Paul Roberts wrote:I'm playing as CSA in 1861, and I notice that the Confederate armies have no divisions at start. And because Corps don't require HQs, it's much easier to just group brigades together into Corps under a general, rather than taking time to build and move Division HQs out to them.
My question is, is this historical? Were divisions common, or were Corps (seen as an ad hoc collection of brigades) more common? I'm used to WW2 gaming where divisions are the standard, but I don't know how organization stood in the ACW.
In game play terms, what's the benefit of building divisions rather than just making Corps of brigades?
very historical. Not having them would be very unhistorical -
Longstreets corp during second Manassas consisted out of Hoods division, Jones division, Kempers division, Andersons division and Wilcox division.
Playing the game - TC2M (take command second Manassas) - from MadminuteGames - you might experience how important this is !
More specific I refer to Longstreets assault on the Union left wing and center after the Union attack on Jacksons position failed.
It's a real beauty to experience. Wilcox division out of the woods - to the central road - Hoods division make an envelopment around the woods south of the road - converge with Kemper and Jones for a final "grand assault". And Anderson to check the Union reinforcments coming in to aid the Union center.
Total beauty ! The coolest thing is that you can also play as Jones (division commander) and choose which other division to sustain - really cool.