<
             Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC) Forums
*    NWC     NWC Staff     NWC Rules     NWC (DoR) Records    About Us     Send Email Inquiry to NWC
*   La Grande Armée Quartier Général        La Grande Armée Officer Records     Join La Grande Armée
*   Allied Coalition    Allied Officers     Join Coalition
*   Coalition Armies:   Austro-Prussian-Swedish Army    Anglo Allied Army (AAA)    Russian Corps
  
                 Military Books, Magazines, Games for sale (see other items)
Forums:    ACWGC    CCC     Home:    ACWGC    CCC
It is currently Thu Oct 18, 2018 10:45 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: 1815
PostPosted: Wed Jan 07, 2015 12:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2001 8:49 am
Posts: 997
Location: USA
I agree with Andy's second point--the speed of movement. There are several reasons for this-a) hindsight means less need for caution, b) the movement rates (I really like the movement rates in the games Bill Peters has done as opposed to those in Waterloo and 1812), c) unrestricted night marching (no fatigue, etc). To address these things, there are harder fixes (coding night fatigue, pdt changes) and somewhat easier ones (house rules, fixing units at night, such as is done in East Prussia 1914)...

Ultimately, a lot of this is design decisions and also reflect the age of the game. Bill Peters went back and tweeked his games over and over based on feedback, his own growing experience as a designer, etc. Waterloo has not gotten the same love. Freezing the French for the first few nights to simulate traffic jams and Ney would be one way to go.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 1815
PostPosted: Wed Jan 07, 2015 5:41 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 8:14 am
Posts: 189
Location: Australia
Night fatigue, I am pretty sure would require an engine change.

Movement, no matter what title, is going to be dependent on the time scale used. I don't know that I have an opinion on this from one title to the next, yet apart from noting that Bill seems to have worked with different time scales with the titles he was working with (I am pretty sure Jena is using a different time scale).

Anyways - setting all of that aside, I sort of like playing the Nivellles scenario in this title -I don't know what that says regarding speed, etc - however the thing is, is that movement speed (as an aggregate consideration) is going to be dependent on morale, and if the user is using Line Movement Restriction.

_________________
[*]Hockey Coach & RW/LW
[*]http://hist-sdc.com
[*]JTS Graphics Coordinator/Artist/Tester/?

Lieutenant des cuirassiers ~S Trauth
2ème Brigade
1ère Division de Grosse Cavalerie
La Réserve de Cavalerie de la Grande Armée


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 1815
PostPosted: Wed Jan 07, 2015 7:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2013 10:55 am
Posts: 965
Location: Bouches-de-l’Elbe
AFAIK the movement range in Bill Peters games is even larger, at least in Leipzig infantry has 16 points per turn and uses 2 points on a pike what means they can make up to 800 meters per turn(10 min), I think in Waterloo you're slower.

The Night Fatigue OR would also not help much as fatigue is differently handled here than in the CW series what has the Night Fatigue OR.
I also don't see what one can do in the PDT as any change would affect both sides.

In general For night movement a houserule depicting the need for at least some rest could be handy, especially after a day of combat.
But it has to be noted that night movement did happen, on 15th June the first French formations started marched by 3 o'clock in the night.


Question is at what point do the French really trail off into a much better position than historically.
If the Allies only have a chance to win when the French make certain "mistakes" or simply chooses to do things differently that is of course a problem but that is a general problem in wargames, every designer for every wargame tries to depict the historical situation as exact as possible but after that it's usually up to the players to do whatever they want to do, of course designers make sure they still behave within what was historically possible but within that they are free.

Question is at what point do the French really trail off into a much better position than historically and is that really outside of the historical possible.

_________________
Chef de Bataillon Christian Hecht, Corps Commander
La Grande Armée - 3éme Corps d'Armée
"Vive la révolution, vive la france and vive L’Empereur!"


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 1815
PostPosted: Fri Jan 09, 2015 3:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:34 am
Posts: 3673
Location: Republic of Galveston Texas USA
For an Allied play time is on your side hold them hold them. Let the Prussian beat them the Allied army as tool. I lost more 1815 games due to not holding them let the Prussian use their man power late in the game. Two choices attack early and destroy all bridges set up at waterloo and wait for the French to run out of steam. As for the short games 66 I never won one. I play maneuver games. As for Bill Peters I was the one he used to test some of his games.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 1815
PostPosted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 12:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 5:21 am
Posts: 604
Location: New Zealand
Christian is correct

"Regarding speed, well I guess if the French player exploits his knowledge(or simply refuses to act as lame as Ney did) and goes directly without a stop to Quatre-Bras mostly ignoring the Prussians in the direction of Ligny there is not much one can do about it."

Remember there was some confusion and delay in the French initial movements due to the death of Berthier and Soult Chief of Staff and the issuer of Napoleon's orders. Also that turncoat that defected had a small delaying effect.

So hindsight being 20/20 Napoleon's plan is acknowledged by all to be magnificent. It caught the allies on the hope and it was just the execution that went astray. The Fog and Friction of war as its known.

The allies playing this have more knowledge of the plan than they accepted (Blutcher) or realised at the time (Wellington). Napoleon DID steal a march on them! So the allies have a fair chance to succeed knowing what they do now, they have options to either fall back in order to concentrate, with small delaying actions; or put up stout resistance early on in the hope of achieving major delays and loses to the French and concentrate for the final battle with all guns blazing. The Prussian guns are also very effective deployed correctly. So realistic options. The execution and player ability to counter the others moves will be the decider. Its not a forgone conclusion. The Allied forces combined ARE a very fine match for the French quality and command advantage.

I believe the campaign choices option with the large map is the best to try to change history without the initial French 'advantage' the allies seem not to be able to handle :frenchdrunk:

_________________
Vive L'Emperor!!

Général de Brigade Baron Mike Ellwood
2eme Regiment de Voltigeurs de la Garde
Duc de Bautzen et Comte de Monfort
La Jeune Garde


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 1815
PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2015 11:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 10:18 am
Posts: 5498
Location:
There is an artillery fire mod in the ver. 13 PDT file. Am not sure if this value was used by Rich White when he helped with the update.

Good point, Cliff, and the PDT files should have a reduction for Mud turns (I did that in the 1813-14 titles).

_________________
Image
General der Kavallerie Wilhelm Prinz Peters von Dennewitz
Husaren-Regiment Hessen-Kassel
Infanterie-Brigade Hessen-Kassel
Königlich-Preußisches Armee-Korps
Scenario Designer for Napoleonic Battles series - John Tiller Software
http://friendsofwargaming.com/support-bill-peters.html


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 1815
PostPosted: Fri Aug 17, 2018 9:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2001 12:13 am
Posts: 574
Location: USA
A bit of first tier Thread Necromancy here, but why not? I'm trying to do a mental reset from some things, so, focusing on other stuff for the eve.

Deep down, I think the fundamental problem with the long scenario is that it fundamentally pushes the Tiller engine way, way past where its designed to go. Pretty much every weakness you can think of will come home to roost. Some of the problems can be wrestled into semi-submission with house rules, but frankly, keeping too many house rules makes a game too much hassle to my feeble mind.

1) No need to rest troops through the night. Not only do you have the fact that the troops should get tired (and hungry...), but look how often the troops weren't ready to move out even at sunrise.
2) The lack of properly handling the difference in column formations. Road Column and Attack Column aren't the same critter.
3) The ability to move troops outside of any kind of prescribed marching orders. We can futz around with how we move stuff every turn adding greater efficiency in ways that ADC's could only dream of.
4) Instant orders. This is the biggie. No 90 minute delays for an ADC to hobble down the road and find the Corps Commander and pass on orders.
5) Orders are obeyed. If we want the lads to move at 0600, they're moving at 0600, not 0930 (as happened so often.)
6) 1980 level Communications. Oh, we have a single squadron that's 30 hexes from its nearest friend spot the enemy column? We can react to it NOW.

Of course, all of these things exist in any of the games and scenarios, but the problems they create in long, operational maneuver based scenarios are progressively magnified.

No game engine will be perfect, but one should also be aware of the flaws that it introduces.

_________________
Feldmarschall Freiherr Gary McClellan
IR44
Portner Grenadier Battalion
Austrian Army

Scenario Designer:
JTS Midway
JTS Seven Years War


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: 1815
PostPosted: Tue Aug 28, 2018 3:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2018 8:22 pm
Posts: 157
All very good points. At the very least I'd expect working modules from Panzer Campaigns to have been compiled in with Napoleon's Battles by now. Like night fatigue. One thing I'd disagree with regarding general assumptions here is reaction time of formations adjacent to the reconnaissance squadrons. A galloping horse can do 6.7km in 10 minutes (a quicktime marching formation only 810m). Although the immediacy of an entire army's reaction in an operational area is unrealistic runners can bring reports in (especially at this tactical level) very quickly. As for daily march orders I always array my units in encampment and piquet positions in the evening and start forming up the road column at first light. Always takes about 3 or 4 turns to begin the march.

It's a simple turn based tactics engine and we can't make to much of realism. The greatest 'flaw' is of course the UGoIGo system. Dunno why Grigsby's Kampfgruppe phased play was never passed on. If only Battlefront would release CMx1 source code so we could design a WeGo Napoleonics wargame... I cannot think of another era where a hyper realistic tactical wargame engine is needed more than the early 19th century. It is increasing in popularity so maybe soon.

_________________
Lieutenant Geoff McCarty
45ème Régiment d’Infanterie de Ligne,
2éme Brigade,
2ème Division,
1er Corps d'Armée,
La Grande Armée


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Localized by Maël Soucaze © 2010 phpBB.fr