"1835, Cos defends the Alamo" Topic

So I'm rewriting BLOODY DAWN: THE FINAL ASSAULT ON THE ALAMO to reflect the new 18mm Old Glory model. There will be a scenario with Fannin's men added to the Texan garrison (even though that what-if is actually pretty unlikely and would have required Fannin to have been a much more aggressive and perceptive commander than he seems to have been).

But it occurs to me that there's another scenario possibility, also requiring a commander to have been a very different sort of man: Cos defends the Alamo in late 1835. Does it make a game to have the Mexicans defending and the Texans attacking? I believe it does.

Cos had upwards of 1000 men, but many of them were either recent recruits/convicts or presidiales who were locals and may well have been more in sympathy with the Revolution. But he had the Matamoros regular infantry battalion, 400 men, plus some good cavalry and the 20 cannon. Remember that it was Cos' engineers who fortified the Alamo. The Texans could not have added much to its defenses between December and February; the earth would have been too cold and hard for much digging.

The Texans had a much smaller but far more aggressive attacking force, including both companies of the New Orleans Greys and some other recently arrived volunteers from the US. They also had several very competent small unit commanders including Bowie and Ben Milam and Deaf Smith.

So WHAT IF Cos leaves his useless mouths (recruits and locals and camp followers) in San Antonio and pulls back into the Alamo with 400 good infantry and 80 cavalry? And sends urgent pleas to brother-in-law Santa Anna to come help?

It would play as a very different game, I think, if we assume the Texans use the same sort of infiltration tactics that they employed successfully in the San Antonio street fighting -- breaking into buildings, tunneling through walls to stay out of the streets' killing zones, etc. I can readily imagine a battle with highly motivated Texans using dead zones (of which there are many) to approach, then seizing some of the buildings and having the same sort of house-to-house fight as really happened in SA.

Has anyone actually done this?

I think it would be an interesting scenario. However, considering how tough the fight for SA was going house to house/room to room, I don't think the Texans could've taken the Alamo except for a coup de main at midnight.

But who knows, it would be a great game either way.

Well, now that is a novel idea! Would love to hear how it games out

I think it would indeed have been a tough fight, and very similar to what occurred in SA. Iirc, the Texans dragged one of their 6 pounders through one or more rooms/houses, through holes in walls, to get it into position to shell the church that was Cos' strongpoint. I'm going to assume that the Texans would have been equally willing and able to bring up their guns in direct support of an attack on the Alamo. I think the Texans had four six pounders in all.

It certainly will not be a fight to the death; the Texans were willing to give quarter, and some of the Mexicans were eager to surrender (but the scenario assumes Cos left those in the town to do so).

The open plaza inside the Alamo is pretty much a killing zone if either side holds one or more of the buildings along the perimeter. The Texans could use the shelter of the wall, outside, to move back and forth, particularly along the west wall, which has almost no fighting positions for defenders. The Mexicans inside could perhaps do the same along part of the perimeter. I suspect the two north wall artillery positions would be hard for the Mexicans to hold, or to supply, under Texan pressure. I'm assuming Cos would at some point surrender, but perhaps not until the Texans had gained control of a substantial proportion of the compound.

One of my sources says that Cos was able to mount, iirc, eleven guns, five or six in the main plaza in San Antonio and the rest in the Alamo. My scenario would have him pulling the guns out of SA, so he'd have at least a dozen or so effective in the Alamo.

I think leadership on both sides will be crucial, and probably advantage to the Texans. Ben Milam was the only Texan leader killed attacking San Antonio, and Smith and Bowie were both effective. But one way the Mexicans could win would be for key Texan leaders to fall and the attack peter out. The Texans needed to win quickly for all sorts of political and logistical and psychological reasons.

One thing I like about this scenario is that it affords an opportunity to use cavalry. Mexican lancers sortie!

The Alamo was in even worse shape then. Green Jameson was responsible for adding a lot to the existing fortifications before the siege. That should be taken into account also.

Yes, I am trying to find my ALAMO READER now to review Jameson's letters before the siege began.

One nice thing about the BlueMoon/OG Alamo is its modular design. I'm already anticipating swapping out some wall pieces for breaches, for the Fannin scenario.

Perhaps we can even prevail on Joel to produce a few extra pieces!

This sounds very interesting. I have also thought about such a scenario myself.

I am a proud Texan,

but Fannin…..one worthless commander, who wouldnt move his 400 men, because he wanted to be relieved of command. Then finally sends 100 men finally, too late, and they turn back because of a broken wagon in the river.

Fannin would have probably not have made it to the Alamo. He surrendered all of his men only to all be murdered. After the Alamo fell. I would have not surreneder my men, after they slaughtered all at the Alamo…how could you trust them with your life as a prisoner.

Not too impressed with Fannin.

But if his 400 men would have been in the Alamo, IMO, the Alamo would have not fell in 13 days. The only problem would have been food, and ofcourse desertion.

tom