"AWI Generals" Topic

No, sorry, not a chance to discuss the pros and cons of this or that general. But an opportunity to suggest who should fill what roll.

I have quite a large collection of figures for the AWI – as seen here:
link

It's time to start narrowing down which specific generals I want to have for each side. I already have lots of figures (some identified ones but mostly not) and a system of "ranking." What I'm looking for are alternative suggestions for which general to place where in line with what is below.

For each side I have a CinC and two alternative CinC stands (and for the Continentals a third but that is going to be Rochambeau – imagine that alternative!).

Then there are four wing commanders, two main, and two alternates.

At division level (yes, I know, a later formation but still a useful rank for organizing games) I have five commanders with two alternates for the British and one alternate for the Continentals (again, already assigned – to Lafayette).

For infantry brigades I have 20 for the Continental side and 18 for the British side. For cavalry there are 5 for the Continental side and 4 for the British side (in my AWI gaming there is the possibility of much more cavalry action than was the reality).

A quick note about how I rank my figures. For each mounted figure there is an accompanying foot figure. CinC gets a flag bearer. 2inC gets a fifer. Other wing commanders get a drummer. Division commanders get a foot officer. Infantry brigadiers get an enlisted foot figure (and I try to match them up – highland to highland, grenadier to grenadiers, etc.). Cavalry brigadiers get a bugler.

So, if you had this collection, what generals would you pick and what rank would you assign them? Yes, I know, there are certain obvious choices – obvious to me. Curious to see how others make their choices and whether some less obvious choices get made.

Recap:
Cont. British
CinC 4 3
Wing 4 4
Division 5 7
Inf Brig 20 18
Cav Brig 5 4

Looking forward to your responses.

Oh, and do note that I built the collection to play all three main land theaters – northern, central, and southern so that might influence some of your choices.

CinC gets a flag bearer.

Except for Washington's HQ, what other general would get a flag, and what would you use?

As for the generals, if Cornwalis is on the table in any norhtern campaign, he ALWAYS gets the Cornwalis Task Force, That is ALL the grenadiers (British and Hessian, if available), ALL the Light Infantry, ALL the Guards, and if the British have any cavalry or Highlanders, then he gets them too.
It's the Law.
Oh, heck, he gets the Jaegers too. And most of the artillery.
We all know THAT gamer, don't we?

Remember Knyhausen was technicaly 2nd in command for the British after Howe, But Corwallis and several other generals had dormant commisions for if something were to happen to Howe so that the army would not fall under the command of a foreigner.

Ah, John, you can always be counted on for a response, if only they were sometimes helpful (okay, once in a while, they are). As to the flags – its not about being historically correct but being able to identify the figure as the CinC for the game – so I'll use whatever darn flag I please, thank you very much. Knyhausen, was he a little known general or did someone abscond with your "p" key for a second?

Now, for those up to the challenge of the original question, any constructive replies? : )

So, what exactly is NOT "constructive"?
I told you the command Cornwalis invariably took in all the major battles of the Northern campaigns.
I regret that this does not fit into your neat little scheme, but "facts" can be stubborn little critters.

As for the "damn" flag, I was curious if you had iny information that I did not.
Forgive me for not reading your mind.

So as to make sure I will not offend you in the future with my unhelpful advice, I will stifle you so I will not be tempted to be unhelpful in the future.

nope

Early morning writer;

I understand your perspective and desire, I believe. You simply want a visible means of pointing to a stand and saying, "That's hisself, the C-in-C". I've done the same in other periods as well as horse & musket. Unfortunately, there is not always an historical example to go by, which will bother some purists in any period. John is certainly close to being a purist regarding the AWI, and has well-known strong feelings regarding some of the hypothetical AWI flags that have been widely posted and used.

One method that I have used, if the General is mounted, is to provide a mounted ADC carrying dispatches or a spyglass or some such. Then again, I have been known at times to be a bit "tongue in cheek" (especially if I know my opponents well and want to twist their tail a bit). When I once did Greene's army of the southern campaign, I made up a stand for a "C-in-C" with a pair of twisted knickers on a spontoon as it's standard. It stopped button-counting and discussions of available vegetable dies and such pretty quickly. If I were to play a game against John, I would have to have a very tattered and frayed "Piss on the British" standard, ala WarFlags. When (and if) he stopped sputtering, I would buy him a beer and have an enjoyable game.

At the end of the day, you're playing with toy soldiers, and they're your toy soldiers. Do what you want, be prepared for either a bit of grousing or some good-natured banter, and enjoy your game.

Bill
Sir William the Aged

Knyhausen, was he a little known general or did someone abscond with your "p" key for a second?

I think that is what we generally call a "typo". I don't think that it merits the firing squad.

Actually, I think that most of what JOFM was in the constructive vein. He is correct that Cornwallis always had the quality troops under his direct command. His comment that Washington was the only general who actually had a headquarters flag is probably not widely known among the casual AWI wargamers, so it is helpful and fair to point that out.

Now if you choose to have your other army CinCs carry one to distinguish the army command stand from the other lesser generals, I see no problem with that either. Your toys, your basing system, so go for it.

best regards

Fritz

This thread has given me a headache already.

JOFM, In your second post you stated:

I told you the command Cornwalis invariably took in all the major battles of the Northern campaigns.

Yet in your first post you concluded your Cornwalis statement with this:

We all know THAT gamer, don't we?

I probably misunderstood…is it bad form to follow the historical record in ahistorical scenarios?

When I first started to study AWI battles, it amused me to see that Cornwalis invariably had "all the good stuff". Thia ia a historical precedent for the player who only paints the Iron Brigade, the Old Guard, Waffen SS, etc.

If one wishes to duplicate historical commands, and I ASSUMED (well, we all know what happens whey you assume, you make an ass out of u and me) that was what the OP was asking for…

Not to worry. I will not make the mistake of trying to answer his questions in the future, thanks to a handy TMP feature.

Ah okay…that makes much more sense, thanks.

I do believe John's original post was pretty much tongue in cheek – which kind of makes me wonder at those defending the 'validity' of his argument – and I thought I was doing something similar in reply but there are some pretty touchy folk here in TMP land – apparently John and his faithful coterie being amongst the touchiest.

However, such responses tend to derail threads from getting the hoped for responses and he does this with annoying regularity – but that's how he is. And, frankly, a lot of his posts seem to have no other point than to keep him at the top of the Top Poster heap – see stats for hard evidence to support my contention, he's so far out in front its absurd. And, of course, stifling works for us all – though he's no longer at the top of the stifled post which he used to keep in contention. Guess he's bummed at that but, frankly, I don't care. Once again – and its hardly only me, I've seen it with too many people here – a thread has been derailed from its purpose. And John is hardly the only one guilty of it. Free speech, I guess.

That's fine, I have all the needed reference material ready to hand. Just thought it would be fun to get other people's input.

You know, one of the best/worst comments I've witnessed about TMP was in a single hour having three people in separate incidents have a visceral negative response to this site's existence and it's John's type of response and what such responses result in that caused those negative reactions. Kind of made me feel embarrassed to be a participant here. But there are plenty of really good and helpful people here as well and I keep coming back because of them.

Imagine where this thread might have gone if there had been a more thoughtful initial reply. Oh, well. If only…

there are some pretty touchy folk here in TMP land

Look in the mirror, Champ.

AGREED…look in the mirror…Got a good laugh though…

"John the OFM said":

Except for Washington's HQ, what other general would get a flag, and what would you use?

"As for the generals, if Cornwalis is on the table in any norhtern campaign, he ALWAYS gets the Cornwalis Task Force, That is ALL the grenadiers (British and Hessian, if available), ALL the Light Infantry, ALL the Guards, and if the British have any cavalry or Highlanders, then he gets them too.
It's the Law.
Oh, heck, he gets the Jaegers too. And most of the artillery.
We all know THAT gamer, don't we?"

*Minipigs enters Saloon shooting up the ceiling*

Jaegers for evereeeee-one!

Who wouldnt like that force? It's like an SS Panzergrenadiers/French Young Guard Division/ACW Texas brigade blowout.

What a difference a day makes

Just be glad there's no search function on here :)