Regiment Recruiting forum

[Octavian360]

Could we establish a regiment, outfit, unit (I think the political correct term is regiment?) recruiting forum? I know that some of the current regiments are playing other games in preparation for this one, however, getting those regiments established on the forum could help in a grassroots effort for the game.

[Bravescot]

The developers have made it clear that they don't want any regiment bookmarking and such. So for the time being I think it's a no for a recruiting forum.

[Octavian360]

The developers have made it clear that they don't want any regiment bookmarking and such. So for the time being I think it's a no for a recruiting forum.

Ah as in claiming names before the game is released? I could see their point possibly there.

[TrustyJam]

Ah as in claiming names before the game is released? I could see their point possibly there.

That is correct. We are looking into creating a subforum dedicated to the followers who would want to set up their own group though. :)

- Trusty

[Caserta34]

What do u mean group, are u saying like when the game comes out people can call a regiment

[Rithal]

What do u mean group, are u saying like when the game comes out people can call a regiment

Yes, many people plan to create these "clan" type groups that try to operate in as historically accurate as possible (Ususally). You would see many of these arise in games such as Mount and Blade: Warband ( Napoleonic Wars DLC ). It was seen in poor taste in that community to claim a historical regiment as the name of your own if it was already claimed.

Lets say someone claims the Stonewall Brigade as the name for their group. If someone else comes along and starts calling his completely different and un-associated group "The Stonewall Brigade" then it is kind of looked down upon and seen as rude. Most people will actually fail to recognize it as an actual group. It would be like a country whose sovereignty is not recognized by any other country if that makes sense.

So here, many people are trying to reserve their desired regiment name as soon as possible to keep someone else from taking it first ;)

[Hinkel]

Lets say someone claims the Stonewall Brigade as the name for their group. If someone else comes along and starts calling his completely different and un-associated group "The Stonewall Brigade" then it is kind of looked down upon and seen as rude. Most people will actually fail to recognize it as an actual group. It would be like a country whose sovereignty is not recognized by any other country if that makes sense.
So here, many people are trying to reserve their desired regiment name as soon as possible to keep someone else from taking it first ;)

Without going much into details:
We are totally aware of this problem and we don't like, that those regiments are kinda "locked" for others.

So we are going a different way in War of Rights ;)

[[RG]Chewie]

Maybe instead of regiments we could do companies which is more like the size of what we would be dealing with anyways . That way we could have multiple communities in each regiment.

[Octavian360]

Without going much into details:
We are totally aware of this problem and we don't like, that those regiments are kinda "locked" for others.

So we are going a different way in War of Rights ;)

Very interesting! Look forward to hearing more about this

[Ry1459]

Chewie;7318']Maybe instead of regiments we could do companies which is more like the size of what we would be dealing with anyways . That way we could have multiple communities in each regiment.

That could happen or as they have it in N&S, there are currently "armies" that you can sign up your regiment to join. That way you're a part of a community with many members.

[Rithal]

Without going much into details:
We are totally aware of this problem and we don't like, that those regiments are kinda "locked" for others.

So we are going a different way in War of Rights ;)

:D Sounds very interesting. I can't wait to hear more about your thoughts when the time comes!

[Bravescot]

Sound to me like we might need to start thinking hard on which companies to pick from which regiments xD start cherry picking the best ones.

[PunIsheR]

We will see.

[Octavian360]

What if we had a council of sorts for both Union and Confederate "Regiments" to ensure we are keeping to certain standards within the community (Tactics, drill, ranks etc...)? The purpose of the council would be to set a sort of standard to help with struggling regiments stay afloat and coordinate attacks for their end-game map that was discussed in another thread.

thoughts?

[Rithal]

What if we had a council of sorts for both Union and Confederate "Regiments" to ensure we are keeping to certain standards within the community (Tactics, drill, ranks etc...)? The purpose of the council would be to set a sort of standard to help with struggling regiments stay afloat and coordinate attacks for their end-game map that was discussed in another thread.

thoughts?

Well the end game map isn't even a thing yet. Its not even planned yet. Its just pure speculation. Also, a "council" of this sorts would force people into a gameplay situation some wouldn't want to be in, isn't necessarily historically accurate, and would also cause a lot of unnecessary drama.

[Octavian360]

Well the end game map isn't even a thing yet. Its not even planned yet. Its just pure speculation. Also, a "council" of this sorts would force people into a gameplay situation some wouldn't want to be in, isn't necessarily historically accurate, and would also cause a lot of unnecessary drama.

It was brought up in another thread I made regarding a live battle map by one of the devs. I can see pros and cons to it just like anything else :)

[Soulfly]

Well the end game map isn't even a thing yet. Its not even planned yet. Its just pure speculation. Also, a "council" of this sorts would force people into a gameplay situation some wouldn't want to be in, isn't necessarily historically accurate, and would also cause a lot of unnecessary drama.

On the other hand it will be nice to have a High Command which has certain regiments/ battalions attached to it, meaning that you have some people giving orders or planning certain actions. I imagine that, when 200+ players are playing simultaneously it will be nice to have like 4 different "clans" acting together following the same rules and standards at least some of them

[Rithal]

It was brought up in another thread I made regarding a live battle map by one of the devs. I can see pros and cons to it just like anything else :)

Well, it was brought up, but it was merely mentioned that the developers were discussing an idea similar to this very very far down the road.

To soulfly, while a "council" of sorts would be cool, it honestly brings lots of unnecessary drama to the community. Who would be on the council? How would they be voted in? What keeps it from being a popularity contest? It really isn't historically accurate either. If an idea like this is put in place, it will end up like a Student Council in high school. It will be a popularity contest and anything that is supposed to be "enforced" or "put in place" by the council will be ignored and everyone will continue to do their own thing. An idea even similar to this would require almost complete teamwork within a community of thousands of people. I honestly don't see this happening. I hope I can be proved wrong :D ....

[Bravescot]

The issue with the ideas that we're throwing around, both Company and Council, is that they'd both result in the removal of General. Should something like Companies be used it means that the highest rank a man can be is a Captain. The Major, Lieutenant Colonel and Colonel would be lost unless some community managed to gain the man power to form a full regiment with all the companies. If companies did go forwards then the "Council" becomes the Major and Co. and that leads to the questions of who becomes said people and who do they control? Also who would actually listen to them?

There is a great deal of things that can go wrong going down both paths.

[Ry1459]

The issue with the ideas that we're throwing around, both Company and Council, is that they'd both result in the removal of General. Should something like Companies be used it means that the highest rank a man can be is a Captain. The Major, Lieutenant Colonel and Colonel would be lost unless some community managed to gain the man power to form a full regiment with all the companies. If companies did go forwards then the "Council" becomes the Major and Co. and that leads to the questions of who becomes said people and who do they control? Also who would actually listen to them?

There is a great deal of things that can go wrong going down both paths.

Maybe the quest for full control in the community would end up in our own Civil War :p

[Soulfly]

A council would indeed not work, but i hope that some clans grow in such sizes that they establish High Commands which will work together. At least by organizing nice events where certain rules are set, i think that is realistic...worked just fine in Battlegrounds 2

[Hinkel]

A council would indeed not work, but i hope that some clans grow in such sizes that they establish High Commands which will work together. At least by organizing nice events where certain rules are set, i think that is realistic...worked just fine in Battlegrounds 2

In North and South, there is a full army (The Union Army) with 1.000 active players, organised in 4 Divisions, with 2 brigades each division, with 3-8 regiments per Brigade...
Each Division/Brigade has a commander and a staff.

When its working out in NaS, it will work out in War of Rights too ;)

[Soulfly]

In North and South, there is a full army (The Union Army) with 1.000 active players, organised in 4 Divisions, with 2 brigades each division, with 3-8 regiments per Brigade...
Each Division/Brigade has a commander and a staff.

When its working out in NaS, it will work out in War of Rights too ;)

I'll take you up on that ;) I am really excited about how the community will evolve and i think that WoR provides a good platform to create good and player friendly structures

[Bravescot]

I, Porter W. Horace, Brigadier General, Commanding Officer of 2nd "Eagle" Brigade, 1st Division, 1st Corps, Union Army, can tell you that if you remove the ability to be a full regiment then the UA will fall apart in WoR. If you used a Company level idea then firstly our Brigades would no longer exist, then with no Brigades there can be no Divisions etc. I know why you want t remove Regiment locking but Regiments are a key part to the Union Army.

[TrustyJam]

I, Porter W. Horace, Brigadier General, Commanding Officer of 2nd "Eagle" Brigade, 1st Division, 1st Corps, Union Army, can tell you that if you remove the ability to be a full regiment then the UA will fall apart in WoR. If you used a Company level idea then firstly our Brigades would no longer exist, then with no Brigades there can be no Divisions etc. I know why you want t remove Regiment locking but Regiments are a key part to the Union Army.

I, TrustyJam of Campfire Games can tell you that I don't really see an issue here. :P Now, until we've actually announced something I won't go too much into detail, but I fail to see the problem with a more authentic naming system in regards to the playercounts likely to be supported and supported in other games and mods.

- Trusty

[Bravescot]

I like the more authentic idea but as I'm the only proper active member of the UA in this forum I feel it is my duty to raise the issue on behalf of the UA.

[TrustyJam]

I like the more authentic idea but as I'm the only proper active member of the UA in this forum I feel it is my duty to raise the issue on behalf of the UA.

Thank you - it's been noted. :) We'll be open for your feedback once our system has been revealed.

- Trusty

[Bravescot]

Roger that boss!

[Octavian360]

In North and South, there is a full army (The Union Army) with 1.000 active players, organised in 4 Divisions, with 2 brigades each division, with 3-8 regiments per Brigade...
Each Division/Brigade has a commander and a staff.

When its working out in NaS, it will work out in War of Rights too ;)

I have seen it work out in other games as well, I believe it could work wonders in this game with the direction the devs are going.

[Rithal]

Honestly accurately naming units as companies rather than regiments is better in my opinion. Its just shifting all organization down one level. Lets say a good sized active group of 30 men can be a company. Several companies that are willing to work together can be a regiment headed by a colonel. Several regiments willing to work together will be a brigade, and from a brigade to a division. Several divisions can be a corps.

6th grade math time...

30 x 4 = 120 (4 companies of around 30 men) 120ish men per regiment

120 x 4 = 480 ( 4 regiments of around 120 men) 480ish men per brigade

480 x 4 = 1920 ( 4 brigades of around 480 men) 1920ish men per division

You can either stop there, or you can go up one more level to a corps.

1920 x 3 = 5760 ( 3 divisions of around 1920 men) 5760 men per corps

So, we are looking at around 6,000 men ( I say men, both genders are welcome XD ) per side. We can even move up one more level and hit the army which would reach the tens of thousands. This of course doesn't take into consideration server limitations, inactive players, general drama that often comes with varying communities, and other branches such as artillery and cavalry. This at least gives you a basic idea of how organization can work if individual players call the smalles scaled group a company rather than a regiment, how this organization fits historically and how this organization can easily reach up to thousands of people working as one cohesive unit. :D

[Bravescot]

Umm.....the fact the union army can muster about 1,000 men is a miracle enough! Asking for 1920 men is WAY above anything most people can bring. Getting 480 men to work together as a Brigade would be hard enough in a game like this.

I'd be happy enough to try and form 120ish as a Regiment at this rate and getting that will be tough. You'd need the man power and speed to grab ALL the company names and to keep the numbers even across the board. You'd need loyal and able Captain (trust me that will be hard enough) who can manage their companies well enough and such.

[Rithal]

What I was trying to say was changing the name of the unit doesn't change the fact that the same amount of people can get together and fight towards a common goal. Think about it like this, you said you would be lucky to get 120 men as a regiment. Well you can get the same amount of men together as a brigade can't you? ( Not exactly sure how the UA is organized ). Lets look at it as an analogy. A Brigade in the UA is to a regiment in WoR as a Regiment in the UA is to a company in WoR. Its just shifting everything down one level. All that changes is the official name of a unit and the ranks. Thats not a big deal.

[Octavian360]

Having units being companies as separate entities will be way too confusing for recruitment purposes, they will just blend together.

[Rithal]

Having units being companies as separate entities will be way too confusing for recruitment purposes, they will just blend together.

Yeah but if those 30 man companies blended into a 120 man regiment then it would be closer to a historical regiment than a 120 man brigade. Its all the same.

[Brother_Padre]

The only problem with not being able to reserve regiments is the huge scrabble that will ensue when the game is released, loads of people without a group of 'members' behind them just claiming names. I can't suggest any ways myself of working out a civil and fair way of doing it, but it is something that should be addressed before the games release.

[Octavian360]

The only problem with not being able to reserve regiments is the huge scrabble that will ensue when the game is released, loads of people without a group of 'members' behind them just claiming names. I can't suggest any ways myself of working out a civil and fair way of doing it, but it is something that should be addressed before the games release.

They will more than likely open up a recruiting forum sometime during beta or even before.

[Rithal]

I wish there was an organized way to do it, much like they actually did it historically. You have an organized army with officers. People sign up on the forum and then are placed at random within one unit. Things could get very organized and such, but then you have issues like what makes someone qualified to be an officer, what will it take to get promoted, what determines who is worthy of command ect. Honestly everything will probably be left up to the community, and the majority of people will flock to the larger units. It will take some major community cooperation to get anything very very large going which saddens me. It would be cool if there was an in game function for army organization.

[Soulfly]

Placing people in random units seems to be dangerous way to walk, since players want to join the unit together with some friends or maybe whole clans are going to switch to WoR all together. But a centralized form where all clans/ regiments are listed up is indeed very helpful and will increase the number of players interested in organized gameplay and public players will also profit from it.

[Rithal]

Placing people in random units seems to be dangerous way to walk, since players want to join the unit together with some friends or maybe whole clans are going to switch to WoR all together. But a centralized form where all clans/ regiments are listed up is indeed very helpful and will increase the number of players interested in organized gameplay and public players will also profit from it.

Yeah I thought about the randomized placement being an issue after I posted. Maybe a random system could be used for players new to the community and just want to get involved while other units can set themselves up however they want. I do however believe that an in game system for officers and such to register and organize themselves would be cool.

[Soulfly]

Yeah I thought about the randomized placement being an issue after I posted. Maybe a random system could be used for players new to the community and just want to get involved while other units can set themselves up however they want. I do however believe that an in game system for officers and such to register and organize themselves would be cool.

For "regular players" it will indeed be a problem, there are many factors to think about like: Language, Age, Location. Like for me i do not want to join a regiment/ clan located in the US...timezone ;) but for officers it is a good idea to have a platform, where they could communicate and are shown as contact persons.

[Bravescot]

SgtRithal I must ask have you ever been in any regiments? If not then sadly you'd fail to understand why your idea would not work.

I terms of stopping people from grabbing names with no men to back them I think there should be a minimum number of men needed to be "in" the regiment before you can take a step further to taking the name. Something like between 10 - 20 men.

[Rithal]

I have actually been "regimenting" for going on threeish years now. I have recently stopped but I still merc every once in a while :cool:

I understand that there are flaws in my thinking, but that is exactly what it is; Just me thinking. I am just trying to think up a way of organization that will take a more historic approach, and will also be integrated within the game itself and not all left out of game or on the forum. I do think your idea for a minimum number of people required before starting a unit is good and that would go along with my idea of full unit integration with the game.

To Soulfly, there all flaws like I was saying but it was merely just a rough idea as to what I was thinking. I do agree with you however in the sense that there should be a platform for officers to organize themselves and communicate even if they are new to the community.

[Soulfly]

Thinking/ creating ideas is always welcome. Actually i disagree with a "minimum" for creating regiments/ clans. I am into gaming for more then 15 years now and have seen clans which started with 3 players and ended up into a total amount of 50-60 players, we need to think about that this game is still in development and so is this community. It will grow and develop, but this will take its time....it wont be perfect/ organized from day zero.

All we can do is building some sort of base...or at least think about it.

[Rithal]

Well, there is really no way a three man unit can survive in this situation. There is nothing against a unit starting small and then recruiting more, but they really shouldn't be allowed to try and take a regiment/company and enlist themselves as part of one side until they have at least a considerable force of 10 or so people imo.

[Soulfly]

Well, there is really no way a three man unit can survive in this situation. There is nothing against a unit starting small and then recruiting more, but they really shouldn't be allowed to try and take a regiment/company and enlist themselves as part of one side until they have at least a considerable force of 10 or so people imo.

But how is this supposed to work ? Like "Hey we are a new clan and need people in order to play as the unit we want to" without them playing/ presenting themselves there is little to no chance people joining them, the three players were just a example from me . But we need to consider that even clans starting with lower numbers deserve a chance building up their unit.

I understand some of you fearing that someone is naming his clan "20th Maine" or whatever and you wanted that name too, but i have never seen that happen in other games with historical units, like Red Orchestra.

[Bravescot]

It wouldn't work in this situation as if a 3 man unit tries to get into a fire fight they'll be cut down. A minimum number prevents historical regiment and/or companies (depending on where the devs take it) from being locked then never actually doing anything. It's a pain to everybody.

[Soulfly]

I terms of stopping people from grabbing names with no men to back them I think there should be a minimum number of men needed to be "in" the regiment before you can take a step further to taking the name. Something like between 10 - 20 men.

I thought we were talking about this, that three guys wont stand a chance against 300000 others...no doubt on that

[Octavian360]

Honestly I think we should revisit this topic once we learn more about the in-game regiments that have been hinted at by the Devs along with more information in general about the game.

[Rithal]

But how is this supposed to work ? Like "Hey we are a new clan and need people in order to play as the unit we want to" without them playing/ presenting themselves there is little to no chance people joining them, the three players were just a example from me . But we need to consider that even clans starting with lower numbers deserve a chance building up their unit.

I understand some of you fearing that someone is naming his clan "20th Maine" or whatever and you wanted that name too, but i have never seen that happen in other games with historical units, like Red Orchestra.

Well that is why you need some connections and friends in the community. Honestly, someone who is brand new to this type of game should not attempt to create a unit without knowing others first, or else he really won't get anywhere with it. I have seen pitiful 4 and 5 man units come and go. Units should have a minimum number of men before they try to become official, which brings me to my next point. A game of this caliber and scope should have an official list of units and a way for all of these units to communicate. This will hopefully allow for an easier way to discover and join units as a new player, and a way for units to collaborate on and off the battlefield easily. An official system such as this might work better than a simple forum.

[Soulfly]

Sounds good actually. Lets say we have official units announced, people then may apply for specific companies/regiments, depending on their size a specific formation is available (4-5 players may form a company, but a regiment gets denied)...this might work.

[Octavian360]

We have a discussion that has evolved regarding regiments and the community over in: http://www.warofrightsforum.com/showthread.php?457-Army-Organization

[DictatorDom]

I just joined this forum so my apologies for not being 100% on everything, but how will one be able to join a group? I'm an avid Civil War enthusiast and would REALLY love to be in a dedicated, historical group when this game comes out and make some like minded friends. How will I be able to find these if the forums are a no for recruiting?

[Rithal]

I just joined this forum so my apologies for not being 100% on everything, but how will one be able to join a group? I'm an avid Civil War enthusiast and would REALLY love to be in a dedicated, historical group when this game comes out and make some like minded friends. How will I be able to find these if the forums are a no for recruiting?

Well this forum is a no for recruiting right now. I suspect there will be a portion devoted to it once the game gets closer to release. The developers also have yet to tell us exactly how they desire play-ran units to be operated, so we will know more when they release that information. :D

[DictatorDom]

Well this forum is a no for recruiting right now. I suspect there will be a potion devoted to it once the game gets closer to release. The developers also have yet to tell us exactly how they desire play-ran units to be operated, so we will know more when they release that information. :D
Ah, I gotchya. Thanks, you're very helpful Sgt!

[Rithal]

No problem! :D