AGEOD Forums

Where do I get information how how many reinforcements to request? Are there any rules-of-thumb about requesting reinforcements or about requesting replacements or purchasing units for that matter? I am reading the AAR's & I do not get a good feeling about having the information available I need upon which to base such decisions. Help, please. Be specific if you can.

replacements

I keep less replacements even than in this example

I try and keep a constant 10 inf replacements, 2 elite , 2 cavalry, 1 each light art & med art. as the CSA, and anything else as i see i need it..( ie, if a headquarters takes a drubbing and falls to low strength, buy a replacement HQ chit that turn..)
Its pretty rare that after a turn I find all my chits used up unless there's been some massive , unanticipated slugfest somewhere.
You do have a calculate carefully when you're doing your purchasing ( specially in mid year)..and resist the temptation to buy units which you then can't get back up to strength after casualties. In fact I don't buy new units at all in the mid year conscription option..

Hi Dale H!

Check out this.

Here you have another interesting link about this issue.

Maybe it can help you. It's a little guide to enlighten you in your first games. It contains very useful tips (about how to form divisions, for example).

Have fun!!


PS: Remember that search function will help you to solve a lot of questions and doubts.

Thanks all. Very good leads. I am getting the impression that it is an art rather than a science.

I recommend them early in the campaign game (to bring units up to strength), and then back off them a while, in favor of building new units. Once that's done, back onto buying replacements. Lots of ways to play this though.

Correct me if I am wrong but the Union really didn't use a replacement system like the CSA did. The Union ground their regiments to dust then combined them with other regiments from the same state. Like what happened to the 20th Maine just before Gettysburg, have the 2nd Maine troop incorporated into their cadre.

Capt Cliff wrote:Correct me if I am wrong but the Union really didn't use a replacement system like the CSA did. The Union ground their regiments to dust then combined them with other regiments from the same state. Like what happened to the 20th Maine just before Gettysburg, have the 2nd Maine troop incorporated into their cadre.

Yeah, the Union generally just recruited new regiments (more open spots for officers meant more opportunities for political favors) but the situation with the Maine regiments at Gettysburg was slightly different- the majority of the older regiment had had their term of enlistment expire and had mustered out but for some strange reason one company had their term of enlistment set to expire at a later date. The men were obligated to stay in the army but since their regular regiment didn't exist anymore, they were just temporarily attached to the other remaining Maine regiment in the 5th Corps.

From what I understand, Union regiments just fought on until their enlistments expired and then if they chose to re-enlist, the regiments were reorganized either with new recruits under the old regimental identity or were renumbered into a "new" regiment. I think the 20th Maine Gettysburg scenario was just an isolated oddity on the Union side. The Confederates however did consolidate a number of regiments later in the war when new recruits and officers to command them started to become a rarity. Neither was ever an issue for the Union so the goal was always to have as many different individual regiments as possible out in the field- a colonel commanding a beat up under-strength regiment received the same prestige as one commanding a full regiment.

The Union, as I understand it, sent replacements to requesting units but only when they were quartered in a depot area and not in combat.

The CSA used to push replacements forward to units in the field, much like the system the US used in WWII.

Both sides consolidated units at times. If you check unit rolls you will find examples like the 4 & 5 consolidated rifles and so on. Late in the war the CSA had little choice in the matter.

Doing some quick research, it appears the 2nd Maine/20th Maine situation actually did happen quite often and was the culprit for most Union regimental combining- the majority of a given regiment would enlist for 2-years service but some troops within the regiment somehow enlisted for 3-years, when the original regiment mustered out the survivors would be folded into the nearest remaining unit from their state.

Capt Cliff wrote:Correct me if I am wrong but the Union really didn't use a replacement system like the CSA did. The Union ground their regiments to dust then combined them with other regiments from the same state. Like what happened to the 20th Maine just before Gettysburg, have the 2nd Maine troop incorporated into their cadre.

At the Battle of Monocacy (in MD, near DC), the Rebs had regiments that were compositions of as many as 10 previously decimated regiments. So, if what you say is true, both sides did it.

Longshanks wrote:At the Battle of Monocacy (in MD, near DC), the Rebs had regiments that were compositions of as many as 10 previously decimated regiments. So, if what you say is true, both sides did it.

I believe much of this was due to the bounty system as well as locally raising regiments by their future commanders. Essentially it was usually more attractive to join a new regiments as a) it could offer better bounties and b) it was the colonel and probably future captains recruiting. An old regiment's recruiting on the other hand usually could offer only the standard bounty and actual recruiting was done by less sucessful officers, one exception could be for very prominent regiments (famous founding officer, famous past commander, famous current commander etc.)...

Of course this was even worse for the Union regular army which could never make itself as attractive as the volunteer regiments and therefore never achieved full strength during the civil war...