The Sassy Southern Brawler ROGUE Appreciation

[Xelossik]

I thought US Avengers was cancelled in December? Proof they'll be involved?



Disagree. It feels earned. She's been well used these past years, and her popularity hasn't taken many hits like most Marvel heroes.

https://www.newsarama.com/36577-aven...r-details.html
U.S.Avengers and Uncanny Avengers will end at least for the duration of "No Surrender" which will be written by Mark Waid, Al Ewing, and Jim Zub, who say plans for the weekly series have been in the works for nearly a year.
"Avengers: No Surrender" will run for three months, with artist Pepe Larraz drawing the first month's issues, Kim Jacinto drawing the second month, and Paco Medina will take over in month three.

Disagree. It feels earned. She's been well used these past years, and her popularity hasn't taken many hits like most Marvel heroes.

true

[ChronoRogue]

They are probably better with tactics than her. She is beter with strategy.
Still I hope that she will have important role and that she will be respected.

Yeah. Rogue's main strengths in leadership all involve her adaptable mind in battle. Quick decisions, creating opportunities, reacting to an enemy. I'm less familiar with Waid's Avengers but from what I read of USAvengers Sunspot has battle tactics too but excels more so in strategy with long-term plots, deception/manipulation, and good managing of his team. The latter of which Rogue needs to work at.

Yep but it'll be interesting seeing how it all plays out but I shouldn't put our hopes so high. Most events don't really have a defined leadership order or process, especially with events which focus more on which characters they want to showcase than who makes sense for the mission.

[Calaigah]

https://www.newsarama.com/36577-aven...r-details.html
U.S.Avengers and Uncanny Avengers will end at least for the duration of "No Surrender" which will be written by Mark Waid, Al Ewing, and Jim Zub, who say plans for the weekly series have been in the works for nearly a year.
"Avengers: No Surrender" will run for three months, with artist Pepe Larraz drawing the first month's issues, Kim Jacinto drawing the second month, and Paco Medina will take over in month three.

But wasn't US cancelled before this? The other Avengers titles have December solicits, US doesn't. Which makes sense with it's sales. Also, that cover doesn't include any US Avengers in it....

[Xelossik]

Yeah. Rogue's main strengths in leadership all involve her adaptable mind in battle. Quick decisions, creating opportunities, reacting to an enemy. I'm less familiar with Waid's Avengers but from what I read of USAvengers Sunspot has battle tactics too but excels more so in strategy with long-term plots, deception/manipulation, and good managing of his team. The latter of which Rogue needs to work at.

I think that people follows her and that's her true strenght. Uncanny X-men 342-350 (Shi ar mission)? When she became leader of X-men?
I also don't read Avengers main title.

Yep but it'll be interesting seeing how it all plays out but I shouldn't put our hopes so high. Most events don't really have a defined leadership order or process, especially with events which focus more on which characters they want to showcase than who makes sense for the mission.

Yes but Rogue did something in AvX, AXIS, Avengers Standoff. Even in IVX she had many panels. More than majority of X-men.

[Xelossik]

But wasn't US cancelled before this? The other Avengers titles have December solicits, US doesn't. Which makes sense with it's sales. Also, that cover doesn't include any US Avengers in it....

True but
I posted part of the article. Maybe article has mistake or false information.

[ChronoRogue]

Disagree. It feels earned. She's been well used these past years, and her popularity hasn't taken many hits like most Marvel heroes.

That's true I just mean that I think star power is important to keeping a book alive. Rogue is popular but having only one character holding a book up (unless they've already proven it through solos) is not good in the long run. It'd feel more 'permanent' with multiple A listers.

I think that people follows her and that's her true strenght. Uncanny X-men 342-350 (Shi ar mission)? When she became leader of X-men?
I also don't read Avengers main title.

I think that's because the X-Men trust her. The Avengers are still getting to know her and those that do haven't seen the best sides of her (UA vol 1). Duggen did a lot to show how Rogue could be a capable leader, but it remains to be seen if the team will recognize her as the leader they want. If Cable and Deadpool weren't there, I think she woulld've had the same problems she's having now (ie being seen as a outsider despite being leader).

Even within UA, they have other options. Wasp led the main team of Avengers for about as long as Storm led the X-Men during the 80s. She has a lot of experience, so Rogue really has a lot to prove if she wants to keep her position. I think the only thing keeping Wasp from taking control is she's not as invested in this team as Rogue is.

Yes but Rogue did something in AvX, AXIS, Avengers Standoff. Even in IVX she had many panels. More than majority of X-men.

She fought against the Avengers (and beat them) in AvX. Then decided she was wrong and ended up joining their side, it's not a good showing for leadership.
AXIS she was mind-controlled.
Stand-off was good since she broke everyone out, but the conflict was resolved by someone else.

IvX she just argued with Emma a lot. Who turned out to be temporarily out of her mind but... not exactly signs of leadership lol.

[Xelossik]

ChronoRogue :

I think that's because the X-Men trust her. The Avengers are still getting to know her and those that do haven't seen the best sides of her (UA vol 1). Duggen did a lot to show how Rogue could be a capable leader, but it remains to be seen if the team will recognize her as the leader they want.

What about UA vol 2? She rallied this team.

Even within UA, they have other options. Wasp led the main team of Avengers for about as long as Storm led the X-Men during the 80s. She has a lot of experience, so Rogue really has a lot to prove if she wants to keep her position. I think the only thing keeping Wasp from taking control is she's not as invested in this team as Rogue is.

Rogue was leading team with Magneto.(Carey run - mission to find Polaris and other in space).
Wasp would be great as tactical leader while Rogue would be higher.

She fought against the Avengers (and beat them) in AvX. Then decided she was wrong and ended up joining their side, it's not a good showing for leadership.

If Rogue will have equally great scenes in this event (but she won't be leading them) i will be happy.

AXIS she was mind-controlled.

issue s 1 and 2? She wasn't mind controlled. She created plan to stop Red O. She rescued some Avengers. Only nova failed.

Stand-off was good since she broke everyone out, but the conflict was resolved by someone else.

Her team did more than ANAD Avengers. right?
Deadpool "beat" Kobik.

IvX she just argued with Emma a lot. Who turned out to be temporarily out of her mind but... not exactly signs of leadership lol.

sorry sorry
I wasn't writing about leadership but about doing something.

[ChronoRogue]

What about UA vol 2? She rallied this team.

I think they came more because of Wanda then because Rogue told them to. The only one who didn't want to be there was probably Creed.

And vol 2 was a mess for her leadership, Rogue got captured and had to be rescued.

Rogue was leading team with Magneto.(Carey run - mission to find Polaris and other in space).
Wasp would be great as tactical leader while Rogue would be higher.

Magneto has bigger issues with getting heroes to trust him than Rogue does (unless he's leading a radical team). Actually Magneto has good tactics but even worse strategy than Rogue... was Avalon his fault? I'd add Genosha but I don't feel he's at fault for that. He has been exposed to higher positions of leadership though.

It's interesting rating characters relative tactics and strategy. I'm tempted just to create a thread. But if Rogue does have higher tactics, it's not enough to cover for the stability good strategy makes. Trust and confidence are a big deal and Rogue's hothead can get in the way of connecting with her teammates.

If Rogue will have equally great scenes in this event (but she won't be leading them) i will be happy.

I want both ofc. If the books are temporarily gone, they really need to satisfy the need to showcase all the teams with equal panel-time. So that means carrying over current plots and developments.

issue s 1 and 2? She wasn't mind controlled. She created plan to stop Red O. She rescued some Avengers. Only nova failed.

True I guess I underestimated her early part in the event. Still she mostly was just used to beat up the inverted bad guys like Sabretooth and Mystique (which I guess I don't mind) lol.

Her team did more than ANAD Avengers. right?
Deadpool "beat" Kobik.

I need to read it again, the clearest part to me was the UA issue. I thought Iron Man was more involved in dealing with Kobik.

[Xelossik]

ChronoRogue :

I think they came more because of Wanda then because Rogue told them to. The only one who didn't want to be there was probably Creed.

Leading = pushing correct buttons. We don't need to look at details.

Magneto has bigger issues with getting heroes to trust him than Rogue does (unless he's leading a radical team). Actually Magneto has good tactics but even worse strategy than Rogue... was Avalon his fault? I'd add Genosha but I don't feel he's at fault for that. He has been exposed to higher positions of leadership though.

haha true true

It's interesting rating characters relative tactics and strategy. I'm tempted just to create a thread. But if Rogue does have higher tactics, it's not enough to cover for the stability good strategy makes. Trust and confidence are a big deal and Rogue's hothead can get in the way of connecting with her teammates.

Feel free to do this.
For me Rogue is better with strategy and weaker with tactics.
or if You prefer: Rogue is great with general plans and ideas but weaker with details. Even in IvX she understood that war is pointless (and she was right) but she didn't think about details (what they need to do to avoid war).

I want both ofc. If the books are temporarily gone, they really need to satisfy the need to showcase all the teams with equal panel-time. So that means carrying over current plots and developments.

I agree but 12 issues in 3 months? and Rogue usally is doing more in Avengers events(Standoff or AXIs than X-men events). This can be great,

True I guess I underestimated her early part in the event. Still she mostly was just used to beat up the inverted bad guys like Sabretooth and Mystique (which I guess I don't mind) lol.

Yeah but she still did more than any other X-man(or at least she was in top3)

I need to read it again, the clearest part to me was the UA issue. I thought Iron Man was more involved in dealing with Kobik.

She read Deadpool mind and decided that she don't want to be used. ANAD Avengers 8
I think that even Quicksilver did more than Iron Man. He removed Avengers before Kobik used her powers on them in ANAD Avengers 8.
maybe I forgot about Iron Man? I don't think soo.

[ChronoRogue]

Leading = pushing correct buttons. We don't need to look at details.

I think getting captured and needing to be rescued on a rescue mission is a pretty big detail.

Actually I think Wanda would've been fine on her own, she leaves he Avengers and randomly returns on her own.

Feel free to do this.
For me Rogue is better with strategy and weaker with tactics.
or if You prefer: Rogue is great with general plans and ideas but weaker with details. Even in IvX she understood that war is pointless (and she was right) but she didn't think about details (what they need to do to avoid war).

I think I'd need to define what aspects of leadership there are first.
Strategy = goals, plots, deception/manipulation
Managerial = organization, resources, expansion
Teamwork = communication, trust, openness, transparency
Battle Tactics = quick decision-making, adapting, creating opportunities

That's what I had in mind for tactics and strategy anyway. So Rogue is strong in tactics but weak in strategy (because she is honest and lives in the "now"). Also weak in managerial, good or bad at teamwork depending on who she is leading.

I agree but 12 issues in 3 months? and Rogue usally is doing more in Avengers events(Standoff or AXIs than X-men events). This can be great,

Hopefully, we'll see.

Yeah but she still did more than any other X-man(or at least she was in top3)

Sadly that's cause Storm is lately even worse of a leader than Rogue atm. CC is the only one to know how to write a Storm with strong leadership.

She read Deadpool mind and decided that she don't want to be used. ANAD Avengers 8
I think that even Quicksilver did more than Iron Man. He removed Avengers before Kobik used her powers on them in ANAD Avengers 8.
maybe I forgot about Iron Man? I don't think soo.

Then I def need to read it again lol.

[Xelossik]

ChronoRogue :

I think getting captured and needing to be rescued on a rescue mission is a pretty big detail.

and? Rogue needs other people to resolve this small details.

I think I'd need to define what aspects of leadership there are first.
Strategy = goals, plots, deception/manipulation
Managerial = organization, resources, expansion
Teamwork = communication, trust, openness, transparency
Battle Tactics = quick decision-making, adapting, creating opportunities

That's what I had in mind for tactics and strategy anyway. So Rogue is strong in tactics but weak in strategy (because she is honest and lives in the "now"). Also weak in managerial, good or bad at teamwork depending on who she is leading.

Ok. For me
Military tactics are the science and art of organizing a military force, and the techniques for combining and using weapons and military units to engage and defeat an enemy in battle. A tactic is a conceptual action aiming at the achievement of a goal.

Strategy versus tactic
Strategy is the overall objective where as tactics are the specific actions used to achieve the objective.

If, for example, the overall goal is to win a war against another country, one strategy might be to undermine the other nation's ability to wage war by preemptively annihilating their military forces. The tactics involved might describe specific actions taken in specific locations, like surprise attacks on military facilities, missile attacks on offensive weapon stockpiles, and the specific techniques involved in accomplishing such objectives.

and that's why Rogue for me is weak in tactics.

Sadly that's cause Storm is lately even worse of a leader than Rogue atm. CC is the only one to know how to write a Storm with strong leadership.

true but what about panel time? Rogue vs any other X-man in AXIS? or in IVX(Emma had more and who?)

Then I def need to read it again lol.

or me lol

[ChronoRogue]

and? Rogue needs other people to resolve this small details.

Rule number one for leaders should be; don't get captured lol. They're basically the heads of the military, after all. In older times it was more important, but modern times and superhero comics it's different.

Ok. For me
Military tactics are the science and art of organizing a military force, and the techniques for combining and using weapons and military units to engage and defeat an enemy in battle. A tactic is a conceptual action aiming at the achievement of a goal.

Strategy versus tactic
Strategy is the overall objective where as tactics are the specific actions used to achieve the objective.

If, for example, the overall goal is to win a war against another country, one strategy might be to undermine the other nation's ability to wage war by preemptively annihilating their military forces. The tactics involved might describe specific actions taken in specific locations, like surprise attacks on military facilities, missile attacks on offensive weapon stockpiles, and the specific techniques involved in accomplishing such objectives.

and that's why Rogue for me is weak in tactics.

Ah that makes more sense. So a good strategist knows and identifies what needs to be done to win a battle/war, while a good tactician carries out those actions (through their team) effectively?

Superheroes don't really work as massive armies or governments (unless it's SHIELD) but instead as small coordinated strike teams so it's difficult carrying over the definitions. Occasionally leaders like Cyclops or Iron Man head bigger organizations and are given provision over multiple teams and resources but that's rarer.

I guess I'm asking what you'd call these different types of tactics?

For most field leaders their weapons and resources are basically their teammates. Knowing to how to defeat and/or capture an enemy, save citizens, and minimize collateral damage are a leaders goal(s). Effectively directing teammates and knowing how to utilize their abilities to prevent as much damage is how they achieve it.

Then there's the long-term planning involving identifying and making preventive measures against villain teams, organizations, as well as creating safety measures and contingencies for things that could go wrong (lots of enemies who fight the X-Men take anti-psi tech for example).

These two types of 'tactics' seems pretty separate.

true but what about panel time? Rogue vs any other X-man in AXIS? or in IVX(Emma had more and who?)

I don't think any of the X-Men had much difference in panel-time after the early part. In relative, I suppose you could have Rogue in the Top 3 for X-Men but that's not saying much to the over all plot.

For IvX Teen Cyclops (teamed up with the Champions), Wolverine (prevented and interacted with the Nuhumans), Forge (with the machine), and Storm (final decision on deciding to go to war) did more.

or me lol

Pfft, I'll check it out later for clarification.

[Xelossik]

posted by Captain M

"Avengers: No Surrender" co-writer Mark Waid described the series as "half celebration, half wake" for the Avengers, while Jim Zub said the story will be the "final hurrah" of the current era of the team.

As for what's troubling the team, the individual members are experiencing their own issues that they'll deal with throughout the series. For Beast, this means trying to reconnect with his past - specifically his time on the Avengers and his friendship with Wonder Man - and focusing on his scientific prowess rather than his beastly strength. He'll work with Wasp to discover some new ideas that, in Waid's words, will be "essential to the team's survival."

For Beast's fellow X-Man-turned-Avenger Rogue, "No Surrender" is about overcoming new challenges - including one that will, according to Zub, "take something special from her."

Then there's Quicksilver, who Zub said is "in a dark place" in the story, as well as Vision, whose actions as the team's communications hub may draw unsavory attention from "dark forces," according to the series' third co-writer, Al Ewing.

Finally - and perhaps most surprisingly - there's Living Lightning (now just going by 'Lightning'), who will enter the story with a new supporting cast of his own. "He hasn't been just sitting in a green room waiting to get a call all this time," explained Ewing. "He's been off having exciting adventures."

The full line-up of the "No Surrender" Avengers has not yet been revealed, but it will also include at least two more founding Avengers, as well as several new characters, and some unnamed characters Ewing described as "cinematic favorites."

Additionally, Jarvis, the longtime butler of the Avengers, will play a key role in the story, as will Voyager, a new character whose identity Marvel has promised will be revealed on September 29.

ChronoRogue :

Rule number one for leaders should be; don't get captured lol. They're basically the heads of the military, after all. In older times it was more important, but modern times and superhero comics it's different.

Rule number one should be:
achieve Your goals.

Ah that makes more sense. So a good strategist knows and identifies what needs to be done to win a battle/war, while a good tactician carries out those actions (through their team) effectively?

Yes

Superheroes don't really work as massive armies or governments (unless it's SHIELD) but instead as small coordinated strike teams so it's difficult carrying over the definitions. Occasionally leaders like Cyclops or Iron Man head bigger organizations and are given provision over multiple teams and resources.

That's true. I can't argue with that.
but
that's why Rogue would be better as leader of X-man than Cyclops or Storm.
X-men respects tactical leaders(mostly because they are used to them)
X-men needs someone with strategical mind to tell them that working with other is better than living in their school doing nothing(except being villains using great tactical plans).

For most fielders their weapons and resources are basically their teammates. Knowing to how to defeat and/or capture an enemy, save citizens, and minimize collateral damage are a leaders goal(s). Directing teammates and knowing how to utilize their abilities to prevent as much damage as possible.

Then there's the long-term planning involves identifying and making preventive measures against villain teams, organizations, as well as creating safety measures and contingencies for things that could go wrong (lots of enemies who fight the X-Men take anti-psi tech for example).

These two types of 'tactics' seems pretty separate.

I don't know. I don't see why.
It is all about using resources. In my opinion:
Rogue would use knowledge of others or would improvise to solve both problems.

but i think that Rogue is usually portrayed as strategic, introvert, intuitive leader

I don't think any of the X-Men had much difference in panel-time after the early part. In relative, I suppose you could have Rogue in the Top 3 for X-Men but that's not saying much to the over all plot.

For IvX Teen Cyclops (teamed up with the Champions), Wolverine (prevented and interacted with the Nuhumans), Forge (with the machine), and Storm (final decision on deciding to go to war) did more.

yes. they did more.
she has more panels than them:P

Pfft, I'll check it out later for clarification.

[gifted]

Rogue as front and center of an Avengers-centric event cover?!

I know some don't like Rogue not in the X-Men, but we have to agree that ever since she's joined the Avengers, she's had an important role to play in every story since. This is great exposure for her. Especially since the X-Books have been mediocre at best.

[mikeb]

What do you think Rogue loses that is "Something special" to her. Do you think it may be the powers she got from Simon? Will this "Something special" which is "taken", be a temporary or permanent loss? (Maybe if we get lucky, it will be Ol' Remy! :-p)
"