Differentiate One Regiment from another

[XxPolishPenetratorxX]

Hello,

I am and executive officer (future squadron commander) of the 4th VA, Company E (CAV). Is it possible to look into changing the naming designation in company tool? I have to add the cav in parenthesis because there currently is another 4th VA that is Infantry. I think the easiest way to do it would be to rename companies in the Cavalry from company to troop. It’s a more modern designation, but I think it would help people understand from the get to the difference. Other opinions on the idea? Thanks.

[A. P. Hill]

I do believe the fault to be yours Sir.

If you select the proper drop down you will see that cavalry is plainly stated. :)

8274

[XxPolishPenetratorxX]

I think I did a poor job of explaining what I meant. I know that you can search by Branch, however what I meant to say or describe was this.

Here is a picture of the 4th Virginia Company #, which is Infantry:

8276

Here is a picture of the 4th Virginia Company #, which is Cavalry:

8277

It could just be a thing for me, because as you stated you could break it down by branches in the search to differentiate them, but if they made all Cavalry companies "Troops" like how they made all Artillery companies "Battery," I think it would make sense. Again could just be me though :)

[XxPolishPenetratorxX]

I think I did a poor job of explaining what I meant. I know that you can search by Branch, however what I meant to say or describe was this.

Here is a picture of the 4th Virginia Company #, which is Infantry:

8276

Here is a picture of the 4th Virginia Company #, which is Cavalry:

8277

It could just be a thing for me, because as you stated you could break it down by branches in the search to differentiate them, but if they made all Cavalry companies "Troops" like how they made all Artillery companies "Battery," I think it would make sense. Again could just be me though :)


I do believe the fault to be yours Sir.

If you select the proper drop down you will see that cavalry is plainly stated. :)

8274

I know Mr. A.P. Hill that you are all about historical accuracy (along with the devs), so I spent the past couple of days doing research on this topic.

In the 1850s, Philip St. George Cooke (currently considered the father of the US Cavalry), a Cavalry Officer on special assignment from the War Department in Washington to analyze and assess the tactics and training of the US Cavalry based on his observations made during the Crimean War. His field manual, "US Cavalry Tactics," was originally submitted to the War Department in 1859; it was published in 1860, and revised in both 1861 and 1862. The final version was titled "The 1862 US Cavalry Tactics." Simon Cameron, the Secretary of War, on November 1, 1861 made this the official manual on regulations and tactics for the US Army and forbid any cavalry commander from deviating from the things written inside.

The reason that I bothered to type all of that up...in Article I, Chapter entitled "Formation of a Regiment of Ten Squadrons in Line," he writes in the very first sentence, "In all parades and exercises the companies will be designated as squadrons." From that point on, PSG Cooke only ever refers to companies as squadrons. Therefore, as the manual was made official in 1861 by the War Department, you could conclusively prove that the Union at least called Cavalry Companies "Squadrons." Now in the Army of Northern Virginia, Cavalry names are a little harder to nail down. There were legions, dragoons, guards, troops, and companies that were used to name cavalry companies. Therefore, it the name of simplicity that is why I proposed calling cavalry companies squadrons.

P.S. For taking this company tool post and going all history on it, I just thought it was relevant to my argument

[A. P. Hill]

... P.S. For taking this company tool post and going all history on it, I just thought it was relevant to my argument

My apologies, I didn't research your original comment deep enough, if links are broken they should be fixed ...

Also, in it's current state, the Company Tool is still very much a work in progress as is the game. Expect to find errors. But I now understand.

And thank you for that bit of personal research. :)

I prefer going "all history"!. :)

[XxPolishPenetratorxX]

My apologies, I didn't research your original comment deep enough, if links are broken they should be fixed ...

Also, in it's current state, the Company is still very much a work in progress as is the game. Expect to find errors. But I now understand.

And thank you for that bit of personal research. :)

I prefer going "all history"!. :)

I actually want to thank you. I learned quite a bit of cavalry tactics for when they add the horse!:D