The Grognards

[Yoda Power]

Originally posted by LouLong
[B@ all : what population equivalent should we give to cities (I am clueless)[/B]

I say: real life numbers can go to hell(btw is it legal to say that in this forum ). I think we have to do this because of gameplay. If we have all cities at their right numbers, France would have a huge problem because they did´nt have as many big cities as Britain. So this is my suggestion:

We look at each country individually, all their major cities(only compared to the other cities of the country) would be 2nd or 3rd size cities. That way every country would have a decent amount of big cities. However some major cities(London, Paris, Istanbul etc.) should still be much bigger than all the other cities, also to show their importance.
Another reason for doing this is, that many countries cities(Im sorry for my bad grammer) would be disbanded when they where under attack, and captured.

just my 2 cents

 

[Yoda Power]

Originally posted by mrtn
How "big" a map is is also affected by how much land there is on it. If it's a "just Europe" map, then even a 120*120 map is large. If we include that very interesting ocean, the Atlantic (Cod! Mackerel! Even Atlantis!), then it's a "smaller" map.

Again I agree with you mrtn, but those history nut wants a big map

 

[Steph]

Originally posted by mrtn
So, I can call myself a "Grognard"? I'm certainly a grumbler.

Normally, to be a grenadier of the old guard, ypu must have been NCO or soldier in the line or light infantry, bet at least 5 foot 5 inch tall, have served at least 5 years in the army, fight 2 campaigns, and distinguished yourself on the moral and military levels.

But I think we could make some exception (for once, I'm 1 inch to short).

 

[barron of ideas]

The Guard contained multiple regiments, old guard, middle guard, young guard, marines, various cavalry types, gendarmes, artillery, both foot and horse, it was a corps, all by itself. You don't have to be a grenadier to be in the Guard.

 

[Rocoteh]

Originally posted by Thorgrimm
Gentlemen, I realise that i am new to this forum, but since my last post with the offer to help with the order of battle i have not seen one reply with a yes your help would be nice or no your help is not required.I am beginning to feel an icy wind blowing out of my monitor when i log into this thread. Is this thread only for the good ol' boys? If it is then i will bid you gentlemen goodbye and good luck.

Thorgrimm

Thorgrimm,

I am really sorry if you feel "an icy wind".

Of course your competence is needed here.
That you are new to the forum does not matter in any case.

I really hope that you will be a part of the team and work
with the order of battle.

With regard to "good ol`boys". I say this is a thread for
all those with an serious interest in this era.

For me who also write in the ACW-thread your post
feels ironic (that is just for me) since when you are the
the only one (with one exception) posting in 5 days you
can also feel an icy wind.(In the ACW-thread)

Again if you feel you have met an arrogant attitude
I am really sorry. No one of the people writing here
have such a attitude.

I hope you will stay

Best Regards


Rocoteh

 

[Ozymandias]

Re: city population -- the gradations I have are as follows:

1,250,000
500,000
250,000
80 - 120,000
50 - 70,000
30 - 40,000

Which totals about 225 cities for the map we're discussing!

So a suggestion for methodology:

1. Finalize map size.

2. Determine how many cities we want on the map.

3. Subract that number from the total I have with whatever pop size city that happens to be equalling pop = 1; multiply accordingly for other cities.

3a. BTW no settlers, right??

3b. And how do we feel about urban unrest? - regular Civ style, or less (i.e., make the # of citizens born happy higher or whatever).

-- & @Yoda -- Yes, I'm looking forward to this too . May I recommend what in corporate America is called a "straw man" approach? -- I'll throw together a tech tree in the next two days or so; you chop it apart / add to it / etc.; we do this a few times (the process can actually proceed very quickly, and I do believe we'll work well together on this!) and we'll have a tech tree within 2 weeks. Are you game for this approach?

-- BTW we need to finalize the years in question ... ? And, one era or two?

Best,

Oz

 

[Yoda Power]

Originally posted by ozymandias
-- & @Yoda -- Yes, I'm looking forward to this too . May I recommend what in corporate America is called a "straw man" approach? -- I'll throw together a tech tree in the next two days or so; you chop it apart / add to it / etc.; we do this a few times (the process can actually proceed very quickly, and I do believe we'll work well together on this!) and we'll have a tech tree within 2 weeks. Are you game for this approach?

-- BTW we need to finalize the years in question ... ? And, one era or two?

Sounds as a good approach, btw anyone ofcause can come with ideas for tech tree. We should do tech for all eras, so four ofcause, or did you mean something else?

Also Lou please voice your oppinion about how long time there shall go between techs. When Oz comes with his list I will start editing the tree, this will ofcause mean that I "start" the scenario file, that would´nt be a problem, right?

YP

 

[Steph]

Originally posted by barron of ideas
The Guard contained multiple regiments, old guard, middle guard, young guard, marines, various cavalry types, gendarmes, artillery, both foot and horse, it was a corps, all by itself. You don't have to be a grenadier to be in the Guard.

True, but only Old Guard were called Grognards.

 

[LouLong]

@ mrtn : actually with the beard you would be a "sapeur"

@ Thorgrimm : sorry if you felt that way. I think it mostly has to do with the "one thread" pb where different discussions cross and meet sometimes on different pages. But you are definitely welcome as a "grognard" ! Hope you enjoy the title.
So this should not be an "old boy" thread but we are probably used to a certain way of writing/answering to messages that may seem a bit puzzling at first. Besides as we have started to organize the various tasks you have to find your "main" partner(s) ie in that case I am not your main partner until we start putting the units on the map.
Now that does not mean we (or you and Rocoteh since that seems to be your predilection topic) you have to wait for it. It is important to know where units should start and how to put them together. No icy wind, just a "creative turmoil one" maybe

@ mrtn & Yoda : I understand perfectly your concern but maybe my post was not so clear about it. But that was what my "map with USA needs to be bigger but has a large ocean was about.
I think we should start with a 100 X 100 map and see if it fits or not.

@Ozy : well, city figures give a good idea but one must not overlook the surrounding countryside as well, meaning France had few big cities but had one of the largest population (largest I believe after Ottomans and Russia) in Europe (even if its growing rate had started to shrink already).
Important and useful figures but actually what I had in mind for this very question was how much does a 1 pop point in Civ3 must be equivalent to in RL terms ?

@ Yoda and Ozy : well that is basically up to you but one year could a good starting base to work on. Now it does not mean every year something important happened everywhere, the way I see it "techs" could be kind of empty if need be and they will probably be empty for many countries anyway.
No pb with starting the scenario file since we can import the different things anyway.

@ Yoda : sorry for the joke but Steph answered before I even had finished my second post and seen your answer !
Could you send me/tell me where to find the first and second map. I tried by just saving the pic but quality is low.

@ barron of ideas : you are right about the different units and corps, it is just the grognards refers more to the Guard Grenadier who were always considered as the elite (since Frederic the first I believe), were the Emperor's pets and made a large part of the Guard altogether. Many regiments were copied from them "down" to the Young Guard.

@all : this thread goes pretty fast ! I typed two posts one after the other and 3 posts had already appeared in-between !

 

[Yoda Power]

hey 100.100 sounds pretty good

and yes this thread is going very fast! Its 10 days old and this is post 270!

 

[LouLong]

Originally posted by Yoda Power
hey 100.100 sounds pretty good

and yes this thread is going very fast! Its 10 days old and this is post 270!

Trying to limit the posts eek: ) I had edited my previous one with a few infos for you.
And YES many here are history nuts (and proud of it) Now I still want that to be playable and enjoyable.

 

[Rocoteh]

Map size and number of CIV:s/units should be
limited by load time/waiting time.

Some of you seems to be computer-people.

Any guess?


Rocoteh

 

[LouLong]

Originally posted by Rocoteh
Map size and number of CIV:s/units should be
limited by load time/waiting time.

Some of you seems to be computer-people.

Any guess?


Rocoteh

How many cities (on each side) + units (on each side) do you have for ACW ?

 

[mrtn]

Originally posted by LouLong
@ mrtn : actually with the beard you would be a "sapeur"
...
@ mrtn & Yoda : I understand perfectly your concern but maybe my post was not so clear about it. But that was what my "map with USA needs to be bigger but has a large ocean was about.
I think we should start with a 100 X 100 map and see if it fits or not.
...@all : this thread goes pretty fast ! I typed two posts one after the other and 3 posts had already appeared in-between !

You mean I'll use my beard to dig through fortifications? Or use it to make the bombs with? Splinter bombs, perhaps? "How do you like a face full of mrtn's beard, you sons of foreigners?"

The map size is important regarding city populations (and number of cities, of course). It's also so that the terrain is dependent on if units cost 1 pop or not. If they do, we should have some extra wheat, if they don't we should try to hinder city growth, otherwise every city will be max size in a few years.

This thread is going too fast by half, I think it's one of the fastest thread I've seen in C&C.

 

[Rocoteh]

"This thread is going too fast by half, I think it's one of the fastest thread I've seen in C&C." mrtn


Do not worrie.

It will slow down!


Rocoteh

 

[barron of ideas]

Assuming membership in the OLD guard was required, and I am not sure I do want to postulate that, I am reasonably certain the old guard contained more than Grenadiers.

Another definition of grognard I saw on the web from 2nd oxford dictionary (as quoted) was a veteran soldier, a grumbler.

Alam Emerich used to have a web site up that dfined the term, but I couldn't find it right now. I will keep looking. Of course, now it means a veteran (war) gamer.

 

[Rocoteh]

Originally posted by LouLong


How many cities (on each side) + units (on each side) do you have for ACW ?

U.S.A. 112 cities 258 units
C.S.A. 112 cities 201 units


Rocoteh

 

[Ozymandias]

Just to get in the spirit of things --

http://www.napoleonguide.com/glossary.htm

I came across this glossary while trying to find a "definitive" definition and/or derivation of "grognard"; bon chance!

Anyway, it's good for fun -- and, besides, how many of you knew that Russian militia was called "Opolchenie", hm?

-Oz

 

[barron of ideas]

This should be useful, to anyone who wants an order of battle for Waterloo of the old guard, which seems to include Chausseurs a pied (as opposed to cavalry chausseurs).

http://www.web2.airmail.net/napoleon/1816.html

I can't this link to work, which is a shame as there are uniforms and other useful order of battle data there, maybe the home site?

http://web2/airmail.net/napoleon/index.html

and for "grognard" the nearly totally uselesss

http://www.kabalarians.com/..male/grognard.html

The link gets me to the kabalarians home page, you can enter grognard as the male name, or any other name in the box and get some possibly reliable data on what it means. I don't much agree with what they say for Richard.

 

[LouLong]

Originally posted by barron of ideas
Assuming membership in the OLD guard was required, and I am not sure I do want to postulate that, I am reasonably certain the old guard contained more than Grenadiers.

Another definition of grognard I saw on the web from 2nd oxford dictionary (as quoted) was a veteran soldier, a grumbler.

Alam Emerich used to have a web site up that dfined the term, but I couldn't find it right now. I will keep looking. Of course, now it means a veteran (war) gamer.

No, no there is some misunderstanding here. Steph just described the rules to be allowed as a a grenadier inside the guard. And inside the old guard, the grenadiers (1st regiment precisely) were pet-called by Napoleon his "grognards". Now of course the term could have been used for other grenadiers or regular troops but the 1st regiment of the Guard is the summon of it all
For info : The Old Guard is basically made up of Grenadiers (2 regiments), Dutch grenadiers + footchasseurs 1st regiment.

Nice to have you here, BTW.