Historical Unit Strength vs ETW scale battles

[Don Jacopo Caldora]

I would like to see any info out there about unit sizes based on the army size options. Also, if anyone knows anything about the historical organization of the various armies in the game, I would love to see that also.

So far, I have been doing some research on real life unit sizes and I was looking forward to comparing it to ETW’s unit sizes to see what kind of scale battles we will be looking at. In the course of my search, I decided to look at typical American organization of the army from the revolution to modern times.

At the time of the revolutionary war, American forces were organized based on the British system of organization. The basic level of organization started at company strength. The companies would then be organized into regiments, then brigades and later as Divisions. The next level of organization was the Army itself. The theater of operations was divided according to geography, and the commanding officer for the theater would run operations unless the main army moved into the theater and Washington himself assumed command.

On paper, troop strength levels per unit were like this
Company 50-90 men common (100 ideal) CO rank Captain
Regiment 7-10 Companies (500-1000 men) CO rank Col
Brigade 5-10 Regiments (2500 men common) CO rank BGEN
Division 1-5 Brigades CO rank MGEN
Regional Commander CO rank MGEN
Army Commander LT GEN George Washington

It should be noted that often the number of men fit for duty at any time was greatly reduced than the full strength of the unit. Disease, Desertion, not to mention dead, wounded, and captured took a tool on the American forces. Troops having different enlistment lengths could cause a unit to lose much of its manpower when enlistments ran out. It was not uncommon for a regiment of men to only have 350 men active and fit for duty at a time. Old units were often merged to form new units and bring them up to strength.

Battalion and Regiment were similar to each other in organization, and depending on the source you look at were sometimes used interchangeably at this time. Battalion seemed to be more preferred to be used in battle.

Artillery was grouped in batteries (company strength of men) one battery tended to be assigned to a brigade at a time.

Calvary forces were uncommon in the American army at this time.

Fast-forward a few years to the civil war era. At the start of the Civil War, the army began to more closely resemble modern troop strengths and organization.

Squad 12 men Corporal in charge
Section 2 squads 25 men total Sergeant in charge
Platoon 2 sections 50 men 2cd or 1st LT
Company 2 Platoons 100 men Captain
Battalion (Volunteers) 4-8 companies Major, LT Col
Regiment 10 Companies or 2 battalions (1000 men) Col
Brigade 3-6 regiments (4000 men) BGEN
Division 2-6 Brigades (12000) MGEN-LTGEN
Corps 2-4 divisions (36000) MGEN-LTGEN
Army 1-8 corps MGEN-LTGEN
Departments Dept ran various theaters of operations)

As the civil war progressed, the following changes were made

Battalions came into widespread use and comprised 8 companies of men (800)
Regiments expanded to having 2 battalions (16 companies) for a total of 1600 men.

Artillery tended to be assigned 1 battery to a brigade with reserve forces also assigned to the Division commander. A battery generally was manned by a company-sized force and contained about 4-6 guns.

Calvary units were organized into Troops (platoon) and Squadrons (company) before reverting to the standard use of organization. A Calvary troop and squadron tended to have fewer men assigned than the equivalent infantry unit.

During the civil war, it was not uncommon for troop strengths drop to 30-50% what the paper strength was for a unit due to casualties and disease. Units were at times disbanded and the remaining men transferred to other units or merged with other units to form new units. Also, as Officers took high casualties as well, it was not uncommon for the CO for a unit to be two to three rank levels below that which is normal to command that unit.

Just for reference a modern unit strength (late 20th century) is as follows:
Squad 10 men Sergeant
Platoon 40 men (4 squads) Lieutenant
Company 175 men (4 Platoons, HQ section) Captain
Battalion 700 men (4 Companies, HQ section) Lt Col
Regiment 1500+ (2 battalion’s, HQ section) Col
Brigade 4500+ (3+ regiments, HQ) Brig Gen
Division 15000+ (3 brigades, HQ, support units) Man Gen
Corps 30,000+ (2 divisions) Lt Gen
Army 100,000+ (2 corps, HQ, support) general

Reference:
http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Ameri...litary_history
http://www.americanrevolution.com/AmRevFormArmy.htm
http://www.geocities.com/mo21infantry/organize.html
http://www.angelfire.com/wv/wasec5/formations.html
http://www.ecsu.ctstateu.edu/persona...cock/ranks.htm

So far, the screenshots I have seen have max unit sizes for infantry from 120-160. So using this information, it would not be uncommon to see up to 2400-3000+ men on the battlefield at a given time. Units will tend to represent 1-2 Companies of men. Using 2500 as a basic number to account for smaller units and artillery (2500 being a normal army as well for me on huge settings in MTW2), I would think that we will be seeing action on a regimental to brigade scale on the battlefield. Seeing that one battery is usually assigned to a brigade (best represented by 1-2 units of artillery in game, brigade fighting seems to be the most likely result of full stacks meeting in combat. If reinforcements is an option during battle like in Rome and MTW2, and taking into account the way casualties and losses effected unit strength and reduced the number of men fit for duty during the actual times, I think it is possible we may even see division scale battles (at least as far as the Revolutionary period to possibly the civil war era) as being represented during our ETW campaigns.

[Sheogorath]

Organizations, unit sizes and dispositions were an utter mess during this era. A 'regiment' could range (on paper) from anywhere between 500 and 5,000 men. Their actual strength varied even more.

I figure that it's best to think of a full ETW stack as a single regiment and leave it at that.

Realism would be difficult in this matter anyway, since most countries maintained their regiments at something like %70 strength during peacetime to cut costs and filled them in with reserves once the fighting started. That would, I think, be difficult to implement in a non-exploitable way in ETW.

[Sheogorath]

Some examples, for refrence, of infantry regiment sizes:
French - Approx. 3100

Polish - Approx. 930-3500

Prussian - Approx. 2100

Austrian - Upwards of 5,000

Russian - Approx. 2,000

British - Between 1,500 and 5,000 (although at least one regiment was down to 500)

These figures are from the early-mid Napoleonic Wars, however.

This was generally because the exact composition of a 'regiment' varied. Austrian regiments had three battalions (two regular, one depot, of six companies each) and two grenadier companies. French had three battalions (one grenadier, one voltiguer, four fusilier companies) and one depot batallion (four fusiliers), plus the command attachment.
Prussians had eight companies and artillery.

The Russians had three battalions (one grenadier, two line).

So really, as you may have gathered, there was no 'standard' for measurement of unit sizes.

[Polemists]

Plus it is important to remeber that TW always does a representation.

So where there might have been ten thousand soldiers on each side, you may only end up with one thousand fighting one thousand.

I'd expect the average full stack army in ETW, judging by screens and other comments.

To be around 1,000-1,500 actual units.

What this would equate to in real life? I dunno

[CBR]

Based on the weapon ranges used in ETW a unit would represent something like a battalion.


CBR

[Familyguy1]

Plus it is important to remeber that TW always does a representation.

So where there might have been ten thousand soldiers on each side, you may only end up with one thousand fighting one thousand.

I'd expect the average full stack army in ETW, judging by screens and other comments.

To be around 1,000-1,500 actual units.

What this would equate to in real life? I dunno

True and the only way to find out a little bit about this....
is
when
the
DEMO
comes
out
!!

[Megas Methuselah]

... Honestly, a unit is a unit. I'm never going to make it any harder than that.

[Don Jacopo Caldora]

Just trying to imerse myself in the game is all. I still prefer to think of the battles being regimental or brigade size units (using full stacks) as I said at the end of my origional post.

[Incongruous]

Well we know that the average unit size will be 120, I am happy about this because it means that most average computers will be able to run it, that battlefields will be more effectively manouverable (meaning for more interesting gameplay), also it shows that CA has not tried to grasp newcomers with "TEH, OH M'GOSH! HUNDREDSES OF THOUSANZES OF MENS PRECIOUS!", or however it they speakes. Which might mean that they have done something else with the battlefield to make it more appealing, perhaps making it more compelling, and thus more pleasent for the mind of a strategy gamer?

[Fisherking]

My guess is that the formations are more Company size for Infantry and a bit larger than Troops for Cavalry.

If you don’t like that then just think of it as you get one man in 10 for your Regiments.

Stacks are pretty much Brigades, just as in Rome a stack was more like a Legion.

I would like it if Regiments were at least of Battalion size, assembled from companies but I doubt we get anything like that.

At least in this iteration we will see some named units and that will add some spice to the sauce, for me.

[Polemists]

Which might mean that they have done something else with the battlefield to make it more appealing, perhaps making it more compelling, and thus more pleasent for the mind of a strategy gamer?

They did, it's called more gunpowder


I mean basically they are putting you into the action the moment you hit start. There is alot less time between the form a line, march, engage.

I mean it is our best understanding that the maps are not much larger then before, so i'd guess in a few steps the shots are going to start firing.

So to deal with the hyper active rts gamers recovering from Red Alert 3 addiction they are offering some faster paced battle, however as Dawn of War 2 is coming out just one week before ETW I think ETW is now hoping to grab it's usual fan base more then the rts crowd.

[Fisherking]

They did, it's called more gunpowder


I mean basically they are putting you into the action the moment you hit start. There is alot less time between the form a line, march, engage.

I mean it is our best understanding that the maps are not much larger then before, so i'd guess in a few steps the shots are going to start firing.

So to deal with the hyper active rts gamers recovering from Red Alert 3 addiction they are offering some faster paced battle, however as Dawn of War 2 is coming out just one week before ETW I think ETW is now hoping to grab it's usual fan base more then the rts crowd.

If I remember somewhat clearly….(?)…then the field is about double the size from M2TW

800m vs. 1400m for land battles and I have seen no actual figures for the sea battles.

If you go with default positions it might be pretty hot from the start. But I am not prone to do that sort of thing.

I would rather take the time and develop my position by maneuver than rush headlong into battle where the meat grinder spits out what’s left.

But to each his own.

[lobosrul]

A full strength British regiment was normally 2000 enlisted combat troops (excluding officers, NCO's, runners, mucisians etc) during the Napoleonic Wars. Each regiment was normally organized into 2 battalions (the 60th foot was apparently an exception with 7 battalions). Each battalion then was organized into 10 companies of 100 men each. I'm not sure there were any permanent units under company strength. Platoons were formed in an ad-hoc as needed basis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British...apoleonic_Wars

I'm not quite sure how the army structure will work in ETW. Hopefully its flexible down to the company level. For instance if I want a 25 company regiment that should be doable. Or if I want to mix cavalry with infantry, and artillery that should be doable as well. I hope your general can command multiple regiments at once. Of course battles have to be limited in size for the game to be playable.

[lobosrul]

To add to my previous post, it seems that in general only 1 of a regiments battalions was on active deployment at a given time.

Note: I see no way to edit a post on this forum or I would have done that.

[Fisherking]

While we are on the topic of units, there was also a difference in officers of the time.

I don’t know the whole of the rank structure of course but many had title for us today that would be strange.

The lowest officers were:
Ensign for infantry &
Cornet for cavalry. They were commissioned flag bearers.
Lieutenant was basically the company XO and commanded detachments ordered by the captin of the company, called platoons.
Captain-Lieutenant: (ca. 17th & 18th century) the lieutenant of the first company in a regiment, whose captaincy was held by the regimental colonel.
Captain was a company commander and still is.
Sergeant-Major's Major: (ca. 17th century) shortened to Major
Lieutenant Colonel as today commanded a battalion
Colonel regimental commander.
General ranks included:
Brigadier-General (changed in the 1920s)
Sergeant-Major-General: (ca. 17th century) shortened to Major General
Lieutenant-General
Captain-General: (ca. 17th century) a full General
Field Marshal (introduced by George I in 1736)

NCOs and Warrents can come later.

[ArtillerySmoke]

Just trying to imerse myself in the game is all. I still prefer to think of the battles being regimental or brigade size units (using full stacks) as I said at the end of my origional post.

I'm like that as well...I always play Total War on the huge unit settings size. It just makes it that much more realistic and immersive for me.

I'll play Empire on the largest settings as well. I would imagine if normal is producing a 1,500 man regular army, huge would pump out a good 3,000 per side.

6k in a battle during a gunpowder era is pretty good. That's a nice fight.

[Don Jacopo Caldora]

To add to my previous post, it seems that in general only 1 of a regiments battalions was on active deployment at a given time.

Note: I see no way to edit a post on this forum or I would have done that.

Editing comes when you get full membership status, Just keep posting and it wont take that long at all.

[lars573]

While we are on the topic of units, there was also a difference in officers of the time.

I don’t know the whole of the rank structure of course but many had title for us today that would be strange.

The lowest officers were:
Ensign for infantry &
Cornet for cavalry. They were commissioned flag bearers.
Lieutenant was basically the company XO and commanded detachments ordered by the captin of the company, called platoons.
Captain-Lieutenant: (ca. 17th & 18th century) the lieutenant of the first company in a regiment, whose captaincy was held by the regimental colonel.
Captain was a company commander and still is.
Sergeant-Major's Major: (ca. 17th century) shortened to Major
Lieutenant Colonel as today commanded a battalion
Colonel regimental commander.
General ranks included:
Brigadier-General (changed in the 1920s)
Sergeant-Major-General: (ca. 17th century) shortened to Major General
Lieutenant-General
Captain-General: (ca. 17th century) a full General
Field Marshal (introduced by George I in 1736)

NCOs and Warrents can come later.

Your missing a few details. In a 17th century regiment there were 10 companies. 7 Captains and 3 Captain-Lieutenants. You see the Colonel, Lieutenant Colonel, and Segeant Major's Major all held the captaincy of a company of the regiment. The Austrians continued the practice into the 18th century. With the Captain-Lieutenants distriputed at 1 per battallion in the regiment. Which had a war time paper strength of 4575 men.

[stufer]

Hey fellers

Not been on these boards in some time. Empire has dragged me back!

Interesting discussion here - it's nice to see how others will see and organise their forces. For me, I have always viewed Total War unit sizes as representative. I usually use the simple maths of one man represents 10 actual. Therefore, on huge size I think I saw screenshots of 120 for infantry. This will represent one Regiment/Battalion for me. Either a large battalion strength regiment or two 600 man battalions in one regiment - depends on which nation I play.

The cavalry I think have 60 men - that's a 600 man regiment (about right). A unit of guns will be a battery - I think I saw 18 men so 180 sounds about right for a battery. Of course, they are not exactly right, but close enough for me.

Then I will organise them into brigades etc as I see fit. Looking forward to the naming ability for units too - that will add another layer of immersion.

Yep, I'm looking forward to this game.

All the best guys,
Stu.

[Sir Beane]

Hey fellers

Not been on these boards in some time. Empire has dragged me back!

Interesting discussion here - it's nice to see how others will see and organise their forces. For me, I have always viewed Total War unit sizes as representative. I usually use the simple maths of one man represents 10 actual. Therefore, on huge size I think I saw screenshots of 120 for infantry. This will represent one Regiment/Battalion for me. Either a large battalion strength regiment or two 600 man battalions in one regiment - depends on which nation I play.

The cavalry I think have 60 men - that's a 600 man regiment (about right). A unit of guns will be a battery - I think I saw 18 men so 180 sounds about right for a battery. Of course, they are not exactly right, but close enough for me.

Then I will organise them into brigades etc as I see fit. Looking forward to the naming ability for units too - that will add another layer of immersion.

Yep, I'm looking forward to this game.

All the best guys,
Stu.

Welcome back! Empire seems to be encouraging a lot of people to post

[Noir]

Welcome back! Empire seems to be encouraging a lot of people to post

heh, its always like that before release - its about a month or so after release, that the *OMG* subside and the hairy bugs crawl out that the real party begins...

[NimitsTexan]

In Rome, a unit was labeled as a Cohort (post-Maurian), so I assume each figure represents about 3 "real" men, on Huge Unit settings. For MTW, I assumed 3-5 real people per figure in game (like actual Middle Ages armies, M2TW always felt a bit more amorphous than the other TW games). Following the same logic, given that units are by default labled as "regiments," I assume each figure is about 10-20 "real soldiers," making a full stack the equivalent of a large division or a smaller Corps, depending on what army/decade we are talking about.

[Incongruous]

During the Seven Years war, after a few campaigns regiments and armies were a complete mess, casualties were often massive due to the concentrated style of warfare. It did not take long for Parade ground numbers and standards to drop.