Call out all the union 100 person companies

[sal_tuskin]

there is like 10 union 100 person companies on company tool calling all you out for a sunday battle at 8:00pm est tonite 6/17/18
the second corps for the last 2 weeks have had to play against out self's all they union companies are all saying we all have 100 people please show up tonite and may yourselves known please

we are hoping we can get 150 people on if all the 100 person union companies can at least get 50 or so each please help us and and test show your union spirit the second corps will be showing our csa spirit
come one come all lets see how many the union can get on

as requested but i did really mean any union companies wether you have 1 or 100 please come show up for our weekend events sundays nite 8pm est and monday nite 8pm est i didnt mean to leave any union companies out sorry i am just getting tired for just playing mostly csa against each other

[Saris]

The numbers on the company tool doesn't show how many have alpha access and I can't recall seeing a large number of people from any of those companies in general.

[Shiloh]

If you only want Union companies with 100 guys to show up then no one will come because no one can field close to that many. Even the largest Union companies field maybe 15-20 guys at most. You should reword your post to invite ALL Union companies for the best chance of success and I'm sure the 'little guys' will appreciate not being left out of the invite.

[Bravescot]

They march only on paper :(

[sal_tuskin]

bravescot yea we are seeing that i really wish the developers would limit company tool to just who have bought into the game at the stage we are now that would fix and the companies and we could see who really is playing and makeing events easier to do
i would venture to say in the 12 months i have been playing the game 90% of all union companies are paper its getting rather tiring playing csa against csa on the events now last nite there were some union for the line battle maybe a total of like 30 combined

[LaBelle]

It doesn't help that the game and community work against the average Union player.

Keep in mind that the Union was far more active when Skirmishes first released, but constant Confederate defence(Burnside's in particular)and shoddy Union leadership that focused on marching and looking cute really did a number on Union morale.

[Bravescot]

I'd credit maps like Burnside killing it for the Union. Yes we have a few match stick commanders, I am guilty of it now and then, but I think the constant attack on some very hard maps begins to grind on the nerves far swifter than having to put up with the odd commander who likes a good line.

[sal_tuskin]

both bridge maps should removed until more of the full game is available all it is is a running and dieing simulator that gets very boring very fast for both sides but your are right the union seems to want to make this a reinactment game and that doesnt work for them nice little lines and marching around doesnt work you have figured after a yr skirmishes they would learn that also after a few loses they usually quit the server in force
i truly love this game but the union has to get some real companies and stop making more for 5 person ones
they all want to be officers and have no pvts maybe after they redo the officer where they have to stay with their troops it will improve matters i really wish the union would get their act together and fight i know that are some good companies out there like bravescots and other but it seems most union companies dont play nice with each other

just want better battles

[Jagdmann]

... all it is is a running and dieing simulator that gets very boring very fast for both sides but your are right the union seems to want to make this a reinactment game and that doesnt work for them nice little lines and marching around doesnt work you have figured after a yr skirmishes they would learn that also after a few loses they usually quit the server in force
...

1st: Some sort of punctuation really helps understanding posts alot!

2nd: For sure one would want to play Companies (if they are Line-infantry) the way a Line-infantry would have acted in the Civil War. If I would want to Lone-wolf around or have 3-4 buddies with me to skirmish only (or let`s say just rush the Cap-point) I could still be playing Battlefield or any of those Swamp-Chicken-Like 1st Person shooters.
To me the "reenactment" side of things is the main cause to get into this game in the first place. I would just see it the other way around. Namely that CSA Companies (for the most part) are unable to understand and to play according to historical respects. Maybe there is a lack of able commanders and the will for historical accuracy on the CSA side of the community.

Anyway, to me! there is nothing as irrelevant than to win/loose Skirmishes at the current state of the game at all.

Best reagrds!

[sal_tuskin]

jag and that will be for what private servers are going to be for i you want to have line battles go for it, but that type of battle was nearing its end in the civil and if we were still back in 1862 it would problaby work but now with how fire teams and scouts and what not work in real life people are imploying them in this game and 1862 battle tactics wont work against a 3 lines with int-locking field of fire sorry for the punctuation problems i am sick and i dont care lol

i am not saying you cant be in lines but one big line against 3 lines on flanks and fire teams or 4 or so will decimate a full line of infantry pretty fast even with single shot rifles
the union has to adapt to the times is all i am saying

and yes redleader the eagle brigade and 1st cav seem to have the right idea hope they can grow and prosper also it has taken the 2nd corps over a yr to get to this pt and i think the union try to fast track things and that doesnt work

[LaBelle]

Maybe there is a lack of able commanders and the will for historical accuracy on the CSA side of the community.

Best reagrds!

Please elaborate, I'm interested in hearing your reasoning for this opinion.

[sal_tuskin]

no labell they want all of us to stand in a line a shoot each other and forget the last 150 yrs of battle tactics that the world has learned
i bet if grant had that battle tactic playbook from today they would not stood in lines either

[RhettVito]

I would like to see a game mode where it's where it's more about tickets and both teams would spawn in with the same exact amount. There could just be a simple point that both sides have to fight over the map could be divided up into three sections.
Morning Phase: primarily north end of the battlefield, Miller’s cornfield, East Woods, West Woods
Mid-Day Phase: primarily center of field, Sunken Road aka Bloody Lane
Afternoon Phase: primarily south end of field—Burnside Bridge, A. P. Hill’s counterattack

[LaBelle]

I was thinking something along the lines of just a simple three point map, with each team vying to take the enemies "base camp," which couldn't be taken unless the neutral point was owned. Just a simple game of push and pull.

[John Jones]

I do wonder how much the rush to the cap is a symptom of actually having a cap point in the first place. Having a point of contention obviously provides focus for the match and its pretty standard for games to have one. I can also understand having one as a focus for locations or features that were historically significant at Antietam. However, it seems to have become the be all and end all of the match to an unhealthy degree.

Reading between the lines of the preceding threads, and others, it seems to me that players are now straining for a bit more complexity than 'simple' cap based matches.

By removing the cap point and basing the results exclusively on ticket loss, both sides would be encouraged to bring their force to battle in an organised way and to maneuver more freely about the map. Terrain (and not always the most obvious types) would assume a much more significant role, as it does in real life, and commanders would be free to chose their own places to defend or attack.

All the buffs from formation should stay in place and the potential lack of focus in the match caused by the absence of a cap point would be countered by the flag bearer spawn system when implemented, and perhaps the ability of commanders to nominate their own 'mini' cap points simply as rally points, which have no effect on the game. I don't see that there would be any more Rambo'ing from such a system than than which currently exists.

Naturally, better organised sides would have an advantage and the risk is that players who take command positions without knowing or caring what they do may cause frustration and loss. However, both those circumstances are historically accurate!

[LaBelle]

There has to be a point of focus or every round will consist of two teams refusing to budge from their tactically superior positions. That's why we need several, instead of a single one.

[Stalin]

To the original post:
The game is still in its testing stages and costs $70 I dont see why you expect everyone to want to spend that kind of money on an ALPHA game, people who have access now are here to test it ready for the open beta etc/full release when the influx comes. Paper companies are to be expected and to close them off to “only people who have access to the game” would be the devs shooting themsleves in the foot as most of the companies are waiting until later in development for more replayability

[Bravescot]

Stalin makes a solid point (never thought I'd say that about the great Sec. Gen. ;)) the game is still in alpha and still has a long way to come.

Everyone is getting overly focused and obsessed on winnings. These early Skirmish maps will change with the patches and the larger maps will be the true testing grounds of units. For now I feel like we should all just focus on having fun and helping the Devs. before we blow out the community during the Alpha phase.

[Dutchconfederate]

Yeah this nonsense boosting about being the most active. I don't see those so called active companies in full force with a 100 people either mostly bits and pieces from different companies getting together which is fine. I agree with Stalin and Bravescot.

[Redleader]

To the original post:
The game is still in its testing stages and costs $70 I dont see why you expect everyone to want to spend that kind of money on an ALPHA game, people who have access now are here to test it ready for the open beta etc/full release when the influx comes.

Don't think Sal had a problem with 'paper' companies, he just hopes for some more 'players' during events.
Also I don't believe there was intention to making any 'boasting' concerning numbers.

[Shebby]

The numbers on the company tool doesn't show how many have alpha access and I can't recall seeing a large number of people from any of those companies in general.

In the 6th Wisconsin we got 57 people and only about 23 of them own WoR
We are working hopefully to set up the Iron Brigade with the 7th Wisconsin so we can expand our reach though

It's not as you easy you think, you guys with your 2nd corps already got it all worked out.

[sal_tuskin]

red is right i just want more union biased players playing and i am fine with if they want to wait till it is cheaper i understand that but there has to be more than 20-40 union players on the weekends playing i would think there should be at least 100 i hope
and like the idea of different styles of maps i would like to see more maps forcing battles instead of taking pot shots at 300m at each other these defend attack maps get boring rather quickly thats why maybe like i think veto said one point in the middle all start at the same distance and who takes the point wins and i mean you have to take the point to win no breaking or this or that make people move and take ground

shelby it has taken us over a yr of hard work to get here so i dont expect to see the union do it over night i just notice the union has alot of 5-10 person companies maybe some of you form one company i know thats what 6la did at the start and so did 1st ga we all took in other companies to get bigger and better it just seems to me and again my point of is that when i play the union side the union does noes not like to play well with others its their company or the highway and that doesnt work well again just my point of view and not think get got 2nd corps to this level without problems

again all i would like is to see more union companies showing up for our weekend battles

[Warboy]

I think company tool is a joke at it's current state and I haven't been recruiting on there anymore, as long as I get them on our private steam group and 2nd corps team speak server then that's fine with me, plus it adds twice the work explaining to the new recruits how to setup a profile in company tool.