View Poll Results: Do you agree or disagree?

Voters
38. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yay!

    28 73.68%
  • Nay!

    10 26.32%
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 44

Thread: Company's join Regiments?

  1. #11

    CSA Captain

    yoyo8346's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    429
    What? I voted yes and I'm telling you that regiments and battalions don't take away your freedom. They are voluntary, meaning you would only choose to join a regiment if you wanted you...

  2. #12
    You or anybody claiming a regiment just for yourselves ain't freedom. If a few companies from the historical regiment want to work together and they can call themselves a regiment fine by me but if the remaining companies also want to form among themselves that should also be allowed. Because that will provide more freedom then a few companies claiming the sole right to be named the 1st South Carolina Regiment for example. No I believe the freedom should be that from all those companies in the 1st SC among themselves should have the freedom to form there own regiments (groups / clans but not name it as such keep it with with the historical name: Regiment)

    quote from the link: " You can form a group and friendship with the other companies, within your mother regiment."

    Quote from the thread creator: "In order to claim a regiment"

    If it would be to form a regiment that is something different then claiming it
    Last edited by SouthCarolina; 06-27-2017 at 09:27 PM.

  3. #13

    USA General of the Army

    John Cooley's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    196
    That begs the Q ...
    What are the Requirements for claiming a Regiment?
    First one to get a majority of Companies? two-thirds? Does that also apply to Brigades, Corps and Army?
    Just food for thought.
    My Great Great Grandfather, Isaac MacDonal Cooley, served as a Pathfinder Cavalry Scout
    in the 1st Arkansas Cavalry Regiment (Dobbin's) Company K
    My Avatar flies his Unit Guidon to Honor his Service.
    My Credo is a simple one ... Unit before Self with Honor above ALL else.

  4. #14

    CSA Captain

    Lance Rawlings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    841
    Quote Originally Posted by John Cooley View Post
    That begs the Q ...
    What are the Requirements for claiming a Regiment?
    First one to get a majority of Companies? two-thirds? Does that also apply to Brigades, Corps and Army?
    Just food for thought.
    I would say it should be something like is already in place when we made our companies. The simple fact is not everyone is going to get their way. You could have a mustering section for battalions where you need at least 3 or 4 mustered (10 men min.) companies to form. And then when you get to let's say 7 or 8 companies you are "upgraded" to a regiment.

    Or.

    The battalion could be the "mustering" part and the first to reach about 8 companies in the battalion would then claim the regimental name as their own.

    Forming a historically accurate battalion/regiment would restrict people from random companies all joining one unit. That's not to say they can't play together, but administratively I'd say they shouldn't be allowed to be formed as a battalion. I know people won't like this, but they really should've expected it from a game with as much high regard for the real history as it has.

    Any thoughts?
    To the Colors!

    Captain Lance Rawlings
    Company K, 38th North Carolina, Pender's Brigade, A.P. Hill's Division, Jackson's Corps, Army of Northern Virginia
    http://www.warofrightsforum.com/show...lina-Boys-quot


  5. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Lance Rawlings View Post
    I would say it should be something like is already in place when we made our companies. The simple fact is not everyone is going to get their way. You could have a mustering section for battalions where you need at least 3 or 4 mustered (10 men min.) companies to form. And then when you get to let's say 7 or 8 companies you are "upgraded" to a regiment.

    Or.

    The battalion could be the "mustering" part and the first to reach about 8 companies in the battalion would then claim the regimental name as their own.

    Forming a historically accurate battalion/regiment would restrict people from random companies all joining one unit. That's not to say they can't play together, but administratively I'd say they shouldn't be allowed to be formed as a battalion. I know people won't like this, but they really should've expected it from a game with as much high regard for the real history as it has.

    Any thoughts?
    Why not let 2 or 3 groups claim the name?
    If you have 10 companies (I would agree on a minimum amount of course) and 5 companies want to work together, they can claim the right to be called a regiment.

    5 left.. 4 of them also team up together claim the right to be called a regiment.
    1 left .. they are in doubt but are now able to choose which one to join. At least this gives a option.

    Restricted freedom combined with a historical flavour if you will.

    * added: To think bigger would it hurt the game or the history if two similar brigades could be made?
    Last edited by SouthCarolina; 06-28-2017 at 03:42 PM.

  6. #16

    USA Brigadier General

    michaelsmithern's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Statesville, North Carolina
    Posts
    858
    I don't get this restriction of freedom argument going on around here, while this at its core is a game and should be remembered, The game itself tries and push for historical accuracy. I'm not here to say that we shouldn't be forced into regiments, honestly if you want to go solo be my guest and have fun. I wouldn't want Company M of the 69thNY(just an example, not sure if such company is even real, don't care either) to be forced into the 69th NY company with all the other guys who have agreed to form it. just as in the 1stMN I wouldn't want A company to be forced to work with My guys in B company, it's harsh and makes one aspect of the game unenjoyable.

    Now that being said, I do believe that for any real work to get done in game it requires a degree of cooperation, if you can't get along with the guys in your own regiment, whether they are slightly irritating or are just plain terrible people, then how would you expect others to get along with your company. going back to it, if A company were forced to work with us(should they be in the same timezone and whatnot) then I'd expect the captain to put his pride on the shelf for the betterment of the unit, since from what the devs have said over and over and over again, this game is mostly about teamwork and your regiment/company will be scored based on how it does, so that raises the point of are you willing to give your regiment/company a bad name or appear worse than others all because you choose to not work with someone else?, I understand we all want our freedom to choose this, this and that, but when it comes down to it, I believe in Regiment over Company in this argument.

    Edit: I think there also might be some disagreement with people who believe a colonel they don't like will be selected when with units that are all working together without you or your company, well if that's the case again bide your time let this new figurehead colonel screw up enough based on his own initiative and then bring it up with the other members of your regiments and get him replaced, were all people at the end of the day and not animals, I'm sure you can talk it out with everyone.
    Last edited by michaelsmithern; 06-28-2017 at 04:10 PM.
    1st Minnesota, Sergeant Michaelsmithern, Company B

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by michaelsmithern View Post
    I don't get this restriction of freedom argument going on around here, while this at its core is a game and should be remembered, The game itself tries and push for historical accuracy. I'm not here to say that we shouldn't be forced into regiments, honestly if you want to go solo be my guest and have fun. I wouldn't want Company M of the 69thNY(just an example, not sure if such company is even real, don't care either) to be forced into the 69th NY company with all the other guys who have agreed to form it. just as in the 1stMN I wouldn't want A company to be forced to work with My guys in B company, it's harsh and makes one aspect of the game unenjoyable.

    Now that being said, I do believe that for any real work to get done in game it requires a degree of cooperation, if you can't get along with the guys in your own regiment, whether they are slightly irritating or are just plain terrible people, then how would you expect others to get along with your company. going back to it, if A company were forced to work with us(should they be in the same timezone and whatnot) then I'd expect the captain to put his pride on the shelf for the betterment of the unit, since from what the devs have said over and over and over again, this game is mostly about teamwork and your regiment/company will be scored based on how it does, so that raises the point of are you willing to give your regiment/company a bad name or appear worse than others all because you choose to not work with someone else?, I understand we all want our freedom to choose this, this and that, but when it comes down to it, I believe in Regiment over Company in this argument.

    Edit: I think there also might be some disagreement with people who believe a colonel they don't like will be selected when with units that are all working together without you or your company, well if that's the case again bide your time let this new figurehead colonel screw up enough based on his own initiative and then bring it up with the other members of your regiments and get him replaced, were all people at the end of the day and not animals, I'm sure you can talk it out with everyone.
    You don't get forums? People discussing and having ideas, yet you present ideas of yourself

  8. #18

    USA Brigadier General

    michaelsmithern's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Statesville, North Carolina
    Posts
    858
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthCarolina View Post
    You don't get forums? People discussing and having ideas, yet you present ideas of yourself
    you misunderstand, I present the idea that the Regiment is more important than that of the company, it is a public forum and the discussion is whether or not we should be forced within regiments or whether we should have the freedom to make regiments with companies that are our friends.

    As demonstrated I argue for my point while against that of forcing people to join regiments. the edit isn't part of my argument it is something I suppose people could take into account when thinking of the subject.

    The whole forum basis is like you said for people to discuss and/or have ideas on the current topic at hand, which is what I did, the only idea of myself I present is that of working together to achieve a greater good, I do not present the idea of communistic/fascist regimental system wherein that end no one single member should have a greater voice to speak within the forum or group as a whole.
    1st Minnesota, Sergeant Michaelsmithern, Company B

  9. #19

    CSA Captain

    Lance Rawlings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    841
    Quote Originally Posted by SouthCarolina View Post
    Why not let 2 or 3 groups claim the name?
    If you have 10 companies (I would agree on a minimum amount of course) and 5 companies want to work together, they can claim the right to be called a regiment.

    5 left.. 4 of them also team up together claim the right to be called a regiment.
    1 left .. they are in doubt but are now able to choose which one to join. At least this gives a option.

    Restricted freedom combined with a historical flavour if you will.

    * added: To think bigger would it hurt the game or the history if two similar brigades could be made?
    I don't really think that this would be ideal, and rather confusing. Just like you can't have more than one Company D of 47th VA, I think the battalion/regiment level should not be different. It's a race to the top so to speak.

    Now, just because you have a company name should NOT mean that you are automatically placed in the regiment. A invite, request system should be implemented in my opinion.

    I really hope that they add a battalion level to the CT soon though!!
    To the Colors!

    Captain Lance Rawlings
    Company K, 38th North Carolina, Pender's Brigade, A.P. Hill's Division, Jackson's Corps, Army of Northern Virginia
    http://www.warofrightsforum.com/show...lina-Boys-quot


  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Lance Rawlings View Post
    I don't really think that this would be ideal, and rather confusing. Just like you can't have more than one Company D of 47th VA, I think the battalion/regiment level should not be different. It's a race to the top so to speak.

    Now, just because you have a company name should NOT mean that you are automatically placed in the regiment. A invite, request system should be implemented in my opinion.

    I really hope that they add a battalion level to the CT soon though!!
    Not a realistic comparison a company vs a battalion or regiment. Company is yours but a cooperation is another level

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •