unit sizes

[daidojisan]

I was wondering, the confederacy tended to organize their forces in rather large groups compared to the union, so that a confederate division was often nearly as large as a union corps. Will this in any way be reflected in the game? like by limiting the maximum allowed building size of a union division compared to a confederate one ?

[Chris0827]

That's mostly a Myth. A.P. Hill's Division was as large as 17,000 men at one point but Confederate Divisions were usually not much larger than Union ones.

[daidojisan]

That's mostly a Myth. A.P. Hill's Division was as large as 17,000 men at one point but Confederate Divisions were usually not much larger than Union ones.

But at Gettysburg the union brought in 7 corps some 80000 men compared to the south's three corps of 70000 men. if confederate divisions were not considerably larger then those of the north how could this be? Aspecially since both the north and the south tended to both have three divisions to a corps (at gettysburg at least ).



Oops posted this whole thread in the wrong directory, belongs in headquarters, sorry

[Chris0827]

The Army of the Potomac had 104,256 men present for duty the day before Gettysburg and the enlistments of more than 10,000 men had expired in the previous month lowering their strength. Two of the Union corps only had 2 divisions. Confederate Divisions at that battle were larger but nowhere near the size of a Union corps. The confederates usually had more brigades in a divisons so on average they were somewhat larger but not to the extent that you think.

[Spruce]

take a look at Take Command second Manassas game, there they did detailed research on OOB's and yes AP Hill's ligth division is the biggest division IIRC (about 9300 soldiers), there are some Union divisions that only have 2000-3000 soldiers ... where the average confederate division is about 5000 soldiers.

so yes, confederate divisions are roughly taken bigger in size compared to Union divisions

[Chris0827]

What Union Divisions have 2-3 thousand men?

[Queeg]

I think it also depended somewhat on the theater of the war. Divisions in the Army of Northern Virginia probably generally were larger than their Union counterparts. I'm not sure that was usually the case in the West, however.

[daidojisan]

Looked up some information on combat formations during the civil war here are some statements

[color="RoyalBlue"]Corps: Usually composed of two or three divisions and totaling from 10,000 to 20,000 with Confederate corps usually considerably larger than Union corps whose brigades and divisions ran to smaller size.

Divisions: Usually composed of two or three brigades and ranging from 3000 to 7000 among Union forces, from 6000 to 14,000 for Confederates.

Brigades: Composed of two or more regiments and varying from 800 to as many as 3000 (with Union brigades generally about half the size of Confederate units).[/color]

here is one more

[color="RoyalBlue"]On the division level, a Confederate division could be larger than its' Union counterpart.
The reason for this was a better organizational development on the part of the Confederates who would fill existing regiments with new recruits rather than creating new ones as the Union frequently did when attrition occurred. In the Confederate armies major generals commanded divisions, for the most part. In the Union armies a brigadier general could command a division.[/color]

So i would conclude that confederate forces were historically organised into fewer, larger units than their union counterparts.

I have already read that there is a mechanism limiting union replacements filling up excisting units, so here is my question

As a division is build up from a maximum of 18 regiment/support units (i assume this 18 maximum applies to both union and confederate divisions) the union could easily create larger than historic divisions simply by putting in more brigades (who tend to have fewer regiments then confederate counterparts).

Am i seeing this correctly?

Thanks

[Chris0827]

The confederate Divisions were often larger because they had more brigades. Confederate brigades were not twice as large as union ones. The union Divisions at Gettysburg had two or three brigades. The Confederate Divisions had four or five brigades.

[Spruce]

What Union Divisions have 2-3 thousand men?

just to name a few =

2'nd DIV Sykes 3412
3'rd DIV Schurz 2878

dunno what corps that was, too lazy

[Chris0827]

just to name a few =

2'nd DIV Sykes 3412
3'rd DIV Schurz 2878

dunno what corps that was, too lazy

Does it say what their sources were? Sykes had 3352 men the day after the battle and reported 917 casualties. Their confederate numbers seem a little low too.

It's possible they are using the Present for Duty Equiped numbers instead of Present for Duty.

[daidojisan]

The confederate Divisions were often larger because they had more brigades. Confederate brigades were not twice as large as union ones. The union Divisions at Gettysburg had two or three brigades. The Confederate Divisions had four or five brigades.

Well you do seem to have a point there

Just found this site detailing the order of battle for gettysburg

[color="RoyalBlue"]http://www.bio.brandeis.edu/classes/hist150b/battleorder.html[/color]

Also if you check the confederate order of battle and look at the composition of the 1st division of the 1st corps (McLaws's division) it is made up of

Kershaw's Brigade (6 regiments)
Semmes's Brigade (4 regiments)
Barksdale's Brigade(4 regiments)
Wofford's Brigade (5 regiments)

plus an additional 4 batteries of artillery

Would 19 regiments plus artillery not conflict with the size limit of 18? how is this handled?

Thanks

[Chris0827]

Regiments would be combined. Even newly formed regiments would have men absent from duty and rarely came close to full strength unless on garrison duty away from the fighting.

[Spruce]

Does it say what their sources were? Sykes had 3352 men the day after the battle and reported 917 casualties. Their confederate numbers seem a little low too.

It's possible they are using the Present for Duty Equiped numbers instead of Present for Duty.

I said there are some Union divisions that had 2.000 - 3.000 soldiers. Off course they had bigger ones too. I don't know what they are using as a source of information.

But playing TC2M I got the impression some Union divisions might be very small compared to confederate average size.

Let's put it statistical - I think the average size is nearly the same - but the variation is much higher for Union divisions.

[Chris0827]

Maybe they would've kept more detailed records if they knew we would be talking about it nearly 150 years later.

[Director]

Standard sizes for units:

Regiment: 800 to 1000 (brand new)
Brigade: 3200 to 4000 (4 regiments)
Division: approx 8,000 to 12,000 (2 or 4 brigades)
Corps: Two or more divisions plus attached units (cavalry, artillery)

What happened was this:

In training a regiment might lose 25% to 50% of its strength to disease, physical problems, desertion. Even a 'new' regiment rarely exceeded 600-800 men after training camp. With combat losses, it was not unheard-of for a regiment to get down to 150-200 men (if it didn't disappear completely). Union practice was to form new units and amalgamate old ones; Confederates were better at sending reduced units to the rear and recruiting them back to strength (not always possible, as with Maryland, Kentucky and Tennessee units).

Brigade 'should' have four regiments. This could be anything from 450 men to 4000 although the extremes are not likely.

'Formal' divisional structure could be two or four brigades but this varied; Confederates liked four but sometimes had three or five. Steele's operations in Arkansas, for example, had two Union divisions with about 3300 men apiece (as he said, the sick-list was awful). Confederates tended to use fewer, bigger units (more 'punch') and also DID count lightly-wounded as present-for-duty; Union did NOT count those men and so totals appear lower.

'Corps' was two or more divisions plus other units and, in Napoleonic fashion, could be added to or have units taken away depending on what the Corps was going to be doing. Some Union corps had barely the strength of a division after Gettysburg; at least one Confederate division (Pickett) had little more than a few hundred men. Within hours after the battle, stragglers and lightly-wounded returning to the ranks would have significantly increased this total.

The only accurate thing you can say is that there are no truly accurate figures for any army, battle or date in the Civil War. There is probably an example (or counter-example) for any figure you can name. But ON AVERAGE using 500 per regiment, 1500-2000 per brigade and 5000 (Union) -7500 (Confederate) per division is not unreasonable. Again, there are as many exceptions to this rule as examples of it.