I have to speak my mind concerning Multiplayer, and the use of language.

[Michael Slaunwhite]

I am only speaking for myself here so if anyone takes issue, please direct your comments to me, and me alone please. This is not a Rant, but a simple request that even though NSD does not officially state that the voice server(s) for SOWgb multiplayer is supported, and it's a third party tool used to bring players together doesn't in my opinion make it right that users can use such foul language.

We have to remember that there are some young people out there that may one day join, and be subjected to language found written on bathroom walls, and spoken in the dark alleys, or in school corridors.

Believe me even though NSD is not tied to the voice servers doesn't change the fact that parents don't, and most likely will not even care to separate the game from the voice servers, they see Scourge of War as the game, and in effect it won't take long before parents stop allowing their children to use SOWgb even though they don't understand that it's the voice servers being the problem, not the game.

I'm not pointing my finger at anyone, all I am asking for is that the language be toned down a notch, and try to remember that how we act while playing this game online does affect how people view NSD, and SOW.

Anyway, like I said this is not a rant. We also have to remember that we are our brothers keeper no matter what side of the tracks you may find yourself.

[Martin James]

Yes I agree, Michael.

Martin

[exp101]

I basically agree but think it's a bit more complicated. In private or closed games, players should be more-or-less free to "be themselves." On the other hand, in contests open to everyone, I wish players would observe more restraint with profanity and topic selection. This isn't a result of prudishness (some of the off-color discussions are actually pretty entertaining), but because this necessarily restricts our player base to the "R-rated" crowd. Very young players or those who simply don't appreciate rough language are practically barred from participating. Not a good thing. In public games players should ask themselves whether they would feel comfortable with their moms or little brothers/sisters listening in, or something approaching that standard. Just my opinion.

-Ron "WJ Palmer"

[KG_Soldier]

I basically agree but think it's a bit more complicated. In private or closed games, players should be more-or-less free to "be themselves." On the other hand, in contests open to everyone, I wish players would observe more restraint with profanity and topic selection. This isn't a result of prudishness (some of the off-color discussions are actually pretty entertaining), but because this necessarily restricts our player base to the "R-rated" crowd. Very young players or those who simply don't appreciate rough language are practically barred from participating. Not a good thing. In public games players should ask themselves whether they would feel comfortable with their moms or little brothers/sisters listening in, or something approaching that standard. Just my opinion.

-Ron "WJ Palmer"

I agree. However, I think Mike is referring to a certain player who doesn't play often, but when he does, he has usually had a few adult beverages and then cusses like a sailor, as he did last night. I always mute him.

But on the whole, I'd say we don't have much of a problem with foul language on the ts server.

[Michael Slaunwhite]

@KG_Soldier: Yeah your right. I'm 51, and I heard it all but that was a wee bit overboard. Mind you it didn't do anything to how I enjoyed the game.

I have to say it was interesting.

[Ingles of the 57th]

Interesting.

It set me thinking just what was the level of profanity displayed during the actual battles, forgiving the occasional adjective or two.

Whilst the extremis of battle can strip away normal behaviour conventions, I get the impression from research that the 1860's demonstrated a very high level of religious and moral observance from the top to the bottom of American society and that soldiers were more likely to call upon God for practical purposes rather than take His name in vain.

Some recent films on the 'dark' side of the civil war might suggest otherwise but I treat those with a pinch of salt.

Anyone have any history to quote ? Any hard-drinking fire-breathing Generals, or even Top Sergeants, gone down in history for their mastery of inventive language to their unfortunate subordinates ?

Geoff Laver Late of Her Britannic Majesty's 57th Regiment of Foot.

[Hancock the Superb]

I've heard that General Andrew Humphreys was the devil himself when it came to such language.

[Armchair General]

As for historical records:

At the Battle of Chancellorsville, when a German in the XI Corps ran up to W.S. Hancock and asked the way to the rear, Hancock, a prolific swearer, replied so vehemently no one wished to write it down.

At Cedar Creek, Sheridan, riding through his mangled lines, is reported to say, "Give 'em hell! Goddamn 'em, we'll drive them!"

There are plenty more examples, but it can be summed up as men, caught in the heat and midst of battle, didn't really pay attention to the niceties of the English language.

[maym]

I find it interesting how we play a war game were, like most war games, the point is to kill as many "people" as possible, but yet people get offended by some "bad words".

I find this bizarre.

[rudy]

Great Caesars Ghost!

Do you think this game might be sponsored by the NRA?!

That would be enough to spoil your mothers preserves