ealabor said:Also that miltia defeated the British expeditionary force at New Orleans.. 5000 milita vs 11000 Brit regulars, so whats the excuse there?
Your fleet also got stuffed by our frigates, which resulted in your side issuing orders for your navy not to engage our frigates, unless they outnumbered our ships
This is because the construction of our ships were superior to yours. Your cannon rounds had a tendancy to bounce off our frigate's hulls. This is a result of construction when used with southern live oak.
It wasn't about territorial gains, it was about telling the Brits to **** off when it came to taking our sailors, and a few other policies. Any territorial gains would have been secondary, and not the objective, which was achieved.
ealabor said:Dain Ironfoot said:I enjoyed it before it got all "Glorious American Freedom!" having just read Fusiliers, that rang quite hollow.
Indeed it was "Glorious American Freedom!".
Victory against the "Most powerful army in all of the world". A complete saga including great storyline from land to sea, including schooners claiming prizes on your British warships.
All great, though I'd have to say secondary to the events which took place in the war of 1812. Beating the Brits at Baltimore, and later at New Orleans where the Brits even outnumbered us, still lost.
Oh, there is of course the U.S.S. Constitution which ran your British fleet into the ground
Ruthven said:Pics and I might accept.
Tiberius Decimus Maximus said:
Ruthven said:I'm leaving for the UK very soon Dain. Be afraid. Be very, very afraid.
Hussey, you're next on my list.
malthaussen said:Since I'm here, I'll float another thought for your delectation. One of the books I've been reading recently has a quote from a Brit of his commander shouting "Aim low, boys, and spoil their hope of future generations!" In re the marksmanship issue, which was once so dear to the British Army before automatic weapons came in and made aiming redundant, I think of the French naval tendency to shoot for the masts, while the British navy famously tried to hull their opponents. I read somewhere-or-other, in re modern war, that those soldiers who bother to fire their weapons in a firefight (not many) tend to aim high. I once had a conversation with a WWII vet, who hastened to assure me (unsolicited) that, with the 80th Infantry Division from Normandy to V-E Day, he never tried to shoot anyone. "I shot out a lot of windows," was his quote.
Incredible as it may seem to us gamers, there is some reason to believe that most soldiers don't try to kill the other guys if they can avoid it. Only when closely supervised by an NCO or officer will they expose themselves, however briefly, to take a crack at the guys trying to kill them. At first, this may seem irrelevant to our period, because in linear formation all soldiers are closely supervised by NCOs and officers, and presumably have to shoot. However, they can aim where they please -- a slight inclination of the muzzle will make the round miss high, without being noticed by the supervising official.
Maybe the British were so successful because they were more bloodthirsty.
Knight_Henry said:I would've thought you chaps for Military History, I deferred my entry last year and start War Studies this Sept. Possibly thinking of popping to Sandhurst afterwards, haven't made m'mind up yet! Fancy the Navy eh Hussey? Why so, if you don't mind me asking old fellow??
Dain Ironfoot said:Yup, I'm with Exeter.
Selothi said:Wow, talk about over-reacting to a simple request to STOP BEING OFF-TOPIC in a mod development thread. But meh, if you feel so inclined to hijack a thread to tell us all of the ancient origins of the various words used to describe leg-wear, be my guess. I'm not saying it sucks or anything, etymology can be very interesting, I'm seeing it hasn't got a place in this thread which is being hijacked way too often.
Oh, and BTW, nice job on those tests. Now, get that head out of your ass and wash it in the water you might just be spending your time on.
Dain Ironfoot said:Well it was a somewhat bizarre that regiments were forbidden to wear kilts for a few years! Luckily by the Hundred days the kilts were flapping in the breeze again
QuailLover said:I thought there was a Highland grenadier or engineer group that wore kilts. (I could be wrong, but this was based off remembering a research paper I did years ago)
Selothi said:Cut the etymological spam, please. Thank you.
bbeck08 said:I hope I can join a highland brigade. And just curious I'm not to sure about the history and I'm off to class right now so I can't look it up, but did the scots greys play a role? They assumed the nickname in 1877 I believe and the time period of this mod has slipped my mind.
Amman de Stazia said:Interestingly enough, I found a source for the Highland Light Infantry wearing kilts - Their uniform according to Haythornthwaite's "Uniforms of the Peninsula War" should be trews...
Dain Ironfoot said:Erm Amman, the OSP 18th century uniforms don't really work with the rest of the models in TPW due to the way they're set up.. while it's not a bad idea, making variations on the civillian models in the current release BRFs would be more useful.