100-percenters

This subforum is devoted to discussing and establishing proper ratings for the database of 1000 Civil War generals and preparing brief bios of them.

Moderator: Gil R.

User avatar
Gil R.
Posts: 10820
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:22 am

100-percenters

Post by Gil R. »

We have decided that we need to add a few more generals to the list of "100-percenters," i.e. the generals who are certain to enter the game at some point. (Since our database has 1000 generals, we need to give generals a 9% chance of entering, unless they're famous enough to merit this elevated status.) So, we would like input on who the remaining ones should be. Please note that we cannot make every good or notable general a 100-percenter for game balance reasons -- we need there to be a good mix of average, below-average and above-average generals. So, for the U.S.A. we need 1-2 more, and for the C.S.A. we need 2-4 more. But in addition to 100-percenters we have 25-percenters -- generals who are about three times as likely as an ordinary general to enter the game. Anyone not making the cut as a 100-percenter can become a 25-percenter, until we fill our quota of those guys.

So, here is the list of 100-percenters:

USA: Burnside, Meade, Grant, McClellan, Sherman, Sheridan, Hooker, Pope, McDowell, Thomas

CSA: Forrest, Jackson, Lee, Longstreet, Stuart, A.S. Johnston, J.E. Johnston, Bragg, Beauregard, Early, Pickett, Hardee, Van Dorn

And here are current 25-percenters (Note: this list is unfinished):
Ewell, Rosecrans, Hood, Wigfall, Zollicoffer, Pettigrew

Please use this thread to nominate and discuss the merits of these guys. In 2-3 days I'll create some poll-threads so that we can have voting on which generals to elevate in this manner.

Thank you for participating -- your input will definitely make for a better game.
Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.
User avatar
dh76513
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 4:25 pm

RE: 100-percenters

Post by dh76513 »

I would certainly suggest BG Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain (Congressional Medal of Honor) be added to the Union list as one of those 100-precenters. It would be difficult not to see his name among the leadership structure. In fact, I would enjoy playing the game making Chamberlain, Thomas, Buford, or Sheridan my top general. I would definitely rate this warrior a "superb" leader and he certainly my list of one of the top four (all rated "8" - superb) among the Union general officers and likewise for the CSA with MG Patrick R. Cleburne. I cannot believe Cleburne was left off the South’s list of 100-percenters when he has been rated by most historians as being among the CSA's best. In the words of Jeffry D. Wert, one of our finest Civil War historians, "Cleburne and Forrest were very similar in their leadership style and very likely the two most successful field generals on both sides in the entire Civil War."
User avatar
dh76513
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 4:25 pm

RE: 100-percenters

Post by dh76513 »

I vote for making MG Patrick R. Cleburne, CSA, a 100-percenter!



Image
Attachments
cleburne.jpg
cleburne.jpg (14.21 KiB) Viewed 491 times
raven1
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 3:01 am
Location: montana

RE: 100-percenters

Post by raven1 »

U.S.A- Buford, Warren, Hancock, Gibbon and Reynolds.


C.S.A. - A.P.Hill, D.H.Hill,and McLaws
User avatar
Gil R.
Posts: 10820
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:22 am

RE: 100-percenters

Post by Gil R. »

ORIGINAL: dh76513

I would certainly suggest BG Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain (Congressional Medal of Honor) be added to the Union list as one of those 100-precenters. It would be difficult not to see his name among the leadership structure. In fact, I would enjoy playing the game making Chamberlain, Thomas, Buford, or Sheridan my top general. I would definitely rate this warrior a "superb" leader and he certainly my list of one of the top four (all rated "8" - superb) among the Union general officers and likewise for the CSA with MG Patrick R. Cleburne. I cannot believe Cleburne was left off the South’s list of 100-percenters when he has been rated by most historians as being among the CSA's best. In the words of Jeffry D. Wert, one of our finest Civil War historians, "Cleburne and Forrest were very similar in their leadership style and very likely the two most successful field generals on both sides in the entire Civil War."

Cleburne's a good suggestion. I'm sure he would have ended up on our (still incomplete) list of 25-percenters, but he may well be the best candidate for promotion to 100-percenter status.

As for Chamberlain, I'm torn, and would like to know what others think. He's most famous, of course, for what he did before he became a general. And his career as a general doesn't compare to that moment at Little Round Top, and his career as a general doesn't compare to the careers of guys most famous for what they did as generals. So should he be a 100-percenter? It would be nice to have him in the game on a somewhat regular basis, so perhaps he should be a 25-percenter. Thoughts?
Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.
User avatar
Gil R.
Posts: 10820
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:22 am

RE: 100-percenters

Post by Gil R. »

ORIGINAL: raven1

U.S.A- Buford, Warren, Hancock, Gibbon and Reynolds.


C.S.A. - A.P.Hill, D.H.Hill,and McLaws

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll include these names when we vote (probably this weekend, after there's been enough time for further nominations).
Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.
User avatar
Gil R.
Posts: 10820
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:22 am

RE: 100-percenters

Post by Gil R. »

Let me add that if anyone has suggested generals in an earlier thread on the main forum I'd appreciate it if you'd put their names here too. There are too many messages to read, so I might miss what you wrote there. Thanks.
Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.
User avatar
dh76513
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 4:25 pm

RE: 100-percenters

Post by dh76513 »

Thanks Gil for listening and for at least opening this issue up for debate. My argument in making Chamberlain a 100-percenter is noted as follows. From Antietam in 1862 to the triumphal grand review of the armies in May of 1865, Chamberlain saw much of the war in the East that included 24 battles and numerous skirmishes. He was wounded six times and had six horses shot from under him.

He received what is believed to be the only battlefield promotion to a general officer ever given by Grant. Due to his great success at Gettysburg, Chamberlain was promoted to the rank of MG by President Abraham Lincoln. Finally, In 1893 Chamberlain was awarded the Medal of Honor for his “Daring heroism and great tenacity in holding his position on the Little Round Top against repeated assaults, and carrying the advance position on the Great Round Top” at Gettysburg. In fact, he is credited with “turning the tide of the Civil War at Gettysburg” as noted in the website below:

http://www.joshuachamberlain.com/

With this being said, I think Chamberlain was responsible for one of the most important scenes of the Civil War. He presided over the ceremony of the CSA surrender. During this ceremony, Chamberlain had his men salute the defeated Confederates as they marched by evidence of his admiration of their valor and respect for the common soldier. These actions further encouraged the confederate armies still in the field to accept the peace. His actions have been incorporated into today’s military policy on enemy surrender.

And for these reasons and many more, to exclude Chamberlain for the game would be a careless decision especially for those who have a sincere appreciation for this period in our country’s history.
Williamb
Posts: 600
Joined: Thu Jan 04, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Dayton Ohio

RE: 100-percenters

Post by Williamb »

Also need to consider bad generals as 100 percenters.
 
Maybe Howard, Fremont, or even Sigel just to saddle the players with someone they dont want.
Image
User avatar
Gil R.
Posts: 10820
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:22 am

RE: 100-percenters

Post by Gil R. »

ORIGINAL: William Amos

Also need to consider bad generals as 100 percenters.

Maybe Howard, Fremont, or even Sigel just to saddle the players with someone they dont want.

Yes, I should have been clear about this: not every 100-percenter is supposed to be a Lee or a Grant. The idea is to have the most famous and important Civil War generals appear regularly, and not all of those guys were exactly outstanding (see, e.g., McClellan and Bragg). So please let me know of any generals who are too central to the war to omit, even if they had some rather large flaws.
Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.
User avatar
Gil R.
Posts: 10820
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:22 am

RE: 100-percenters

Post by Gil R. »

dh76513, having thought about it, I'm convinced that Chamberlain should be in the game, just as it was obvious to me that Pickett should be included. I'm not convinced that he should be a 100-percenter, but I'll be putting his name up for voting, along with the other candidates to be 100-percenters. Even if he doesn't get enough votes for that status, he'll still be a 25-percenter. But I think you're definitely right that he should have a good chance to appear each time one plays.
Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.
User avatar
dh76513
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 4:25 pm

RE: 100-percenters

Post by dh76513 »

Thanks Gil. William, beautiful photograph of the of the USS New Jersey battleship firing her 16 inch guns! Awesome! Just think about having her as a blockade runner?
User avatar
dh76513
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 4:25 pm

RE: 100-percenters

Post by dh76513 »

With all these issues around generals and the percentages of them appearing in the game, I have some questions. Do the general officers appear as the Union and Confederate military numbers increase? Does one have an initial pool of general officers from which each side can select? Can one only promote general officers form “those generals” that were generals at the onset of the Civil War or can you make general officers (e.g. In October 1861, for example, Nathan Bedford Forrest was a LTC over the Tennessee Cavalry Battalion)? Although I have illustrated my point and in agreement with Gil that the generals ratings should remain fixed (see post under the thread Generals Ratings -- Overview), please disclose a little information behind those 100-percenters, how promotions effects command, how general officers are placed in command of newly created units, and how what are the smallest levels one can appoint to command (i.e., Brigade, Division), etc.? Just curious!
User avatar
Oldguard
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:35 pm

RE: 100-percenters

Post by Oldguard »

Gil,

I'm sure you have valid reasons but I was interested in knowing why Pickett is a 100%-er and Ewell only 25%?

EDIT: Just curious, where do Union cavalry commanders Judson Kilpatrick, John Buford and Wesley Merritt sit?
"La Garde muert, elle ne se rend pas!"
genie144
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 4:47 pm

RE: 100-percenters

Post by genie144 »

ORIGINAL: dh76513
William, beautiful photograph of the of the USS New Jersey battleship firing her 16 inch guns! Awesome! Just think about having her as a blockade runner?
Are you sure it isn't the Missouri?

Sam
User avatar
dh76513
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 4:25 pm

RE: 100-percenters

Post by dh76513 »

Sam, I think you may be correct especially when I focus on the Helicopter pad. Magnificent ships!
User avatar
Oldguard
Posts: 94
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2005 6:35 pm

RE: 100-percenters

Post by Oldguard »

ORIGINAL: genie144

ORIGINAL: dh76513
William, beautiful photograph of the of the USS New Jersey battleship firing her 16 inch guns! Awesome! Just think about having her as a blockade runner?
Are you sure it isn't the Missouri?

Sam
I can't see at that resolution (my eyes aren't that good) but the Missouri would have BB63 stenciled on the top of the turrets. Like this:

USS Missouri at Pearl Harbor
"La Garde muert, elle ne se rend pas!"
RERomine
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 9:45 pm

RE: 100-percenters

Post by RERomine »

For a generic answer, how about considering all commanders of large armies or independent commands, corps and maybe some Confederate divisions. For an army commander to be considered, it would have to be at least as large as typical Confederate division. That would leave Nathaniel Lyon out. Many Union divisions were only two brigades, so I left them out. Confederate divisions could be fairly sizable, however. Rodes and R. H. Anderson at Gettysburg had five brigades each. Pickett's division at Gettysburg was only three brigades, but a brigade or two were detached and weren't present for the campaign. Using this method, the game will have the good, the bad and the ugly. From there, you have a heathy list and some can be weeded out at that point. Others, not falling in any of the above categories can be petitioned on a case by case basis.
User avatar
Gil R.
Posts: 10820
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:22 am

RE: 100-percenters

Post by Gil R. »

ORIGINAL: Oldguard

Gil,

I'm sure you have valid reasons but I was interested in knowing why Pickett is a 100%-er and Ewell only 25%?

EDIT: Just curious, where do Union cavalry commanders Judson Kilpatrick, John Buford and Wesley Merritt sit?




Pickett has more name-recognition. In my opinion, his fame merits inclusion as a 100-percenter, but I'd be willing to entertain arguments that he be demoted to 25-percenter status.

Ewell will be up for voting as a potential 100-percenter.

I take it that Kilpatrick, Buford and Merritt should also be included in the voting? We could definitely use some more Union generals with cavalry skills (though I think the South should get more, and thus get an advantage in that department).
Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.
User avatar
Gil R.
Posts: 10820
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 4:22 am

RE: 100-percenters

Post by Gil R. »

RERomine,
I hear what you're saying about casting a big net, but that might make the list of candidates too big. I'd rather go with guys whom people on this forum know and think worthy of consideration. It'll make our lives easier.
Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.
Post Reply

Return to “Generals' Ratings”