eUSA Military Restructuring; How to create a more engaged fighting force?
•
by NXNW
Memorandum
To: All elected officials, active service members and eUSA citizens
From: NXNW, CEO of MArket Street Management & National Guardsman assigned to the 3rd Division
Date: 4/16/09, 930pm PST
Subject: eUSA Military Restructuring
The eUSA military is staffed by many people who generously give their time and energy in the service of their country. Their efforts have created a formidable fighting force. However, in the opinion of this author, the military would benefit from restructuring.
Currently the eUSA military is composed of 3 branches, the USMC, Army and National Guard. The suggestions in this memo are directed to the Army and National Guard. Combining these two organizations would eliminate parallel command structures and result in more effective communication.
The new combined Army would be comprised of "active" units comprised of veteran soldiers able and willing to deploy abroad on command as well as "reserve" units comprised of recruits and veteran players who are either unwilling or unable to deploy overseas. While I advocate for streamlining organizations on a macro level I believe that there is a need to create more, smaller units. This would create a need for more officers which is a good thing.
We all have RL commitments and being responsible for a smaller number of soldiers would allow commanders to better focus their energy. Small units of 4-6 players would also be able to more easily communicate, build esprit de corp and ultimately take ownership of their units. During the Civil War many units were named for a specific commander or region. Creating a setting where players can take a more active part, perhaps by "badging" their unit is a key aspect of my restructuring proposal. I know it would be a nano second before the service was replete with units named "The Purple Helmeted Warriors" but that would be half the fun and could result in more engaged, active players with higher strength and damage ratings.
A single QMG entity would in theory be more efficient but recent events have shown that a centralized QMG could be vulnerable to various types of security breaches. I therefore propose no changes to the QMG structure.
I've tried to avoid writing a text wall, I hope this article is brief enough to be easily readable but interesting enough to provoke thought. I appreciate any and all comments.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
I think combining the USNG with the Army would be nice, as long as the USNG didn't get extremely damaged by taking on the Army's problems.
As Justin pointed out on "Is This The Real Life?" the Army's purpose was for taking and holding long sections of territory, and they've apparently never succeeded in doing this job. Furthermore, the USNG has been deployed beyond the natural borders of the USA, at the end of the Mexican War in the Northeast.
Naming units is a good idea. Hopefully that will instill camaraderie in our troops. I know it'd be nice to name my platoon in the Guard. Numbers just don't have the same ring to them.
I have to say, there's a lot of sense in this idea.
I have secret pet names for my Guardsmen.
Also: Subb'd.
I somewhat agree with this. I'm all for a restructuring with our forces.
Some good ideas there. Couldn't the National Guard simply keep expanding slowly and steadily? Add units of increasing strength and rank, made up from people who have shown continuous interest, competence and involvement during their earlier service. Why lose them to the other services? If the name is a problem, change it to something else. 'New Model Army' springs to mind, but maybe it should be something more American.
Thank you all for the positive comments, they are much appreciated.
@Sam Wystan: As a member of the NG volunteer force that deployed to The Northeast I firmly believe that effort faltered due to poor communication from the highest level of leadership. In terms of taking and holding I think we need to realise that taking is easy, holding is hard. Any assualt needs to be followed by a mass migration of citizens (perhaps with GI issue tickets)& it could even be worthwhile to immediately plany a Q2-3 defense system. that might be futile but what the heck, make the opponent earn back the real estate.
@Gertrude: If the current trend continues the NG will eventually swallow the Army; I'm not sure how accurate this is but I beleive the current NG:Army ratio is 4 to 1. If the inbalance in numbers and effective leadership continues it is only a matter of time before a "new model army" is created.