperfect, flawed, gullible, idiotic, degrading, and dysfunctional people, simply by nature of being human. It is our job individually, to combat our natural tenancies towards angering other people, wanting to feel superior and degrading those around us, and fight to make everyone else's life a little easier. You can do this by recognizing you won't always get your way and sending up a respectful suggestion when you feel it unjust. And if at the end of the day you are turned down then you can be mature about it and put on your happy face and go along with it, again trying to make everyone else's life easier. If it is in contradiction with your values and beliefs too much, then quietly leave and go somewhere that suits you better. So that you, the unit you left, and the unit you go to, can have their lives made easier and better by your decision and actions. This essay was not about the unit's right or wrong or about our faults or merits. It is about being respectful, helpful, and making the day to day lives of everyone involved in this community more enjoyable and happy. Make those around you feel as though their day has been improved by their interaction with you. If everyone did that, we would be in a dramatically different place. At the end of the day this all boils down to a rule we should all have been taught as toddlers: Be nice to those around you and treat them like you want to be treated. To everyone in this unit: please apply the paragraph above this sentence to every single interaction you have in this unit from now until you leave. You will find it a better place if you do. -Hart

First let me start this off by saying I'm making this post not as a member of CS, not as a Team leader, not as Capt Hart. Just as someone who has been a member of the same community for 3 years, held the same position, and seen the same patterns and types of people come and go through that time. Second: any discussion had in this thread must be kept professional and civil. Any deviations from that will inevitably result in this thread being locked and or deleted. Third: This is for discussion and debate. You must be able to consider other individuals points of view and allow yourself to be open enough that you can be convinced to the other side. If you are going to be involved in this thread but are not willing to allow your own mind to be changed then please don't involve yourself. This is intended to be a constructive debate and discussion of thoughts and ideas. If you just want to use this as an excuse to start more drama, don't, and kindly screw off. I've laid these out in points that talk about a single concept. If you are going to respond to this thread, please do me a favor and actually read all of it and consider what I've said. Point 1: You are a grown up. Act like it. Currently in this unit we have 76 active members. At previous times in our history, and in our other variants of the unit, we have had upwards of 150. This means there will be A LOT of conflicting view points and not everyone can always be right or get their way. That idea is something taught in elementary school but for some reason because it's the internet, and people loose touch with the reality of the very real people who are also on said internet, all maturity and adult behavior goes out the window. If you had a job where you disliked the boss or the decisions they were making, the VAST majority of the civilized population would either try to change the behavior through the appropriate and professional channels, or they would quit the job and go somewhere else. But this being an online Arma 3 unit, for some reason that ability and behavior goes out the window. The incidents with Brawler, Drumheller, Harrison, and so on, prove my point. Rather than starting a coup or shutting down servers or causing a mass exodus, try to fix the problem maturely or quietly leave and go to another place you would rather be at. Point 2: You are not always right As previously stated, you WILL NOT get your way 100% of the time. Even in CS, though we present a united front after we have decided on a course of action, the amount of conflict and argument and opposing view points that are presented means that in about 40% of decisions we make at least half of CS has to come to some sort of compromise. On about another 40% just under half of CS (this is why we have a majority vote for things) doesn't get their way at all. There's only about 20% of the decisions we make where we all agree on what should happen. And that's just with 5 BLOODY PEOPLE. With 76? No wonder you didn't get your way and someone else did, or vice versa. That's why modern civilization has developed more appropriate means of expressing dislike and working for something better. Because throwing a hissy fit and causing drama and problems for the other 70 people in the unit only serves to make yourself feel better by putting everyone else down. 5 year old children do that on the playground. High-school bullies do that. You are all grown adults. Act like it and find ways of fixing the problems, or expressing your dislike for a situation, in a way that benefits the other 75 people in the unit rather than just your or your 5 friends. Point 3: If you have a problem, do something constructive about it As stated in point 2, if you just cause drama or bitch about stuff to make you feel like you have a bigger penis at the expense of everyone else, you are cancerous by definition and should stop or get out. We have a set CoC and structure so that complaints and suggestions can be sent up in a Mature and Adult manner and can be addressed as such. Being a dick in the meme thread or just bitching to those sympathetic with your bias helps no one but yourself and your similarly useless and parasitic cohorts. If you want change to actually happen or would like to see things appropriately addressed, send it up and follow up on it. Yes the CoC is imperfect. Yes things are neglected and forgotten about from time to time. Again we are only human. But it's never intentional. Its never to slight you or to make ourselves feel like our penises are bigger. And for anyone in any leadership capacity who does that intentionally or uses it as a penis enlargement pill, you should not be where you are and should resign. As for everyone else, if you find yourself guilty of pointlessly bitching or festering drama, please apply my earlier advice: Stop it, or get out. Send stuff up and be constructive about it. Try to help everyone and not just yourself. Point 4: Command Staff isn't the enemy, or the problem. The reason CS exists is because of my last sentence in the above paragraph. Due to people's natural inclination to be self serving and dictatorial, and that paired with the absurd level of dickish-ness that is rampant on the internet, having just one person in-charge of 76 people is likely going to result, eventually, in biased and self serving decisions. I have only to point at Drumheller to explain this. His reasoning for taking over the unit, for kicking 100 of us out of the unit, was because "It's my unit. I founded it and it was going in a direction I didn't like. So I decided to do something about it." He took control and made decisions that were self-serving and for his benefit. Not the majority of the unit. And solely because he was removed from power. The new leadership wasn't making dramatic changes to anything and the unit was functioning fine. The ONLY thing that changed was he was out of power. So he destroyed 75% of his unit because of the self-serving nature of mankind. CS has 5 voting members so we can check our own bias and stupidity. No one person is perfect enough to be unbiased when their precious ego is at stake and no one person is as community minded and non-self serving to make decisions that are always more beneficial to everyone else. There have been many times that I have been blinded by my own bias or self-serving nature and I could not see what was best for everyone else. And every. single. other. member of CS has had the same happen to them. We exist, as we are, so that we can try, and fail at times as we are only human, to make decisions that benefit the majority of the unit and uphold what we were founded to be, rather than just ourselves or a small group. We are not trying to make you hate us. We are not trying to hurt you or make your experience here a bad one. We are trying to make an enjoyable community of, and for, people who all want to play Arma the way we do, and the way it is defined officially by our definition of realism. It's easy to let CS bear the brunt of your hate and unhappiness towards everything in the unit. I did it plenty before I found myself in that position. But while its easy to do that, its better for us, you, and the rest of the unit, if you support CS and send up suggestions and complaints. Because as I said we are only human. We can and will make mistakes. Send up your thoughts and we will do our damned best to evaluate it as unbiased as possible and continue to make decisions that benefit the unit as a whole. Be constructive towards the entire unit, and don't make your dick bigger by putting down those in-charge of helping everyone. Point 5: Structure The idea of a structured MILLSIM unit is to provide a location where gameplay and scenarios are realistic and challenging. Those who join units like this, for that kind of experience, find fun in the successful execution of a difficult mission and in the professional mindset and semi-realistic methods we accomplish that in. If your idea of "Fun" in arma is just doing what you want, there are plenty of places out there that cater to that. This isn't one of them. In professional basketball, or soccer, or baseball or literally any other sport, the fun enjoyed there comes from winning. From being the best. From doing something incredibly difficult and coming out on top. Not just playing the game for the sake of playing it. If you want to just play basketball, just to play it, and don't find your fun in being the best or winning or anything, that's what games of pickup basketball are for. And if you want to win national or international tournaments and succeed against overwhelming odds, that's what professional basketball is for. Fun ops, and other non-structured units or events are for those of you who just want to play the game and do what you want. The pickup game of basketball. This unit, the 15th, the 506th and many more are for those who want to actually get good at what you are doing and be set in that mindset and practice it. The professional basketball. If you are someone who wants to just play some pickup basketball in arma, go join a unit that caters to that. No one should fault you for doing that. But if you are someone who legitimately does want to play some professional basketball, then suck it up and put in the work to get good. And branching off somewhat from the above topic to touch on this FTX cycle: Part of our fun, as stated above, is to actually get good. Not have missions catered to us, but to actually be good at what we do. That takes effort and time and work and dedication. And it takes not just doing what you want or what you have been doing. Change is difficult, and for us to change there has to be some motivation or some pressure to make that happen. Sure the grades seem a little high-schooley. So what? People complain about FTX cycles anyway, and they always have, just because its an FTX. So if you're someone who just complains at FTX cycles, why not give this change, and something that hasn't been tried before, a shot before you hate it completely. If you are not, then look at this as a great opportunity. We get to play a friendly game of our figurative basketball against our team-mates to see who is the the best and to push ourselves to become better. Friendly competition goes a long way on driving people to get better, and since getting better is where we get our fun from, we should relish the opportunity to push ourselves and get better. Try it before you knock it folks. And do your best to make it a positive experience for everyone. Point 6: Growing Pains The 3rd has existed in its current form for only about a year an a half of that. Through that time, only about 3/4 of a year ago, we had a massive uprooting of our leadership and structure. CS was completely replaced, Battalion was replaced, company was replaced, bravo company was dissolved, and many of the long-standing members in their previous positions were called upon to fill the MASSIVE vacancies that drama-filled event caused. I.e. Maj Ray, Maj Makowski, MSgt Wolfe, LTC Brueske, and so on. Since then, company leadership has changed hands three times, battalion has been opened and closed twice and has changed leadership twice, the S-shops have been vacated and filled at least two times each, with the somewhat exception of S-1, and S-shop leadership has changed hands too many times to count. On top of all of that, the deployment and story-building department was moved from S-3 to S-2, and the leadership of S-2 has changed at least two times now. The battle captains and zeus operators have been cycled through a few times, and to boot the FTX cycles have now been handed back over to S-3/Company. So to say that we have been through some change is a COLOSSAL understatement. We have had two deployments, one of which was a monumental failure (Jungle Hunter) largely due to the leadership not having adapted to the special forces mindset yet, and the fact that insta-death was turned on. The latest one, actually went reasonably well since we weren't chasing after other captured MSOTs or the entire task force being KIA every mission. Say what you will about our last deployment and the faults it may have had, but at the end of the day it was a MASSIVE step up from the last one we had. So my point is this: We have not existed long enough, and with stable leadership long enough, to have fleshed out or even come close to perfecting what we are doing and how we are doing it. So be patient. It's going to be painful as we will have to learn from our mistakes, but if everyone in the unit was constructive and helpful and willing to work hard, we would get through these growing pains and get ourselves figured out in the fraction of the time it would take if things stay where they are now. Where currently people just complain for the sake of complaining and force good people out of their positions due to burnout and others not being willing to lend a hand or be helpful. You don't have to be in CS or an S-Shop leader or even in a leadership position to make positive change for the unit. Lend a hand and help out wherever you can. Be patient and constructive and help your friends and subordinates to do the same. Point 7: This is an escape for us. Don't screw it up. All 76 of us have real lives outside of this, with real problems and real shit that we have to go through. I remember last year when the 15th held a memorial service for one of their members who committed suicide. I remember when King died, a good friend of many of the older members of the unit. I remember when a close friend of mine in the unit went through an incredibly depressed and suicidal phase. And even now if you look at the LOAs thread and see Parker who had a close friend commit suicide. My girlfriend who nearly has done so on multiple occasions, Kardnal and whatever it is he is dealing with. And that's just those who feel comfortable, IN THE LAST MONTH, publicly posting about the shit they are having to go through. That doesn't even come close to the number of people IN THIS UNIT who go through hell every day and come here for an escape from the hell they live in. People come here to enjoy their time in a structured community and to escape whatever horrendous thing it is that life has put on their plate. If you come into communities like this and make our time here, our breaks from reality, our ability to escape the shitstorm of life that we normally have to deal with, into time that is more stressful more dramatic and more painful than our every-day lives, you can go to hell. Go fuck yourself, that's not what anyone here has bargained for. There's my novel/rant. Rather than sitting on all this and letting it fester, I felt it was better to put this out where you all can see it. Feel free to comment and debate and respond to all this, as I stated above. But if there is one thing I wish everyone could take out of this; its Point 7. All this is where the idea of "I just want to play arma with my friends" comes from. Please don't put those people down and make their lives harder than they already are. Thanks for reading. - Hart

My overarching principal through all of my big long post is the following: We are not perfect. The unit is not perfect. Everyone in the unit is a real person and has real problems and faults. So don't make it more difficult for anyone by starting drama or overreacting. Send things up and be a grown up about it. You won't always get your way even when you send stuff up, and you have to accept that. If there was a TLDR for my first post, that is it. Debate that principal if you desire. If not, leave the topic be.

With context of Maj Makowski's comments I would say this: What he is saying in that first line is a very rough paraphrase of this policy, found in Unit Duties and Responsibilities. " h. All Command Staff decisions and directives are reversible by future Command Staff vote. i. Command Staff is the final authority in the 3d MRB Realism Unit and holds directive and reversible authority over all elements, units, commands and individuals in the 3d MRB." What he is not saying is that we do not have to follow our own rules. We are bound by the policies we make just like everyone else. If we determine a policy or action to be incorrect we do have the ability to vote and reverse a previously held policy or decision by a proper vote. Second: This forum is not a place to express the specifics of your personal issues, problems or grievances. It is a place to debate, on a very general level, the concepts and principals I laid out in my first post. Please leave it at this so that this topic may return to its intended purpose. But to address your accusation before this goes any further down the rabbit hole. Your claim that it is unjust derives from the policy about interviews. We did not modify policy or change it or do whatever we wanted whenever we wanted. As we have on several office hours votes in the past, the interviews we conducted were though the format of forum PM. Policy has not ever stated in what format, TS, Forum, or whatever else the interview must be conducted in; Only that it must be equal and sufficient to gather the appropriate evidence. In your case, a PM was submitted from the opposition and was taken into consideration by CS. You submitted a PM defending yourself and submitting that necessary opposing evidence and "Interview" to CS. That evidence was collected from both parties, and that both were equally interviewed via forum PM, as has been done in other instances, CS made a ruling on the office hours. If you feel that our actions were incorrect, despite the wording of the policy, please send up a request to modify that policy and its wording. To conclude. Please keep this about the overarching principals and and not about personal drama or specifics. That just creates more problems and if this derails too far I will lock the topic.

Fair. And that suggestion should, and maybe was, be sent up the CoC to be appropriately handled and resolved. Gotcha. I never viewed those as conflicting but I'm glad you addressed it as its good to take note of. In my experience, and I cannot say how true to reason that stands, the role-playing falls in line easily after the professionalism and performance have been sorted out. I at least find it easier to role play as an MSOT Team Leader when things are going according to plan and my team is kicking ass, not when we are getting our asses handed to us because we didn't train something stupid like how to properly clear a house. Regardless, thanks for the feedback. Very true. However, there is nothing saying that grading everyone or consistent coaching kills the fun. It is very much a matter of opinion. That also said, I want to point back to that this has never been tried before. Assumptions are being made without trial, evidence, or experience. You may be 1000% correct in that opinion and I, along with everyone else, will find out in a month and a half if you were right or wrong. But progress is made by making mistakes and learning from them. Imagine for a moment that this worked and that it was discovered to be the funnest thing the unit had ever done and had people enjoying their time the most. (Granted that likely won't happen to that degree but I'm using it to make a point) We would never know if we never tried it. I'm not saying this is perfect. I'm not even saying its the best idea or the correct course of action. I'm saying its something innovative and different and we should at least see where that takes us. As part of the growing pains is failure, if we try this and two months later we are worse off from it, we have a plethora of knew knowledge to draw upon to make better decisions going forward. First please site me the sources and evidence. That's quite a claim and, while I'm willing to accept that, I won't do so lacking clear evidence pointing at that. Second: If there are problems people need to send them up. In my entire time in CS I can recall receiving only one complaint from the unit about the performance of CS and how we were running things. Sent up by Cole in a very irreverent manner, but I have to give him major credit that he actually bloody sent something up. He complained that we weren't being transparent enough and that the public thread was not being utilized appropriately. He was right. And from that we made changes. We limited discussions in OPSEC to disciplinary and awards based things, as they were supposed to be, and created the public portion of CS meetings as a result of that PM. So while its all well and good to accuse command level decisions of being the cause of burnout, if nothing is ever sent up and nothing ever gets on our desks, you have no-one to blame but yourselves. We cannot read minds; We are only mortals. And in your opinion you believed you could do it better. So you've gone and given it your shot at it, as you should. But for us, we're still figuring it out as we are still all relatively new to this whole running a unit thing. So as I have said and re-iterated more times than I can count, if there are problems send them up. We have to know about them to do anything about it. Growing Pains. Yes there is clearly an issue if that is happening. And we can pay attention, and we can pay that attention in the wrong ways if that happens. The reason words should come through official channels is because it then enables all persons involved to use their higher brain power and come to logical sensible conclusions rather than resulting to their base instincts of wanting to hurt other people and feel important. Command is just as susceptible to being drawn into that base, degrading, fighting and confrontational attitude as everyone else. Look at Dale and Harrison. If members went out of their way to be professional and send things up properly, you would find it would elicit better reactions from those in command simply because we can look at it objectively and not hate you for causing drama. TLDR; It doesn't need to go through those channels for us to notice, and we do notice, but if it does it's a lot less dramatic and a lot nicer for everyone involved. Why would go beat up your brother over him taking your book rather than just go ask for it back? It's why society has evolved (mostly) to where lawyers and courts are used to settle disputes over going over and shooting your neighbor because he took some of your corn. Fair. I think our official definition of realism needs to be seriously looked at, considered, and updated to reflect fully what this unit is striving to be. Thank's for the advice.

To Waller: Thanks for sharing. And I'm sorry to hear about your personal demons. To address I absolutely understand the reservations and rationale behind disliking the idea. And I want to point out as well that I was not involved in planning that or working towards that in any way. I found out with the rest of you guys so I feel it's fair to say I'm not really biased towards it. In any capacity. My thought is that lets give it a try. If people are mature about it and are aware or the potential drawbacks then I see good things being able to come out of it. If people are blind and stupid and immature and it creates the elitism and cliques then we will be fully aware that was a bad idea and to not do it again. But my point is: we don't know. We can draw conclusions based on past experiences, good and bad, but with this group of people and in this mindset and community it has never been tried. So while I admit I laughed out loud when I read we were getting grades, I believe it's worth giving a more than fair shot. Simply because we don't know. I can definitly see the benefits of that method, so I'm open to being convinced. But I don't make the decision so, to you and everyone else who has a suggestion or complaint or thought or whatever, do what I said in my first post and send a constructive suggestion up the CoC. Also, I'm on my phone so appoligies for any odd spelling or whatever. Also also RIP triple post.

As far as I interperate our definition of realism I would think what you have laid out goes hand in had with what I've been saying. The role-playing side of it has always been a large component of my millsim career and I see no reason why the two ideologies cannot work alongside eachother.

To cole: Thanks for the feedback and the opposing viewpoint. After all, opposition is the only way real truth is found. I'll respond to the various sections of your message seperatly: First While that may have been your perspective of the unit that is not, from an official standpoint, what the unit is or has set out to be. In our application form it says: "The 3d MRB Realism Unit is a volunteer unit. By applying, you are accepting a realistic environment as the way you want to play ArmA 3. To explain, here we "role-play" being members of the military. When you're involved in Official Unit activities, you will be expected to play your role accordingly, regardless your rank, or billet. The reason why you are here, is because Realism is the type of experience you are looking for in this game. These expectations must be read and understood, as these are the core foundation of what this gaming community wants to achieve." If the reason why you are here is because you want to experience the realism of it, then that means the pickup basketball is decidedly not what you signed up for. So since your view is/was contradictory to what the official statement is it leaves two possible courses of action. The first is the unit as a whole should re-define our definition of what we want to be. Or the second is that you were going along in a unit and situation with a mindset contradictory to what the unit was. Given the (ret) by your name and your place in a new unit I believe the latter theory to hold more ground. Following that logic then, your statement that makes a whole lot of sense. You got burnt out working for a structure and a unit type contradictory to what this unit was pushing for and/or was founded on. So the only acceptable recourse for you is to either create or go to a new unit that has what you are looking for. And I give you credit for doing that and doing it in a professional manner and not causing problems with your departure. And more power to you for that. And I would encourage anyone who feels the same way to follow suite. I'm not power hungry, I don't need to stoke my ego by running a bigger unit. I simply want to play the game with like-minded people. If here is not the place for you then I encourage you to find a place that works for you. This community and this mindset is not for everyone. And we don't pretend it to be so. The arma playerbase is responsible for finding and joining units that have the mindset they want. Not the other way around. So if this isn't for you then find something that is. Second And that is an important part of trust with leadership and in building morale and keeping members around. I agree with that point. That said, the method that is approached in is critically important and often neglected. Outright rejecting the chain of command and structure and discipline, even if sometime unjust, only serves to disrupt the order and structure of the unit as a whole, to cause drama and make problems for more people, even if you are saving one person from a seemingly unjust action. Having been on the receiving end of your incorrectly channeled wrath against your CoC more than once, I can say all that with a reasonable level of certainty. Third I agree to some degree with that. You are absolutely correct about the cohesion thing. Cohesion is built through action, consequence and so on. Can't be taught, must be learned. However, the assumption that everyone understand tactics is fundamentally incorrect. While you may be somewhat correct in that the leadership should mostly understand it, the general member will have discrepancies in terms of who knows what and how much. Classrooms, when effectively used, not overdone, and not done for too long, can help to standardize tactical knowledge and proficiency. Even leadership with the knowledge already learned can absolutely benefit from short, focused, refreshers on combat tactics. It's a perishable skill so for the above reasons I think its wise to use classrooms. Used sparingly and usefully I might add. If overused or done wrong few things can kill morale more than 2 weeks of 2 hour classroom sessions. That said, they are often done horribly wrong, thus wasting their usefulness and making people hate them. (Myself included for long periods of time) I cannot say if they will be done correctly during this cycle or not, time will tell, but if they are done wrong then I will gladly bring it up and adress it with company following the conclusion of the cycle. Fourth Sure. I can concede to that. But if I asked Maj Makowski I would be willing to bet money company has not received a single official complaint about that. I bet he has heard general bitching and moaning from leadership and the meme thread and retired members who are sympathetic to current members bias, but not a single bit of constructive, non-derogatory feedback about it through official channels. Fifth No their point is made quite clear. My point, and this isn't specifically about people leaving this is a long-standing issue and thought that has been bothering me for a while, is that there are much better and more constructive ways of handling that. Making everyone else's life more difficult because you dislike a decision is the worst thing you could possibly do. Point 1 in a nutshell. Bring it up like an adult and don't make this harder for everyone else. "Don't screw this up for us" is not directed at the FTX at the people leaving or any of that. THAT comment is because we have a schedual for drama and that everyone is worse off for that fact. And it needs to stop. Period. The tldr of my post is to bring up and fix problems in a constructive and non-detrimental manner. Because there will be problems. That much is unavoidable. But how we go about handling those problems is what we have control over. And it's what can make the difference between everyone enjoying what they are doing, and everyone just kinda stomaching what they are doing.

LMAO I'M CRYING

Huzzah! Freedom and murica and online hostile takeovers and coups for the win!

Capt Hart: Oh?! Why is Mycka unconscious? What did he do? Cpl Turk: Ooo! Lets take advantage of him!

Sgt DelPercio: The airforce has AFSOC, Marines is MARSOC, Navy is....NSFW?

ITC Class Bravo 08-17

Cpl Turk: I want to roleplay more. Oh! I can make more gargley sounds!

When you've finally joined the exclusive 3000+ hours club....

Cpl Turk: Yeah that's the golden rule isn't it? "Don't get caught"

I freaking love this

Sad. Personally I found the IAR to be a fancy M4 with the 249 still as the main support and suppression weapon system. Ya just can't beat 200 rounds of sustained suppressive fire.

But would you not then be losing the advantage of the HQ fireteam? With the ASL attached there then you just have a full strength fireteam that has the big crap on it and still 2 fireteams with just 3 and an HQ with 2.

Personally I would be concerned about the decreased lack of maneuverability and flexibility a three man fireteam would have. Only three people means that fireteam sized bound and maneuver tactics have to stay in closer and move slower. The squad itself must stay more consolidated and would cover less ground, or at least, would cover it slower. That said, the squad leader would definitely benefit by the two additional personnel effectively making the squad HQ a fourth fireteam. Hopefully the tactics will allow that additional fireteam to maintain the effective reach and dispersion the squad could have and counteract the negative effects of the three man teams. Also, designated grenadiers I definitely like. @Maj Ray I'd be interested to hear Steven's thoughts on this though he did primarily 2 fireteam stuff.

I think I've seen falconer post a picture, similar to this, on at least one article per deployment we have ever been on... Exhibit A:

Well written. Love seeing this side to all our conflicts.

Cpl Turk: Yeah I'm going to hell. Its probably a nice place.