Talk:Battle of Asźod: Difference between revisions
From Halopedia, the Halo wiki
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
::::::The difference there is that the Headhunters operated in two-man teams by default. You'd only need a designated "leader" in larger units. It could be argued that Emile was only the team's de facto commanding officer, I suppose.-- '''[[User:Forerunner|<font color="blue">Fore</font>]]''[[User talk:Forerunner|<font color="green">run</font>]]''[[Special:Contributions/Forerunner|<font color="red">ner</font>]]''''' 13:54, 22 July 2011 (EDT) | ::::::The difference there is that the Headhunters operated in two-man teams by default. You'd only need a designated "leader" in larger units. It could be argued that Emile was only the team's de facto commanding officer, I suppose.-- '''[[User:Forerunner|<font color="blue">Fore</font>]]''[[User talk:Forerunner|<font color="green">run</font>]]''[[Special:Contributions/Forerunner|<font color="red">ner</font>]]''''' 13:54, 22 July 2011 (EDT) | ||
:::::::It could be argued, though you'd be wrong. "Commanding Officer" refers to the senior member of a unit in rank, not who has the most seniority with time-in for a particular unit. If that was the case, even the most junior enlisted personnel would be more senior to a "butterball" Lieutenant and you'd see companies and battalions led by First Sergeants and Sergeants Major, respectively. Like I said before, designations within a unit have NOTHING to do with it; which is why Jorge, a Chief Warrant Officer (unknown grade), was Noble Four, though was more senior to WO Jun and WO Emile (Nobles Three and Four, respectively) in both rank and time-in NAVSPECWAR. '''''VERY FRAKKIN' RARELY''''' does time-in unit have any bearing on the succession of unit leaders, i.e. when a MCPO (highest Navy enlisted rank) took over for a LT (third lowest Navy officer rank) in a tactical leadership fashion while the officer still had operational and administrative command. Similar to what Halofan1234 said, Spartans in a small unit wouldn't need a team leader as it is, sure, they may order them around in the sense that you need to do something, but there's no real chain of command with two guys; not to mention the close-knit of Spartan teams. Now, you don't see Battalion Sergeant Majors assuming command of the formation if their Lieutenant Colonel or Major commanding officer falls in battle do you? Nope, that would go to the executive officer, then any staff officers, then to company commanders, then to platoon commanders, and if they fall...there's nothing really making that a proper formation. {{User:CommanderTony/Sig}} | :::::::It could be argued, though you'd be wrong. "Commanding Officer" refers to the senior member of a unit in rank, not who has the most seniority with time-in for a particular unit. If that was the case, even the most junior enlisted personnel would be more senior to a "butterball" Lieutenant and you'd see companies and battalions led by First Sergeants and Sergeants Major, respectively. Like I said before, designations within a unit have NOTHING to do with it; which is why Jorge, a Chief Warrant Officer (unknown grade), was Noble Four, though was more senior to WO Jun and WO Emile (Nobles Three and Four, respectively) in both rank and time-in NAVSPECWAR. '''''VERY FRAKKIN' RARELY''''' does time-in unit have any bearing on the succession of unit leaders, i.e. when a MCPO (highest Navy enlisted rank) took over for a LT (third lowest Navy officer rank) in a tactical leadership fashion while the officer still had operational and administrative command. Similar to what Halofan1234 said, Spartans in a small unit wouldn't need a team leader as it is, sure, they may order them around in the sense that you need to do something, but there's no real chain of command with two guys; not to mention the close-knit of Spartan teams. Now, you don't see Battalion Sergeant Majors assuming command of the formation if their Lieutenant Colonel or Major commanding officer falls in battle do you? Nope, that would go to the executive officer, then any staff officers, then to company commanders, then to platoon commanders, and if they fall...there's nothing really making that a proper formation. {{User:CommanderTony/Sig}} | ||
:Points taken and I rest my case, I am wrong. But, what is Noble 6's reason for being listed as a leader? Is it that he outranked Emile, or Lead the Marines (I'm pretty sure they were under Keyes' command, but he could of lead ARMY troopers), or the fact he was last left? <font color="black">Something<b>Different</b></font> 20:04, 22 July 2011 (EDT) | |||
Revision as of 20:04, July 22, 2011
preceding battle
Is it possible to add to the template the preceding ground battle of the Reach campaign as well as the following? --The Reborn Qual 'Fulsamee 11:37, 8 April 2011 (EDT)
Emile was a "Leader"
I don't understand why people keep removing him from the infobox. After Carter's death the leadership of Noble inevitably falls to Emile. SomethingDifferent 22:01, 16 July 2011 (EDT)
- Emile was only a Warrant Officer One while B312 was a Lieutenant. Irregardless of unit precedence, 'Six would become the assistant team leader after Catherine fell at New Alexandria and after the team leader when Carter sacrificed himself. And even when it was just A239 and B312, the position of team leader would be pretty useless as it is. User:CommanderTony/Sig
- There are instances of lower ranks leading higher ranks in the Halo univers, John Forge and the unnamed Marine officer come to mind from Halo Wars. And it is relevant for there to be a leader out of a two man team. And it just makes sense that the leadership of Noble goes from 1-6 if needed. SomethingDifferent 22:56, 21 July 2011 (EDT)
- Numbers have nothing to do with seniority. And the "lower ranks" have been annoying mistakes and gameplay/story decisions rather than anything serious. Unless E-5 Sergeants are supposed to command entire battalions and regiments... User:CommanderTony/Sig
- No, they're not. But Emile was the more senior member of Noble Team during the battle. It doesn't matter if there are 2 members left, Emile was the leader. This is reinforced by Emile's dialogue, "Crevice to the East, let's go" etc. And if I really have to use it, Noble 1 = leader, Noble 2 = second in command, so by logic we have our leaders/ second in command in the event that one of them karks it. SomethingDifferent 01:54, 22 July 2011 (EDT)
- EDIT: And on the topic, why is Noble 6 listed as a leader? He didn't lead any UNSC force during the battle.SomethingDifferent 02:43, 22 July 2011 (EDT)
- In the short story Headhunters is their a team leader? No not really because it's really pointless to have a team leader telling only one other soldier what to do.--1234fansofHalo 11:15, 22 July 2011 (EDT)
- The difference there is that the Headhunters operated in two-man teams by default. You'd only need a designated "leader" in larger units. It could be argued that Emile was only the team's de facto commanding officer, I suppose.-- Forerunner 13:54, 22 July 2011 (EDT)
- It could be argued, though you'd be wrong. "Commanding Officer" refers to the senior member of a unit in rank, not who has the most seniority with time-in for a particular unit. If that was the case, even the most junior enlisted personnel would be more senior to a "butterball" Lieutenant and you'd see companies and battalions led by First Sergeants and Sergeants Major, respectively. Like I said before, designations within a unit have NOTHING to do with it; which is why Jorge, a Chief Warrant Officer (unknown grade), was Noble Four, though was more senior to WO Jun and WO Emile (Nobles Three and Four, respectively) in both rank and time-in NAVSPECWAR. VERY FRAKKIN' RARELY does time-in unit have any bearing on the succession of unit leaders, i.e. when a MCPO (highest Navy enlisted rank) took over for a LT (third lowest Navy officer rank) in a tactical leadership fashion while the officer still had operational and administrative command. Similar to what Halofan1234 said, Spartans in a small unit wouldn't need a team leader as it is, sure, they may order them around in the sense that you need to do something, but there's no real chain of command with two guys; not to mention the close-knit of Spartan teams. Now, you don't see Battalion Sergeant Majors assuming command of the formation if their Lieutenant Colonel or Major commanding officer falls in battle do you? Nope, that would go to the executive officer, then any staff officers, then to company commanders, then to platoon commanders, and if they fall...there's nothing really making that a proper formation. User:CommanderTony/Sig
- The difference there is that the Headhunters operated in two-man teams by default. You'd only need a designated "leader" in larger units. It could be argued that Emile was only the team's de facto commanding officer, I suppose.-- Forerunner 13:54, 22 July 2011 (EDT)
- In the short story Headhunters is their a team leader? No not really because it's really pointless to have a team leader telling only one other soldier what to do.--1234fansofHalo 11:15, 22 July 2011 (EDT)
- Numbers have nothing to do with seniority. And the "lower ranks" have been annoying mistakes and gameplay/story decisions rather than anything serious. Unless E-5 Sergeants are supposed to command entire battalions and regiments... User:CommanderTony/Sig
- There are instances of lower ranks leading higher ranks in the Halo univers, John Forge and the unnamed Marine officer come to mind from Halo Wars. And it is relevant for there to be a leader out of a two man team. And it just makes sense that the leadership of Noble goes from 1-6 if needed. SomethingDifferent 22:56, 21 July 2011 (EDT)
- Points taken and I rest my case, I am wrong. But, what is Noble 6's reason for being listed as a leader? Is it that he outranked Emile, or Lead the Marines (I'm pretty sure they were under Keyes' command, but he could of lead ARMY troopers), or the fact he was last left? SomethingDifferent 20:04, 22 July 2011 (EDT)