gatling guns

[Morskittar]

They probobly never will but i would love it if gatling guns were added. they were around at the time. I dont know how balanced they could be as if they had a continous fire until they ran out of supplies it would make sense yet they would do little damage. Yet it could be a really good anti infantry brigade weapon yet has a short range so would be put at the front exposing it to cannon fire and has few supplies and dopes high damage, and when it runs out of ammo it fires really slowly. So yeah how do others think a gatling gun could be implamented.

[CrashToDesktop]

Publicado originalmente por 1stNCSS-Pvt.GrayGhost:

I know its a historical weapon but it played a rarely role during the civil war

So did the Whitworth Cannons, but they're in-game.

[Kinote]

Publicado originalmente por The Soldier:

Publicado originalmente por 1stNCSS-Pvt.GrayGhost:

I know its a historical weapon but it played a rarely role during the civil war

So did the Whitworth Cannons, but they're in-game.

You are correct, but depending on how we count they were about 4-25x less rare. If I recall correctly, they were actually government equipment (on both sides) too unlike the case of the Gattling.

[CrashToDesktop]

Publicado originalmente por Kinote:

You are correct, but depending on how we count they were about 4-25x less rare. If I recall correctly, they were actually government equipment (on both sides) too unlike the case of the Gattling.

You do realize that a lot of soldiers and officers on both sides could choose to bring their own equipment, right? Pistols, sabres, rifles, all could be brought by the soldier instead of using their own standard issue weapons. The standard issue pistol was the Colt 1860, but many liked the Remmington 1858 if they could get it. The game doesn't represent this, but hey, it doesn't represent combining brigades with different weapons.

Same applies for cannon. Nothing is out of bounds. Unless a dev comes in here and says they're not putting it in, in which case the rest is pointless. :P

[Kinote]

Publicado originalmente por The Soldier:

You do realize that a lot of soldiers and officers on both sides could choose to bring their own equipment, right? Pistols, sabres, rifles, all could be brought by the soldier instead of using their own standard issue weapons. The standard issue pistol was the Colt 1860, but many liked the Remmington 1858 if they could get it. The game doesn't represent this, but hey, it doesn't represent combining brigades with different weapons.

Same applies for cannon. Nothing is out of bounds. Unless a dev comes in here and says they're not putting it in, in which case the rest is pointless. :P

Keenly aware, yes. Unless you feel the need to also press Darth for Great Uncle Rick's custom field spade or belt buckles it's not all that important of a point. There's a level of rarity where things become slightly less important.

Mixed weapons of the same class would actually be pretty handy and is something I'd rather like to see. Save me having to run to the shop for ONE rifle like some petty hunter when I'm carting ten thousand Springfield's around.

[CrashToDesktop]

The Gatling Gun was a famous weapon used during the Civil War, unlike Great Uncle Rick's custom field spade or belt buckles, just like the Whitworth cannon. The Whitworth is already in the same class of rare as the Gatling Gun, no matter what you say about how many were made - both are about as rare as they come.

Am I saying it MUST get added? No, but I'd really like it if it did. And yes, I'd be a bit sad if it didn't because it's rather iconic.

[Kinote]

Publicado originalmente por The Soldier:

The Gatling Gun was a famous weapon used during the Civil War, unlike Great Uncle Rick's custom field spade or belt buckles, just like the Whitworth cannon. The Whitworth is already in the same class of rare as the Gatling Gun, no matter what you say about how many were made - both are about as rare as they come.

Am I saying it MUST get added? No, but I'd really like it if it did. And yes, I'd be a bit sad if it didn't because it's rather iconic.

The funny thing is, we both actually agree on that but have completely different conclusions. Despite the Whitworth having a better case made for it, neither are common enough to matter. Neither should really be there.

Just like when we have a WWII game drop and every obscure German prototype never heard of outside of Krupp or FW gets rolled out.

Ewell's belt is critical to gameplay though.

[CrashToDesktop]

Publicado originalmente por Kinote:

Ewell's belt is critical to gameplay though.

That indeed.

[Sagit84]

Gatling guns in this game? Doable I think. Give them great fire rate, poor range, very long reload time (these things had to be cooled down in addition to reloading the cartrige), good morale damage, big ammo usage and make them like a single unit with 20 peaople tops so even skirmishers would wipe them out in a single volley. This could work. I'm not saying I want them, but it could work.
Personally I would prefer for devs to add more small scale battles instead...

[Lord_Malacrat]

i guess if it was added, to appease the "not historically accurate" people (its a video game guys we can take some liberties here and there) they could be expensive and very few in number and not reproduced so once u lost it u lost it for good. make it like the cannons, it can be its own unit thats very expensive and like i said before very few in number and not reproduced so once u lost it u lost it for good. i really dont have an opinion on the matter though it doesnt bother me if its the game or not.

[Morskittar]

Publicado originalmente por Kinote:

Publicado originalmente por Agentmnm:

and what do you mean by at lest its more than two.

300-400 being more than 2. Thus, "at least the Colt had more than 2.".

Apparently it cost him $12,000.00 too, which seems cheap when you compare it to the costs of our other weapons... I wonder how it would convert if we took the normal price of the standard issue muskets and inflated them to game price then did the same with the Gattlings.

I'm not entirely sure where Butler's other two guns went, either. Two at Petersburg, eight on the gun boats. Held in reserve for maintence or something, perhaps.

first off they had 12 guns. 1000 dollars per gun. i dont know where you got the two statstic from. next point the numbers does not matter yet compare it to battery sizes and brigades. a Brigade consisted of about 1500-2000 men. The colts then would be around a 1/5 of a full 2000 man brigade if the 400 men were equipped with a colt. an artillery battery had about six guns. Yet if we use the artillary brigades in the game 24. lets go with the game, the gatling gun would fill 1/2 of a brigade unlike th 1/5 of the colt in an infantry brigade.And as less artillary existed than guns we should be argueing in fractions.

[Morskittar]

Publicado originalmente por 1stNCSS-Pvt.GrayGhost:

I know its a historical weapon but it played a rarely role during the civil war

The withworth rifle (infantry rifle not cannon rifle). was only ordered by the confederates and in small number, dont know if they were ever used. The gatling gun was used in the trenches in the siege of pitsburg and then some were equipped to gunboats. The fact they were then equipped to a gun boat tells me at least they must have done something of value in Pitsburg otherwise they would have just remained un used for the rest of the war. Like the colt revolving rifle.

[Morskittar]

Publicado originalmente por Sagit84:

Gatling guns in this game? Doable I think. Give them great fire rate, poor range, very long reload time (these things had to be cooled down in addition to reloading the cartrige), good morale damage, big ammo usage and make them like a single unit with 20 peaople tops so even skirmishers would wipe them out in a single volley. This could work. I'm not saying I want them, but it could work.
Personally I would prefer for devs to add more small scale battles instead...

Thank you for being the one person who has actually been talking about the thing i wanted this discussion to be on... thank you

[Kinote]

Publicado originalmente por Agentmnm:

first off they had 12 guns. 1000 dollars per gun. i dont know where you got the two statstic from.

Correct. Twelve were purchased. Two were present in Petersburg, eight were on gunboats, and the rest... somewhere.

Publicado originalmente por http://www.americancivilwarstory.com/gatling-gun.html:

A couple Union officers bought a few the guns privately, so the guns did see very limited action during the war. The most notable purchase was by General Benjamin F. Butler, who bought twelve guns at $1,000 each. Two of those guns were used at Petersburg in 1864 to defend against Confederate attacks, and the guns worked quite well.

Publicado originalmente por http://www.civilwarhome.com/gatlinggun.htm:

While the gun showed much promise and fired the standard .58-caliber ammunition, it had so many drawbacks and was so radical in both design and purpose that Gatling was unable to interest the U.S. government. The army purchased none of his guns, but Maj. Gen. Benjamin F. Butler, after a field test, purchased 12 for $1,000 each and two were used on the Petersburg front in 1864 and apparently were considered successful.

[Morskittar]

Publicado originalmente por Kinote:

Publicado originalmente por Agentmnm:

first off they had 12 guns. 1000 dollars per gun. i dont know where you got the two statstic from.

Correct. Twelve were purchased. Two were present in Petersburg, eight were on gunboats, and the rest... somewhere.

Publicado originalmente por http://www.americancivilwarstory.com/gatling-gun.html:

A couple Union officers bought a few the guns privately, so the guns did see very limited action during the war. The most notable purchase was by General Benjamin F. Butler, who bought twelve guns at $1,000 each. Two of those guns were used at Petersburg in 1864 to defend against Confederate attacks, and the guns worked quite well.

Publicado originalmente por http://www.civilwarhome.com/gatlinggun.htm:

While the gun showed much promise and fired the standard .58-caliber ammunition, it had so many drawbacks and was so radical in both design and purpose that Gatling was unable to interest the U.S. government. The army purchased none of his guns, but Maj. Gen. Benjamin F. Butler, after a field test, purchased 12 for $1,000 each and two were used on the Petersburg front in 1864 and apparently were considered successful.

weirdly there is alot of contradictions on numbers. I found an article saying twelve were used in Petersburg and then another eight were equipped to gunboats. which makes no sense.

[Dave]

I am a bit neutral in this issue:

On one hand: Gatlink guns were very rare, not officially adapted and play a very small role during the war. Thus leaving them the Gatlink guns out is no problem. Additionally, since they function quite a bit different compared to cannons it would take considerable development time and resources that might be put to other (better) use.

On the other hand, they were present in the war. Already in the game are some very rare weapons that are also very limited in number. Gatling guns role could be similar to that of canister shot cannons. In the end having a maximum of 12 Gatling guns (with no replacement of losses) will not make that much of a difference.