Will this game be better than Infinite Warfare?
I think this is a great idea and I am looking forward to more on this. What is your reaction to this? Here is the website. My question is will the morons actually form a line or just run around like chickens?
https://warofrights.com
I can see it's potential, but i also see how it can be a total shitfest.
>Civil War shooter
>doesn't have hundreds of men on screen at once
yikes
>>339570370
>>339570310
My question is will repeating rifles, such as the Winchester be overpwered? They saw use in the Civil War.
>>339570558
They were very effective with units that received them, so yeah I'd imagine it would be a pretty big step up. It'd be up to the game to figure out how they want to balance that, though.
>>339570671
Limited usage per team most likely, like how some games have sniper limits.
>>339570206
This is going to be a flagwanking cringe-fest.
>>339570671
they can do it like red orchestra there is diferent roles like commander and squad leaders who only get the "overpowerd" weapons
who /zouave/ here
>>339570206
>volley shooting
>little squeaker shit head steps out of line
>pistol whip that fucker and execute him in front of the soldiers
>permaban after hes dead
This has potential, sounds like fun riding on horseback with a cavalry saber ordering men around on the front lines
>North is going to be portrayed as good guys
bye
>>339573575
History is written by the victors.
>>339573575
Stupid southerners
just play battlegrounds if you want to fuck around with muskets
>>339573575
>the protagonist will be a freed slave out to seek revenge on the evil southerners
>>339573575
>good guys
>war
back to highschool
>>339570206
>the game is called war of rights
My ancestor managed to turn a profit raiding for the CSA and it's sort of stuck in the family culture. Can I be a raider running around with my G&W and a Sharps blowing up bridges and stealing federal silver and gold?
Are black characters confirmed?
>>339573575
>Expecting Southern traitors to be the good guys
>>339576546
>traitoring from a country taking away your rights is bad
>>339576731
Traitors dont have rights
>>339570206
If the game has a cool Rebel Yell I'll buy it
I wanna hear like a hundred people hollering and having it echo throughout the woods with no way to tell where it's coming from
>>339575836
Underrated post
>>339576546
>traitors
>hey guys we didn't try to make it to where the south wasn't well represented at all, there was no other reason to the war other than the pure hatred of niggers
man good thing that nobody will be discussing the actual game and every thread turns into a /pol/ embassy, right guys?
>>339576785
The won't have traited if they stop taking their rights
>>339575984
>G&W
Uhh S&W?
Stupid poorly disguised shill thread. Fuck you OP your game looks like hot garbage
>>339573575
WILL RISE AGAIN
>>339576968
Fug. I meant G&G. It's like 4am in Dixie Land.
>>339577045
I was under the impression that this was just a multiplayer shooter with no plot
>>339577045
No, the south was actually being poorly represented to the point of nearly becoming an entirely different class of people.
OP is very clearly a shill trying to raise money for his shitty game.
>>339576848
the confederates where murderers and started one of the bloodiest wars in American history completely unprovoked
>>339577214
>completely unprovoked
Revisionists everyone.
>>339576731
>Stopping people from owning people is bad
>>339577394
>the war was over slavery
Kek
>>339577394
>He thinks the civil war was about slavery
There were multiple states with the North that still kept slaves.
>>339577506
>>339577469
Explain what it was about dum dum
anyone can explain why americans get so triggered over this?
>>339577760
Lack of representation iirc. Same thing that caused the actual rebellion that made this place. I'm no buff on this section of history but yeah, southerners where being poorly represented and a lot of it came from classist aritudes having to do with a fair amount of the south being agricultural in its function.
>>339577930
*atitudes
My phone can be the worst piece of shit at times. It won't even recognise words like if at some points.
>>339577760
Northern elites isolating the south.
Then a donation for south came to start shit it up.
>>339575557
people still play that?
>>339577469
Holy shit you can't be this fucking stupid.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcy7qV-BGF4
This is from a right-leaning source, so there's really no debate.
>>339578215
>the entirety of the war was right versus left and the only argument in it has to do with liberal and conservative atitudes clashing
Great job showing how knowledgeable you are about it.
>>339577760
It was literally about slavery, even if you want to make the argument that it wasn't, the south definitely tried to make it a war over slavery as their strategy to win was pretty much "make war about slavery, and try to get the UK to get involved to protect profits from the textiles industry."
This was a resounding failure as there were popular protests and strikes in manchester (cottonopolis) as while they may have been literally starving, slavery was just that unpopular in England and had been for hundreds of years.
This could be fun, but I imagine I couldn't play without being triggered by people not marching in formation to 50 yards from the enemy then taking turns shooting at each other.
>>339578335
I was talking about the source itself
>>339570206
oh hey, I met you guys shilling this a while back while playing Insurgency
>>339578352
>trying to spin up a reason for others to get involved implys motivation behind the war
Things are spun up all the time by factions to bring others in to help their side.
>>339577506
They didn't keep them, they had them at the start, didn't join the confederacy and abolished it before the end of the war.
Will it have a leMat and if so I hope the shotgun is functional. Was cucked so hard in Red Dead without the shotgun, that's like half the cool factor of that gun
>>339578419
It doesn't matter if it's right leaning is my god damn point. Not only that but that's a shit free "college" program even I signed up for.
>>339578525
I mean, there's numerous other reasons, but you can't try and define a war in one way and then claim it wasn't about that. It doesn't work that way.
The south itself tried to frame the war around slavery.
>>339577930
>>339577998
Lmao you guys are retarded there was no proof of not being represented the first confederate states were formed after Lincoln one the election with almost 0 southern support (the north had a much large population it was a completely fair election) Lincoln was a known abolitionist But he did not want the the states to not be unified so he promised not to abolish slavery knowing the practice would eventually die out anyway. The south is full of little pussies that didn't care about Americas safety or potential invasions so they spilt and refused to pay federal taxes (North Carolina being the first of many) Lincoln didn't do shit and then the confederates fired cannons at ft sumner (completely unprovoked but who cares about the people that died at ft sumner right fellas) the north and south went to war and the south got their shit rekt because they're retarded hillbillies probably explains why they're the poorest part of this country still.
>>339578556
>before the end
Yeah because the north had made it into a smear campaign about the south just hating fucking niggers and wanting slaves. It's better to get rid of slaves then lose the entire bottom half of your country.
>>339570206
>tfw it's going to end up being another "this one nigger platoon kills all the evil white men" game
>>339578639
>the representation had to do solely with Lincoln
Gr8 B8 m8
>>339578639
*won
I am also retarded
>>339578556
That's not true. The 13th amendment didn't pass till half a year after the end of the civil war. Even Lincoln has stated that he didn't give a shit about the slaves or black people
>>339578594
You gonna actually argue any of the points brought up rather than the source itself?
>>339576785
How many laps does your logic run in single race?
>>339578618
That's ultimately just a tactic however to try and drum up support from wealthy people. If your wealthiest people own slaves then are you going to try and not reel them in?
>>339578639
So the war was not about slavery, right?
>>339578881
No it wasn't. The Confederacy legally seceded. The north was interested in preserving the union and maintaining federal power so they began taking hostile actions against a now foreign power.
>>339578735
I don't have to. It literally starts with. "All deviating thought is because people don't want to feel guilty." I'll watch it though and come back in a second just because this actually may have value. Seriously though saying it's right leaning and that makes it to where there is no argument paints you as a fucking idiotic piece of fucking shit.
>>339578881
No Curtis it was about slavery like I said Lincoln was known abolitionist southerners were already pissy that the abolishment of slavery was a very popular idea at the time Lincoln was very popular for being strongly against slavery that's why southerners were so fucking pissy like you are now it was the final straw in their eyes they saw it as a direct attack on their fucked up way of life even though it was a completely fair election
>>339578815
I mean I completely ignored the fact that all secessions specifically talked about the rights to hold slaves and the "plight of the slave holding states" on top of the fact that even at the time most people believed the war was being fought around the issue of slavery exclusively and focused exclusively on the south's own attempts to make the war solely about slavery.
>>339575836
>war
>not a natural part of our existence
Back to highschool with you
>>339576817
You too faglord.
Wew lad. Here we are trying to stir up a second American Civil War over the internet.
All you had to do was look away, look away, look away Dixieland.
![lecture-12-part-i-the-civil-war-20-638[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/2LT8fPS.jpg "lecture-12-part-i-the-civil-war-20-638[1].jpg")
>>339579145
>muh lincoln was against slavery meme
it was just a catalyst for him to expand federal power. The Union instigated the war, not the south. The southern states seceded legally, though for shitty reasons. The Union didn't want to go down there and protect slaves but take land and expand power
>>339579041
>foerign power
Literally North Carolina and like two other states refused to pay federal taxes shit it might have been just North Carolina before ft sumner I forgot it's been a long time since 8th grade history when you retards should of learned this shit
>>339579461
They formed a new government and seceded before fort sumter. The Union refused to withdraw troops from Fort Sumter, which was no longer in their territory. The confederacy did a show of force to scare them into evacuating. The union invaded afterwards
>>339578735
> a few people's words define the whole of all people's concerns in the war
I'm sure then that all sjws now define perfectly what it means to be a liberal, sure not a single person fighting in the war who didn't own slaves decided against the abolition of something that didn't effect them personally. Face it, rich fucks where slave owners, to get backing from the rich you have to try and represent them and their interests as well. But ultimately all the support they got from the rich still wouldn't be enough to sway the hearts and minds of all the fuck faces it did making it a supposed extremely bloody war.
I'm guessing there was just a nigger in every house and everyone just loved to have their own pet toby.
>>339579146
Read above
My little toby, my little toby. If you're in the south you just gotta own a black. My little toby my little toby, really don't matter so long as he hears the whip crack.
>>339575836
Guy you replied to here
I understand this.
But it doesnt mean devs wont do it anyways
ITT: Americoons representing their ignorance and their lack of general knowledge even when it is their own history.
Your Civil War was not waged because of Tyrone/Shaniqua ( daily reminder that America is the only country that went to war because of slavery at that time-all other countries had a peaceful transition- draw conclusions from that ) even though abolition was a big "econopolitical" problem for the USA. Your country went to war because of the clash between the form of government as it was originally thought of in the Republic ( small and constitutional in basis ) and prototypical large government that only continued to grow over the years,up to today when it can be rightfully called a Leviathan ( my nigga Hobbes ).
>>339579651
*wouldn't decide against
Its 4 am.
>>339579145
>no under-representation
>Lincoln won with 0 southern support
These statements contradict each other. If they were properly represented, they wouldn't need to put 100% of their efforts towards opposing a single candidate to beat him, and would most certainly stand a chance if they did, as both sides of the country have swing states.
The main component of the American civil war was because of different cultures between the north and the south. Along with the north having a much bigger population so the south was becoming disenfranchised in American politics.
It's no different than the Irish and the British, except the British won instead of the Irish.
>>339570206
Just play Darkest of Days.
Shit is SO cash.
>>339579614
>show of force
>murdered innocent soildiers at ft sumner completely unprovoked after the confederacy already began seizing federal property with no push back from the U.S government at all
>U.S government sets up peace talks after southern states start storming us governments said property
>in response to peace talks they murder people
>Southerners are the good guys in your eyes
>>339577930
>>339577998
It's like you never read any of the Declarations of Secession, they're primary complaint about rights is about rights to own slaves
"Those States have assume the right of deciding upon the propriety of our domestic institutions; and have denied the rights of property established in fifteen of the States and recognized by the Constitution; they have denounced as sinful the institution of slavery; they have permitted open establishment among them of societies, whose avowed object is to disturb the peace and to eloign the property of the citizens of other States. They have encouraged and assisted thousands of our slaves to leave their homes; and those who remain, have been incited by emissaries, books and pictures to servile insurrection. " - South Carolina
"proclaiming the debasing doctrine of the equality of all men, irrespective of race or color--a doctrine at war with nature, in opposition to the experience of mankind, and in violation of the plainest revelations of the Divine Law." - Texas
They go on like this, and if you look at the period around it the primary strain on relationships was that of slavery. Even the claim about representation is flawed, because the South wanted representation of slave states to be equal with free states, the North didn't (hence the creation of Maine, etc.)
>>339577214
That being said, the South wasn't completely unprovoked. Though on the front of Slavery, Lincoln stated multiple times that he had no problem with slavery where it existed (and therefore secession could be arguably seen as unprovoked) the issue of forts such as Fort Sumter shows the North provoking the South to fire the first shots of the war.
>6 whole weapons tied to various tiers of pledges in the game
What a shitty practice.
>>339580149
>murdered innocent soildiers at ft sumner
Stopped here since you apparently are retarded.
Literally no one died at fort sumter except 2 union soldiers that blew themselves up a while after the battle ended and surrendered to evacuate
>>339570558
Did not Winchesters use what was really a pistol ammunition at the time? Comparable to .357 Magnum or so.
>>339580157
>the words of a few representatives is the words of the entirety of the people
Once again, just because those groups tried to reel in support of the upper southern class doesn't mean that that's the concerns of all southerners that participated in the war. I guess now all liberal want to have bulls fuck their gf on top of them because a few representatives said so. Seriously learn how politics work, you need the support of the upper class so in many cases you will represent their concerns, if you don't then there is no reasonable way to get backing even if your concerns personally have to do with the other classes. Go learn what a representative actually is and how it functions well.
>>339577506
>>339577469
Literally contradicting your own arguments,
>traitoring from a country taking away your rights is bad
"Rights" clearly meaning "owning people."
I love how these arguments always derail, "muh states rights."
Well, rights to what?
Slaves.
>>339580620
Aren't you southerners a bit cucked and stunted by the fact that your states rights jargon is just a cover for your old guard boys network to promote their personal racism while starving and pushing your white poor folk down into being nothing better than the niggers they once owned? So they're race-traitors whose propaganda you regurgitate while they treat you like niggers of the old days.
>>339580620
>The people in power who make important decisions and declare the war are irrelevant when trying to determine why the war broke out
As a general rule, yeah, Southerners were angry about a lack of representation and rights, which is understandable considering how few voted for Lincoln (Lincoln didn't even appear on the ballots in some states) and he still won. Stuff like that would be important to figuring out why the everyman would be willing to fight for the South (and the Southern soldiers were famously pretty good, especially in the first couple years of the war), but the argument was about what the war is over, and the war was declared by the upper classes who make the decisions.
>>339580791
>defaulting to ad hominem and assuming I'm a southerner because you can't win an argument
Shows how well you've actually come to understand /b/ argumentation from experience I guess
Go home
>>339580791
>>traitoring from a country taking away your rights is bad
That goes both ways considering the 10th amendment protects states rights. It then devolves into the definition of people, which back then everyone had very different views on who is and isn't people.
Regardless, it was the Union that was the aggressor. The Confederate States seceded legally. The war is due to the Union's bid for more federal power and to retain territory.
>>339580883
People keep talking about how the South was "underrepresented," but, underrepresented on which issues? What issues were the North steamrolling them on?
Besides that, I've never seen one of these "Civil War wasn't about slavery" revisionists give a good account of why there was so much tension surrounding the Western Territories, and why there was militia fighting in Kansas prior to the Civil War.
>>339580883
>implying I'm saying they are irrelevant and that I'm not just saying the whole thing was solely about slavery
Faggot, if I'm saying that they had to work for the upper classes interest while not actively dismantling their own power then I'm not saying that they where irrelevant. I'm saying these issues are multilayered things. It's why there are history buffs over this one specific event. Also faggot, the representatives aren't the people who solely make the decisions. If your leader told you to kill yourself would you? Is there no such thing as impeachment or overthrowing a leader? Are you implying that the everyman didn't have a fucking choice and couldn't reasonably understand simple things such as backing the wealthy to get their fucking support?
>>339581207
*wasn't
As stated earlier it's 4 am and I'm phone posting. sorry for the lack of checking on autocorrect fuckups.
![2000px-ElectoralCollege1860.svg[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/BqwQtje.png "2000px-ElectoralCollege1860.svg[1].png")
>>339581072
This for one. Even if the south's vote included tennesee kentucky, and virginia, they still would have lost to the north
>>339581416
Okay, but deciding the president isn't in itself an issue. What about the president upset them so much? Also, dare I say it, this just shows that the three-fifths compromise wasn't a long-term solution.
>>339581540
To quote the declaration of secession of South Carolina "the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery"
>>339581072
It looked something like this and there was absolutely no way for the South to ever win, both houses too, since the North had a bunch of tiny states like RI, VT and NH.
>>339581540
>Okay, but deciding the president isn't in itself an issue.
Deciding the president is always an issue. People get irrationally pissed about this even to this day. Of course this is not the only issue, just one of the most easily shown.
>>339581761
People don't like it when a president gets elected who they perceive as having beliefs incompatible with their own. So far all that's been established is 1. the northern states had population growths such that even the three-fifths compromise wasn't enough to compensate, and 2. people in the southern states didn't like President Lincoln for some reason or other. The defenders of the South have yet to zero in on what it was about Lincoln that southerners didn't like, or what "underrepresentation" meant in practice. The issue of Bleeding Kansas has been ignored completely, but then I can't really blame them for not tackling such an incredibly inconvenient point.
>>339581648
>accepting everything in politics at face value.
I guess we where really looking for weapons of mass destruction
>>339581950
From what's been shown obviously it's about the destabilization of southern economics that would be brought in with abolition. So thenpr I blem wasn't directly with slavery itself but the impact on its economic state
>>339582346
Phone posting while playing rocket league is horrible.
>>339576992
lol no. yuppies from the coasts are taking over the south
>>339582346
Oh and also with the present showing of how they have no power the succession was also something they figured it was time to do so they could still have a say in how things where ran for them on a federal level.
>>339582608
>>339582346
\thread
The civil war was mostly about slavery, but the north had a lot of biased trade, infrastructure, and economic policies. Industrialists in the north made sure almost all the roads, railroads, and investments happened in the north, and they wanted to force the south to sell cotton to them as cheap raw material instead of allowing the exporting it to countries like britain that would pay more. The south had tried to shift away from agriculture and industrialize earlier but it was impossible to compete due to the north's huge headstart. If slavery hadn't been an issue, the war STILL would have occurred because Southerners were a bunch of unruly, tax evading dicks (as were the founding fathers) that were getting backed into a corner, but it would have been later. Lets stop pretending that white people loved us and decided to swoop in and save us because it was the right thing to do, that never happens.
>>339583959
>us
WE
>>339584113
WUZ
>>339584134
KINGZ
>reminder that the south controlled the federal government for decades before Lincoln was elected
>reminder that the fugitive slave act was the greatest violation of states rights in history
>reminder that the confederate constitution forbid its own states from ending slavery
>reminder that that the reasons for independence that were given focused entirely on slaver
>reminder that the war started when south carolina tried to sieze federal property by force
>reminder that the south aas so backwards that they couldbt even use all their cotton to make enough uniforms for their troops
>reminder that the confederacy had to fight constant insurgencies againt themselves
>reminder that the confederacy tried to bully england and france onto their side by holding their cotton hostage, when both cointries had large contton reserves and Egyptian and indian cotton were taking off
Texan/Virginian here, the confederacy was fucking retarded
>>339584458
>I don't know anything about economic stability and how the above comment on how the south was forced to sell to the north at lower prices would interact with the new dynamic of said sellers who where getting a low profit already now having to pay their workers money they don't have as thus destroying any sense of stability for the south.
