Community Rep Thread (September-October)

[AP0CALYPS3]

Feel free to do option 2 cause option 1 isn't a well thought out or fair approach.

Option 2 is probably an option that makes sense, but my entire point is no one ever puts the time to do that other than when Siwi had his up. Also, when you say we complain when we get pressured,it's more so I complain about it when people complain that the 63e isn't open to people and I bring up the fact is because the narrative always ends up one of bullying/harassment, hence why we try not to open our community to the outside 1v1/competitive/veteran community.

But yeah, Ap0c your second option sounds like a good option, have people from all around the community actually take their time for a community siege server and then populate it as a community. Don't see a problem with that, sounds great actually.

Take a moment to consider why: People don't dislike the 63e without reason, and many have said exactly why they dislike the 63e on this thread. It seems to me that the 63e aren't taking these grievances very seriously, and have just taken a "Hate us cuz they aint us" attitude towards the community, which is honestly pretty disappointing to me.

As for option 2, the problem with it is that it is neigh impossible to compete with 63e siege without concentrated effort from alot of the community for months and months, and even then it is doubtful they could pull the pubs away from 63e Siege. Not only that, but you are basically asking of other regiments what you have said is unreasonable to demand from the 63e: A privately owned server opening up recruitment to other regiments. Option 1 is far more reasonable I would say, and Option 2 should only be used as a last resort.

[maccle]

Feel free to do option 2 cause option 1 isn't a well thought out or fair approach.

Option 2 is probably an option that makes sense, but my entire point is no one ever puts the time to do that other than when Siwi had his up. Also, when you say we complain when we get pressured,it's more so I complain about it when people complain that the 63e isn't open to people and I bring up the fact is because the narrative always ends up one of bullying/harassment, hence why we try not to open our community to the outside 1v1/competitive/veteran community.

But yeah, Ap0c your second option sounds like a good option, have people from all around the community actually take their time for a community siege server and then populate it as a community. Don't see a problem with that, sounds great actually.

Take a moment to consider why: People don't dislike the 63e without reason, and many have said exactly why they dislike the 63e on this thread. It seems to me that the 63e aren't taking these grievances very seriously, and have just taken a "Hate us cuz they aint us" attitude towards the community, which is honestly pretty disappointing to me.

As for option 2, the problem with it is that it is neigh impossible to compete with 63e siege without concentrated effort from alot of the community for months and months, and even then it is doubtful they could pull the pubs away from 63e Siege. Not only that, but you are basically asking of other regiments what you have said is unreasonable to demand from the 63e: A privately owned server opening up recruitment to other regiments. Option 1 is far more reasonable I would say, and Option 2 should only be used as a last resort.

[AsianP]

Feel free to do option 2 cause option 1 isn't a well thought out or fair approach.

Option 2 is probably an option that makes sense, but my entire point is no one ever puts the time to do that other than when Siwi had his up. Also, when you say we complain when we get pressured,it's more so I complain about it when people complain that the 63e isn't open to people and I bring up the fact is because the narrative always ends up one of bullying/harassment, hence why we try not to open our community to the outside 1v1/competitive/veteran community.

But yeah, Ap0c your second option sounds like a good option, have people from all around the community actually take their time for a community siege server and then populate it as a community. Don't see a problem with that, sounds great actually.

Take a moment to consider why: People don't dislike the 63e without reason, and many have said exactly why they dislike the 63e on this thread. It seems to me that the 63e aren't taking these grievances very seriously, and have just taken a "Hate us cuz they aint us" attitude towards the community, which is honestly pretty disappointing to me.

As for option 2, the problem with it is that it is neigh impossible to compete with 63e siege without concentrated effort from alot of the community for months and months, and even then it is doubtful they could pull the pubs away from 63e Siege. Not only that, but you are basically asking of other regiments what you have said is unreasonable to demand from the 63e: A privately owned server opening up recruitment to other regiments. Option 1 is far more reasonable I would say, and Option 2 should only be used as a last resort.

Nicely worded +1

[GeneralSquirts]

Feel free to do option 2 cause option 1 isn't a well thought out or fair approach.

Option 2 is probably an option that makes sense, but my entire point is no one ever puts the time to do that other than when Siwi had his up. Also, when you say we complain when we get pressured,it's more so I complain about it when people complain that the 63e isn't open to people and I bring up the fact is because the narrative always ends up one of bullying/harassment, hence why we try not to open our community to the outside 1v1/competitive/veteran community.

But yeah, Ap0c your second option sounds like a good option, have people from all around the community actually take their time for a community siege server and then populate it as a community. Don't see a problem with that, sounds great actually.

Take a moment to consider why: People don't dislike the 63e without reason, and many have said exactly why they dislike the 63e on this thread. It seems to me that the 63e aren't taking these grievances very seriously, and have just taken a "Hate us cuz they aint us" attitude towards the community, which is honestly pretty disappointing to me.

As for option 2, the problem with it is that it is neigh impossible to compete with 63e siege without concentrated effort from alot of the community for months and months, and even then it is doubtful they could pull the pubs away from 63e Siege. Not only that, but you are basically asking of other regiments what you have said is unreasonable to demand from the 63e: A privately owned server opening up recruitment to other regiments. Option 1 is far more reasonable I would say, and Option 2 should only be used as a last resort.

 

it is neigh impossible to compete with 63e siege without concentrated effort from alot of the community for months and months

Firstly, we could care less who hates us. We aren't going to control that because we can't. Also, there's a lot of parties who have already spoken that showed they "don't care." Stop playing the victim of not taking the matter seriously when others are doing it, and only framing one group for it. But to the main point, How is option 2 impossible? If 63e Siege's success is accomplished through the concentrated effort from our NCOs and members, why can't Community Siege prosper with members of the community putting in the same amount of work? Why put in the work when we can just convince a private owner to open his server for us, and we just leech of the work they put in? You have to listen to your proposal. It involves the private owners who have put in the work to create it to what it is now, to just let anyone sit on the back of that work. No, go out yourself and work for it yourself. Plus, it has only gotten big because no one tried to run a siege server as long as we have. Of course the thing that is there for the longest and does it more efficiently is going to do better, compare this situation to the production market. If a product is the only product of its kind for the longest, it is bound to succeed.

You can see it anywhere, the USMC decided not to sit around and they went from being a small time regiment to pretty much competing with the 63e in numbers. What did they do? They made a server that really was unique, offered slots that fit their needs, and then had their guys put in the work. Do the same for the Community Server. At this point it just sounds like the unwillingness to put in the time and effort to do something good, but just to point a finger.

Not only that, but you are basically asking of other regiments what you have said is unreasonable to demand from the 63e: A privately owned server opening up recruitment to other regiments.

Not really, the 63e Siege is aimed for the 63e. When you suggest a community siege, it's more aimed for the community so you can't compare a privately owned server to a server aimed to adhering to the community. Also, isn't this where the criticism of the siege is coming from, right? Not from a few individuals who over time have disliked the 63e, but actual regiment leaders? Otherwise there's nothing to talk about here if no actual regiments that participate in the open community don't speak up about it. So far the only current regiment leader to bring anything up is cheesypants, and his regiment has 60-100 active members. So where are the regiment leaders you speak of that say their regiments have failed do to the server. At this point it's a claim made by non-regiment leaders and more so people who have been in the community/browse the forums.

[maccle]

Feel free to do option 2 cause option 1 isn't a well thought out or fair approach.

Option 2 is probably an option that makes sense, but my entire point is no one ever puts the time to do that other than when Siwi had his up. Also, when you say we complain when we get pressured,it's more so I complain about it when people complain that the 63e isn't open to people and I bring up the fact is because the narrative always ends up one of bullying/harassment, hence why we try not to open our community to the outside 1v1/competitive/veteran community.

But yeah, Ap0c your second option sounds like a good option, have people from all around the community actually take their time for a community siege server and then populate it as a community. Don't see a problem with that, sounds great actually.

Take a moment to consider why: People don't dislike the 63e without reason, and many have said exactly why they dislike the 63e on this thread. It seems to me that the 63e aren't taking these grievances very seriously, and have just taken a "Hate us cuz they aint us" attitude towards the community, which is honestly pretty disappointing to me.

As for option 2, the problem with it is that it is neigh impossible to compete with 63e siege without concentrated effort from alot of the community for months and months, and even then it is doubtful they could pull the pubs away from 63e Siege. Not only that, but you are basically asking of other regiments what you have said is unreasonable to demand from the 63e: A privately owned server opening up recruitment to other regiments. Option 1 is far more reasonable I would say, and Option 2 should only be used as a last resort.

 

it is neigh impossible to compete with 63e siege without concentrated effort from alot of the community for months and months

Firstly, we could care less who hates us. We aren't going to control that because we can't. Also, there's a lot of parties who have already spoken that showed they "don't care." Stop playing the victim of not taking the matter seriously when others are doing it, and only framing one group for it. But to the main point, How is option 2 impossible? If 63e Siege's success is accomplished through the concentrated effort from our NCOs and members, why can't Community Siege prosper with members of the community putting in the same amount of work? Why put in the work when we can just convince a private owner to open his server for us, and we just leech of the work they put in? You have to listen to your proposal. It involves the private owners who have put in the work to create it to what it is now, to just let anyone sit on the back of that work. No, go out yourself and work for it yourself. Plus, it has only gotten big because no one tried to run a siege server as long as we have. Of course the thing that is there for the longest and does it more efficiently is going to do better, compare this situation to the production market. If a product is the only product of its kind for the longest, it is bound to succeed.

You can see it anywhere, the USMC decided not to sit around and they went from being a small time regiment to pretty much competing with the 63e in numbers. What did they do? They made a server that really was unique, offered slots that fit their needs, and then had their guys put in the work. Do the same for the Community Server. At this point it just sounds like the unwillingness to put in the time and effort to do something good, but just to point a finger.

Not only that, but you are basically asking of other regiments what you have said is unreasonable to demand from the 63e: A privately owned server opening up recruitment to other regiments.

Not really, the 63e Siege is aimed for the 63e. When you suggest a community siege, it's more aimed for the community so you can't compare a privately owned server to a server aimed to adhering to the community. Also, isn't this where the criticism of the siege is coming from, right? Not from a few individuals who over time have disliked the 63e, but actual regiment leaders? Otherwise there's nothing to talk about here if no actual regiments that participate in the open community don't speak up about it. So far the only current regiment leader to bring anything up is cheesypants, and his regiment has 60-100 active members. So where are the regiment leaders you speak of that say their regiments have failed do to the server. At this point it's a claim made by non-regiment leaders and more so people who have been in the community/browse the forums.

wtf are you on?? 71st only brings like 15 Lol and they only have 43 in their steam group Lol

Addition: You are literally delusional

[GeneralSquirts]

According to their page

The 71st (Highland) Regiment of Foot is a Mount & Blade: Napoleonic Wars regiment dedicated to creating lasting friendships, enjoying weekly events, and accurately representing military structure, command, and tactics -- all the while making sure our members are disciplined and able to follow orders to-the-letter. We have an active roster of approximately 60 men, around 100 in total.

I just took that as their official number count, if so then they've mistakenly put on their page that they have 60-100 active men.

[maccle]

According to their page

The 71st (Highland) Regiment of Foot is a Mount & Blade: Napoleonic Wars regiment dedicated to creating lasting friendships, enjoying weekly events, and accurately representing military structure, command, and tactics -- all the while making sure our members are disciplined and able to follow orders to-the-letter. We have an active roster of approximately 60 men, around 100 in total.

I just took that as their official number count, if so then they've mistakenly put on their page that they have 60-100 active men.

Right above that is the avatar of their steam group clearly showing that they have 43 people in it. Your attention to detail is seriously lacking.

[GeneralSquirts]

wait what. It states 60-100 men right there. LOL

[AsianP]

Obviously they have not updated it lol
Don't pick and choose information. It's common sense.

[maccle]

wait what. It states 60-100 men right there. LOL

retard? hello? hello?

[GeneralSquirts]

Obviously they have not updated it lol
Don't pick and choose information. It's common sense.

I can't distinguish that from their page, but stop trying to take the topic off to a different narrative and remain to the one at hand.

Whether they have X active members or Y active members, whichever they claim they have, the point is he's the only actual individual from a regimental standpoint who's posted about anything. But still, the only regiments who have a voice that will complain will be like.. 58e, 3eVolt remnants, 71st, and that's about it. So like, definitely not the bulk of anyone new, more so a bulk of those regiments have elements that heavily dislike the 63e.  So is the whole of the community actually being represented or just the side that is apparent on the forums/just are anti-63e.

[maccle]

Obviously they have not updated it lol
Don't pick and choose information. It's common sense.

I can't distinguish that from their page, but stop trying to take the topic off to a different narrative and remain to the one at hand.

Whether they have X active members or Y active members, whichever they claim they have, the point is he's the only actual individual from a regimental standpoint who's posted about anything. But still, the only regiments who have a voice that will complain will be like.. 58e, 3eVolt remnants, 71st, and that's about it. So like, definitely not the bulk of anyone new, more so a bulk of those regiments have elements that heavily dislike the 63e.  So is the whole of the community actually being represented or just the side that is apparent on the forums/just are anti-63e.

Last night I talked extensively with Immath and Dodge the leader of the 9te and the 23rd infact dodge helped me write my paragraph. He is not the leader of one of the regiments that you named and his regiment does participate in large 200 man events such as thunderstormers. I guess that means they are real community regiment??

[AP0CALYPS3]

Firstly, we could care less who hates us. We aren't going to control that because we can't

Funny joke. "Take a moment to consider why: People don't dislike the 63e without reason, and many have said exactly why they dislike the 63e on this thread. It seems to me that the 63e aren't taking these grievances very seriously, and have just taken a "Hate us cuz they aint us" attitude towards the community, which is honestly pretty disappointing to me."

How is option 2 impossible? If 63e Siege's success is accomplished through the concentrated effort from our NCOs and members, why can't Community Siege prosper with members of the community putting in the same amount of work?

Its alot easier to tell your ~100 attendance to go to your siege server after an event, especially when a large number of your cadets were recruited there, than it is to contact 5-10 regiments that bring 10-20 to EVENTS to get their people on siege and populate it constantly. If the amount of "work" it took for a server to compete with 63e siege was equal to the amount of "work" it takes to maintain 63e siege, then this would be a non-issue, but I think you are failing to see that.

Why put in the work when we can just convince a private owner to open his server for us, and we just leech of the work they put in? You have to listen to your proposal. It involves the private owners who have put in the work to create it to what it is now, to just let anyone sit on the back of that work. No, go out yourself and work for it yourself.

You are basically asking others to do exactly what you think is unreasonable for the 63e to do: Get a privately owned server and make it widely accessible to the community.

Not really, the 63e Siege is aimed for the 63e. When you suggest a community siege, it's more aimed for the community so you can't compare a privately owned server to a server aimed to adhering to the community. Also, isn't this where the criticism of the siege is coming from, right? Not from a few individuals who over time have disliked the 63e, but actual regiment leaders? Otherwise there's nothing to talk about here if no actual regiments that participate in the open community don't speak up about it. So far the only current regiment leader to bring anything up is cheesypants, and his regiment has 60-100 active members. So where are the regiment leaders you speak of that say their regiments have failed do to the server. At this point it's a claim made by non-regiment leaders and more so people who have been in the community/browse the forums.

Almost this entire paragraph is a Straw Man Fallacy.

Listen, servers are often privately owned. You know NA_Groupfighting? Privately Owned. Its owned by Label, you may know him, visits the NA_GFing thread alot, is pretty bad at melee tbh, and he lets anybody recruit on his server. But, that still doesnt make it less privately owned. If we were to get a "Community Siege", it would be privately owned by some individual, most likely a regimental leader. However, you are asking them to open up their recruitment to everybody and put in all the effort to contact alot of regimental leaders and populate it CONSTANTLY. Yet, it is unfair to ask the 63e to put in minimal effort and just relax recruitment restrictions.

I also dont care who the criticism is coming from to be honest with you. If they are part of the community, and if it is valid criticism, then it shouldn't matter if they are the leader of the 71st or a 63e cadet. What I see now is a large portion of the community bringing up valid grievances against the 63e, and the 63e is just shrugging it off as "lol haters, dont hate cuz u aint". If this keeps up, I would be more than willing to get alot of the "leaders" around here and see exactly what they think.

[AsianP]

Obviously they have not updated it lol
Don't pick and choose information. It's common sense.

I can't distinguish that from their page, but stop trying to take the topic off to a different narrative and remain to the one at hand.

Whether they have X active members or Y active members, whichever they claim they have, the point is he's the only actual individual who's posted about anything. But still, the only regiments who have a voice that will complain will be like.. 58e, 3eVolt remnants, 71st, and that's about it. So like, definitely not the bulk of anyone new, more so a bulk of those regiments have elements that heavily dislike the 63e.  So is the whole of the community actually being represented or just the side that is apparent on the forums/just are anti-63e.

I was not changing the subject. I was simply informing you of what was wrong with your thought process. As for me I just want a 1v1 or something but the 63e constantly challenges regiments such as the 23rd and the AEF. Regiments such as the 1er, 71st and 45e strive off of competitive play. Give or take a few public events spread throughout the week. Plus the 63e made the claim "Stick around for a while and then we will 1v1 you". However, when I brought up the issue with Cheesy never receiving a response for his requests, the subject was changed? How come? You're the largest regiment currently in NA yet you refuse to compete against other regiments competitively. It's been 4 months since the 63e has played against a top contending regiment. At this point it isn't about rebuilding. It's about saving face and the fear of being beat. Every regiment gets beat every now and then. Deal with it. It's part of competitive play.

Edit*- The purpose of this is to show where some of the animosity comes from. Both the 1er and 71st feel the same way.

[GeneralSquirts]

Obviously they have not updated it lol
Don't pick and choose information. It's common sense.

I can't distinguish that from their page, but stop trying to take the topic off to a different narrative and remain to the one at hand.

Whether they have X active members or Y active members, whichever they claim they have, the point is he's the only actual individual who's posted about anything. But still, the only regiments who have a voice that will complain will be like.. 58e, 3eVolt remnants, 71st, and that's about it. So like, definitely not the bulk of anyone new, more so a bulk of those regiments have elements that heavily dislike the 63e.  So is the whole of the community actually being represented or just the side that is apparent on the forums/just are anti-63e.

I was not changing the subject. I was simply informing you of what was wrong with your thought process. As for me I just want a 1v1 or something but the 63e constantly challenges regiments such as the 23rd and the AEF. Regiments such as the 1er, 71st and 45e strive off of competitive play. Give or take a few public events spread throughout the week. Plus the 63e made the claim "Stick around for a while and then we will 1v1 you". However, when I brought up the issue with Cheesy never receiving a response for his requests, the subject was changed? How come? You're the largest regiment currently in NA yet you refuse to compete against other regiments competitively. It's been 4 months since the 63e has played against a top contending regiment. At this point it isn't about rebuilding. It's about saving face and the fear of being beat. Every regiment gets beat every now and then. Deal with it. It's part of competitive play.

Our choices as a regiment are neither your business or yours to make, so you need to stop acting like a little kid and just do other 1v1s. We aren't the only regiment, and just because one regiment doesn't participate doesn't mean shit to the community as a whole, more so you're looking for an excuse to complain. That has nothing to do with a community issue, more so a personal issue you and a few other regimental leaders who don't go to public linebattles or events, and strictly do 1v1s complain about. Just because your regiment doesn't have fun with the other regiments in linebattles doesn't mean ours has to follow the same mantra. Is it ok that your regiment just does 1v1s? Perfectly fine. Is it okay you 1v1 regiments that have the same outlook? Absolutely. But is it fine when you harass a regiment that doesn't want to 1v1 regiments that will not provide a good experience for their regiment members? Absolutely not. So grow up and find another reason, cause yours makes no sense. You guys want to change our rules, change our server, and apparently now change the events we choose to attend. Is there no end to the failure to see what you guys are suggesting is literally impossible/plain out stupid.