Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

Sirs who helped develop the scenarios,

Why is it that the HPS Waterloo game has the Prussians arriving through Bois de Couture - St Germain and the villiage of Couture and not through Lasne (and much later Ohain) as was the case?

It seems strange the scenario editors have done as no accounts I have read have this occuring other than late in the battle where some Prussians may have moved south of Plancenoit, in order to flank it and cut the chasse.

Is there a fix to this to make it historically accurate?


Col Mike Ellwood
Konig Regt
1 Bde, 22 Div
VII Saxon Corps, ADR

I've often wondered about that too in the Historical game. I put it down to a game balance thing. Arriving via Couture at least in theory stops the French from blocking the Prussians.
Anyway it's always difficult to say what happened historically in precise geographical and time terms.
It's easy to correct via the Scenario Editor. I did start once but gave up.

Generaal
2de Brigade
2de Nederlandsche Div
I Corps
Anglo Allied Army

I checked out scenario #43 and the Prussians are on the historical path. I then looked at #37 and they enter in via several locations.

As the battle scenario (#37) doesnt have the larger map ability my only guess is that Charlie felt that this is where they arrived based on his sources.

However, Hofschrorer definitely places the route of march up the Lasne valley. He also describes the ordeal that the men had moving the guns through the mud! Its no wonder that swift tactical movement of artillery at the battle was not the usual pace of most battles.

Thus I would play the #43 scenario to get a better arrival point ...

The more southerly arrival points probably need to be corrected in a future update.

Colonel Bill Peters
Armee du Rhin - V Corps, Cavalerie du V Corps, 20ème légère Brigade de Cavalerie, 13ème Hussar Regiment
HPS Napoleonic Scenario Designer (Eckmuhl, Wagram, Jena-Auerstaedt and ... more to come)

Thanks for that Andy and Bill,

The facts are very clear in that the Prusians arrived via Lasne and then later through Ohain. At approx 1pm Napoleon was first aware of the troops at Chapelle St Lambert (a good spy glass and obviously easily seen. Note it is approx 80 hexes distance in the HPS game!!!). Blucher had in fact halted there so the troops could catch up and a recon could be made. The first clash with the French in fact occured just west of Lasne at approx 3.30pm. The Prussians had been moving at approx 1.5km an HOUR! Due to steep terain around Lasne, mud, poor roads/tracks, bottlenecks and they were tired after three days of marching.

Andy, Is it relatively easy to use the map editor to just change the arrival locations of the Prussians or is it a bit time consuming having to change each unit/formation or grouping?

Bill, would it be possible to give different movement allowances for different nationalities? This to me would be of interest as I would allow the early French Inf (say prior to the Prussian and Austrian reforms) a grater movement allowance to replicate their real ability to out march strategically and then out manouvure tactically. The difference would be slight but enough to give that little bit of an advantage. Would be interesting in both the 10 and 15min turns.

Col Mike Ellwood
Konig Regt
1 Bde, 22 Div
VII Saxon Corps, ADR

Mike - different movement allowances are not something we will get. I dont want to lobby for it as on the battlefield it wasnt as marked as it was on the open countryside.

Remember the main thing is the operation format of the Austrian army for instance in Italy, they being tied to supply wagons, that made them so slow.

The Russians on the other hand had an interesting march format under Suvarov. If left away from the Austrians they would march three times during the day. They could outmarch the Austrians as a result.

But I dont see a difference on the battlefield between the nationalities. And the Allies in the club would want my head (Ken Jones leading the necktie party with Herr McClellan right behind him!) if I did this.

Historical accuracy is important and it can be modeled in the way that we do the campaign branches.

For instance in Jena the Prussians retreat in the large campaign file (the one with 7-8 branches per campaign - not the one map monster) but the French always catch up with them. If it was the other way around the French would be able to out pace their pursuers.

That is how I model the different nationalities. Surely at Waterloo the French must have been slow as well as the Prussians? Maybe that accounted for partly why Grouchy was not going to be able to reach the battlefield on the 18th? We have scenarios that postulate "what if Grouchy had marched to the sound of the guns ..." but frankly I dont see him able to arrive until about 9pm at the latest. And surely not in strength.

I am not big on the weather element in the game (as a disordered army inevitably gets run over) but its accurate!

So no, we wont have different MP rates per nation. And frankly I dont think it would work anyway. Giving the French more MPs than the Allies would unbalance alot of our past work and I would not want to try and balance future work either ...

Colonel Bill Peters
Armee du Rhin - V Corps, Cavalerie du V Corps, 20ème légère Brigade de Cavalerie, 13ème Hussar Regiment
HPS Napoleonic Scenario Designer (Eckmuhl, Wagram, Jena-Auerstaedt and ... more to come)

Hi Bill,

Thanks for that. Yes I agree mostly with what you are saying reference the games as they are now. I love the campaign branch options by the way. I understand that is a gret way to replicate the movements. I was really looking for the posibility of different rates for the early period only just as a personal interest thing.

I do realise the Allies fight tooth and nail to deny the French the obvious advantages they had...why else would they all copy it [:D].

Anyway keep up the great work and I have a large order to place once the next game comes out as I have a few converts here just from showing them a quick look. All miniture wargamers who are chaffing at the bit to get into it.



Col Mike Ellwood
Konig Regt
1 Bde, 22 Div
VII Saxon Corps, ADR

Hi Mike,

The difficulty with assigning different movement rates by nationality <i>on the battle-field</i> is that the bulk of each turn's time allotment is actually devoted to the <i>command function</i>, not the covering of distance or the performance of combat. This enhanced combat worthiness of moving somewhat faster <i>on the battlefield</i> is actually reflected in the French quality rating. Only if a separate <i>March-order column</i> formation is added would it make sense to assign movement allowances by nationality (or unit type).

However, it might make sense to boost cavalry movement allowances slightly. I am playing a Hunting Davout scenario, where my opponent surprised a screening cavalry squadron and disordered it (with only 4 casualties, darn-it!). In open, rolling terrain, my cavalry now moves slower than formed infantry (18 MP vs 22). With a two hundred yard head start, this is absurd in historical terms. In open terrain, only at distances in excess of 100 to 150 miles does a human's greater endurance and ability to consume protein as an energy source overcome a horse-and-riders innate speed advantage.

Also, as a primary use of light infantry and light cavalry was as a screening force, routinely outside of command radius, perhaps these unit types should have a base 2-in-6 chance of re-ordering instead of the usual 1-in-6 chance. Perhaps allow this only to companies/squadrons, as smaller formations are certainly easier to reform than are larger ones. I believe this would be a better reflection of actual capability of these troops when in open order.

Lieutenant Pieter Geerkens
2ème du 22ème, VII Saxon Corps,
L'Armèe du Rhin


"Even in the attack, [I found] the spade is the equal of the rifle." - Erwin Rommel

Hi Pieter,

Yes I must admit the disorder thing with the cavalry is an issue. In fact I don't see why the same movement rate is still not used. Why reduce the movement for disorder when in reality they would move just as quick if not quicker than formed troops. The reduction in fire, melee effect and formation change is ample penalty I feel.

I would also like to see an increase in Cav movement allowance when going to charge. I realise the gradual increase in speed blah blah etc etc but to me it also increases the threat effect and reduces the counting of hexes when in close proximity a little, which I think is lacking. Maybe reduce the normal move for cav slightly but increase the charge move and obviously the chance to re-order is still quality and command radius driven.

But these have been covered before I'm sure and its a hard to please everyone whilst trying to make the perfect game [:D]. Their doing a good job to date [:)]

Col Mike Ellwood
Konig Regt
1 Bde, 22 Div
VII Saxon Corps, ADR

Hi Mike,

I have been pondering cavalry movement, as well as your thoughts, and believe there is an argument for a 33MP movement allowance for light cavalry. This would mean that disordered light cavalry had the same movement allowance as formed infantry, to eliminate the absurdity of infantry moving faster than such cavalry. It would also result in light cavalry moving:
1) on a road at the same progress as infantry on a pike (ie 11 hexes per turn); and
2) cross country at slightly greater progress per turn than infantry on a road (8 vs 7 hexes per turn.)

I believe this is consistent with contemporary practice of light cavalry using parallel roads to either side of the infantry march column as a screening force, without the infantry having to wait for the cavalry to catch up!

Lieutenant Pieter Geerkens
2ème du 22ème, VII Saxon Corps,
L'Armèe du Rhin


"Even in the attack, [I found] the spade is the equal of the rifle." - Erwin Rommel

Hi Pieter,

Yes that would seem a good fix. I would restrict it though to cav in skirmish order. Therefore cav out on such reconaissance duty would not be constrained by formed bodies or orders of march etc. You would still have the main force moving at a formation (regt/bde/div) advance rate. The higher move alowance would also be in effect for disordered skm cav and the normal rate for sqn/regt disordered elements. Thus you keep that inf/cav move ratio.

I would also like to see a restriction in visibility of all formed units with only cav in skm order and officers having extended visibility. Combine this with a new obscurred marker showing only type ie inf/cav/arty/supply and your getting more 'fog of war' reality. Forcing you then to use cav and officers more in screening and information gathering.



Col Mike Ellwood
Konig Regt
1 Bde, 22 Div
VII Saxon Corps, ADR

Mike
Regarding the scenario editor - it's not that time consuming. It's a matter of selecting what units arrive where and when. I did make a start once but can't find my data any more. Have a play around with it. Don't forget to rename the scenario though!

Generaal
2de Brigade
2de Nederlandsche Div
I Corps
Anglo Allied Army