View Poll Results: Do you agree or disagree?

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

    29 74.36%
  • Nay!

    10 25.64%
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 44

Thread: Company's join Regiments?

  1. #31

    CSA Captain

    Frederick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by LBoland View Post
    That's when all the independent companies form up and work together against the coordinated regiments. Hoorah.

    I doubt there will be any independent companies left, most of them will have been incentivized to join a regiment.
    Capt. Frederick Cox

    44th Georgia Infantry Regiment
    Doles Brigade
    Army of Northern Virginia

    State of Georgia

    Confederate States of America


  2. #32

    CSA Captain

    LBoland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by Frederick View Post
    I doubt there will be any independent companies left, most of them will have been incentivized to join a regiment.
    Naw man.
    Captain of the 1st Texas Company B, "Livingston Guards."
    Regimental Titles
    Chief Diplomat
    Arbitor
    Troublesheuter
    Chief Mediater
    Chief Negotiator
    Regimental Psychic Medium
    Hedmaester of the Verginia Military Instatute (pm to attend officer courses, all CSA officers are required to attend before taking to the field)

    My great great great grandma fought alongside Ulysses S Lee in the 12th Airborne Brigatallion at the battle of Niagra Cliffs, RIP Smitty Werbenjaegermanjensen

  3. #33

    CSA Captain

    Frederick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by LBoland View Post
    Naw man.

    we'll see man, but i think it's a bad idea to give people higher rank than captain.
    Capt. Frederick Cox

    44th Georgia Infantry Regiment
    Doles Brigade
    Army of Northern Virginia

    State of Georgia

    Confederate States of America


  4. #34

    CSA Captain

    Lance Rawlings's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    North Carolina, United States
    Posts
    836
    I don't think there should be a vote system in the tool, if a certain group wants to vote for a leader go for it, but don't make it a requirement for the regiment tool for those who don't use a democratic military. Just like you could vote for the Captain of your company, but there isn't a tool for it, I think the regimental tool should reflect this. Basically the tool is already set up, just another level would be added to support regimental formation. I don't think there would be an issue of a company being forced into a regiment. There's no pressure into joining and no way you can force them in. Companies should be able to join and leave as they wish.

    I really think most of the concern about "big brother" units comes from a history with the MB community. This is a new community, one that respects each other more and works together. Not as big guy helping little guy, but everyone just getting on and shooting. This organization stuff is so simple when you cut the drama.

    I guess in the end this topic has been discussed a ton, it's just time to see what the devs decide.
    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. #35
    David Dire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    America
    Posts
    680
    Again, there's no reason to have people above the rank of captain outside of battle.
    http://i.imgur.com/STUHVb8.png

  6. #36

    CSA Captain

    Frederick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by Lance Rawlings View Post
    I don't think there should be a vote system in the tool, if a certain group wants to vote for a leader go for it, but don't make it a requirement for the regiment tool for those who don't use a democratic military. Just like you could vote for the Captain of your company, but there isn't a tool for it, I think the regimental tool should r eflect this. Basically the tool is already set up, just another level would be added to support regimental formation. I don't think there would be an issue of a company being forced into a regiment. There's no pressure into joining and no way you can force them in. Companies should be able to join and leave as they wish.

    I really think most of the concern about "big brother" units comes from a history with the MB community. This is a new community, one that respects each other more and works together. Not as big guy helping little guy, but everyone just getting on and shooting. This organization stuff is so simple when you cut the drama.

    I guess in the end this topic has been discussed a ton, it's just time to see what the devs decide.
    The conversation isn't over. Especially not when a dissenting opinion is being expressed. There is a social pressure in joining established regiments for many reasons. For the same reason you don't have to join the NBA or follow its rules to play basketball, or the NFL to play football. Theoretically, the NBA and NFL are both voluntary organizations that you don't 'have' to join, but it is effectually obligatory, even if you can leave and go as you please. If you want to be a professional football player or basketball player, you have to play ball with those organizations. once there are established regiments, that's going to be the effect on the community. Play ball or go home.

    Subjecting you to these self-proclaimed 'generals' whose only claim to the title is that they started it first and convinced a couple captains to join with them. legitimized by their 'position' and official 'title' to which they do not deserve nor have earned. They have no more right to the role than any other captain.

    You disagree with mandatory democracy, because you don't want 'a democratic military'.

    That's just the thing, this isn't a military where you can command others what to do just because you started the regiment or founded the unit. This isn't the military. in a real life military, you have to obey the rules or you will be shot or punished.

    This isn't a real life military, it's a video game and the 'military' nature of the structure should represent that.

    you may respect and 'work together' with others, and that's fine, but such a trust system will break down when the small community nature of this game changes and it's released to the lower tiers and general public.

    The real question is; why do you oppose a 'democratic military'? Is it because you or whom you support for leadership positions isn't capable of garnering enough political support to maintain that position in lieu of permanent status?

    Is it because your decisions and actions or those of whom you support would not stand up to democratic scrutiny?

    It's hard being a leader when you're held accountable to those you lead, i agree. and certainly, in a real-life military situation, such 'democratic' institutionalisms questioning leadership would be negative. But this is an entirely different situation.

    Certainly, a 'military structure' would be beneficial if you wanted to assert some sort of established power over a larger organization without a legitimate claim besides the rank you've purportedly 'earned' and maintain with permanency without the consent of the governed.

    The only power an individual player has any claim to is that which the players below them have consented to. No 'general' can rightly claim such a title without the democratically expressed view of the players below them.

    There can be no reasoning behind not permitting or requiring a democratic process besides attempting to usurp the power of the player-base they are there to serve.
    Last edited by Frederick; 06-30-2017 at 08:59 PM.
    Capt. Frederick Cox

    44th Georgia Infantry Regiment
    Doles Brigade
    Army of Northern Virginia

    State of Georgia

    Confederate States of America


  7. #37

    CSA Captain

    Frederick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by David Dire View Post
    Again, there's no reason to have people above the rank of captain outside of battle.


    I completely agree with your assessment.
    Capt. Frederick Cox

    44th Georgia Infantry Regiment
    Doles Brigade
    Army of Northern Virginia

    State of Georgia

    Confederate States of America


  8. #38

    USA Brigadier General

    michaelsmithern's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Statesville, North Carolina
    Posts
    863
    Quote Originally Posted by Frederick View Post
    The conversation isn't over. Especially not when a dissenting opinion is being expressed. There is a social pressure in joining established regiments for many reasons. For the same reason you don't have to join the NBA or follow its rules to play basketball, or the NFL to play football. Theoretically, the NBA and NFL are both voluntary organizations that you don't 'have' to join, but it is effectually obligatory, even if you can leave and go as you please. If you want to be a professional football player or basketball player, you have to play ball with those organizations.

    You disagree with mandatory democracy, because you don't want 'a democratic military'.

    That's just the thing, this isn't a military where you can command others what to do just because you started the regiment or founded the unit. This isn't the military. in a real life military, you have to obey the rules or you will be shot or punished.

    This isn't a real life military, it's a video game and the 'military' nature of the structure should represent that.

    you may respect and 'work together' with others, and that's fine, but such a trust system will break down when the small community nature of this game changes and it's released to the lower tiers and general public.

    The real question is; why do you oppose a 'democratic military'? Is it because you or whom you support for leadership positions isn't capable of garnering enough political support to maintain that position in lieu of permanent status?

    Is it because your decisions and actions or those of whom you support would not stand up to democratic scrutiny?

    It's hard being a leader when you're held accountable to those you lead, i agree. and certainly, in a real-life military situation, such 'democratic' institutionalisms questioning leadership would be negative. But this is an entirely different situation.
    i don't think shooting people for not listening is all too common especially if it's over something stupid, now if your in combat that's a different story.
    as for the game itself, I see it as our duty to support and substain a regiment, everyone is all about what if the rules suck within the regiment, or i don't like the leader or this or that or this or that. when i think of a virtual regiment, with companies making it up of people from all over i don't envision people forcing these freelancing companies in and basically making them slaves to their whim, I think a represented republic style vote should be in place such as captains being the only ones who vote on people of certain rank to achieve the regimental lead position, i wouldn't want everyone voting, for example the 1stMN Co.B has 56 members in it, the next biggest company is Co.A with 10 or 14 members, sorry travis i haven't checked in a while, now if all 56 voted for Jon(our captain) then it'd be a no brainer for him to get it, that's why with 3 or more companies that communicate often they can deside on what is best for the company. And even then the regimental system shouldnt' be feared for it's rules, just imagine brigades and division level leadership, that's where my concern lays, because it's more influence than what one company can deal with.

    Another point is, what if we let companies freelance with others to form up a regiment, they wouldn't exactly be a named regiment(like 38thNY) they'd be something else i suppose, custom 1 maybe? and then when we get access to a brigade chain of command, it's would be hell for the commanders, you would see 28thNJ Co.A, with 93rdOH Co.K or something like that, it'd be harder to work with especially if you had for example Co.M 69thNY freelance, while the 69thNY regiment is under your command, of course M company would go with it's free lance regiment, but some people coudl see it as why are the 69th splitting up like that?

    To summarize, while a regiment shouldn't be forced into it's mother regiment, I can't support the idea of unhistorical freelance regiments

    Disclaimer: to any regiments/companies i used it's purely example and i mean no harm towards you

  9. #39

    CSA Captain

    Frederick's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by michaelsmithern View Post
    i don't think shooting people for not listening is all too common especially if it's over something stupid, now if your in combat that's a different story.
    as for the game itself, I see it as our duty to support and substain a regiment, everyone is all about what if the rules suck within the regiment, or i don't like the leader or this or that or this or that. when i think of a virtual regiment, with companies making it up of people from all over i don't envision people forcing these freelancing companies in and basically making them slaves to their whim, I think a represented republic style vote should be in place such as captains being the only ones who vote on people of certain rank to achieve the regimental lead position, i wouldn't want everyone voting, for example the 1stMN Co.B has 56 members in it, the next biggest company is Co.A with 10 or 14 members, sorry travis i haven't checked in a while, now if all 56 voted for Jon(our captain) then it'd be a no brainer for him to get it, that's why with 3 or more companies that communicate often they can deside on what is best for the company. And even then the regimental system shouldnt' be feared for it's rules, just imagine brigades and division level leadership, that's where my concern lays, because it's more influence than what one company can deal with.

    Another point is, what if we let companies freelance with others to form up a regiment, they wouldn't exactly be a named regiment(like 38thNY) they'd be something else i suppose, custom 1 maybe? and then when we get access to a brigade chain of command, it's would be hell for the commanders, you would see 28thNJ Co.A, with 93rdOH Co.K or something like that, it'd be harder to work with especially if you had for example Co.M 69thNY freelance, while the 69thNY regiment is under your command, of course M company would go with it's free lance regiment, but some people coudl see it as why are the 69th splitting up like that?

    To summarize, while a regiment shouldn't be forced into it's mother regiment, I can't support the idea of unhistorical freelance regiments

    Disclaimer: to any regiments/companies i used it's purely example and i mean no harm towards you


    I don't mind regiments or other forms of organization, as long as it is democratic in nature. With suggestions, not orders. Rules should be mutually agreed upon for the common good, and not made arbitrarily by regimental leadership. I don't mind captain voting for regimental leadership.
    Capt. Frederick Cox

    44th Georgia Infantry Regiment
    Doles Brigade
    Army of Northern Virginia

    State of Georgia

    Confederate States of America


  10. #40

    USA Brigadier General

    michaelsmithern's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Statesville, North Carolina
    Posts
    863
    Quote Originally Posted by Frederick View Post
    I don't mind regiments or other forms of organization, as long as it is democratic in nature. With suggestions, not orders. Rules should be mutually agreed upon for the common good, and not made arbitrarily by regimental leadership. I don't mind captain voting for regimental leadership.
    i'm sure the rules will be discussed amongst the group within the regiment, i figured if your company didn't like them you could up and leave, but when it comes to a democratic style i still can't hop on board, it should be left to a select few to vote on regimental leadership.

Posting Permissions

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