In Response to the CSA Army thread made.

[michaelsmithern]

I noticed it was closed and a lot of you said that he could reserve a whole army.

Well think on this for a moment, we've had people reserve placeholder spots for brigades, and whole Divisions(an example would be A.P Hills Division(reserved by Hill himself)) yet we immediately shoot down the thread and close it early. I say reopen the thread, as i do not see it as this man is literally calling everything under him and saying no one else can have it unless you are recruited into it. I see it more as the way others have done in the sense it's just a formation of different companies.

P.S. i saw that one guy who reserved a whole army say he couldn't do such, yet it was fine with his ahistorical Australian army.


Short Version: Open the thread, see what he is actually doing, if he continues on a path of forcing people to fall under him, then close it down and delete it. if not then let it stay up and run as a brigade, division,corp, or even army would.

[Legion]

Hill didn't really reserve the division for himself, his division is just a bunch on independent companies that have decided to play closely together under his command, he doesn't have any authority of how the companies themselves operate.
say for instance I reserved a whole regiment for myself, I would have absolute control over every aspect of that regiment, this is not what Hill is doing imo, he just created a group that people could play under while remaining independent themselves.

[Sir Doctor Professor]

Hill didn't really reserve the division for himself, his division is just a bunch on independent companies that have decided to play closely together under his command, he doesn't have any authority of how the companies themselves operate.
say for instance I reserved a whole regiment for myself, I would have absolute control over every aspect of that regiment, this is not what Hill is doing imo, he just created a group that people could play under while remaining independent themselves.

His complaint is that people are 'reserving' regiment, division, etc. names. He's simply saying he feels that names should still be useable by others and that groups that indicate all organisational sizes should be acceptable. I'll second those beliefs.

[Bravescot]

You can't "reserve" anything at the moment. The only system that will allow you to reserve anything will be the Company tool. As a result the highest level of reservation is a company and nothing more.

Those people choosing to form larger units such as Brigades and such will not be able to reserve the name and are simply calling their community by the name of a historic brigade or division for a little extra immersion. That being said we can not allow people to run around calling their communities things like "Confederate States Army" as it gives off the completely wrong message as to was is and is not okay.

Another point to note is the gentleman in question has not messaged me over the matter at all. This for me in terms of what it was aiming to be sends up signals that they were trying to claim the name.

[Sir Doctor Professor]

Those people choosing to form larger units such as Brigades and such will not be able to reserve the name...

That's exactly the concern. People are behaving as if they can 'reserve' the name when, as you stated, that is not allowed. When people are allowed to reserve every company in a battalion, as has been done by many NaS brigade affiliates, they are effectively 'reserving' entire battalions when no one else can claim companies in that battalion therefore giving them a monopoly and more or less the rights to the battalion's name. I mean it's a little hard to have an *insert battallion name here* group when all the companies have taken by another individual. I mean, look at this: http://www.warofrightsforum.com/showthread.php?1704-69th-New-York-Infantry-1st-Battalion-Co-A-B-C-D-E-F-H-K-EU-NA and this http://www.warofrightsforum.com/showthread.php?721-42nd-Pennsylvania-quot-Bucktails-quot-Company-F-quot-Irish-Infantry-quot-EU-NA . Those are just two of the countless examples.


That being said we can not allow people to run around calling their communities things like "Confederate States Army" as it gives off the completely wrong message as to was is and is not okay.

And an Australian army is ok?

Additionally, please don't abuse the forum rules as to not allow me to give an open rebuttal to your post as you certainly haven't provided the same courtesy to me.

[FakeMessiah27]

As far as I can tell, the main issue is simply the word ''Army''. There wouldn't be anything higher than the entire army. Therefore by registering the name, you say that everything else is a part of you. Now every regular on this forum knows that this wouldn't be the case, but a newcomer might not.

As for the Australian Army, the difference there is it's instantly obvious to anybody that it's just a name of a group. Because, you know, the Australian Army wasn't in the ACW.

[Hiram Lee]

You can't "reserve" anything at the moment. The only system that will allow you to reserve anything will be the Company tool. As a result the highest level of reservation is a company and nothing more.

Those people choosing to form larger units such as Brigades and such will not be able to reserve the name and are simply calling their community by the name of a historic brigade or division for a little extra immersion. That being said we can not allow people to run around calling their communities things like "Confederate States Army" as it gives off the completely wrong message as to was is and is not okay.

Another point to note is the gentleman in question has not messaged me over the matter at all. This for me in terms of what it was aiming to be sends up signals that they were trying to claim the name.

if you have 300 people under your command could you "reserve" a Battalion

[Sir Doctor Professor]

Now every regular on this forum knows that this wouldn't be the case, but a newcomer might not.

Being that I've been a member longer and have significantly more posts than you, it seems rather nieve to suggest that I'm a 'newcomer'.


if you have 300 people under your command could you "reserve" a Battalion

May I remind you those aren't necessarily active members and therefore are not a true represenation of the unit's real strength upon the release of the company tools and regardless, Bravescot just explicitly stated that it is prohibited.

[Bravescot]

That's exactly the concern. People are behaving as if they can 'reserve' the name when, as you stated, that is not allowed. When people are allowed to reserve every company in a battalion, as has been done by many NaS brigade affiliates, they are effectively 'reserving' entire battalions when no one else can claim companies in that battalion therefore giving them a monopoly and more or less the rights to the battalion's name. I mean it's a little hard to have an *insert battallion name here* group when all the companies have taken by another individual. I mean, look at this: http://www.warofrightsforum.com/showthread.php?1704-69th-New-York-Infantry-1st-Battalion-Co-A-B-C-D-E-F-H-K-EU-NA and this http://www.warofrightsforum.com/showthread.php?721-42nd-Pennsylvania-quot-Bucktails-quot-Company-F-quot-Irish-Infantry-quot-EU-NA . Those are just two of the countless examples.

Thank you for picking one good example and one poor example for this. Helps me a lot.

The 69th New York that people keep moaning about is not a single person taking every one of those companies. If people, like yourself, bothered to look through the forums you'll find that each of those individual companies has its own thread. All those companies from the 69th New York have willingly and voluntarily chosen to do what many people hope units will do, put aside that they are different companies who would like small differences between them and chosen to work together as a single unit. That people are getting stingy over it shows a lack of understanding as to what the unit is.

Now for the 42nd Pennsylvania of all the 10 companies from the regiment mine are the only two that have been formed. As we have two companies, Co. E for NA and Co. F for EU, we chose to call ourselves a battalion. We have on no occasions pressed any claims on any of the other companies and we don't plan to unless we grow large enough to warrant the need for a another company, which will take a lot of hard work and effort to do.

People are not claiming Battalions at all, they can't so how can they as well. They are often adding the Battalion bit to be more historical. For example someone might call themselves the 33rd Virginia Volunteer Infantry - 1st Battalion - Company E "Emerald Guard", the only important parts from that title is the 33rdVA and Co. E. The Battalion is just there for decorative effect.


And an Australian army is ok?

You're the only person to have complained about them being an "Army". If you ever bothered to look into what they are then it would save me a lot of time. They are a gaming community who call themselves the "Australian Army". Nobody had any issue with it, except you, so I don't see any issues with it.


Additionally, please don't abuse the forum rules as to not allow me to give an open rebuttal to your post as you certainly haven't provided the same courtesy to me.

Lastly on two occasion you have chosen to "openly rebuttal" by breaching forum rule No. 4 "Attacking and insulting other forum users, sending insulting private messages etc.". For doing so I removed the posts and gave you a warning for it. You're the last person who should be trying to lecture anyone on courtesy.

[Hiram Lee]

thank you just wondered about could we reserve battalions

[FakeMessiah27]

Being that I've been a member longer and have significantly more posts than you, it seems rather nieve to suggest that I'm a 'newcomer'.


Where in that post did you gather that I'm calling you the newcomer? I was talking in a general term. Regulars of the forum, to which I counted you as well, might know that someone claiming an entire army is talking out of his ass, but a newcomer might not.

[michaelsmithern]

Alright calm it on down my dudes, all i'm asking is lets reopen the mans thread, and see what purpose he has for the army, and Again if he is trying to start something such as the dixieland army in which people form companies and join said social group then let it stay open, if he attempts to become super strong and practically force others under his command since he technically has "The Confederate Army" then shut it down. As of now i see no violation of any rules with it. considering it is only just a reservation spot(which as bravescot pointed out i believe is limited to right now only companies due to the company tool).

[Fisty Richards]

all i'm asking is lets reopen the mans thread, and see what purpose he has for the army, and Again if he is trying to start something such as the dixieland army in which people form companies and join said social group then let it stay open, if he attempts to become super strong and practically force others under his command since he technically has "The Confederate Army" then shut it down.

All they're asking is for him to call it something else.

If I call myself, say, The Union Army, it implies that every Union regiment and battalion is under my command. Same with battalions and brigades. It's confusing for people and serves little use.

North and South was a mod, so the community was already more limited than a full release, and large groups like the DA and the UA were somewhat necessary to organize events.
War of rights will be a full game with a full community to match. While gaming groups like armies and brigades would indeed help organize events and inter-regimental discourse, I believe their original purpose would inevitably be bastardized and ruined along the way, much like the DA.



if you have 300 people under your command could you "reserve" a Battalion


What would even be the purpose of these battalions/armies?

What would an officer above the rank of Major or even Captain, even do?

Just seems like a way for some guy to get off on people calling him General.


There's already folks going around asking regiments if they'd like to join a brigade like sales reps selling timeshares, and I just don't see the point.

I kind of get the immersion, but what experience do you get out of a forum thread that you can't get out of a steam group or any other?

[Bravescot]

I'd also like to point out Mr. michaelsmithern that you're currently attempting to assert claims on to Companies A, C, D and E of the 1st Minnesota that you can't fill. Don't you think that's a tad bit hypocritical of you to be arguing for another person's ability to grab a full army name when you yourself are doing it but on something of a small level.

[David Dire]

I'd also like to point out Mr. michaelsmithern that you're currently attempting to assert claims on to Companies A, C, D and E of the 1st Minnesota that you can't fill. Don't you think that's a tad bit hypocritical of you to be arguing for another person's ability to grab a full army name when you yourself are doing it but on something of a small level.

I don't know what's going on with A, C, D and E company of the 1st Minnesota, but just two cents I had reading this: I think if somebody wanted a company, such as, let's say, Company E of the 1st Minnesota the person wanting a company should get one.

[Bravescot]

I don't know what's going on with A, C, D and E company of the 1st Minnesota, but just two cents I had reading this: I think if somebody wanted a company, such as, let's say, Company E of the 1st Minnesota the person wanting a company should get one.

I'm sorry but you lost me at the end there. Are you trying to say he should have Company E or that if someone else wants it they should get it.

[David Dire]

I'm saying that if somebody has 4 companies of a single regiment, they should give up at least one to somebody who has no regiments. Now if he has a company already that's a different story, but that's just what I think.

[Fisty Richards]

I'm saying that if somebody has 4 companies of a single regiment, they should give up at least one to somebody who has no regiments. Now if he has a company already that's a different story, but that's just what I think.

I think it's stupid to have more than one company in the first place.

How can one person be in multiple companies at one time, let alone be the Captain of four companies?

[michaelsmithern]

in response to bravescot, i only reserved company E for myself, and that will used at a later date. as for A,C,D i have recently said that they will be open to any who want them, so by all means go ahead and take one if you would like to.
on top of this there were orignially captains of these companies to which i reserved the companies for them and transferred the rights of it all over to them, they simply got bored or merged into companies with each other. so not hypocrisy here my dude

[Challis89]

Well as someone that's got a "battalion" and to avoid any hypocrisy going forward I'll explain our position both companies one commanded by me the Other jack. We created a second company so as to make it easier to have full companies. His company is made up of players who has WoR as a main game friends and gents. My company is made up of clan mates from the star citizen and we have gaming nights and on occasion will clash and this system will prevent half hearted companies having to merge for an event. The battalion has a shared Command

What I think is a problem is people with multiple companies looking for people to come in and fill them for them without putting the effort In. To me to command a battalion or greater you have to have a good record Commanding a company.

[michaelsmithern]

Well as someone that's got a "battalion" and to avoid any hypocrisy going forward I'll explain our position both companies one commanded by me the Other jack. We created a second company so as to make it easier to have full companies. His company is made up of players who has WoR as a main game friends and gents. My company is made up of clan mates from the star citizen and we have gaming nights and on occasion will clash and this system will prevent half hearted companies having to merge for an event. The battalion has a shared Command

What I think is a problem is people with multiple companies looking for people to come in and fill them for them without putting the effort In. To me to command a battalion or greater you have to have a good record Commanding a company.

i can understand what your saying. Although I may take you up and look for new company commanders, i guess putting out messages isn't enough, but i'll try adn find the replacements to them, as of right though we do not have a battalion commander, i thought we should put it to a vote among officers to decide that

[Bravescot]

i can understand what your saying. Although I may take you up and look for new company commanders, i guess putting out messages isn't enough, but i'll try adn find the replacements to them, as of right though we do not have a battalion commander, i thought we should put it to a vote among officers to decide that

Right now you have 60 men on paper. For a single company this is an impressive number and you should be pleased with it. However you talk about taking Co. A, C, D and E if nobody wants them. What are you going to do, spread all 60 of your men across 5 companies? Right now you need to either stick with a single company or consider having ONE other company to help maybe split EU and NA as trying to play the two together with the ping difference might be highly risky for how difficult it's going to be to drill your men into shape.

Right now all I'm seeing is the unit killer mentality of "If it's here people will come".

[Sir Doctor Professor]

Right now you have 60 men on paper. For a single company this is an impressive number and you should be pleased with it. However you talk about taking Co. A, C, D and E if nobody wants them. What are you going to do, spread all 60 of your men across 5 companies? Right now you need to either stick with a single company or consider having ONE other company to help maybe split EU and NA as trying to play the two together with the ping difference might be highly risky for how difficult it's going to be to drill your men into shape.

Right now all I'm seeing is the unit killer mentality of "If it's here people will come".

+1 I have to agree.

[michaelsmithern]

Right now you have 60 men on paper. For a single company this is an impressive number and you should be pleased with it. However you talk about taking Co. A, C, D and E if nobody wants them. What are you going to do, spread all 60 of your men across 5 companies? Right now you need to either stick with a single company or consider having ONE other company to help maybe split EU and NA as trying to play the two together with the ping difference might be highly risky for how difficult it's going to be to drill your men into shape.

Right now all I'm seeing is the unit killer mentality of "If it's here people will come".

i guess i can see reason to this. I PM a message to you with changes to the thread