Army leaders are the backbone of armies. Is this statement always true? Under what conditions is an army leader a resource to an army? Do we have other options in hand? We must clear these questions at once.
When Club Penguin armies began in 2006, anyone who established a friend group known as an ‘army’ would be called a leader. However, in the contemporary army world, the definition of an army leader is variable. It is said that army leaders uphold the final decision-making power. But, one must understand that this may not always stand true. Let us first learn about various types of leaders to learn why not all army leaders matter.
Types of Leaders
Type IV: Clueless Leaders
Sometimes, armies may induct a high-posted staff member to the leadership solely to motivate them. However, they do not attest to their leadership skills in doing so. As a result, the army gains a leader who continues the same practices as they would when they were a staff member. It is already too late for one such leader to learn how to lead an event, or how to maintain diplomacy. Sometimes, such staff members might also be clueless about what armies even are! These leaders are said to be mostly unproductive. They add to the number of leaders, but they do not have enough skills to remain at such a high position.
Type III: Meme Leader
Leaders lead an army by role. However, this does not necessarily indicate that a leader is trying their best to support the pillars of the army. Sometimes, an individual asks to be inducted into an army’s leadership promising to provide advice. Moreover, they may lead events without being present in-game to see what is going on in a battle, too. It may be evident that they are in the leadership only for name and fame, or they may be busy with other tasks. They have skills, but they are not productive.
Type II: Serious Leader
A serious leader has months of wisdom to sufficiently lead an army. They have the skills, and they are productive. When we talk of productivity, we include leading and coordinating. They may also regularly plan out events and accolades for the army to sustain by rejuvenation.
Type I: Coordinating Leader
This is a very inspiring leadership role. However, it is difficult to compare this role with any other, because of the way it works. A coordinating leader dictates what has to be executed to individuals at a lower level, such as a High Command (HCOM). Personally, this is my dream leadership role. Furthermore, such a leader would be able to train their staff members to follow their assigned tasks and also have a voice in what they are doing. This is a good option for opinion-building.
Relevance of Leaders
Do army leaders deserve medals for their service? It is an interesting concept, and I am not against it. However, leaders are praised for winning these medals by their troops. Leaders winning medals is not in their best interest, because they would love to see something happening within their zone—the troop zone. This means that they would be more rejuvenated to see fellow troops winning prizes, instead of leaders. A coordinating leader may not be able to win a medal, because they do not actively prove their leadership skills. On the other hand, a serious leader has the highest chance of winning a medal. Clueless or meme leaders have little to no chance of winning any merit for their work. Moreover, army leaders have already lost their troop behavior skills, so they are not perfect either.
Semi-autonomy
If a leader instructs the High Command to become semi-autonomous, then the leader will not matter much. In such a scenario, most decisions would be made by the High Command, and the leader would have lost relevance. A leader only matters if they are the ‘everything’ of an army. For a leader to be relevant, they must do much part of the entire staff team’s work. They must take up a plethora of duties, including recruiting, leading, having accounts activated, declaring promotions, submitting event results to the Top Ten Committee, and so on.
A Democratic Situation
A popular example of an army that conducts elections for inducting a monarch to the leadership is the Winged Hussars. According to WH leader Shinzō, the Hussars conduct elections in which only High Command members (“Szlachta”) may participate to elect the monarch of their choice. In this case, what the leaders have to offer influences the development of the army and the staff team. If an elected leader is of a particular type mentioned earlier in this post, they would either benefit themself or the army, depending on their leadership type.
In conclusion, it can be understood that leaders do not always matter. Leaders should assign tasks to their staff team, but they would have to sacrifice their relevance, only benefitting the army. If leaders are unable to assign tasks to the staff team, the staff team will fail to develop further, but it would allow a leader to be important to the army. If such a leader leaves the army, the army would become very vulnerable to a downfall. What type of leader would you be? Are you relevant?
Fun X Time
Managing Editor
More Information
Hi! I am Fun X Time, formerly and popularly known as Krill 300, or simply Krill. I am currently serving as a Commander-in-Chief at the Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) since November 2023. I have been in armies since February 2020. I am interested in computer science, programming, physics, chemistry, and biology. What about you?