OK, so it sounds like the ultimate definition of "green" is how much
you can find out about its previous drill/training. But isn't the
ultimate test of how well a green unit does is how it did during the
battle? Of course leadership/morale/food/weather/etc., all figure
into how a unit does for the first time under fire too.
Anyway, learning how much training a green unit had before the battle
is quite a challenge. I remember reading that some new units trained
on the march or in camp during the night--see my Conn. paper on MHO.
But that wouldn't compare to those units which spent weeks/months
Good luck in your endeavor and I look forward to seeing the game.
--- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com
, "dean_essig" <dean_essig@...>
> Hey Larry!
> While an extensive rating system would be very interesting to see,
such a thing goes well
> beyond my needs here.
> I'm concerned about units that have not gotten enough time on the
drill field to obtain
> even the minimal proficiency an otherwise green (no combat) unit
would be expected to
> This status will affect the unit in a number of ways, but in a
nutshell it makes the
> formation more sluggish and unwieldy as well as reducing its
ability to generate firepower.
> There might be more effects (skittishness and such), but testing
will allow me to get to the
> point where I can tell when there is "enough" as opposed to "too
much" or "not enough"
> effect (some of these units acquitted themselves well, they were
> So, the definition revolves around drill and training as opposed to
the previous experience
> of combat.
> --- In TalkAntietam@yahoogroups.com, "eighth_conn_inf"
> > Dean,
> > Looks like "green" may require your imposed definition. If you
> > it as a regiment with a majority of men who have never been in
> > combat, then you have a good list already. But as you point out
> > then "green" could also then mean a regiment with a majority of
> > who have been together for several months and have drilled, etc.,
> > then that is a different kettle of fish (fresh fish). This would
> > include most of the heavy artillery units around DC which turned
> > excellent cannon fodder during the Overland Campaign.
> > IMO, "green" means a regiment which never has been in combat. But
> > arguably a green regiment having drilled together and perhaps had
> > marksmanship training would likely be much more effective than
> > a "green" one which had none of that. I suppose you could assign
> > number from 1 to 10, 1 being brand new with no experience in
> > to 10 being a regiment which has been in combat several times.
> > sounds like a great masters thesis topic.
> > Larry F.