I think the 82nd's glider as a 'first get up' (like the South Staffords), followed by the 82nd's Paras as a second (like the No2 Commando) - Or in all frankness I am personally fine not doing the Airborne, leaving that to another group of chaps and sticking with he doughboys - Any unit, just a change of badge.
Why?
1 - 82nd fought everywhere, especially compared to the 101st
2 - Doing glider infantry means you can 'fit in' if (well, not if but when) there are loads of para's about at a game
3 - Leg infantry look better, sorry but it is a provable fact - see earlier funkometric calculations.
3 - 101st bore me, I like band of brothers but have watched it so many times I go 'meh'. Also the 101st exist in 'zeitgeist'. From the tone of the series to the feel of the games that feature them I would feel guilty somehow if I didn't rub ash on my face till it was a pallid gray, become actually fit by starving myself for a month and stare wistfully into the middle distance in memory of past corporals. That's great if it is what you want, but I do have my commando magazine desires, and the AA feel more appropriate to large 'war cigars'.
Anywhoo, theres my thinkings. And I don;'t even have any webbing yet.
i like this, it works well ive already badge to glider infantry and im going to order another 82nd badge and rebadge my airborne
but my glider will be my main load
I reckon though if you do this and the bossed decide its a GIR day then all doughboys MUST turn up as GIR. (and vice versa with PIR).
Otherwise you still don't have a cohesive group!
(to be honest if it was a PIR day then I'd probably stick to Brit anyway, so its no skin off my nose)
Actually the more I think of it the more I think that making this Inf kit only is the easier option. Then making sure everyone is on the same unit is simply a badge change.
I reckon though if you do this and the bossed decide its a GIR day then all doughboys MUST turn up as GIR. (and vice versa with PIR).
Otherwise you still don't have a cohesive group!
(to be honest if it was a PIR day then I'd probably stick to Brit anyway, so its no skin off my nose)
I would too.
I do think that it would be nice (and practical) to be a 'Doughboys' group, just infantry. Other impressions are better served by the Big Red One, 2nd Armored or Rangers etc etc. All require minor changes, most just sewing.
Yes, Big Red One would be a good second unit and Rangers a good third.
I agree, with 82nd, 1st and Rangers as good unit choices, so does that mean we would be excluding airborne from doughboys altogether then, and let them do their own thing? because the airborne segment is a very large portion of players and us all being infantry still would'nt stop the vast flood of 101st at games (like Husky), and we (infantry) would still be in the minority, what I thought would be a good idea was trying to create a majority instead of a minority with having 82nd which covers both infantry and airborne and still be a unit, despite how much I would love an infantry only group I don't see it being as practical as having an 82nd group, then at games we can separate into squads like at Haggard, whereas if we are all infantry we would be excliding lets face it a very large portion of players.
i too would like the 'Doughboys' group stay as infantry beacause i thought thats what it
was surposed to be just infantry, am i wrong?
Yep, and All Americans could be a new group.
Look, someone needs to just take ownership of this and run with it. There's no point in trying to decide by committee because nothing will ever get done.
Just decide what you want to do and do it. If it's good enough, people will follow.
Doughboys Infantry sounds good. You can then badge up as whatever according to the scenario and go GIR if necessary. Then the All Americans will be able to join you!
Just decide and do. Enough faffing!
I agree, with 82nd, 1st and Rangers as good unit choices, so does that mean we would be excluding airborne from doughboys altogether then, and let them do their own thing? because the airborne segment is a very large portion of players and us all being infantry still would'nt stop the vast flood of 101st at games (like Husky), and we (infantry) would still be in the minority, what I thought would be a good idea was trying to create a majority instead of a minority with having 82nd which covers both infantry and airborne and still be a unit, despite how much I would love an infantry only group I don't see it being as practical as having an 82nd group, then at games we can separate into squads like at Haggard, whereas if we are all infantry we would be excliding lets face it a very large portion of players.
So? They can then form their own group. Either 82nd Airborne or generic Airborne.
You can't please all the people all the time. Do any of you feel excluded that the Dog Company group has been set up?
Course not.
Im fine with us being infantry only if we get a little bit more strict on kit at games, games should be limited to the units that took part in the battles only, ie not 101st at places they did'nt take part like Husky, im also not keen on M42's being worn at bulge games when all you need to look the part is a greatcoat but that would be going too far, it's just these blatant inncauracies just hit you in the face and kind of ruin it for thoes who actualy made the effort, and I know many other people think this.
DT - Doughboys as infantry ought to be the majority with others as airborne a minority. An infantry only (forget the glider thing 82nd thing as it is just an infantry kit rebadged to fit in with one game) group will give incentive and purpose to other players who see nothing but a sea of airborne bods and want to do something different and less predictable.
Therefore, 1st Inf as primary and 82nd as a specialist option (subject to scenario) sounds most obvious to me.
Now then, the question is what is expected of the group, what are its aims? If you just want a banner in your signature then it matters nor one whit what you wear. However, if you want to follow the PBI schema then that requires time and commitment. It's not something you leave to others to do, every member must be active and willing to spend time and money in fulfilling the objective.
I do not think it is too excluding. These groups are optional for those who want to 'take things a little further', or just in a slightly different direction.
Firstly not doing a bit of sewing to have an 82nd badge on at Huskey instead of a 101st (If I read you correctly?) would be a sign to me that you do not really want to be part of such a group. You are not being excluded from the game at all.
It is not about organising the American team, but for people who would like to immerse themselves a bit more in a 'role'. It is also a way for those who want to play as US infantry to work on immersion in game, tactics, to play with commands and squads - rather then walking around Rambo style - and, simply, to badge up the same.
The 'Do we go as airborne or Infantry?' debates that would go on and on before every single game are enough reason to make it one or the other 
. PBI was, so I read, put up to rais the profile of the under-represented, uncool British WWII Airsofter, the Doughboys can do the same for the under-represented, uncool American leg infantry.
They work well on a 'few extras' to portray other units. That is not the case with Infantry and Airborne as the kit is totally different. The variations between infantry units is doable, as is the variation between airborne units. It would feel to make so much more sense, to my caffeine addled brain, to have and Infantry group, and an airborne group - if wanted.
I see your points, I like the idea of a decent infantry only group and I also like the idea of an Airborne goup aswell to help raise the bar of airborne kit and unit cohesion, because thats the only thing I feel can improve, like I have said many times, turn these 1 loadout airsofters into team playing airsoftenactors, which I feel will improve CIA and other WW2 games alot, both gameplay wise and immersion wise, thats just my opinion many people might not like it but there it is. 
DT - Doughboys as infantry ought to be the majority with others as airborne a minority. An infantry only (forget the glider thing 82nd thing as it is just an infantry kit rebadged to fit in with one game) group will give incentive and purpose to other players who see nothing but a sea of airborne bods and want to do something different and less predictable.
Therefore, 1st Inf as primary and 82nd as a specialist option (subject to scenario) sounds most obvious to me.
Now then, the question is what is expected of the group, what are its aims? If you just want a banner in your signature then it matters nor one whit what you wear. However, if you want to follow the PBI schema then that requires time and commitment. It's not something you leave to others to do, every member must be active and willing to spend time and money in fulfilling the objective.
well for one thing i like to see same level kit and uniformaty and what CW surjest 1st inf as primary
our aim is to show a better imperession of a infantry unit
Of course, there's nothing to stop the American sub-groups from doing joint training days....I could certainly run a little fitness course for you all with calisthenics and jogging.
DT - Doughboys as infantry ought to be the majority with others as airborne a minority. An infantry only (forget the glider thing 82nd thing as it is just an infantry kit rebadged to fit in with one game) group will give incentive and purpose to other players who see nothing but a sea of airborne bods and want to do something different and less predictable.
Therefore, 1st Inf as primary and 82nd as a specialist option (subject to scenario) sounds most obvious to me.
Now then, the question is what is expected of the group, what are its aims? If you just want a banner in your signature then it matters nor one whit what you wear. However, if you want to follow the PBI schema then that requires time and commitment. It's not something you leave to others to do, every member must be active and willing to spend time and money in fulfilling the objective.
well for one thing i like to see same level kit and what CW surjest 1st inf as primary
That is exceedingly easy to do, as the change is little more then a badge.
Hi
I think the Doughboys group and a new US airborne group would work well
I would sign up for both
Could the two groups be launched/relaunched together The Doughboy's group + US Airborne group both with new Banners/Signatures/Forum pages?
The two groups could work together as HS suggested. possibly with a CO ('s) in charge of both groups (Webby? anyone? with the knowledge/time etc..?
I would be happy to help in the Doughboys in any way I can, I just don't want to tread on any toes by steaming all reign taking.
I see that Webby's here, he's the man we wait to listen to. 
Could the two groups be launched/relaunched together The Doughboy's group + US Airborne group both with new Banners/Signatures/Forum pages?
Not really Tarpey, groups have got to be more than segregation!
If all you want is a new banner then everything else is academic - it's about doing something for real.
(Heh, I don't know quite why I'm posting here - I play 94th Inf and won't be joining the group, but I will 'help and facilitate' !!)
Well I can say that Webby is already looking for new people to help him head up Doughboys. I had a chat with him about all this this morning...
Personally I prefer the Infantry only concept over the mixed airborne and infantry 82nd. The main reason being unit cohesion.
The whole point of this group has to be getting people to work together in the same uniforms as a single unit. We can't have that if half wear airborne kit and the other infantry kit. Yes they're both in 82nd Division, both were at the same battle, but they were not mixed at a platoon level were they! Hence by nature it ends up being two separate groups. It's almost the same thing as Brits and US being in the same unit. The kit is that much different and specialised.
Stick with Infantry and that is not a problem.
im more and willing to help in any way
