REVS Posted June 10, 2003 Share Posted June 10, 2003 OK, this happened while discussing a CMBB game, hence its placement here. CMBO/BB playing friend with awesome win/lose record is, admittedly, a nice neat person. Freud would say he's anal retentive. Symptoms of anal retentive (AR) personality: neatness, orderliness, attention to detail. Everything has to be so-so. Symptoms of the opposite:anal expulsive (AE) personality: neatness is verboten (or rare), basically sh*t goes everywhere (on really bad days, that is). Most of the time the AE type keeps the mess under control sufficiently to be regarded as socially OK. On the positive side, the AE can be creative and unconventional. My grand theory is that CMBB/BO commanders (and maybe military commanders in general) need to be much more like an AR personality than an AE personality. Sure, the expulsive, creative guy who's a bit disorganised will achieve the odd inspired victory, but it's the neat, tidy, organised, attention-to-detail type that wins the battles and, in the end, the wars. Of course, as to who gets the chicks, that's another,and probably more important, question altogether. But that doesn't happen anywhere near a keyboard. But is it a travesty to think that toilet training is what this wonderful game is all about? And please, I am hoping that up to 30% of the CM community can refrain from either gay, toilet or fart jokes in reply to this thread. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soddball Posted June 10, 2003 Share Posted June 10, 2003 Can I be in the other 70%? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nippy Posted June 10, 2003 Share Posted June 10, 2003 My grand theory is that CMBB/BO commanders (and maybe military commanders in general) need to be much more like an AR personality than an AE personality. I always find the opposite true. You know the saying about no plan surviving contact with the enemy? And AE person has a much easier time making up plans "on the fly" then the AR person does. Sometimes you don't have hours to sit and plan your next move. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted June 10, 2003 Share Posted June 10, 2003 I really haven't found a connection between the types. Take Patton, he had some classic AR traits, clean freak, dress codes, but he was one of the most creative commanders the U.S. produced. If there has been one lesson of military history it is that you can almost never tell the lions from the lambs until they are put under fire. A garrison stud often turns out to be a battlefield dud while that private who was nothing but trouble in the barracks becomes another Audey Murphy when the bullets start flying. Another thing to consider is that the AR commander will often tend to have everything in order and so is more difficult to surprise. A more opportunistic commander often tends to get men out of position to exploit one opportunity only to find his men in trouble when something unexpected comes up. [ June 10, 2003, 06:36 AM: Message edited by: sgtgoody (esq) ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nidan1 Posted June 10, 2003 Share Posted June 10, 2003 I think you need to define the level of command control. I would think that people on the higher operational level of command would be more AR than say, a company commander. The more information you have to sort through the more anal you have to be IMO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted June 10, 2003 Share Posted June 10, 2003 Originally posted by Nippy: My grand theory is that CMBB/BO commanders (and maybe military commanders in general) need to be much more like an AR personality than an AE personality. I always find the opposite true. You know the saying about no plan surviving contact with the enemy? And AE person has a much easier time making up plans "on the fly" then the AR person does. Sometimes you don't have hours to sit and plan your next move. But Nippy, wouldn't a better-organized commander also be better prepared for changes? You could think of comparing a Swiss pocket knife to a box choked with all sorts of tools. With that neat pocket knife, you just need to fold out the phallic symbol, but with the messy box you never know what you get... I mean, it takes minutes to find the right thing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim Posted June 10, 2003 Share Posted June 10, 2003 Originally posted by REVS: My grand theory is that CMBB/BO commanders (and maybe military commanders in general) need to be much more like an AR personality than an AE personality. Sure, the expulsive, creative guy who's a bit disorganised will achieve the odd inspired victory, but it's the neat, tidy, organised, attention-to-detail type that wins the battles and, in the end, the wars. From my opinion, it is the team that wins. If you have an AE guy with an AR staff, that would be a good thing. Or an AE guy who is forced into an AR role by his CO. Usually everythinbg is in place - so when AE is needed, it can be fully unleashed without searching. On Patton: What makes you sure he is AR? Maybe he is AE but forces himself to be more AR. At least that's what I am trying to do with me... Gruß Joachim 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serge Posted June 10, 2003 Share Posted June 10, 2003 Put a team of AR's in place and you get a team that is so predictable ... they will not survive the battle. Put a team of AE's in place and you get a team that probably will make such a mess out of it, that the enemy will be p....ng in their pants of laughter. The golden rule: a bit of everything, creating balance, filling shortcomings of others. ... and loads of luck :cool: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shosties Posted June 10, 2003 Share Posted June 10, 2003 You guys are migrating away from REVS' focus: the CMBO/CMBB player. Shying away from self-analysis here? The question stands: does personality type correlate with victories in PBEMs and TCP/IP games? One popular personality type theory out there is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Lots of resources based around it are available over the web. The "AE/AR" axis REVS has expounded upon is equivalent to the perceiving/judgement axis in Myers-Briggs typology. The three other axes are introversion/extroversion, thinking/feeling*, and intuitive/sensing. With four axes with two extremes each you end up with sixteen archtypes. If you're interested in this at all... and I'm betting the last paragraph probably dropped out 90% of the readership ... there are a number of places to take online tests with dozens of questions, but it's probably best to just answer four simple ones such as those given here. If you've found a tentative MBTI for yourself, you can find a more detailed thumbnail pysch portrait here or among many other sites you can find via a search engine. OK.. back to the question: My guess is "Thinking"* types will have a distinct advantage, but then most wargamers are probably there anyway (but listening to all the moralizing on the GF I have to wonder). Introverts are probably better at focusing all their attention on the game at hand while playing. But the other dimensions have potential pros and cons for play style either way. Naturally the only way to say for certain would be to get the data and poll players. I'm INTP and I'm not really that good at CMBB (yet?). Notes: (*)One can get wrong-footed by the descriptors... "thinking" is best described as a tendency to base decisions on logic and being rational, while "feeling" is a tendency to base decisions on value judgements and being moral/ethical/esthetic. [ June 10, 2003, 11:57 AM: Message edited by: Shosties4th ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Serge Posted June 10, 2003 Share Posted June 10, 2003 Originally posted by Shosties4th: You guys are migrating away from REVS' focus: the CMBO/CMBB player. Shying away from self-analysis here? The question stands: does personality type correlate with victories in PBEMs and TCP/IP games? One popular personality type theory out there is the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Lots of resources based around it are available over the web. The "AE/AR" axis REVS has expounded upon is equivalent to the perceiving/judgement axis in Myers-Briggs typology. The three other axes are introversion/extroversion, thinking/feeling*, and intuitive/sensing. With four axes with two extremes each you end up with sixteen archtypes. If you're interested in this at all... and I'm betting the last paragraph probably dropped out 90% of the readership ... there are a number of places to take online tests with dozens of questions, but it's probably best to just answer four simple ones such as those given here. If you've found a tentative MBTI for yourself, you can find a more detailed thumbnail pysch portrait here or among many other sites you can find via a search engine. OK.. back to the question: My guess is "Thinking"* types will have a distinct advantage, but then most wargamers are probably there anyway (but listening to all the moralizing on the GF I have to wonder). Introverts are probably better at focusing all their attention on the game at hand while playing. But the other dimensions have potential pros and cons for play style either way. Naturally the only way to say for certain would be to get the data and poll players. I'm INTP and I'm not really that good at CMBB (yet?). Notes: (*)One can get wrong-footed by the descriptors... "thinking" is best described as a tendency to base decisions on logic and being rational, while "feeling" is a tendency to base decisions on value judgements and being moral/ethical/esthetic. Definitely true about Myers-Briggs ... I am an ESFP myself ... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.