Legendary Units' Weapons, etc.

[Drex]

BTW, since we have bios on the generals, do we get something on the Legendary Units? I see their names but they don't mean anything to me and I don't always have the time to look them up or where to look them up.

[Hard Sarge]

Drex

pick the unit and then click on the name of the unit as if you were going to change the name (LUs can not be changed)

and the info screen will come up and show you the LU's info

[Drex]

Duh! Great. It probably would have taken me some weeks before I noticed this. Thanks Sarge.

[Hard Sarge]

there is more in the game then most people know, it is just finding all the little tricks, I am sure most of it is in the rules, but they get overlooked when you are looking for something else

[Mike13z50]

Washington Artillery, CSA Napoleons

http://www.civilwarhome.com/eshlemangettysburgor.htm


Reports of Maj. B. F. Eshleman, Washington Artillery.
JUNE 3-AUGUST 1, 1863.--The Gettysburg Campaign.
O.R.-- SERIES I--VOLUME XXVII/2 [S# 44]

AUGUST 11, 1863.

Col. J. B. WALTON,
Chief of Artillery, First Corps.

COLONEL: I have the honor to transmit the following report of the operations of the Washington Artillery Battalion under my command at the battle of Gettysburg, Pa., July 3:

....I placed my battalion, consisting of eight Napoleon guns and two 12-pounder howitzers,

Edit: According to "The Long Arm of Lee", by by Jennings Cropper Wise, the Wasington Artillery Bn had 6 pounders at Manassas, re-equipped to Napoleons by Gettysburg

[Drex]

Reading the manual once is not enough. there is just too much info to digest at one time. thanks for the tidbit Mike.

[Gil R.]

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

By the By, remember on the LUs or Elites units, it was never about what weapons they had, it was what the men had, in a perfect world, you would want to be sure to give your best men the best weapons and place them into the best places for combat, but wars are not perfect and lots of the LU's became that way, while proving themselfs

by standing there ground, when all else ran, by chargeing when the smart thing to do was to stand, to fight on and die, when the smart thing would of been to run and hide

Weapons didn't make the LUs, the men did and there Guts and there Honor and what they gave up

(we got a change in, to be sure that the LU's get a morale bump when they come in, so they are better able to show that trait)

I don't disagree. I just want to be historically accurate in the cases of famous units that were armed with particular weapons. If some famous cavalry brigade had Musketoons, I want to make sure they had Musketoons in the game.

[tiredoftryingnames]

"I like the game mechanic where you can get captured weapons from winning a battle and routing and surrendering enemy troops. Very nice and historical."

I like the idea but I wish after a battle there was a prompt from each unit that could pick up a weapon to ask for permission to swap out with the screen showing the stats of their current weapon and the one they could get. Yeah they get better weapons, but sometimes you don't want the added upkeep cost. I always seem to have units with Minis pick up some european dropped weapon with high upkeep costs and i have to get the Mini again for them.

[Hard Sarge]

ORIGINAL: Gil R.

ORIGINAL: Hard Sarge

By the By, remember on the LUs or Elites units, it was never about what weapons they had, it was what the men had, in a perfect world, you would want to be sure to give your best men the best weapons and place them into the best places for combat, but wars are not perfect and lots of the LU's became that way, while proving themselfs

by standing there ground, when all else ran, by chargeing when the smart thing to do was to stand, to fight on and die, when the smart thing would of been to run and hide

Weapons didn't make the LUs, the men did and there Guts and there Honor and what they gave up

(we got a change in, to be sure that the LU's get a morale bump when they come in, so they are better able to show that trait)

I don't disagree. I just want to be historically accurate in the cases of famous units that were armed with particular weapons. If some famous cavalry brigade had Musketoons, I want to make sure they had Musketoons in the game.

I agree, but as has been pointed out, not all companies with in a Div were armmed the same, so at times it is still a guesswork

[christof139]

A good 'unofficial' list of how units were armed is to look at the old Battleground/Talonsoft ACW games and of course the newer HPS ACW titles. The type of weapon a unit was armed with is very important in these games so I would hazard a guess that this area was researched fairly well.

Unfortunately the types are broken down into basic types eg musket/rifle/shotgun/mixed etc and not by actual make.

Information is contained in an exportable oob text file so you don't have to open up the game scenarios to check, although I had a quick look at Picketts Charge to see if any US units still had muskets by 1863....didn't see any.

TalonSoft equipped the units randomly with small arms, and the games only sometimes have accurately equipped Infantry units. Many units that had SBs have RMs in those games, but overall they are OK because they generally use an overall percentage of weapon types and a random assignment of those weaposn that is permanently imbeded in the OOB. In Chickamauga, Wilder's Lightning Brigade is properly equipped if I remember right. The Arty. is also off in most instances. Easy to fix though, just time consuming. I modded Antietam down to the section and even individaul guns in the CSA and USA Arty. per some good books such as Artillery Hell, and the game was so much more fun to ply, only I didn't save some of my work and my Hard drive crashed, but I still have some left. I believe I might also have some stuff saved for Murfreesboro.

The OOBs are easy to alter in many ways including weapon types, and new weapons can be easily created in the PDT (maybe PDF file, I forget offhand).

You may already be familiar with all this, and are aware of the ACW Cartographer's Office and ACW gaming Club and the NIR (Napoleon in Russia project) led by JM Barbier in France. Lots of helpful info. at these sites for modding, and John Tiller of HPS still has helpful info. and file downloads for the TalonSoft games. Lots of people have done greatmods with the TS battleground games, including the Napoleonics, and I have about 20 Nappy War disks from NIR, including Wavre during the 1815 waterloo Campaign. Fantastic and very accurate maps, unit icons (including Sappers) with correct uniforms, correct OOBs as far as is historically possible, etc.

I like the BMP unit panel icon files in the game, and they are easily moddableincluding adding new units, takes some time though. Plus, the unit sprites that appear on the game screen battlefield are also moddable.

The Sabine Pass scenario at NIR is by me, and I made all the ship icons and stats, and the CSA can have Gunboats in the TalonSoft games. I was the first and only person to do that as far as I know. You have to arm the Gunboats generically because of the greatly varied mix onf weapons that were usually carried on the ships. The sprites for both the USA and CSA are only one type, and I have thought about trying to add some different sprites to the sprite sheet, but this will require some work and testing, and I don't know if it would work, but someone much more knowledgeable than me in the past also considered it and said it just might work. I do have this stuff saved on disk, the Unit.bmp files with Gunboats and Ships, and quite a few people have used my work, it's free.

I had evey class of Gunboat and Ironclad represented, plus sailing ships and Sloops of War etc.

Chris

[christof139]

Problem is FoF uses Brigades, and the Regiments within those Brigades were usually (probably close to 95% of the time) armed differently, and the Regiments themselves frequently had Companies armed differently. So, it's impossible to be accurate when using a Brigade unit as in FoF, you can just try to balance out the mix, and that's what I like about the game's Minie Rifle, as it can represent such a mix. Even the Liege Rifle can be construed to represent a mix of SBs altered to RMs.
 
The Irish Bde. at Antietam was unifromly armed with SBs, but whether they were all the same type and model of SB I don't know, but it doesn't matter, since they were all similar in performance, so the game's 1 SB is good enough IMHO.
 
I have the Arty. understood very well, and could give you my idea of organizing the Arty. into classes, and this is mainly the BIG GUNS, as the game already has a good and accurate mix of Arty. types already, and the 24, 32, 42pdr. guns are just wonderful to see and use, as are the 8-inch Howitzer and Mortars.
 
The Improvised Naval and Fort Arty. to me represent the mix of 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 18, 24, 32 and 42pdr. guns, shell guns, and howitzers that were used. No way nor sense to go any farther with that mass of a mess of varied guns. Down in Texas, even some older Mexican Army and American Army Arty. guns were used by the CSA. Interesting to read about, but with the scale of FoF, not necessary nor practicle to duplicate every blasted gun type used.
 
Chris
 
 
 
 
 

[christof139]

By the By, remember on the LUs or Elites units, it was never about what weapons they had, it was what the men had, in a perfect world, you would want to be sure to give your best men the best weapons and place them into the best places for combat, but wars are not perfect and lots of the LU's became that way, while proving themselfs

by standing there ground, when all else ran, by chargeing when the smart thing to do was to stand, to fight on and die, when the smart thing would of been to run and hide

Weapons didn't make the LUs, the men did and there Guts and there Honor and what they gave up

(we got a change in, to be sure that the LU's get a morale bump when they come in, so they are better able to show that trait)

Many times there was a marked increase in the performance and morale of a unit when it got better or much better firearms. Getting better firearms could provide quite a morale boost, and it seems the game does this to some degree. It seems when I upgrade a unit with better small arms that sometimes its Dispostion goes up and maybe its morale by 0.1 or so. Could be or maybe this doesn't occur due to the weapons upgrade but occurs just because of time passing and the Commander(s) in the container, I don't know.

Chris

[christof139]

You just don't know when to quit, do you?

Neither do you buddy. You don't acknowledge anyhting that others say, and are rather rude about it.

Glad I wasn't in your unit.

Chris

[christof139]

Yes this was vital to the South since they couldn't produce enough weapons of their own. Stonewall Jackson was well know for getting all the booty possible from the field, especially what the South needed most, medical supplies. In the Valley campaign where he gained so much from Nathan Banks that his troops called him "commissary" Banks and again at Manassas Junction where he captured the huge supply dump of the Union Army.

Both sides used captured supplies and weapons. After the Battle of South Mountain, I believe it was a veteran New Jersey Regiment that scoured the battlefield and replaced its SBs with abandoned CSA Rifles. The Kentucky Arty. Battery in Burnside's IX Corps at Antietam used 1 CSA iron 12pdr. howitzer that they had captured in West Virginia.

Both sides had details of troops tha would scour battlefields for anything usable, but it was perhaps more prevalent in the CSA Army. Ammo, food, blankets, hats, socks, shoes, Arty., caissons, limbers, battery forges, ambulances, wagons, antyhing that was usable would be used, or sent to the rear for repair, cannibalization or stripping of useful parts, or scrapping and recycling.

Chris

[Ironclad]

I have just read about the battle of Perryville where union troops were infuriated to find that the departing confederates had stripped the union dead of their clothes/footwear leaving their old garments (often rags) behind. Some remaining confederate wounded suffered the backlash. Both sides tended to do this throughout the war but the confederate need was usually greater.

[christof139]

I have just read about the battle of Perryville where union troops were infuriated to find that the departing confederates had stripped the union dead of their clothes/footwear leaving their old garments (often rags) behind. Some remaining confederate wounded suffered the backlash. Both sides tended to do this throughout the war but the confederate need was usually greater.

This was done during and after every battle when practical.

Please read my previous statement: "Both sides had details of troops tha would scour battlefields for anything usable, ***but it was perhaps more prevalent in the CSA Army.*** Ammo, food, blankets, hats, socks, shoes, Arty., caissons, limbers, battery forges, ambulances, wagons, antyhing that was usable would be used, or sent to the rear for repair, cannibalization or stripping of useful parts, or scrapping and recycling."

Of course the CSA's need was greater as they didn't have a large industrial base and were being blockaded. Point is that in any war or catastrophe people will use whatever they can to help them survive. Sometimes CSA troops were actually better equipped and supplied than Union troops, mainly when the Union troops were on a raid or other operation behing enemy lines. In the 1864 Valley Campaign, when Hunter's Union Army penetrated deep into the upper or southern reaches of the Shenandoah Valley, his troops were living off the land out of necessity and design, and they became very ragged, and hungry, and low on supplies. They were in dire straits after Early arrived to reinforce the CSA's Valley Forces, and they had to skedaddle pretty quick.

Earlier in the war, such as when Perryville occurred, both sides were still a little bit naieve. As the war progressed, and both sides became worn and battlewise, they more frequently used what they could from the dead. Sometimes personal effects were stolen, but many times they were left on the dead. Many of the Union troops at Perryville were still green and naieve.

The CSA Army would have detachments of unarmed and ill-equipped troops that would follow in the wake of an advance to quickly gather weapons and ammo and whatever else they need and then move on to their units. This occurred at Cedar Creek and it seems at Murfreesboro, but many CSA troops were well clothed and equipped at murfreesboro, but quite a few weren't as far as small arms went. One tennessee regiment advanced without weapons, picking up any they could find as they advanced in the rear of their brigade. I think this occurred near the Round Forest.

I am very interested in the Trans. Miss. Theater, and the big problem there for the CSA was not having enough wagons to transport supplies around, and little railroads and river systems that trended in a north to south direction, thus making the transport of supplies from east to west very difficult. Kirby Smith did a fairly good job in partially alleviating the problem, but it was still there in a big way.

The CSA armaments, ordnance, and clothing industries were quite efficient in utilizing what it had, and repairing and converting/modernizing weapons, but as you know it was not nearly enough but it did help a lot, all considering.

The large distances and area involved in the war made supply and logistics etc. a nightmare for both sides.

Chris

[Ironclad]

Thanks I had read your previous statement. My observation concerned the stripping of dead bodies. In the example of Perryville that included individual survivors taking clothes/footwear from a dead enemy and leaving their discarded clothes in a pile next to the body. That made the scene look even worse and undoubtedly contributed to the anger of the union troops; especially shocking for those experiencing their first battle aftermath.

The collection details you described were in operation there too and its certainly true that both sides became more hardened during the war and practiced battlefield scavaging for various reasons - necessity, denying the enemy or personal avarice.

[christof139]

Thanks I had read your previous statement. My observation concerned the stripping of dead bodies. In the example of Perryville that included individual survivors taking clothes/footwear from a dead enemy and leaving their discarded clothes in a pile next to the body. That made the scene look even worse and undoubtedly contributed to the anger of the union troops; especially shocking for those experiencing their first battle aftermath.

The collection details you described were in operation there too and its certainly true that both sides became more hardened during the war and practiced battlefield scavaging for various reasons - necessity, denying the enemy or personal avarice.

Yeah, I understood what you were talking about, stripping the dead bodies and the fact that that would just add to the torment of green troops after their first or second battle. that became accepted to a large degree as the war went on.

That period with Perryville and Richmond etc., Bragg's and Kirby Smith's offensive, is very interesting, and i have read a lot, but still enjoy reading ot the Trans Miss. more. I think that period you're referring to and Murfreesboro may be rather high in my interests now, particularily Murfreesboro, and then Antietam and South MTN., followed by the 1864 Shenendoah campaign, and all the Naval and Combined Amphibious Ops. in the Trans Miss. I bounce around from time to time.

Stealing personal affects, such as family photos, watches, letters, was somewhat discouraged, and those things were used for intelligence gathering, but troops on both sides swiped them off the dead, also gold and silver teeth.

Is That your main interest, Perryville and Bragg's Offensive??

Well, for the last 10 minutes or so I have been looking for 2 books about Murfreesboro that I have recently read and been rereading, and Ii can only find one: 'Stones River, Bloody Winter in Tennessee', and the other I think has a title similar to 'Stones River, a Good Place to Die', something like that. I'll eventually find where the book dissappeared to someday soon I hope. [8|][&:] They are both good books if you haven't already read them or have them.

Have to hit the hay now, Chris [>:][>:][>:][>:]

[decaturkev]

[quote]ORIGINAL: Ironclad

I have just read about the battle of Perryville where union troops were infuriated to find that the departing confederates had stripped the union dead of their clothes/footwear leaving their old garments (often rags) behind. Some remaining confederate wounded suffered the backlash. Both sides tended to do this throughout the war but the confederate need was usually greater.
[/quote

It was probably the Union officers who were outraged. Enlisted folk from both sides tened to be cordial betwen engagements. Sharing and swapping were prevalent.

[Ironclad]

ORIGINAL: christof139

That period with Perryville and Richmond etc., Bragg's and Kirby Smith's offensive, is very interesting, and i have read a lot, but still enjoy reading ot the Trans Miss. more. I think that period you're referring to and Murfreesboro may be rather high in my interests now, particularily Murfreesboro, and then Antietam and South MTN., followed by the 1864 Shenendoah campaign, and all the Naval and Combined Amphibious Ops. in the Trans Miss. I bounce around from time to time.

Is That your main interest, Perryville and Bragg's Offensive??

Well, for the last 10 minutes or so I have been looking for 2 books about Murfreesboro that I have recently read and been rereading, and Ii can only find one: 'Stones River, Bloody Winter in Tennessee', and the other I think has a title similar to 'Stones River, a Good Place to Die', something like that. I'll eventually find where the book dissappeared to someday soon I hope. [8|][&:] They are both good books if you haven't already read them or have them.

No its the first book on Perryville I have read although I have come across details in more general campaign studies. In ACW my preference used to be the western theatre although my interest in the east has been renewed. Presently I am looking at the Confederate counter-offensive in 1862 hence the Perryville book and one on Iuka/Corinth just purchased. Its the same author as one of those you mentioned which I would like to read at some time.