Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
No, the Union did not have Repeating Rifles in any significant number at any point in the war. At no point did the majority of Union Soldiers have anything but Single Shot muskets. The rest of his "analysis" is base line elementary stuff and Pop-History.
In that period the weapons and personnel were pretty even, and the generals on the Southern side were far better than on the Northern side.
1862 in Maryland was a pretty bloody year in that conflict, if memory serves me well.
But by 1863, not within the scope of the game, the South lost at Gettysburg, lost their second best general, and the other points of my comment come into play. Lincoln tired of the bad Union generals and finally turned to Grant and Sherman, and while no exact match for Lee, Grant wore him down with flanking manouvres and a war of attrition for two long years.