Company Tool Preset Names For Artillery Companies

[Rainbow_Flyer]

So i've returned to take ownership of the 1st New York Battery A, but ive noticed that the name has changed to Pettit's Battery. Now I have nothing against having the battery nicknames for the battery, honestly that is quite cool. But for the 1st NY Bat. A, the name dose not apply, The name Pettit's Battery was Battery B. of the 1st New York, Named after the officer, Capt. Rufus D. Pettit. I Like the idea what yall have going on, but if yall do it this way, may i sudgest adding a way to change the company's name. IE. the 1st NY Battery A. would be the "Empire Battery" (or going by officer's names, Bate's Battery :) ) But other examples would be battery L. AKA Rochester Union Greys

Thanks For Reading,
~Thomas H. Bates

And Also Heres A Sorce
https://dmna.ny.gov/historic/reghist/civil/artillery/1stArtLt/1stArtLtAllMain.htm

[Colum O'Brien]

I have a similar problem. I'm named Simpson's Battery when my Battery was knows as either the First Pennsylvania Light Artillery, Bat B. Or Cooper’s Battery B. I hope they change ti soon it;s confusing a lot of the player base when they try to look for me on the company tool.

[John Jones]

Regrettably we have a similar issue. We are down as Troup's Battery when in fact we should be 'Carlton's Battery the Troup Artillery'.
I have communicated with the Devs on the matter, alas to no avail as yet, but it seems the issue is wider than just our battery.

[Charles Caldwell]

but it seems the issue is wider than just our battery.

Which in our case is a positive, an isolated incident could be ignored, a wider one has to be addressed surely (or I hope so ;))

[A. P. Hill]

To: All Artillery Batteries
From: A.P. Hill

Once again, I find myself having to apologize to the community for my sins.

To begin with, I am responsible for the changes in all the Orders of Battle for the Company Tool, not just the Artillery. I was handed the original database for the C.T. edited it and also appended to it. I worked with what I was given and thought I did the best I could do with it within those confines.
I agree with all of you, it’s not perfect, not yet. But units that were missing have been now officially incorporated into the C.T., and some that were not fully fleshed out were. And others that were errantly placed were removed.

This program, previously nonexistent in other avenues before WoR, (as far as I know,) was a “first of” composition. FancySweetroll, the original coder of the C.T. did a great job for a first time effort of writing something this complicated, and not having any previous efforts of other’s work before him to model from. In my mind he's a genius.
However, after I got working on the rosters and we discussed in great detail some of the things that I considered to be missing information and needed information, we both agreed that when he first set out on this task, he may have been unaware of the enormity of the various ways organizations could and should be presented, and therefore was somewhat handicapped by that lack of knowledge beforehand when coding.

Some of the errant names of commanders could well be a fault of the limitation that was put into the various branches programming due to the handicapped lack of full understanding before. I again apologize for this mix up.

As you may know, most Federal Batteries are arranged in Regimental formations with each battery being an independent company of that regiment, much like the infantry and the cavalry. The Confederacy wasn’t as fortunate to have such an organization except in one or two cases, due to lack of material and personnel, so many times we find Confederate artillery to be a conglomeration of several individual batteries, and no one official military way to define them.
So the mix we have at the moment is going to have to be asked to be acceptable for the time being, please.
So as you can see, programming for both Union and Confederate artillery may have to differ from each other as well, and not only be different than the infantry setup. It may be multiple databases may need to be created if we can’t work all the data into one.
It’s just that space was not provided to display all the information as you the players would prefer on the public pages. I am also aware of some misplacements of battery commander’s names that need shuffled around. This too will be addressed in time, again I ask that you please work with what you have for now, knowing it'll get better in time.

I get the idea that many would like to see, (as examples,) “1st New York Light Artillery, Battery A,” or “1st Battery, Richmond Howitzers” designations on your public documents. And I also understand that when on the field, commanders referred to the various batteries via the current commander’s Surname before the battery, in which case the two examples above become: Wever’s Battery, or McCarthy’s Battery. So when attempting to combine these methods, I was presented with the lack of enough space in the programming to provide all the combinations. But the information is there.

A reading of much history, first person, quoted diaries, and the like, as well as various battle maps, provide the adequate defense for the Surname of the battery commander preceding the Battery designation, and not the official military designation.
Very rarely do you read a history where a commander, when asking for the nearest battery, was presented with the full military designation “1st Pennsylvania Light Artillery, Battery F.” It was more often, and quite literally, provided in terms of “Matthew’s Battery.” The reason being, the commander already knew that Matthew commanded the 1st Pennsylvania Artillery, Battery F, from the relationship they would have by being brigaded together by higher command and formation of the armies.

Again, I ask that you not rely entirely upon unit histories. Unit histories, while informative and beyond doubt true of the organizations actions, are considered somewhat biased in its military descriptive designation or presentation, of the organizational name.

As has been suggested already, the C.T. will be revisited for editing and modifying. Yeah it’s going to be a while before the C. T. gets a re-visitation due to work out the foibles, or to even get FancySweetroll to release his original programming so it can be modified outside of his personal attention and then re-presented for approval before releasing to the community.

But I assure you as things move on and time becomes available or permission is granted, the C.T. will see a visitation and a restructuring. The C.T. is a living document, it’s not cut and dried. I will also assure you that your equipment when it is in that state where it can be player controlled, will be labeled, and lettered properly. But that time is not now.

So I ask for patience and understanding. Thank you.

Respectfully
Powell

[Charles Caldwell]

Thank you General.

[John Jones]

Thank you General for taking the time to explain at length.

[Colum O'Brien]

Thanks, as stated Simpson was commander of Battery A I believe but Cooper was in command of Battery B so hopefully in the future we can regain the name in the future. :D

[McMuffin]

To: All Artillery Batteries
From: A.P. Hill

Once again, I find myself having to apologize to the community for my sins.

To begin with, I am responsible for the changes in all the Orders of Battle for the Company Tool, not just the Artillery. I was handed the original database for the C.T. edited it and also appended to it. I worked with what I was given and thought I did the best I could do with it within those confines.
I agree with all of you, it’s not perfect, not yet. But units that were missing have been now officially incorporated into the C.T., and some that were not fully fleshed out were. And others that were errantly placed were removed.

This program, previously nonexistent in other avenues before WoR, (as far as I know,) was a “first of” composition. FancySweetroll, the original coder of the C.T. did a great job for a first time effort of writing something this complicated, and not having any previous efforts of other’s work before him to model from. In my mind he's a genius.
However, after I got working on the rosters and we discussed in great detail some of the things that I considered to be missing information and needed information, we both agreed that when he first set out on this task, he may have been unaware of the enormity of the various ways organizations could and should be presented, and therefore was somewhat handicapped by that lack of knowledge beforehand when coding.

Some of the errant names of commanders could well be a fault of the limitation that was put into the various branches programming due to the handicapped lack of full understanding before. I again apologize for this mix up.

As you may know, most Federal Batteries are arranged in Regimental formations with each battery being an independent company of that regiment, much like the infantry and the cavalry. The Confederacy wasn’t as fortunate to have such an organization except in one or two cases, due to lack of material and personnel, so many times we find Confederate artillery to be a conglomeration of several individual batteries, and no one official military way to define them.
So the mix we have at the moment is going to have to be asked to be acceptable for the time being, please.
So as you can see, programming for both Union and Confederate artillery may have to differ from each other as well, and not only be different than the infantry setup. It may be multiple databases may need to be created if we can’t work all the data into one.
It’s just that space was not provided to display all the information as you the players would prefer on the public pages. I am also aware of some misplacements of battery commander’s names that need shuffled around. This too will be addressed in time, again I ask that you please work with what you have for now, knowing it'll get better in time.

I get the idea that many would like to see, (as examples,) “1st New York Light Artillery, Battery A,” or “1st Battery, Richmond Howitzers” designations on your public documents. And I also understand that when on the field, commanders referred to the various batteries via the current commander’s Surname before the battery, in which case the two examples above become: Wever’s Battery, or McCarthy’s Battery. So when attempting to combine these methods, I was presented with the lack of enough space in the programming to provide all the combinations. But the information is there.

A reading of much history, first person, quoted diaries, and the like, as well as various battle maps, provide the adequate defense for the Surname of the battery commander preceding the Battery designation, and not the official military designation.
Very rarely do you read a history where a commander, when asking for the nearest battery, was presented with the full military designation “1st Pennsylvania Light Artillery, Battery F.” It was more often, and quite literally, provided in terms of “Matthew’s Battery.” The reason being, the commander already knew that Matthew commanded the 1st Pennsylvania Artillery, Battery F, from the relationship they would have by being brigaded together by higher command and formation of the armies.

Again, I ask that you not rely entirely upon unit histories. Unit histories, while informative and beyond doubt true of the organizations actions, are considered somewhat biased in its military descriptive designation or presentation, of the organizational name.

As has been suggested already, the C.T. will be revisited for editing and modifying. Yeah it’s going to be a while before the C. T. gets a re-visitation due to work out the foibles, or to even get FancySweetroll to release his original programming so it can be modified outside of his personal attention and then re-presented for approval before releasing to the community.

But I assure you as things move on and time becomes available or permission is granted, the C.T. will see a visitation and a restructuring. The C.T. is a living document, it’s not cut and dried. I will also assure you that your equipment when it is in that state where it can be player controlled, will be labeled, and lettered properly. But that time is not now.

So I ask for patience and understanding. Thank you.

Respectfully
Powell

Why did you format it like it's actually from AP Hill himself

[Oleander]

Why not have all the units listed from the AoB in the CT and let units pick from that? If they want to rename it they can. Then have a form where they can create units that weren't necessarily there.

[Maximus Decimus Meridius]

there is a small naming error for a battery

1st New York Artillery Battalion was Langners' Battery not Langers

[Hinkel]

there is a small naming error for a battery

1st New York Artillery Battalion was Langners' Battery not Langers

Its an authentic and common mispelling.
The quartermaster of the AoP had a problem writing down german names, so the official records always had these errors.
We of course adopted that error to stay authentic ;)

[Maximus Decimus Meridius]

Its an authentic and common mispelling.
The quartermaster of the AoP had a problem writing down german names, so the official records always had these errors.
We of course adopted that error to stay authentic ;)

you are just looking for a reason not to do your job :P