ACW 10mm NOT 6mm!

[Norm]

Some rules span both the napoleonic and ACW periods. It is the absence of cavalry on the ACW battlefield that partly helps such rule systems to feel a little less generic.

I would like to have a couple of units of cavalry (and their dismounted other half), but pressure on the painting table always seems to mean there is something more needy that needs to be painted.

I would like to do the opening hours of Gettysbury and that will be my motivation to get some cavalry (at least dismounted bases) painted.

[Leman]

First day at Gettysburg is an excellent way of getting cavalry into a major ACW battle. Also, look to the West, eg Pea Ridge featured cavalry and Confederate Indians. One of the good things about the ACW is the sheer amount of information, scenarios etc, that are around. I even have a scenario for 'The Horse Soldiers" - ding dong, ding dong.

[getagrip]

First day at Gettysburg is an excellent way of getting cavalry into a major ACW battle. Also, look to the West, eg Pea Ridge featured cavalry and Confederate Indians. One of the good things about the ACW is the sheer amount of information, scenarios etc, that are around. I even have a scenario for 'The Horse Soldiers" - ding dong, ding dong.

Funny you should say that.  I started reading about Gettysburg last night and the author has started with Stuart's cavalry.

[toxicpixie]

Dismounted bases with a couple of mounted guys on a penny to put behind to show when they're in "prepare the BBQ boys, the burgers are comin'!" mode?

I think most of the "cavalry on cavalry" battles are probably well fought at something approaching an almost skirmish level set, preferably in some sort of flowing campaign structure. It'd lend itself well to a bigger version of the Necromunda/Mordheim/Legends of the Old West sort of approach I reckon, but at a somewhat higher level. Basically let you do a chevauchee into and across enemy lines and supplies opposed by who ever is sent to hunt you down...

[getagrip]

Think you're right!

I'm going for a single unit of cavalry which will be deployed as Dragoons.

[Last Hussar]

Their not 'dragoons' as such; think of them more as mounted infantry.

Of course this is distracting.  What you actually need is infantry.

And trees.

No matter how many trees you have, you don't have enough for ACW.

And some more infantry.

[getagrip]

Okay, so what's the difference (please be kind) between a dragoon and a mounted infantryman?

I'm new to the history stuff.

[Leman]

A dragoon is a cavalryman trained to fight on foot using a carbine. A mounted infantryman is an infantryman trained to travel by horse, but fight on foot using normal infantry weapons. There were designated mounted infantry in the ACW, such as Wilder's Lightning Brigade. I would suggest that the cavalry were more like dragoons.

[getagrip]

A dragoon is a cavalryman trained to fight on foot using a carbine. A mounted infantryman is an infantryman trained to travel by horse, but fight on foot using normal infantry weapons. There were designated mounted infantry in the ACW, such as Wilder's Lightning Brigade. I would suggest that the cavalry were more like dragoons.

Thanks 

[Last Hussar]

By the late 18thC Dragoons were used as cavalry- the original idea was pretty much out of use in Western European armies:  in the 17?70s I think (might have been 80s)
Horseguards redesignated all British cavalry as dragoons without changing the role, purely because dragoons were paid 2d a day less.  I don't think you'll find a 'cavalry' regiment in the Army today - they are Hussars or Dragoons (the odd lancer etc)

Yes there were cavalry battles, and yes there were important contributions made in some battles by dismounted cavalry, and yes Custer did make his name with a charge at Gettysbury, but we remember them because there are so few.  They are really mounted infantry, fighting skirmish order, often with the better weapons - think a sort of mobile 95th Rifles.  You won't need more than a couple of regiments - good for a flying column maybe, but often not much more than a speed bump.

[FierceKitty]

A dragoon is a cavalryman trained to fight on foot using a carbine. A mounted infantryman is an infantryman trained to travel by horse, but fight on foot using normal infantry weapons. There were designated mounted infantry in the ACW, such as Wilder's Lightning Brigade. I would suggest that the cavalry were more like dragoons.

For a large part of his history. a dragoon is also an infantryman trained to ride a horse to get to the action faster.

[toxicpixie]

For a large part of his history. a dragoon is also an infantryman trained to ride a horse to get to the action faster.

Hence they have drums not trumpets for instruments

Lots of Dragoons promoted themselves to "actual" cavalry - even as far as French mounted longbows, or British Dragoons up to the WSS. Doesn't mean they *cant* fight on foot, just that it's got a bit beneath them.

[Leman]

Union cavalry still armed as dragoons with carbines. Union mounted infantry armed with rifled muskets. Confederate cavalry armed with a right mixed bag of goodies - shotguns, muzzle loading carbines, the odd BLC, muskets etc.

[Last Hussar]

I know dragoons were originally mounted infantry, my point was by the ACW, and being in the US cavalry tended not to be cavalry. Did any yanks call themselves Dragoons? Ive never seen reference, and they usually took great delight in pretending to be French.

[getagrip]

This from Wikipedia:

The word dragoon originally meant mounted infantry, who were trained in horse riding as well as infantry fighting skills. However, usage altered over time and during the 18th century, dragoons evolved into conventional light cavalry units and personnel. Dragoon regiments were established in most European armies during the late 17th and early 18th centuries.

Which means I think you're both right!

Blessed are the cheese makers.