1
Confederates / Re: I am levy from CSA my steam name is CSA_MajGen_Levy
« on: July 31, 2015, 05:20:47 am »
Thanks for the thought Sherman but we have already have encounters with Levy, we know the pain.
Flying Squirrel Entertainment
News:
Over The Top: WWI Steam Store Page
New Game announced! Add Over the Top: WWI to your Steam Wishlist!
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
2
North & South: First Manassas / Re: STRENGTH OF THE CONFEDERATE ARMIES & MORE TAKE A LOOK !
« on: July 31, 2015, 05:16:41 am »
Texas Fielded 37 regiments of Cavalry not 28.
source: http://gen.1starnet.com/civilwar/texmain.htm
Another thing to note is that your battle casualty rates are a bit misleading. For example you mention the first Texas which did indeed suffer the listed casualty rate but that was only for the few companies that participated. This somewhat downplays other regiments like the 26th North Carolina that only suffered 71%, but with the entire regiment participating making them the highest number of casulties suffered.
source: http://gen.1starnet.com/civilwar/texmain.htm
Another thing to note is that your battle casualty rates are a bit misleading. For example you mention the first Texas which did indeed suffer the listed casualty rate but that was only for the few companies that participated. This somewhat downplays other regiments like the 26th North Carolina that only suffered 71%, but with the entire regiment participating making them the highest number of casulties suffered.
3
North & South: First Manassas / Re: Any simple Thursday events?
« on: July 10, 2015, 03:26:33 am »
We are expanding on to another server, give us till next week.
4
North & South: First Manassas / Re: Thoughts about "Confederate Flag" being banned
« on: June 26, 2015, 03:50:17 am »
To clarify a bit the flags removed from the capital grounds were being flown over confederate war monuments. Most former confederate states have similar monuments with many dating back to to 1900-1920 period. When news of this hit the front page many other groups decided to withdraw products or displays of the Confederate flag.
On a personal note I can say the flag is used in many contexts around the south, and that the vast majority are not meant to be racist. It is true that hate groups such as the KKK have been known to fly the confederate colors but more often it is flown by private citizens often as a sign of rebellion and as a big middle finger to the prevalence of the insistence for "political correctness". I do not, nor have I ever owned any flag symbolic of the confederacy but I would not judge someone for doing so, most are good honest people just going about being decent people.
In the past few days I have seen the flag carried much more openly along with the "Come and take it" flag. Most people really don't care but a few seem to have been putting themselves out there and preaching on why the recent events are deplorable and the flag should come back and a whole lot of rabble. The same thing happened when Blue Bell was taken off the shelf's (a beloved southern ice cream for all you Europeans and yanks) and it really isn't anything to be worried about. Truth be told this will probably blow over in a week or two.
As far the argument is concerned neither side is really appealing for change from the other but simply condemning them with one side claiming they are "fighting racism" and the other "preserving heritage" when in reality neither is happening, they are all just making fools of each other. The more we escalate and continue the discussion the bigger fools we make of our nation.
Another item that has come up is gun control and how the shooter obtained a firearm. Initial reports said that the weapon was a full sided 9mm that the suspect had hidden away. The United States guarantees in its constitution the right to obtain firearms for the public defense, a very loose and poorly defined point that leaves room for argument on what they did or did not intend. I feel its worth mentioning that rates of gun ownership and rates of gun control do not correlate with rates of gun related crime; why is up to speculation and your guess is as good as mine.
On a personal note I can say the flag is used in many contexts around the south, and that the vast majority are not meant to be racist. It is true that hate groups such as the KKK have been known to fly the confederate colors but more often it is flown by private citizens often as a sign of rebellion and as a big middle finger to the prevalence of the insistence for "political correctness". I do not, nor have I ever owned any flag symbolic of the confederacy but I would not judge someone for doing so, most are good honest people just going about being decent people.
In the past few days I have seen the flag carried much more openly along with the "Come and take it" flag. Most people really don't care but a few seem to have been putting themselves out there and preaching on why the recent events are deplorable and the flag should come back and a whole lot of rabble. The same thing happened when Blue Bell was taken off the shelf's (a beloved southern ice cream for all you Europeans and yanks) and it really isn't anything to be worried about. Truth be told this will probably blow over in a week or two.
As far the argument is concerned neither side is really appealing for change from the other but simply condemning them with one side claiming they are "fighting racism" and the other "preserving heritage" when in reality neither is happening, they are all just making fools of each other. The more we escalate and continue the discussion the bigger fools we make of our nation.
Another item that has come up is gun control and how the shooter obtained a firearm. Initial reports said that the weapon was a full sided 9mm that the suspect had hidden away. The United States guarantees in its constitution the right to obtain firearms for the public defense, a very loose and poorly defined point that leaves room for argument on what they did or did not intend. I feel its worth mentioning that rates of gun ownership and rates of gun control do not correlate with rates of gun related crime; why is up to speculation and your guess is as good as mine.
5
Confederates / Re: 5th Georgia Volunteers "Clinch Rifles"
« on: June 22, 2015, 03:38:25 am »
How did you get the holes to show up and not just be white space on the flags?
6
North & South: First Manassas / Re: North and South - First Manassas 1.0 [in progress]
« on: June 22, 2015, 03:37:11 am »
He added other cool stuff within a short time, like a "Next Page" button for units.. which could get us to make 30 infantry per faction.. as an example.
Hinkel it's awesome that he figured out how to implement a next page but wouldn't it be quicker and easier to just add another tab or two?
7
North & South: First Manassas / Re: North and South - First Manassas 1.0 [in progress]
« on: June 20, 2015, 03:27:39 am »
I'm just going to leave this here....
8
Confederates / Re: 1st Kentucky Light Artillery Battalion [NA]
« on: June 13, 2015, 09:24:37 pm »If any of you guys are looking for a artillery regiment, then this is the one to choose from!
9
Confederates / Re: McNeill's Rangers [NA]
« on: May 22, 2015, 04:03:57 am »
It was good to see you guys again at the event tonight, best of luck!
10
Confederates / Re: Confederate Division, Union Army
« on: May 22, 2015, 04:02:54 am »
Guys keep it Civil, honestly many members of the UB are quite skilled and I'm sure this is equally so for the new Confederate Division. What it appears from my perspective is that the DA is becoming more NA focused and the UA more EU focused. This isn't necessarily a bad thing but if it gets bad we may need to get together as communities and see what the future holds from there.
11
North & South: First Manassas / Re: Cavalry in NaS 1.0 [discussion]
« on: May 19, 2015, 01:40:38 am »Well, I agree with you, Cavalries are made to be like that! irl, they did use guns on horsebacks, even indians did. I mean they should allow FOH, because this is how it realistic, no matter how "OP" is it, then be more opperI love to see cavalry used as historically as possible. I think they should eb allowed to fire from horseback and pull out the sabre and cut some heads!
Cavalry rarely ever used those paperweights called sabers. Confederate command felt they were outdated and Union command soon saw the advantage of mobile firepower over death charges. IRL as well the only weapon being fired off horseback was the pistol most cavalrymen carried with them, carbines were highly unwieldy and were difficult to fire even when dismount, let alone on a half ton hunk of flesh. A major issue was that the report of a carbine was much louder thanks to a single exit point and much more powder compared to a pistol, causing mounts to buck their riders already strained by the high recoil and for this reason carbines were rarely used from horseback.
12
Confederates / Re: 27th Horse Artillery Battalion [NA]
« on: May 10, 2015, 03:22:10 am »Yes, because the Confederacy is clearly racist and the Union was fighting for freedom. Union sure was tolerant...
No Racism (Even if we are a confederate unit)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Order_No._11_%281862%29
13
North & South: First Manassas / Re: Cavalry in NaS 1.0 [discussion]
« on: May 08, 2015, 05:00:45 am »
Well since we are all about history here I feel that we should let the facts stand. Each confederate cavalryman was required to acquire his own mount and was paid 40 cents a day for her maintenance and purchase (I say her because stallions are NOT recommended from a cavalry standpoint. They tend to get a bit... frisky and feisty). While this system resulted in a number of loopholes that enabled men to escape duty the overall care of the mounts fell to the soldiers and men having immense equestrian experience could patch up a wound on their mount; not absolutely everyone of course but at least a few in each squadron could.
Ulysses S. Grant was an excellent horseman from his days in West Point was never allowed to ride into battle because he abused a mount, this sums up the Union attitude to mounts quite nicely. Union mounts were, especially in the beginning of the war, god awful. Riders rarely had experience being chosen mainly for their physical stature and despite the pleas of those officers who knew what they were doing a veterinarian corp never sprang up. Massive amounts of mounts were lost to neglect and abuse with inexperienced riders taking the reigns and finding themselves in over their heads.
So if you ask me the superior horsemen (the CSA) should be able to patch up their mounts with a specialized rider. This wont break the game as they ride light horses that can easily be dispatched with a single shot but will highlight their mounted talents and help offset the equipment advantage the Union has in general.
Ulysses S. Grant was an excellent horseman from his days in West Point was never allowed to ride into battle because he abused a mount, this sums up the Union attitude to mounts quite nicely. Union mounts were, especially in the beginning of the war, god awful. Riders rarely had experience being chosen mainly for their physical stature and despite the pleas of those officers who knew what they were doing a veterinarian corp never sprang up. Massive amounts of mounts were lost to neglect and abuse with inexperienced riders taking the reigns and finding themselves in over their heads.
So if you ask me the superior horsemen (the CSA) should be able to patch up their mounts with a specialized rider. This wont break the game as they ride light horses that can easily be dispatched with a single shot but will highlight their mounted talents and help offset the equipment advantage the Union has in general.
14
North & South: First Manassas / Re: Cavalry in NaS 1.0 [discussion]
« on: May 04, 2015, 04:30:25 am »
Steering us back to the topic without closing off discussion will we have bleeding of horses and if so can we expect a mounted medic to come save the day?
Also not exactly in love with the heavy cavalry in the Beta, while I think a variety of units is awesome the light and heavy horses forced cav to be careful around infantry and the heavy horses just steamroll.
Also not exactly in love with the heavy cavalry in the Beta, while I think a variety of units is awesome the light and heavy horses forced cav to be careful around infantry and the heavy horses just steamroll.
15
North & South: First Manassas / Re: North and South - First Manassas 1.0 [in progress]
« on: May 03, 2015, 09:15:06 pm »
Hinkel if it wouldn't be too much trouble could you put the .5 download back up until 1.0 is released? It would allow new players to continue to get interested.