History Main / NeverSplitTheParty

7th Nov '17 2:54:36 PM jormis29
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* ''MutantCityBlues'', a low-powered sleuth game, presents an interesting technical reason to keep the party together. When everyone are playing uniformed detectives it's not very easy to conceive of 4+ detectives all working on the same case in the same scene. But the system says that clues on the scene are automatically (or semi-automatically) available only to those with the right skill off the long long list, which is only feasible to 100% cover with the whole party. Therefore, if 2 detectives go one way and 2 other go the other (which would, in real life, make perfect sense), the first group on their scene will automatically miss all the clues tied to the skills of 2 other detectives, and vice versa, possibly rendering even a relatively straightforward case unsolvable.

to:

* ''MutantCityBlues'', ''TabletopGame/MutantCityBlues'', a low-powered sleuth game, presents an interesting technical reason to keep the party together. When everyone are playing uniformed detectives it's not very easy to conceive of 4+ detectives all working on the same case in the same scene. But the system says that clues on the scene are automatically (or semi-automatically) available only to those with the right skill off the long long list, which is only feasible to 100% cover with the whole party. Therefore, if 2 detectives go one way and 2 other go the other (which would, in real life, make perfect sense), the first group on their scene will automatically miss all the clues tied to the skills of 2 other detectives, and vice versa, possibly rendering even a relatively straightforward case unsolvable.
28th Sep '17 9:15:49 AM TwobitMulder
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* Edgar Cantero's ''Meddling Kids'' has the now grown up Scooby Gang expies decide this is a more effective strategy than splitting up, which resulted in serious trauma when they were still kids. Notably the Fred expy is absent from the investigation leaving the others free to criticize his {{Lets split up gang}} strategies as dangerous and stupid.
8th Sep '17 11:49:38 AM chopshop
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* Briefly mentioned in ''ComicBook/TheTransformersLastStandOfTheWreckers''. It's noted that [[TemptingFate the first rule listed the Wreckers' training manual is to never split the party]]. Sure enough, the Wreckers splitting into two teams for the Garrus-9 mission ends up being a big contributor to [[DwindlingParty the deaths that ensue]].
9th Jul '17 3:53:08 PM nombretomado
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** The [[WorldWarII Battle of Midway]] was a US victory because Admiral Yamamoto had carefully split his fleet in a manner that ''would'' allow each successive element to come to the aid of the one before it...assuming that the US forces were as he believed them to be. Unfortunately for him, US Naval Intelligence had cracked the Japanese codes and the Americans knew what to expect, so they sent more and stronger forces. Meanwhile, the Japanese were completely in the dark about US movements. This allowed the American task force to destroy Admiral Nagumo's flotilla well before the flotillas of Admirals Yamamoto and Kondo could come to their rescue.

to:

** The [[WorldWarII [[UsefulNotes/WorldWarII Battle of Midway]] was a US victory because Admiral Yamamoto had carefully split his fleet in a manner that ''would'' allow each successive element to come to the aid of the one before it...assuming that the US forces were as he believed them to be. Unfortunately for him, US Naval Intelligence had cracked the Japanese codes and the Americans knew what to expect, so they sent more and stronger forces. Meanwhile, the Japanese were completely in the dark about US movements. This allowed the American task force to destroy Admiral Nagumo's flotilla well before the flotillas of Admirals Yamamoto and Kondo could come to their rescue.
4th Jul '17 5:37:35 PM nombretomado
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanchester%27s_laws Lachester's Laws]], as detailed on TheOtherWiki, explain this trope. In brief, imagine two sides of perfectly equal soldiers. Same training, same capacity, same equipment, same position. One force is larger than the other. Engagements by the two sides can be thought of as exchanges. Every time the smaller force loses a casualty, it also loses a proportionally greater part of its capacity to deal the other side damage. For example, suppose Force A, 100 strong, engages Force B, 1000 strong. Each unit has a 5% chance to cause another to be eliminated during each exchange. B eliminates 50 of A in the first exchange. A eliminates 5. In the next exchange, B's 995 remaining men will likely destroy A, and A can expect to only cause 2-4 more casualties. As a result, A would be eliminated at the cost of less than 10 from B. Numbers count twice, as they add firepower and dilute the ability of the enemy to negate your firepower.

to:

* [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanchester%27s_laws Lachester's Laws]], as detailed on TheOtherWiki, Wiki/TheOtherWiki, explain this trope. In brief, imagine two sides of perfectly equal soldiers. Same training, same capacity, same equipment, same position. One force is larger than the other. Engagements by the two sides can be thought of as exchanges. Every time the smaller force loses a casualty, it also loses a proportionally greater part of its capacity to deal the other side damage. For example, suppose Force A, 100 strong, engages Force B, 1000 strong. Each unit has a 5% chance to cause another to be eliminated during each exchange. B eliminates 50 of A in the first exchange. A eliminates 5. In the next exchange, B's 995 remaining men will likely destroy A, and A can expect to only cause 2-4 more casualties. As a result, A would be eliminated at the cost of less than 10 from B. Numbers count twice, as they add firepower and dilute the ability of the enemy to negate your firepower.



** Because of real-world concerns discussed on TheOtherWiki, the usual formulation is that greater numbers of absolutely equal troops apply an exponent of 1.5 to the superior numbered side's capability, but before the law can be applied, you have to know all the Force Multipliers. These are any and all advantages that make a unit more effective, such as superior equipment, terrain, leadership, training, and so on. For an abstract combat game like many role playing games and wargames, the original exponent of 2 may make more sense.

to:

** Because of real-world concerns discussed on TheOtherWiki, Wiki/TheOtherWiki, the usual formulation is that greater numbers of absolutely equal troops apply an exponent of 1.5 to the superior numbered side's capability, but before the law can be applied, you have to know all the Force Multipliers. These are any and all advantages that make a unit more effective, such as superior equipment, terrain, leadership, training, and so on. For an abstract combat game like many role playing games and wargames, the original exponent of 2 may make more sense.
3rd Jun '17 11:14:12 AM nombretomado
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* Most ''WhiteWolf'' [=ST=]s in any kind of hacky-slashy situation will cackle with glee if the party is split up simply because they know that they will be eating character sheets for dinner when the [=PCs=] split up in a combat situation.

to:

* Most ''WhiteWolf'' Creator/WhiteWolf [=ST=]s in any kind of hacky-slashy situation will cackle with glee if the party is split up simply because they know that they will be eating character sheets for dinner when the [=PCs=] split up in a combat situation.
27th Apr '17 10:51:38 AM LentilSandEater
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Sun Tzu mentioned this in the sixth chapter of his book ''Literature/TheArtOfWar''. In the moment of ignorance, the enemy force will likely split his army into several units in hopes that they will cover more ground, but this will just bring the opportunity for the other side to use his whole army to crush these units one by one.
*** He does flip-flop the trope by explaining exactly when one ''should'' divide one's forces (baiting a trap, for instance).

to:

** Sun Tzu mentioned this in the sixth chapter of his book ''Literature/TheArtOfWar''. In the moment of ignorance, the enemy force will likely split his army into several units in hopes that they will cover more ground, but this will just bring the opportunity for the other side to use his whole army to crush these units one by one.
*** He does flip-flop
one. On the trope by explaining exactly when one ''should'' divide one's forces (baiting other hand he recommends it in some situations, baiting a trap, for instance).instance.
19th Jan '17 7:37:55 PM dsneybuf
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* The ''Webcomic/FreeSpirit'' comic "Bedbugs and Broomsticks" has Winnie [[http://www.platypuscomix.net/freespirit/index.php?issue=6&page=13 enforce this]] by objecting to Robb's plan for their party to split up.

to:

* The ''Webcomic/FreeSpirit'' ''Webcomic/FreeSpirit2014'' comic "Bedbugs and Broomsticks" has Winnie [[http://www.platypuscomix.net/freespirit/index.php?issue=6&page=13 enforce this]] by objecting to Robb's plan for their party to split up.
13th Oct '16 10:09:29 PM SSJMagus
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* German's first three campaigns against the USSR during WWII. The Germany Army High Command (OKH), optimistic and impatient to get the war over with, ultimately split its force of 3 million men and 3000 tanks into three Army Groups. These were to pursue three initial goals 500km away and 300km apart (Riga, Smolensk, Kiev), three primary goals 1000km away and 600km apart (Leningrad, Moscow, Rostov-on-Don), and three final goals 1500km away and 1000km apart (Archangelsk, Samara/Kuiybyshev, Baku). Needless to say, by the time they reached the initial goals in July the problems with this approach had become apparent: all three Army Groups were too under-supplied and weak to advance without either stopping offensive operations for at least a month or redistributing forces to concentrate on taking just one or two of the primary goals. The OKH wanted to focus on Moscow alone, for questionable reasons [[note]] its commanders wanted the glory and political clout, it didn't care about the economics of Germany's war effort, and they may have genuinely thought it might win the war (for some reason) [[/note]], arguing that it was possible to capture and hold it with a small force which could be reinforced later. Hitler overruled this hare-brained scheme and did something sensible instead, ordering a campaign to take raw resources necessary for the German economy at Kiev (July-September) and placating the Army with a questionable advance on Leningrad (August-September). Postwar evaluations of this strategic choice show that the German Army's scheme for taking Moscow was an ''incredibly'' bad idea as it would have entailed a force of just 200,000 men and 1000 tanks attacking a well-entrenched defensive force of more than 500,000 men. Even if they had succeeded, it would have left the German forces in/around Moscow extremely vulnerable to the Winter Counter-Offensive as they would have had at most 500,000 troops to hold a salient less than 200km wide and 500km long against an attacking force of as many as 1.5 million troops attacking from the north and south. Indeed, successfully taking Moscow in the face of heavy Soviet resistance could only have weakened these forces even further than in real life. Given that Soviet forces were able to advance up to 100km in a single operation in some of the actual winter offensives, an early advance on Moscow would likely have been nothing short of disastrous. ''Never split the party'' indeed.

to:

* German's first three campaigns against the USSR during WWII. The Germany Army High Command (OKH), optimistic and impatient to get the war over with, ultimately split its force of 3 million men and 3000 tanks into three Army Groups. These were to pursue three initial goals 500km away and 300km apart (Riga, Smolensk, Kiev), three primary goals 1000km away and 600km apart (Leningrad, Moscow, Rostov-on-Don), and three final goals 1500km away and 1000km apart (Archangelsk, Samara/Kuiybyshev, Baku). Needless to say, by the time they reached the initial goals in July the problems with this approach had become apparent: all three Army Groups were too under-supplied and weak to advance without either stopping offensive operations for at least a month or redistributing forces to concentrate on taking just one or two of the primary goals. The OKH wanted to focus on Moscow alone, for questionable reasons [[note]] its commanders wanted the glory and political clout, it didn't care about the economics of Germany's war effort, and they may have genuinely thought it might win the war (for some reason) [[/note]], arguing that it was possible to capture and hold it with a small force which could be reinforced later. Hitler overruled this hare-brained scheme and did something sensible instead, ordering a campaign to take raw resources necessary for the German economy at Kiev (July-September) and placating the Army with a questionable advance on Leningrad (August-September). The scheme was too hare-brained for ''Adolf Hilter'', who was himself quite prone to ill-conceived and overly grandiose plans. Let that sink in. Postwar evaluations of this strategic choice show that the German Army's scheme for taking Moscow was an ''incredibly'' bad idea as it would have entailed a force of just 200,000 men and 1000 tanks attacking a well-entrenched defensive force of more than 500,000 men. Even if they had succeeded, it would have left the German forces in/around Moscow extremely vulnerable to the Winter Counter-Offensive as they would have had at most 500,000 troops to hold a salient less than 200km wide and 500km long against an attacking force of as many as 1.5 million troops attacking from the north and south. Indeed, successfully taking Moscow in the face of heavy Soviet resistance could only have weakened these forces even further than in real life. Given that Soviet forces were able to advance up to 100km in a single operation in some of the actual winter offensives, an early advance on Moscow would likely have been nothing short of disastrous. ''Never split the party'' indeed.
23rd Sep '16 11:28:33 AM MacedonianKing
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** When the cop finds Ben, Bill, Eddie, Richie, and Stan playing in the Barrens, he says that he can understand them wanting to play there, but they should only do so if they stay together as a group the entire time and don't go off to play hide-and-seek or something in ones or twos.

to:

** When the cop finds Ben, Bill, Eddie, Richie, and Stan playing in the Barrens, he says that he can understand them wanting to play there, but they should only do so if they stay together as a group the entire time and don't go off to play hide-and-seek or something in ones or twos. ReasonableAuthorityFigure indeed.
This list shows the last 10 events of 72. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.NeverSplitTheParty