Keepbro
-
Posts
49 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Downloads
Events
Everything posted by Keepbro
-
Ok - here's another super serious "what if" question for the intellectuals to ponder. WHAT IF - the Union colour had been pink instead of blue and the confederates green instead of grey? How would a differing colour scheme have affected the outcome of the war? As ever treat the question with all seriousness. Links to articles and recommended reading to back up claims is the part that I'm really actually interested in so please do throw in some of those. Anything on uniform and camouflage would be great. As a professional costumier Im always interested in looks. -
Apparently the town is some sort of cultural center but since the culture in question seems to be country music that can be debatable. People advise going to Music row. Whatever that is. Supposedly a row of buildings where they "play" (and I use that word Inna slightly ironic sense) a lot of country music. Why that would be a tourist point is beyond me. In fact it sounds exactly like one of my circles of hell. Its also a slightly sucky TV show - I only watched one episode but I didn't care for it much. Again country music In case you are not getting it I'm not a big fan of country music.
-
Sun Tzu is a philosophy of war that is designed for autocratic societies (ie Dictators and Kings and how they should wage war) that is still relevant today but probably only if you are tinpot dictator in the arse end of nowhere. Modern militaries and their very complex supply needs are run philosophically almost exactly the opposite of Sun Tzu. Most Governments with big militaries these days are Democratic and how they wage war is entirely different. Democracies generally only fight only when they have to and prefer to have coalitions backing them. They also have professional volunteer armies that aren't used as police forces since a civilian police force is preferable. Dictatorships are more likely to invade other countries, usually use armies as police forces and in many cases forcibly conscript. Dictators also don't care about casualties. Democracies are susceptible to casualties since democratic leaders will get voted out if too many casualties occur which is why democracies use highly trained volunteers (to keep morale high) and try to use the best equipment. If you take a rough look at Sun Tzu and compare it roughly to US doctrine (using the US since this is an ACW game site) they are almost completely different. Sun Tzu advocates quick decisive action taken on enemy soil with plunder being given to troops and no interference from civilians. The US military states that it should not to go to war unless its in the National interest, does so wholeheartedly with full supply, has clear objectives and exit plan and is backed by its Congress. The US does not usually wage war quickly. There's usually heavy buildup with lots of talking before any action is taken. So completely the opposite of Sun Tzu. Please note that my study of US military doctrine was done during the Powell era so it may have changed a bit.
-
Ok, being serious.... I'm going to ask some proper questions now 1. If George McClellan won the election in '64 and took charge from Lincoln what effect do you think he would have had on the war? (I know that this is a "what if" question but I'm interested in some actual academic answers) 2. What one action/order given/movement/stroke of luck etc do you think did the most damage during the war? 3. Finally, How drunk do you think Grant was at Shiloh on a scale of 1 (still safe to drive) to 10 (black-out drunk and will wake-up married to a tran-sexual man and with traffic cone in his bed)?
-
Question : How the holy hello kitty did this guy survive his wounds? Notice also that he has a medal of honour!
-
I saw this thread and thought of this movie. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_UvfESHUjI
-
I tried to keep it slightly stupid.... Look I'm sorry ok. It's hard trying to work 2 jobs, look after a manic 5 year old and a crazed pregnant wife AND cope with a video game addiction all whilst suffering from mental health issues (aspie). Comedy can't just happen all the time. Question: Whatever happened to Harper's Ferry? I'm guessing Harper lost his boat to crazed rebs during their Maryland campaign but did he ever get it back?
-
Just reading some very interesting history books. Did you know that at the same time the American Civil War was being fought (which many people consider the first modern war) there was also an extremely nasty civil war being fought in China too? In fact more than a few military historians believe it to be the first true instance of the concept of total war since the rebels (the Taiping) forcibly conscripted everyone into their armed forces (and had a bloody good go at it by all accounts). American Civil War casualties (estimated) : 1.5 - 2 million casualties. Chinese Civil War casualties : best guess 20-30 million casualties but some people think maybe 100 million casualties (which I guess unlikely so I think its probably around 30 million which is still a jaw dropping-ly huge number and only beaten in the slaughter stakes by the lovely time being had by all during WW2). One particular siege was so brutally unpleasant that the Yangtze river (which for those who don't know is one of the largest rivers in the world and comparable in size to the Nile and Amazon) was actually blocked by dead bodies. As in an actual dam made out of human bodies. Across a river that at certain points is so wide that you cannot see across it. Also bear in mind that, unlike the ACW, a lot of the soldiers in the CCW weren't equipped with actual guns (they were reserved for more elite troops) so a lot of the carnage was done hand to hand. What I find interesting is that here's a conflict which by most accounts is the 2nd most unpleasant war in history and it seems to be overlooked just because a more trendy, hip and modern war was being fought on the other side of the world.
-
Ok - so it seems accepted that Lincoln would have gorilla pressed the crippled Davis from the top of the cage onto the commentators table before walking off with groupies to the sound of something by Ted Nugent. Now next question. For some reason Grant and Lee meet in a bamboo forest wearing kimonos and have a traditional samurai duel with katanas. Who'd you place your bet on? Again, reasons would be nice.
-
I have a question - in a straight up no-holds barred fight between Jefferson Davis and Abraham Lincoln who would have won? To make it more interesting and honouring American culture lets make it a steel cage match!
-
A vicious assault by an army of Lego bricks. My counter would be to use guerilla units of Duplo to hide behind enemy lines whilst flanking them with my regiments of Lego Technic before finally doing a full frontal assault with brigades of Lego Juniors because f@@k lego Juniors. On a related note Darth may want to pitch Ultimate General: Lego to someone. Could be some bank in that.
- 29 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- ultimate general civil war
- army
- (and 3 more)
-
I think it's clear that the evidence is showing that the Union won because of the amount of neck hair they grew. I think the Confederacy put a great deal of emphasis on chin hair and that whilst tactically fearsome in the initial stages of the war, it would become more and more of a hindrance when the long term attritional powers of union neck hair was allowed to become more and more of a factor.
-
What if I set the debate to be something something neutral? I would like to propose as neutral adjudicatoreferee that the debate topic be.......... Civil War Beards and how they affected the War effort for both sides. Now I want a nice debate. I will permit use of Photoshop for the express purpose of doctoring photos only by way of removing beards from old timer pics. I want to see clearly referenced articles by Civil War historians but, and this is important, they must have beards or at least 2 day growth before being accepted as source. Solo Mustaches are not acceptable unless they are long enough in length to reach beneath the chin. Woman with beards will be acceptable sources too. Forum members will vote to decide the winner but only if they have beards. Finally any debater found playing Mumford and Sons will be automatically disqualified and will be shaved.
-
Good point.... have to think on that. Maybe if I insist that the video be each debater holding up his passport to the screen before being paddled. But then we can't be sure that the person being paddled is the actual forum member unless we can prove somehow through online receipts and steam profiles. The other problem is that debates soon become multi debates as multiple people start pitching in on one side or the other. Such a mass debate soon becomes rowdy and uncontrollable unless everyone agrees to be paddled before hand. Heh heh...... Mass debate.
-
I'd like to offer to adjudicate any debates so as to ensure fairness. Might I also suggest that some form of humiliation be suggested for the losing debater? I suggest posting a video of them being paddled on the buttocks. Of course to ensure that competing debaters hold up their end of the bargain they will need to email me a video of themselves being paddled before the debate. I will post only the losers video. Otherwise they may back out of the forfeit.
-
Wow. I never knew that Abraham Lincoln used Viking Rune magic. You can see here that he has summoned Jormungandr the World Serpent to crush the Confederacy. A risky strategy since he represents Ragnarok but a spectacular one.
-
I have a question - how many snakes did the Anaconda plan necessitate for its implementation? I'm guessing that, what with the entire South being on the coast and all and the number of rivers, ports and coastal villages that it must have needed a serious shit ton of snakes to blockade the South? Also why didn't the rebels develop some form of anti-snake ship? Or were the anacondas really that big? Finally - what happened to all the snakes after the war? Were they all male snakes so as to prevent an ecological catastrophe or were they hunted for food or did they just slink into the Everglades?
-
I have informed the military police. Wait there soldier until the MPs have you flogged for the heinous crime of "caring about your men."
- 22 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- casualties
- too
- (and 2 more)
-
What's wrong with 40% casualties anyway? And also what do you care? You're the general giving orders whilst sipping cocktails inside a giant beautiful silk tent. You lose half your army but who cares as the enemy lost and the president is going to get a report saying how amazing you are which in turn means celebrations and parades and you getting fame and recognition and even possibly a presidential nomination. Just fill your ranks with more chaff and remind yourself that human wave tactics are hilariously funny and after multiple horrific battles the survivors will be suitably mean enough to kill anything. The only thing to worry about is being shot by your own side.
- 22 replies
-
- 2
-
-
- casualties
- too
- (and 2 more)
-
What about a massively multiplayer version of this game? So you could have massive Civil War style battles but have players as officers controlling small bodies of men - higher ranked officers are players with more experience and whilst they too control groups of men they also are the ones who give orders and are in charge of supply and medics and so forth. In fact you could even have players working small ambulance groups healing soldiers and players acting as supply officers handing out ammo and cartridges. You could even go further and have reconnaissance, spying, chaplains and the like so that the feel of an actual army is portrayed. Finally you get Generals and their staff with runners and aides running around passing orders back and forth which I think would give a much more realistic feel to a battle.
-
Just for the record I'm reporting this entire thread and adding the suggestion that I be allowed to hunt you all down for sport for crimes against pun-anity.
-
Sighhhhh
-
MUST ..... RESIST...... (nope can't do it) I would like to let everyone here know that I think upping unit size is something that certainly half of us should be very interested in. My issue is that, from a tactical viewpoint, it might hinder mobility and in extreme cases even cause significant accuracy penalties mainly due to the balancing issue. Finally, and most importantly, it would lead to a massive cover penalty as troopers would be unable to lie down properly - increasing their sight profile and making them an easier target. Im sure I've left other problems out but those to me are the ones that I have to deal with on a daily basis.
-
You propose creating a map of the eastern portion of the North American Continent then simulate the entirety of the American Civil War in real time? I'm sold. You might go actually mad with power or the micro might well cause you to slit your wrists. It would necessitate accurately mapping some (and Im just using rough figures here) 8 million square kilometers of terrain, oh and accurately modeling it as it was back in 1860s (so as to get the right feel what with all the wood, mud and shit that was everywhere). Then you'd have to add in the some 3 million odd poor fuckers who actually fought the war and accurately portray all the economics of the time (fuck tons of farms) so as to allow a realistic portrayal of supply and technology that made such an impact during the war. Oh and other small systems like accurate weather patterns and other little things like health since most of the Civil War's dead died due to disease rather than actual combat. All in all its the type of game that I think a video game developer would rather chew his/her reproductive organs off than make. But then you do get the occasional crazy type who does games like this (the Dwarf Fortress guy springs to mind).
-
I prefer to roleplay as Nathan Bedford Forrest....... actually no.... I won't go there....
