Effective Alternate Confederate Corps Formula's

Just for a bit of fun and interest I thought I'd offer a challenge.

Of the Corps Commanders of every army to see action for the Confederate States of America in the Civil War what alternate formula would be the most effective?

By this I mean that while the Longstreet/Jackson/Stuart formula of the ANV may have been the most effective in the OTL it is not available as an option just because it would be the first pick of everyone and the purpose of this thread is to see what other formula's could have worked.

List of Confederate Corps Commanders:

Gustavus Woodson Smith
Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson
James Longstreet
Ambrose Powell Hill
Richard Ewell
Richard Henry Anderson
Jubal Early
John B. Gordon
Braxton Bragg
William J. Hardee
Leonidas Polk
Edmund Kirby Smith
John C. Breckenridge
Daniel Harvey Hill
John Bell Hood
Alexander P. Stewart
Carter Stevenson
Stephen D. Lee
Benjamin F. Cheatham
Simon Bolivar Buckner
J.E.B. Stuart
Joseph Wheeler
Wade Hampton III
Nathan Bedford Forrest
 
Last edited:
At minimum all CS troops in the West should have at most two Cavalry commanders, one in the Army of Mississippi, one in the Army of Tennessee. A CS dream team would leave the ANV leadership intact, while I would have John C. Breckenridge commanding the Army of Tennessee, with Patrick Cleburne commanding its First Corps, Benjamin Cheatham its second, and Braxton Bragg its third (he was a good Corps commander and not exactly suited in the CS system for command of an army).

The Army of Mississippi would consist of four corps, under command of General Simon B. Buckner, the division commanders Hardee, Stevenson, Anderson, and Lee. I would assign Wade Hampton command of cavalry in this army, Forrest in the first. Forrest's mounted infantry tactics would boost the AoT's overall numbers which it would rather sorely need given the theater it would have to defend.

Where the ANV is concerned, I think that its dream team of Stuart in command of cavalry, Jackson the smaller of two wings and Longstreet the larger of two wings with Lee in overall command is as good as it can hope for. It is the one army with the best chance to win the CSA a short war and most likely to face politically chosen incompetents to ensure said short war.
 
The Confederacy has (I'm picking late 1862 for the time frame) three field armies (Northern Virginia, Tennessee, and Mississippi) plus one independent corps (Army of the West) and numerous local commands.

Given that, if I am suddenly put in Davis' shoes, here are my picks, both for army commanders and corps commanders:

Army of Northern Virginia: (70,000) (Virginia)
Commanding General: Robert E. Lee
First Corps: James Longstreet
Second Corps: Thomas J. Jackson
Third Corps: A. P. Hill
Cavalry Corps: J.E.B. Stuart

Army of Tennessee: (60,000) (Tennessee)
Commanding General: Joseph E. Johnston
First Corps: William J Hardee
Second Corps: Leonidas Polk
Third Corps: Edmund Kirby-Smith
Cavalry Corps: Nathan B. Forrest

Army of Mississippi: (50,000) (Two corps in Mississsippi, one in Louisiana)
Commanding General: P. G. T. Beauregard
First Corps: Thomas C. Hindman
Second Corps: John C. Breckinridge
Thrid Corps: Braxton Bragg
Cavalry Corps: Joseph Wheeler

Army of the West: (15,000) (Arkansas/Missouri)
Commanding General: Sterling Price

Notes: Although some of the generals in the list might be better suited to command than my choices, they were either too junior (Gordon, SD Lee, Hood) or unavailable (A. S. Johnston and Van Dorn are dead, Buckner is a POW). I added Price and Hindman to the list because they were effectively commanding corps-sized forces at times, with mixed results. Pemberton, who is also not in the list, I would assign to the defense of Charleston, Savannah, and adjoining coastal areas.

The numbers given are TOE; actual strengths would vary considerably. The areas of operations are more or less historical. I put Bragg in a corps command with the idea of his corps being detached and assigned to Louisiana.

What the Confederacy lacks, and the North has, is a decent Chief of Staff and attendant organisation. To some extent Davis was his own chief of staff, but someone like Gustavus Smith operating in that capacity would have been of great assistance to him.
 
Well, actually, my intention was just to discuss what different combinations of officers at a Corps level could have been effective, not to reorganize every army, though I dont mind you doing it that way instead.

For instance; a combination of Hardee and Bragg as Corps commanders instead of Hardee and Polk as was OTL could have seen the AoT be far more effective than it was. Both could handle Corps level administration and would have complimented each other in that Hardee had an extremely good grasp of tactics and Bragg had a relatively good grasp of strategy - the only problem being the difficulty in stopping Bragg alienating everyone.

Similarly a combination of Hardee and Jackson would have worked quite well.
 
At minimum all CS troops in the West should have at most two Cavalry commanders, one in the Army of Mississippi, one in the Army of Tennessee. A CS dream team would leave the ANV leadership intact, while I would have John C. Breckenridge commanding the Army of Tennessee, with Patrick Cleburne commanding its First Corps, Benjamin Cheatham its second, and Braxton Bragg its third (he was a good Corps commander and not exactly suited in the CS system for command of an army).

The Army of Mississippi would consist of four corps, under command of General Simon B. Buckner, the division commanders Hardee, Stevenson, Anderson, and Lee. I would assign Wade Hampton command of cavalry in this army, Forrest in the first. Forrest's mounted infantry tactics would boost the AoT's overall numbers which it would rather sorely need given the theater it would have to defend.

Where the ANV is concerned, I think that its dream team of Stuart in command of cavalry, Jackson the smaller of two wings and Longstreet the larger of two wings with Lee in overall command is as good as it can hope for. It is the one army with the best chance to win the CSA a short war and most likely to face politically chosen incompetents to ensure said short war.

Interesting differences between our picks. Who would you put in command in Arkansas? Louisiana? Gulf Coast? Atlantic seaboard?

I split up the ANV into three corps because in practice that worked better; I would give the lion's share of troops to Longstreet and Jackson, though, so the difference is not as great as it appears.

You wouldn't employ Joe Johnston? Surely he rates to command one of the armies, even if he isn't Davis' favorite person. How about Beauregard?
 
Interesting differences between our picks. Who would you put in command in Arkansas? Louisiana? Gulf Coast? Atlantic seaboard?

I split up the ANV into three corps because in practice that worked better; I would give the lion's share of troops to Longstreet and Jackson, though, so the difference is not as great as it appears.

You wouldn't employ Joe Johnston? Surely he rates to command one of the armies, even if he isn't Davis' favorite person. How about Beauregard?

I would employ Albert Sidney Johnston as chief of staff, with Joe Johnston overall commander of the Trans-Mississippi Department. Richard Taylor would be overall commander in Louisiana and Arkansas along with Kirby Smith in Texas. This is the team that produced the most lopsided CS victories in 1864, otherwise disastrous and they've the best chances to halt the US Army.

I would employ Beauregard as a theater commander in the West with actual power as opposed to Davis running rings around him. He had good ideas, and he's teams that can carry them out as much as the CSA can do, while the USA's best generals face the best guys the CSA has to offer.

This is no guarantee of victory, but it is the best the CSA has to offer. A single commander in the West with actual power during the timeframe that the USA has divided command in the West and poor command in the East and with the CS Army under the one general Jeff Davis absolutely, fully trusts and with a different set-up to the Department system that went so far to enhance all its other weaknesses this is as much as the CSA can ask for.
 
Well, actually, my intention was just to discuss what different combinations of officers at a Corps level could have been effective, not to reorganize every army, though I dont mind you doing it that way instead.

For instance; a combination of Hardee and Bragg as Corps commanders instead of Hardee and Polk as was OTL could have seen the AoT be far more effective than it was. Both could handle Corps level administration and would have complimented each other in that Hardee had an extremely good grasp of tactics and Bragg had a relatively good grasp of strategy - the only problem being the difficulty in stopping Bragg alienating everyone.

Similarly a combination of Hardee and Jackson would have worked quite well.

Actually my picks were made with the idea of each army having at least one "maneuver element" (Jackson, Kirby-Smith, Hindman, Bragg) and one "supporting element" (Longstreet, Hardee, Breckenridge) with suitable commanders for each. I limited picks to those individuals suitable for army and corps command in late 1862, with the exception of AP Hill, who will be commanding the smallest of the three corps of the ANV.
 
Actually my picks were made with the idea of each army having at least one "maneuver element" (Jackson, Kirby-Smith, Hindman, Bragg) and one "supporting element" (Longstreet, Hardee, Breckenridge) with suitable commanders for each. I limited picks to those individuals suitable for army and corps command in late 1862, with the exception of AP Hill, who will be commanding the smallest of the three corps of the ANV.

Where mine simply redraws the map of all the armies for a hypothetical best-case scenario starting in 1861. Which is the difference between my idea and yours. Mine also has two overall cavalry commanders, Hampton and Forrest, whose origins were *in* the West as defined by the war, has a two-theater overall system with actual power, and favoring infantry leaders and cavalry as a means to compensate for AoT and AoM weaknesses in artillery.
 
Top