It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Group Survival Tactics and Strategies.

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 07:25 PM
link   
This thread was inspired by this ultra cool thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com... (Women and Survival)

I learned a lot of cool things in that thread, and it made me think of a very important question:

What would be your dream team group in a SHTF scenario? Let's assume for a second that it is a group survival situation and for the sake of this exercise, you are not by yourself.

For me, I think 2 men, 2 women, and 2 dogs would be a good group.

Here are my reasons why I think this group would be relatively effective. (Hypothetically speaking, let's say that this dream team has decided to seek shelter into a big forest. Also, when you share your dream team ideas, assume you are one of the members, so for example, I would count for 1 of the 2 males in this said group.)

-First off, there are no children in the group. While of course the children are the future, they would bog down the group in a SHTF situation. Of course if it is your own children, then of course you would want them in the group, but for the sake of this discussion, let's say there are no offspring of the 2 men and 2 women yet.

-It would be best if the 2 men and 2 women were in the age group of about 18-35. This would be best because when the time is right they can be fertile and able to make babies to rebuild the human population if needed. Also, if one of the men or one of the women dies, there is still a capability to create babies.

-I also think having 2 men and 2 women is best because there is a nice balance. I was thinking at first maybe 1 man and 2 women, but that might be risky if the man is off hunting and the 2 women are back at camp by themselves. Not being sexist, just being realistic.

-2 dogs would be the best in my opinion. While they would cut into the supplies and water, having one dog for hunting and one dog back at camp would be very good. If one dies, then one is still available for usage as guarding or hunting. Also, doggies are great for companionship anyway.

Yeah. So that would be my dream team in a group survival scenario.

What do you think would work best?




posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 08:15 PM
link   
Me and 5 puerto rican pool boys??

Seriously though.. small group dream team? 4 men and 4 women.. I guess starting out me and my spouse.. and chose the others specifically for what they can bring as far as skills to the "dream team". Basically things that my husband and I cant do or dont know how. More than gender or whatever.. its the skill set that would interest me most for dream team candidates.


Of course dogs too! LOL!



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 10:21 PM
link   
Good talking point!
I like including the dogs. They are a great addition, especially if they can hunt or catch food.

Personally, I would opt for a fairly larger group for protection and battle situations. Personally, I'd want a group of about 5-10 family members with their respective spouses. I'm sure in some occasion we'll encounter other people or groups, as to ensure breeding outside the family. If not, at least the children can mate successfully as cousins, 2nd cousins, or 3rd cousins.

Having a family group would help to establish the natural hierarchy already found within families, and also help to ensure more of a trust factor. Family members would fight harder to protect one another. If SHTF, the first people I'm organizing is my family. More mouths to feed, but more protection and love.



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Hhhhmm...Im not sure 4 people are enough, but where is the limit? You would not want your crowd to be too large for many reasons. I think 6 -8 people....more on the man side, just for stronger protection.



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 10:36 PM
link   
You have to consider the skills you would need/want in this scenario. Unless I've got a Jack of all Trades, i want several people, depending on food availability/general safety.
Off the top of my head..someone as well as myself who is in good shape and can hunt, shoot, trap, track
and fish. Basically another adept outdoorsman. Secondly, I need someone versed in Irrigation and Renewable Energy. Clean water and solar power would go far in a drawn-out survival situation.
Next comes A builder/construction expert for shelter/defense purposes.
Of course these skills could be covered by 2 people or 4, I dont mind as long as the abilities are present.
Add my girlfriend and maybe a lucky person who can be the financier?(wink wink)

edit on 7-3-2011 by StripedBandit because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 10:43 PM
link   
Four is far too small a group to provide mutual support and protection.

Consider this: in the event of having to be on the "qui vive?" for an extended period, no one would get more than a few hours sleep at a time.

You need at least two people to stand watch, and each watch can last no more than two hours, the practical limit for maintaining high alert levels.

I would prefer a group of at least twenty or so, with all age ranges distributed thusly: 4 fit elders, 4 middle age, 6 young adults, 4 teenagers and 4 children from ages 6 to 10. The presence of children focusses the group and works against the group taking stupid chances. They give immediate purpose and joy. The other ages provide resiliency and temper to the group.

The numbers mean that some can hunt while others protect and till. A bout of illness becomes survivable rather than utterly debilitating.



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 10:49 PM
link   
reply to post by apacheman
 


Interesting interesting.

I think my original idea would be a start, and then from there maybe recruit people as we continue on our adventure.

But I think the 2/2/2 team in my OP is nice for just the basics. But definitely can be expanded upon.

Good contributions so far.

The main reason I stayed with such low numbers was because I was thinking of conserving water and food.

But yes, all valid points by the posters.



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 10:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sahabi
Good talking point!
I like including the dogs. They are a great addition, especially if they can hunt or catch food.


Most definitely. It also makes me think some dogs can even take care of themselves, like they can go eat squirrels and such and find their own food. That way, they don't really cut into the food portion of the group.

Does animal blood count as water?



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 11:02 PM
link   
I read a book recently that covers this topic extensively, and while a work of fiction, it delves deeply into the creation and self sufficiency of a group and strategies for the survival and prosperity of said group in a post-SHTF scenario. The website for the book is really damn cool too.



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 11:11 PM
link   
If anyone's interested here's a copy of the fictional manifesto that the story of Noise: A Novel is based around. I found it in it's entirety on the book's website


www.salvagecountry.net...


edit on 7-3-2011 by Demiwatt because: fixed a link



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 11:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sahabi
Good talking point!
I like including the dogs. They are a great addition, especially if they can hunt or catch food.

Personally, I would opt for a fairly larger group for protection and battle situations. Personally, I'd want a group of about 5-10 family members with their respective spouses. I'm sure in some occasion we'll encounter other people or groups, as to ensure breeding outside the family. If not, at least the children can mate successfully as cousins, 2nd cousins, or 3rd cousins.

Having a family group would help to establish the natural hierarchy already found within families, and also help to ensure more of a trust factor. Family members would fight harder to protect one another. If SHTF, the first people I'm organizing is my family. More mouths to feed, but more protection and love.


Good post!
Family for sure...and some close friends who may not have a family to team up with. I couldnt put a number on how many members to have in your group, but I would think you can go farther with people you are close to and familiar with. A "team" like that could realy hit the ground running.



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 05:20 AM
link   
As weird as this may sound, I would rather Family members form their own individual groups, especially if we live far from each other. My thinking is, If something were to happen to the group as a whole, then in that instant BAM the whole legacy could vanish. I rather have Family spread out so as to increase each family member's chances of survival. And later after things settle down, we can meet up at say a pre destined rally point somewhere.



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Majestic Lumen
 


You know I had not even thought of it in that light before. Not only would it better insure the survival of the family or continuing the family name/line, but it would also aid in 'diplomacy' of different groups to have ties in several different groups. To illustrate my point, lets say you and I are family members of different survival groups in different locations. Because you and I are family members it may mean easier communication and cooperation levels between the 2 groups. Kind of like a modern day way of doing things like they did in the middle ages where the monarchy of one country would marry into the monarchy of another country to strengthen bonds. Just a thought



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   
Depending on what the ultimate goals are, but from the initial get go, the numbers will have to be determined by the available resources for that group and must live within the restraints of the availability of the resources. They would also need to determine if they will be self-governed, while there must be rules and enforcement, the group can self-govern if it is not too large.

Don't forget about a doctor, someone needs to know how to take care of injuries and other illnesses, but every person should be well versed in the basics of first aid. As long as there are individuals that can provide and assist with the 5 fundamental requirements of survival(water, food, security, shelter, fire) then the group can survive.



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 05:10 PM
link   
I must say, fantastic ideas being shared here. Things I have never even thought of.

I think my fave so far is having the family split up to have a better chance of having someone carry on the family legacy.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 12:06 AM
link   
Need at least these basics:

Doctor- Anyone, not nessisarily a doctor, but a nurse or anyone who can provide some sort of medical help is basically a must, especially in a long term situation.

Builder- Someone who can set up homes, defenses, etc. Helps if they can use multiple materials, but any skilled builder would be useful.

Guard- Someone who knowes how to f*** s*** up if nessissary.

Hunter- Somone who can find and take down animals for food (deer, cyotes, etc) as well as clean and prepare it.

Planter- Someone with skill growing edible plants, though any will do in a pinch.


Those are just basics. Preferably there would be multiple people in each of these groups, with a total group size of 10-15. Also useful would be people with skill in water purification, animal husbandry, trap and weapon making, as well as someone who can keep the lights running.

If I am in the group, I could fill (loosely mind you) several of these roles, and have skill in water purification, which makes that a less than dire need for my group. The group would also require a clear chain of command, as well as a plan for any combat situation, having even those who can't fight as well as the guards armed may help.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 12:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Demiwatt
If anyone's interested here's a copy of the fictional manifesto that the story of Noise: A Novel is based around. I found it in it's entirety on the book's website


www.salvagecountry.net...


edit on 7-3-2011 by Demiwatt because: fixed a link


awesome link. spot on advice.

All i can add is that it is not going to be ideal. Sure a doc would be great. Good luck. Living in a dream world will get you killed.

one other thing, keep the group small. no dogs. In the beginning your ability to stay alive, and stay hidden will be your only needs. If you have 10, or 20 people, are organized, and have supplies. your going to be targeted. The best thing you can have aside from clean water is information about whats going on around you. important to deny information to those around you as well.



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 01:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Bluesquid
 


The thing with a group that big is that a smaller goup would have a hard time attacking, and a larger group would be avoidable, if a nomadic lifestyle is accepted. Also if a group that size set up shop somewhere in the woods they would be hard to find, especially if smart with camoflaging their stuff.



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 05:36 AM
link   
personally I'd want to keep the group smaller for stealth reasons and for consumption reasons. I'd go with OP , 2 men and 2 women. I wouldn't want liabilities / having to risk my life or that of the group to rescue curly sue.
Also if it's more of an urban area I'd want my partners to be good freerunners (parkour) for evasive reasons, other than that the usual skills you'd want in this SIT.

ETA: in ALL honesty I'd prefer to go lonewolf for the beginning times, I especially wouldn't want to make bonds early on and end up losing someone.
edit on 10-3-2011 by eathis because: (no reason given)


Also IMO being lonewolf (if you're capable) you wouldn't be targeted unless they are downright murderers, lonewolf you would have the ability to come and go as you please, you wouldn't have much possessions to be targeted and you could use your talking skills to join other groups and go from there (either for a place to regain strength or perhaps to infiltrate for future purpose knowledge). Of course obvious dangers lurk on your own but IMO it outweighs the situations you might find yourself in if you were grouped (in the beginning times anyway).
edit on 10-3-2011 by eathis because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by eathis
 


There will probably be "highwaymen" along the easier paths and bigger roads (think book of eli) that would make being lonewolf a less survivable situation, also people are more willing to take on only one person, and you have no one there to watch your back, that's why you should have at least one more capable person along for the ride.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join