There were 800,000 women who served in the Soviet Armed Forces during the war, which is roughly 3 percent of total military personnel.
For example Natalia Kauchevskaja - during a fight she were surrounded by German soldiers and used grenades to stop them, she died in that fight.And how do you think 800.000 women according to wikipedia fight or not?I can swear, most of them saw battlefield as close as soldiers do.
The Soviet Union mobilized women at an early stage of the war, integrating them into the main army units, and not using the "auxiliary" status. More than 800,000 women served in the Soviet Armed Forces during the war, which is roughly 3 percent of total military personnel, mostly as medics. About 300,000 served in anti-aircraft units and performed all functions in the batteries—including firing the guns. A small number were combat flyers in the Air Force, forming three bomber wings and joining into other wings. Women saw also combat in infantry and armored units, and female snipers became famous after commander Lyudmila Pavlichenko made a record killing 309 Germans (mostly officers and enemy snipers).
I do find it strange that people are so hung up on the women in combat thing. It's not like you won't shoot the women because they have boobies... Unless you are exactly that type of fedora wearing tool bag that you think even virtual women soldiers need a knight in shining armor... It's a cosmetic portion of the game, no special bonus for using it or not using it. Same as the prosthetic limbs.
""If you did a bunch of cosmetic things, you might start to violate the canon, right? Darth Vader in white probably doesn't make sense, versus in black. Not to mention you probably don't want Darth Vader in pink. No offense to pink, but I don't think that's right in the canon."
These women were soviet medics. Add women in their historical roles, people aren't against that. The woman in the trailer is fighting with and for the British Army with an amputation, neither of those were accurate or real.
Disney wanted approval on cosmetics that may have been true. But you know what is also true, people want the cosmetics in WW2 games to reflect reality and history, not all the time but they sure as hell were expecting it in Battlefield.
Represent women based on their accurate historical roles and people would be fine with that, Russia used women as medics and snipers. Women don't have to see themselves represented to enjoy a game. Can a man decide to play Tomb Raider, and if so how is that possible if he isn't represented?
No she was fighting with the Nagas against the Japanese in the pacific. The trailer isn't in the pacific, isn't with the Nagas, and more importantly she didn't have an arm amputation while doing any of that.
I have already said represent women in their historical roles, the trailer and what you are saying don't match, that is the issue. If EA wants to claim they are about treating women equally why are they not doing that? They are portraying the historical roles of men and not doing the same for women
She started out recruiting Naga scouts for intel. However once the front line advanced she commanded a unit in the British 14th army, assigned to her directly by General Slim. Her commanding officer was Colonel Scott. She was on active patrol duties, tasked with engaging any Japanese troops they encountered. She was so effective that the Japanese put a price on her head.
As you can clearly read on the battlefield website, the squad shown in the trailer is an example of an evolved squad showing combinations of high level individual customisations, with those customisations being inspired by real world events in the single player campaign.
We already know there is a campaign story based on a real life woman from Norway, presumably that's who is on the front cover. From the presence of mohawks and warpaint I'd say it's a safe bet that there will be a campaign story based on the filthy 13 too. No doubt things like katanas and prosthetics will also appear in the single player campaign, in 100% authentic historical settings.
Then through multiplayer unlocks you can gain access to those historically accurate individual options and combine them in any way you see fit, to create your own personal fantasy WWII hero.
She started out recruiting Naga scouts for intel. However once the front line advanced she commanded a unit in the British 14th army, assigned to her directly by General Slim. Her commanding officer was Colonel Scott. She was on active patrol duties, tasked with engaging any Japanese troops they encountered. She was so effective that the Japanese put a price on her head.
As you can clearly read on the battlefield website, the squad shown in the trailer is an example of an evolved squad showing combinations of high level individual customisations, with those customisations being inspired by real world events in the single player campaign.
We already know there is a campaign story based on a real life woman from Norway, presumably that's who is on the front cover. From the presence of mohawks and warpaint I'd say it's a safe bet that there will be a campaign story based on the filthy 13 too. No doubt things like katanas and prosthetics will also appear in the single player campaign, in 100% authentic historical settings.
Then through multiplayer unlocks you can gain access to those historically accurate individual options and combine them in any way you see fit, to create your own personal fantasy WWII hero.
Like I said she was fighting in the Pacific with the Nagas, not with the British Army in Europe. Why are we promoting only men to be portrayed in their historical roles, are you not for equality? Why don't the developers have the Japanese Army fighting in Europe? Because they weren't there that is why it isn't historically accurate, add her or women representing her role in battles pertaining to the battles fought in the Pacific. Same with the battles fought in Europe add women representing the women and their roles, the Russians used women as medics and snipers regularly, what is wrong with representing these historical facts in a historically based game?
The nagas were not a country or an army, she did not fight for them. They were a small tribe who worshipped her as a goddess (really) who she recruited as scouts. The famous British General Slim added his own troops and equipment to this to form a unit in the British 14th army, which British woman Ursula commanded and saw active combat with.
Multiplayer has always been a melting pot, with a general pool of weapons drawn from all countries for everyone to have free reign with, many of which weren't even used by any armies at al
The Zemi Naga were referred to as Nagas because they came from the Naga hills. I know they aren't a nation/country/army, it was a term referring to them based on the geographic region from which they came.
She did fight with them, her personal choice weapon was the sten gun, which she wore out in action. This is literally directly from the Wikipedia page about her and you can check all of the sources and google and you will see that she did fight with them. It doesn't matter who she was fighting for in regards to my argument though, that the woman in the trailer isn't Ursula Graham Bower and in no way represents what she did.
She was a British and fought on the front line in the British army.
Tell me again which battlefield game has ever been country accurate? Female combatants existed in their hundreds of thousands in WWII. Selbstlader 1906 rifles existed in WWI.
No female combatants are known to have served in the British army in France in the lead up to Dunkirk (although it's concievable that some of the SOE may have ended up in the fight, some of them were absolutely lethal and also in the right place at the right time). And yet you're allowed to choose it for your British soldier in B
No Selbstlader 1906 was ever wielded by an Italian soldier, it was an exclusively German weapon. And yet you are allowed to choose it for your Italian soldier in B1.
Battlefield games ignore country boundaries. The fact that something was present in the era is enough for battlefield's standards, has been that way since battlefield 3.
And sometimes their artistic licence doesn't even require that. See portable one man pocket mortars in B1, which never existed in WWI, they're a complete fabrication yet a standard fixture of B1 games.
Historical significance can be pointed out. Doesn’t in any way alter the fact that multiplayer is a different beast to single player stories or movies, which people keep bringing up. In mp, you can authentic up to a point but ultimately it is the competitive portion of a Video game, there’s nothing wrong with giving the player period correct options no matter how rare they actually were at the time.
Welcome to Summitgist.blogspot.com This is a blog site that focused on all that’s interesting and matters and history event. As a visitor, you are free to participate by sharing, comment, and asking of questions and don't forget minding our policy in regards to whatever things you choose to do. You can also subscribe to our
A place where you can watch real lives leak sex video that has surface online. Don't be left out. Thank you.
.jpg)
%20(18).jpeg)
Comments
Post a Comment