Alexiandra wrote:New Edom wrote:I think while we are gearing up for that rp we should have a general structure for ICE peacekeeping operations. I'd like to recommend that players fulfill the following roles to make things simple.
1. A field commander.(will draw up a general operational plan, be kept up to date on what each contingent is doing, make reports directly to ICE, command overall operations)
2. A deputy field commander. (assists field commander, acts in his absence)
3. a director of humanitarian operations
It would also be helpful to have contingents organized according to branches and areas of operation. When we have a map this will be easier, but if we do things this way then there will be an inherent connection between the player nations and things will be less confusing and more efficient.
I've always been in favour of maintaining individual, national militaries. In the event of a conflict, these militaries can be controlled by a war council consisting of officers from each military. In my opinion, this allows for a faster, more forceful and more flexible response in the event of a crisis. That's my point of view, anyway.
I've never seen any evidence of this. What I have seen, particularly on NS, is the enormous difficulty of war councils or just representatives of nations coordinating anything. I've seen national contingents bumping into one another going to the same places on maps, failing to deploy effectively, lack of a general understanding of rules of engagement, and ultimately the alliances really just being a collection of individual nations with a vague approach towards the same goals.



