Author Topic: Why not more Cav? (Rant)  (Read 2909 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Incognitoandahalf

  • First Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 129
  • DA Cavalry Corp Fuehrer
    • View Profile
  • Nick: Incognitoandahalf
  • Side: Confederacy
Why not more Cav? (Rant)
« on: August 09, 2014, 01:28:09 am »
In NW there is cav galore. From the lightest to the heaviest all types of cav are included, so why not in North and South? Sure we have dragoons, with a rather bothersome difference in horse health. Why not raiders for the confederates? Or the 6th Pennsylvania cavalry "Rush's Lancers"? It seems that with such great variety of infantry the good old boys on horses should have a bit options. End Rant;

Offline Hinkel

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 1484
  • Confederate Commander in Chief
    • View Profile
  • Nick: Gen_Hinkel
  • Side: Confederacy
Re: Why not more Cav? (Rant)
« Reply #1 on: August 09, 2014, 09:12:03 am »
If you can show me in the order of battle, that there were more cavalry units at Manassas, I could add more. The 6th PA wasnt even formed.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Bull_Run_Union_order_of_battle

People forget, that the mod is called First Manassas and its not about the whole civil war. Look at the units ingame and their uniforms. If the mod would be about the whole civil war, I would have other important regiments and uniforms.. ;)

Offline Incognitoandahalf

  • First Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 129
  • DA Cavalry Corp Fuehrer
    • View Profile
  • Nick: Incognitoandahalf
  • Side: Confederacy
Re: Why not more Cav? (Rant)
« Reply #2 on: August 09, 2014, 02:46:41 pm »
I feel as if your rather diminishing the role of cavalry. Yes at the battle the Union composed a mere 5 companies and the 1st VA was all the confederates could field, I get that. I understand from a purely historical point its not necessary, however from a game play perspective it severely limits the role cav can take. Given good men (Which I admit can be a rarity) the Union cav is tied down to melee assaults because its shooting is crap and the confederates to ranged engagements because their horses are fragile. However imagine the the Union having the US mounted rifles, able to employ completely different tactics and challenging confederate leadership. Or confederates having cav equipped with only pistols, but everyone gets a pistol. New units like these would allow new tactics to be utilized. I understand they weren't at the battle, but frankly accuracy has to take a backseat to game play and adding units that employed later war tactics into the game not only makes things more interesting and attracts new players, it also increases game play variability allowing interest to hold longer and therefore better hold on to the audience that already plays the mod.

Offline Hinkel

  • Board Moderator
  • *
  • Posts: 1484
  • Confederate Commander in Chief
    • View Profile
  • Nick: Gen_Hinkel
  • Side: Confederacy
Re: Why not more Cav? (Rant)
« Reply #3 on: August 09, 2014, 08:58:58 pm »
Okay, I will add at least one cav unit for each faction. Maybe even 2.. ;)

Like partisan ranger with shotgun and revolver or union lancer.

Offline Reznov

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 395
    • View Profile
  • Side: Confederacy
Re: Why not more Cav? (Rant)
« Reply #4 on: August 09, 2014, 09:03:01 pm »
Aslong the no fire from horseback rules on saturday are still counting im fine as a infantry commander :D

Offline William

  • Major General
  • **
  • Posts: 8538
  • What doth life?
    • View Profile
    • Youtube Channel where I upload NW and M&B
  • Nick: CluelessWill
  • Side: Neutral
Re: Why not more Cav? (Rant)
« Reply #5 on: August 09, 2014, 09:05:39 pm »
Okay, I will add at least one cav unit for each faction. Maybe even 2.. ;)

Like partisan ranger with shotgun and revolver or union lancer.
What about Union and Confederate Marines and sailors if you're looking at the whole civil war.
Check out my YT channel where I post NW www.youtube. com/c/CluelessWill
Spoiler
god damn, Anthony is smart, he was able to get the shit AEF to tie with the best reg in the game. The tactical geniusness needed to pull off such a feat is insane. He's the Erwin Rommel of NW.
i always get an erection when i check my subscrptions and see that phresh cluelesswill vid
It won't be FSE developing it, so it will come out!
[close]

Offline Incognitoandahalf

  • First Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 129
  • DA Cavalry Corp Fuehrer
    • View Profile
  • Nick: Incognitoandahalf
  • Side: Confederacy
Re: Why not more Cav? (Rant)
« Reply #6 on: August 10, 2014, 08:32:13 pm »
Naval actions where quite infrequent during the war where as cav started the war (First confederate casualty was a cavalryman) and ended it (Lee was forced to surrender after Union cav cut off his supply). Overall naval units experienced general monotony, and while naval battles would be cool the coding required would be tremendous to get it to a playable quality and isnt really worth the time.

Offline NicolasKiyoshi

  • First Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 204
    • View Profile
  • Side: Confederacy
Re: Why not more Cav? (Rant)
« Reply #7 on: August 22, 2014, 02:04:21 am »
Okay, I will add at least one cav unit for each faction. Maybe even 2.. ;)

Like partisan ranger with shotgun and revolver or union lancer.
What about Union and Confederate Marines and sailors if you're looking at the whole civil war.

If the Union have marines, why the confederates can't?
Hinkel, please do me an favor: add confederate marines and sailors; and also add this cap for the marine's  officer's uniforms:
some more images of the confederate marines: