If you can actually cover expenses, I'll definitely consider coming down. Just make sure to give me plenty of advance notice (at least a few months), so I can schedule the tickets in advance (tickets are cheaper if they are well ahead of the travel date).
Sub Divisions of Test
- Thread starter Ranger BearBlood
- Start date
I got you brother. It won't be for a while for sure. We have to get PDX Meetups going first, then launch our proganda/recruitment campaign on the Puget Sound.
Mwahahaah....
Ok, I've had a conversation with some of our leaders, and it seems that the way the newer squads are being presented is creating some amount of discomfort. I would like to try and publicly address this before this whole hubhub about squads get out of hand.
One of the problems we're seeing is a distinct lack of disclaimers stating the following:
In regards to #1, it's important to understand that all squads would need to be given the blessing of TEST leadership before being canonized as an official squad. And I will say this in no uncertain terms: There will be no such blessings handed out until TEST Leadership determines that said squads (and their roles) are a vital necessity for the Persistent Universe.
As a result, all squads are considered speculative.
In regards to #2, we're seeing some general issues with people starting to represent themselves as the leader of their respective squad proposals. This is a potential major issue in the long term, as it can generate friction long before the game has even started. We want to avoid this! As such, I would like to point out to those who are currently involved in these squad discussions, that any leadership representations are speculative, and do not hold any finality at all.
Why am I posting this here? The answer is simple: I want to get in front of people who appear to be jockeying for "prime real estate", and to remind them that TEST Squadron is an all-volunteer organization, and that even if you create a squad, you won't be considered a leader until you actually prove yourself through trial by fire - and that's not happening until the PU. This is the most important part.
Right now, everybody in TEST is generally equal. We're all going into Star Citizen with the same amount of experience. None of us have any right to step up onto the stage and say, "I am the leader of so and so squad, come join us!" (Which is what this recent glut of squad postings is starting to come off like.) The better method is to actually present the squad threads as Interest/Discussion threads, where you sound them off of TEST members and get feedback.
So, TL;DR - People need to chill on the squad thing.
One of the problems we're seeing is a distinct lack of disclaimers stating the following:
- The Squad is unofficial, and the thread is merely being used to gauge interest.
- That leadership is not finalized.
In regards to #1, it's important to understand that all squads would need to be given the blessing of TEST leadership before being canonized as an official squad. And I will say this in no uncertain terms: There will be no such blessings handed out until TEST Leadership determines that said squads (and their roles) are a vital necessity for the Persistent Universe.
As a result, all squads are considered speculative.
In regards to #2, we're seeing some general issues with people starting to represent themselves as the leader of their respective squad proposals. This is a potential major issue in the long term, as it can generate friction long before the game has even started. We want to avoid this! As such, I would like to point out to those who are currently involved in these squad discussions, that any leadership representations are speculative, and do not hold any finality at all.
Why am I posting this here? The answer is simple: I want to get in front of people who appear to be jockeying for "prime real estate", and to remind them that TEST Squadron is an all-volunteer organization, and that even if you create a squad, you won't be considered a leader until you actually prove yourself through trial by fire - and that's not happening until the PU. This is the most important part.
Right now, everybody in TEST is generally equal. We're all going into Star Citizen with the same amount of experience. None of us have any right to step up onto the stage and say, "I am the leader of so and so squad, come join us!" (Which is what this recent glut of squad postings is starting to come off like.) The better method is to actually present the squad threads as Interest/Discussion threads, where you sound them off of TEST members and get feedback.
So, TL;DR - People need to chill on the squad thing.
To add to this, I should NOT be allowed to lead anything, and bomb squadron is 100% not an official actual thing, and has no actual official status. And prob won't for year or two lol.
Update the OP of the Bomb Squad thread to reflect that, then. :)
Soon as we get some bros in here that are able to run this joint I will. Won't be long just waiting on some stuff. And yeah, when I am not driving around town in a giant circle jerk and get to a legit PC I will update the thread more for the Bomb Wing. We had to cut our Lil meeting short due to a family function but we will get around to it sooner or later. Big plans. One thing we need to do is determine and post what specific roles and who we are looking for. I know we need some artists, cause I suck donkey dick when it comes to artsy fartsy stuff. I know we'll need some outside recruiters for sure too. And one glorious leader perhaps?
At the moment, TEST is taking the approach for finding leadership like this:
It's all by player initiative. When something needs to be done, someone will step up and try their hand at it. If they rock at it, more TESTbros will come to them. If they suck, people will be less inclined to join them for their ops. However, this won't happen until the PU starts up, where people can actually start showing their skills.
That's how we anticipate field command roles to shake out. As far as I'm concerned, "leadership" in each squad will actually be centered on simply keeping the squads operational, so most of the work would be associated with the logistics relevant to that squad. Politics should be completely ignored when it comes to running a squad.
So for now, I wouldn't worry about recruiting people for the squad, just simply discuss what kind of roles the squad should focus on, and what should be prioritized (and de-prioritized as well). You want to avoid role overlap with other squads, while also ensuring that you have a solid foundation in place for other people to build on.
I am sure you are referring to everyone except our glorious leader, about to start a ruckus...
This equality was a major draw for me. As it has been stated there is some CONCERN for where these sub group threads are headed. There is only one ego that I will gladly stroke with aloe cream and all. I for one hope even after the PU launch we don't go down that road. For me TEST is all about not taking this stuff too seriuosly. If we ever have to do applications to be a part of something within TEST then that thing is not TEST. I got my 1 point on Aurora Crash, I am in.
Steps down from soap box.
thanatos73
Space Marshal
OK, I agree with just about everything that has been said in this thread, like the squads are TBD, and leaders of said squads are in the same state, if not more so. There is one thing everyone missed......who is going to be there to patch up your livers between bar hops???
I propose the SAR Squadron.....
We have quite a few squads of combat ships, mining ships, and bounty hunter ships(and some people who own all the ships), but there are a couple of guys/gals who own the Cutlass Red, or want the Hope when its released, so, lets put them to good use. Me, I'm a good pilot, I can fly circles around the Vanduul through the astroids in my Cutlass, but targeting is not my strong suite. The little race ships are too twitchy, so racing is out. So, when I saw the SAR ship, I thought, thats what I can do. So, now I would like to start a squad, for people who are like me, those of us who can't fight, can't race, but can park a Durango in a compact parking spot, and still be inside the lines.
I propose the SAR Squadron.....
We have quite a few squads of combat ships, mining ships, and bounty hunter ships(and some people who own all the ships), but there are a couple of guys/gals who own the Cutlass Red, or want the Hope when its released, so, lets put them to good use. Me, I'm a good pilot, I can fly circles around the Vanduul through the astroids in my Cutlass, but targeting is not my strong suite. The little race ships are too twitchy, so racing is out. So, when I saw the SAR ship, I thought, thats what I can do. So, now I would like to start a squad, for people who are like me, those of us who can't fight, can't race, but can park a Durango in a compact parking spot, and still be inside the lines.
Medics typically fall under combat ops, especially combat medics. In my personal opinion, we don't know if we really need a medical division or not. The same as we don't know whether or not we need a capital ships division.
The problem with this suggestion is that over-specializing the division runs into several kinds of issues.
thanatos73
Space Marshal
This wouldn't be for just combat, from some of the reading I have been doing, there will be the possibility of non combat medical emergencies, such as mining accidents. And from the looks of it, mining is going to be pretty big, so having a dedicated "ambulance" squad, providing free First Class service to fellow TESTies, would be a good idea.
It's something worth considering, but at this time I don't think we have enough dedicated medics to actually validate this. It's one reason why I classified medical duties as part of Infinity Squad's "SPEC" category (also known as Specialization) that would be easy to transfer to other disciplines. I think in the end, TEST Squadron will organically and automatically maintain a flexible medical capability based on demand and expectations in the battlefield.
Basically what I'm saying is, it's worthwhile to discuss the medical profession, but at this point we don't know enough to actually validate establishing an independent squadron. Maybe when the MISC Endeavor is revealed for its concept sale, we'll also get a design document on medical functions, and we'll be able to extrapolate something from that.
For now, though, medical is a hyper-specialized segment of science.
Last edited:
I think that leadership might want to address this themselves.. I think a post from them stating how they want shit to be done would bring up way less dicussion then NKato conveying what 'leadership' says, and what he thinks is true.. coming off as a 'leader' where he is not.
I've been thinking lately that official squads may end up being more restrictive than we want. There's so much crossover that there are going to be people flying with easily 3+ squads. Take pilots, medics, or engineers for example. They are going to be needed in literally every squad because multi-crew ships will need all of them (though hopefully medics won't be needed in the cargo/trade group). "Squads" are going to do nothing but divide our human capital if we end up making squads any more than a tool to organize group operations (like having segregated mumble channels or restricted subforums).
I feel like with the amount of crossover, people in TEST should never say "Oh, I'm in X squad." It should be more like "Oh, I'm an X in TEST."
I feel like with the amount of crossover, people in TEST should never say "Oh, I'm in X squad." It should be more like "Oh, I'm an X in TEST."
Personally I think any divisions should be really thought about, and not just created on the fly. I mean, look at the actual meaning behind the word in this context:
But don't start cutting up a beautiful cake before its cooked. Because I like cake.
- the action of separating something into parts or the process of being separated.
But don't start cutting up a beautiful cake before its cooked. Because I like cake.
GrammarGestapo
Pro Chat Necromancer
This is great. Handles the issue without dissent. Maybe a few grumbles, but it's better for everyone. Leadership is proven and earned, not given away.
I won't go into any rules, that seems above me at this point and would just be my opinions. but we NEED to establish some other rules come the PU. I suggest that, for now, we just stick to basic things that promote healthy socializing within our org, the things we do NOW. come the PU, however, we're going to need a real constitution that basically says
"do what you want, unless you're hurting or infringing on either SC's EULA or the rights of other TEST members. we're here to give everyone a good time".
I won't go into any rules, that seems above me at this point and would just be my opinions. but we NEED to establish some other rules come the PU. I suggest that, for now, we just stick to basic things that promote healthy socializing within our org, the things we do NOW. come the PU, however, we're going to need a real constitution that basically says
"do what you want, unless you're hurting or infringing on either SC's EULA or the rights of other TEST members. we're here to give everyone a good time".
I understand where your coming from, however @NKato is actually relaying everything said for the most part. It was a good sized group of us in mumble when Montoya asked Ranger's thoughts (turned into a full blow think tank). As far as concern about misinterpretation, Nkato has done a fantastic job at explaining everything I can verify that. Some stuff is a bit off but nothing worth noting.
The interesting part is that while I'm Deaf, I'm pretty much on the same wavelength; I had an inkling that such a discussion took place on Mumble, but I was never apprised of the details.
I do apologize for coming off like that, and my only intention was to reiterate what leadership said to me in general terms when I had "the conversation" with them.
(10:11:13 PM) nkato: Anyway, you should just simply reply that you understand, and that the conversation we've had just now in RSI chat (this chat window) helped clarify things significantly