... You see the word 'Police' and think 'Militia', don't you?
I see "police" and think "they're gonna end up being shot at eventually", which means they ought to dress in a way that doesn't make it
easier to be shot at.
so, reading through this conversation, so far as I can see, what
@Crimson Doom is saying seems to boil down to 'superman should be like batman' which shows a severe misunderstanding of who and what superman is. something that might be familiar to worm fans is the concept of 'hot' and 'cold' capes (the ones from India) which is apparently the attitude of DC, too. the 'batman' persona and the methodology Bruce uses it with are intended to strike fear into the hearts of his enemies and leave them wondering if he'll turn up at any moment by letting him hide in the shadows. civilians generally won't even know batman's nearby unless he appears to save them or something.
compare that with superman; his goal isn't to scare his opponents or to hide because he's a very different type of superhero. 'superman' is intended to reassure civilians; he can fly around wearing bright colours and show people that they're safe by way of his presence.
what it comes down to and the reason why the costumes that artist made aren't great designs is that they missed something when they said "We're fighting
evil, not passing out game tokens at chuck E cheese." about the design of supergirl's costume. it's
literally true, sure, but 'hot' type superheroes like superman himself
are essentially mascots meant to stand out to and from the crowd. that's what people mean when they say that they're symbols.
I understand who and what Superman is, thanks very much, but that doesn't mean he should be making it
easier for people to hit him. Man of Steel is a good Superman costume to me, because at least it uses muted colors and cuts out the yellow almost entirely.
Because helps ensure no friendly fire, makes communication and chain of command clear, and for every one that dies, three more can take their place.
But that works on the assumption that the purpose of the battle is to kill/defeat all the enemy, rather then kill the commoners and capture the nobles for money and glory.
And there is a military situation where being noticeable is important even in modern warfare: bait/distractions.
I'm not sure how making it easier for the
enemy to shoot you is worth minimizing friendly fire. You're dead either way.
I've conceded chain of command as regards old-time warfare, but superheroes are in the modern age and have no excuse.
If three more commanders could take their place that easily, killing commanders wouldn't be so effective.
It's a
battle. Political rivals could be looking to assassinate you in a way that gives them an immediate scapegoat, just for one.
You place way more value in the life of an individual when compared tot he unit than most militaries dude.
A random individual, no, but the
commanders, yes. They're responsible for doing the strategy that the rank and file can't, so they had better damn well not get themselves killed.
Bright uniforms and fancy hats are because the risk of being killed by random fire is far less significant than the absolute need to be able to command and control whatever part of the battalion your given officer is in charge of, communicate and coordinate with the others and the overall commander, and allow messengers to find them despite the chaos and smoke. Even the basic infantry need uniforms and fancy hats if you want them to be able to figure out where they should be. And flags.
Sharpshooters? You've got arguably a good two hundred years of firearm formations as your main infantry before their threat became a more important issue for officers than having their unit be able to function, and when this happened, they adapted. Militaries tend to adapt, and base their fancy hats and formations on what works.
But no, I'm sure everyone was deeply stupid and more concerned with fashion than winning wars.
(ok they were also often heavily concerned with fashion, but)
See, I'm fine with not-dumb uniforms, but the
hats are just... ugh, so
dumb! The only consolation is that if
everyone's wearing them, rather than just the commanders like I thought, then at least you don't stand out as much.
In addition to the battlefield communication aspects that the thread has gone over ad nauseum... The shako, which is probably what you're referring to, was actually substantially better protection than the leather caps it replaced. Metal helmets existed, yes, but they weren't in common use because they're heavy and expensive and in warfare of the time a shako was just as effective for the hits you were likely to take.
I don't consider better armor that screams "shoot me" to be better armor.
That's not right at all. Just because YOU can accelerate that fast without hurting yourself doesn't mean you can accelerate someone ELSE that quickly without hurting THEM. Congratulations; if you had taken the bullet, the intended victim would have been fine, but now they've just been unexpectedly body-checked by a superhero.
And
I'd be dead and unable to save the
next victim. And this is preferable somehow? Unless you run the risk of killing the victim yourself (which is possible for some heroes, I'll concede), you don't have to take the damn bullet for them; moving them out of the way is superior.
