Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

The Rhine Tavern

*   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)   Imperial Russian Army

 

Forums:    ACWGC    CCC     Home:    ACWGC    CCC
It is currently Wed May 07, 2025 8:11 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Dec 17, 2008 5:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:01 pm
Posts: 75
Location: Canada
.. of enhancements I would like to see in the engine (in no particlular order, except as I remember them):

1) A new <i>march-column </i>formation for infantry and cavalry, entered/exited from line at ~4MP and from column at 1/2 turn. Only this formation would get pike/road/path bonus. It would attack and defend as disordered and would have only flank hexes. The French and British would get faster movement in this formation than other nationalities.

2) Reduce stacking limit in town/forest hexes by 1/2, but leave the skirmisher limit at 1/8 regular stacking. Thus 250 skirmishers could strongly defend a forest town hex against a maximum of 1000 attackers.

3) Separate movement point costs for skirmishers from battle column, since they are a distinct formation. This would allow skirmishers to have faster movement through forest hexes, battle columns to have slower movement through town hexes, etc.

4) Make squadrons the basic cavalry unit, regarded as a <i>formed</i> unit, able to break down into 2 flugels/companies each for <i>open order</i> assignments. Of course, use the historical squadron counts (4 for most French, 8 for Austrian light and 6 for Austrian heavy cavalry, etc.)

5) Assign fewer points to Hussar/Chasseur/Cheveauleger casualties, and more to Cuirassier casualties, leaving Dragoons unchanged; the rationale seems fairly obvious.

6) Create a new <i>City</i> hex type with maximum stacking set at about 750 infantry, 375 cavalry or 6 guns, completely unchargeable by cavalry.

7) As a corollary, maybe as an optional rule, allow cavalry to charge only <b>one</b> hex into Town hexes but disorder them <b>before</b> they initiate melee. This would remove the necessity for a MOE rule.

8) Allow square to be formed in covered terrain. A Square is nothing more than an extreme refusal of both flanks, until the flanks meet again in the rear, which simply happens to be an effective anti-cavalry measure (by refusing all flanks, curiously enough).

9) Introduce additional <i>National</i> traits, as there certainly were plenty:
i) Allow French additional movement in square, a tactical doctrine their elite units used frequently.
ii) Give Austrian/Prussian/Polish light cavalry bonuses when in open order, such as better visibility and slightly increased movement. (Cossacks might get the movement but not the visibility - suggestions from Russian players welcome.)
iii) Give British units in Line a melee bonus to reflect their better-aimed volley fire at extreme close range - perhaps 10% instead of the 25% others get in column, but let them have it in attack <b>and</b> defence.

10) Introduce a <i>closed-order</i> battle column with effective anti-cavalry capability (eg no flank attack bonus and charge at only *1.5), increased vulnerability to artillery (+20%) and small-arms fire (+10%) relative to a square, and fast movement to/from normal column. Available to all except the British I believe.

11) Track artillery rounds separately by round-shot and case-shot, and by battery with replenishment wagons as for infantry ammunition.

That's enough for tonight. I have no expectations of seeing all of these next spring, but it would be nice to imagine one or two being implemented each year for the forseeable future. (Otherwise I might have to get off my @$$ and write my own game engine, as I have been threatening to do for years now.)



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


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 12:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 3:54 pm
Posts: 660
Location: Eboracum, Britannia
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by pgeerkens</i>
iii) Give British units in Line a melee bonus to reflect their better-aimed volley fire at extreme close range - perhaps 10% instead of the 25% others get in column, but let them have it in attack <b>and</b> defence.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">I like that. But not just because they maintained cohesion and delivered a devastating close range volley. The British often followed it with a brutal bayonet charge, both in attack and defence. Sometimes there was no volley, just the bayonet charge. Being in line formation didn't detract from the potency with the bayonet and this often shattered the resolve of the enemy. It would be nice to see this simulated somehow.[8D]

<center>[url="http://homepage.ntlworld.com/a.r.barlow/nwc/nwc_personal_record.htm"]Brigadier General Antony Barlow[/url]
~ [url="http://www.geocities.com/anglo_allied_army_stats/Anglo_Allied_Army_Cavalry_Corps.htm"]2nd British (Union) Brigade, Anglo-Allied Cavalry Corps[/url] ~
~ [url="http://www.geocities.com/militaireacademie/dragoons.html"]4th (Royal Irish) Dragoon Guards[/url] ~
Image</center>


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 8:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 10:18 am
Posts: 6156
Disagree with the British firepower thing. It was not their firepower but their ferocity in melee that won them so many counterattacks against the French.

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)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 8:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 5:21 am
Posts: 594
Location: New Zealand
Hi Gents,

Pieter...Love your thinking and agree 90%. See below.

Bill...have to disagree with you a little ref the british. I feel it was a combination of factors (not just ferocity/steadiness)that gave them the upper hand so often. Tactical positioning (often hidden/covered very well), their undoubted fire supremecy AT CLOSE RANGE and their (usually) unshakable superior steadiness/reslove which combined gave them a massive surprise/shock effect. Hard to replicate I'm sure in the single phase but easy if you allow inf countercharge in the MDF phase. I would however only allow british inf this counter charge option.

#7 Partially agree - Should be able to attack via the road only!No disorder for first round but limit to a sqn only. Has anyone seen over 100 horses in a town, anyone moved through a town in formation...I have...its a very fruaght and tight excercise. It would only be effective against shaken/disordered/unprepared troops. otherwise the inf will win! Best left to only A grade cavalry.

#11 No need to diferentiate between ammo type but really like the battery ammo supply limit!!

Would also go for

1. Cav can be melee attacked by inf in obstructed hexes with a big bonus to discourage such gamey tactics as are being used.

2. 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.

2a. You could in fact reduce the visibility of <u>units in combat</u> to an extreme close range ..say 4-16 hexes (cav charge range/artillery max range) to really start to get real in command
and control.

My 2c worth [:D]



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


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 9:02 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2008 12:01 pm
Posts: 75
Location: Canada
Hi Bill,

Please correct me if I misunderstand, but you appear to agree that the Brits were more efficient in melee, and so deserve a melee bonus, but for an entirely different rationale than what I presented?

I can't claim to be as expert on the period as many others in this forum, but I did find Nosworthy's argument (in <i>Battle Tactics of Napoleon and his Enemies</i>) about a superior British tactical doctrine in the lead-up to melee compelling. Can anyone one here present evidence [edit: for or] against Nosworthy's claim?

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


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 9:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 4:11 pm
Posts: 1765
Location: New Zealand
I reckon we give those Britz sten guns for close combat. [:(!][V][:D]

This business of the invincible British infantry is over rated in my view. They were not tested vs Napoleon often enough and if it had not been for Blucher Wellington would not be the name of the city I live in. The French Marechals for all their fame were no match for Wellington.

The game already gives them a firepower bonus which is enough I think. I believe the main factors that made them so effective was leadership and defensive placement on the field of battle. Much like Mike describes. I would be inclined to ensure the command ratings were high to reflect this.

You can make virtually any infantry force appear superb if you use them properly.

Just my 5 cents. Also Pieter Cavalry does become disordered and loses its charge bonus if it charges into covered terrain. Which is a big waste of good cav.

Merry xmas all!




General de Brigade Knox
Baron de l'Empire
2e Regiment Gardes d'Honneur (the regaled pheasants)
La Jeune Garde
CO. 1er Brigade, III Division Cavalerie Legere, III Corps Armee du Nord
http://www.aspire.co.nz/colinknoxnwc.htm

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 10:19 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 3:51 pm
Posts: 142
Location: Brisbane, Australia
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Colin Knox</i>
<br />I reckon we give those Britz sten guns for close combat. [:(!][V][:D]

This business of the invincible British infantry is over rated in my view. They were not tested vs Napoleon often enough and if it had not been for Blucher Wellington would not be the name of the city I live in. The French Marechals for all their fame were no match for Wellington.

The game already gives them a firepower bonus which is enough I think. I believe the main factors that made them so effective was leadership and defensive placement on the field of battle. Much like Mike describes. I would be inclined to ensure the command ratings were high to reflect this.

You can make virtually any infantry force appear superb if you use them properly.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">


I think you're right Colin: the advantages of firing in line against a disordered column seem to have accrued very often to the British. No doubt they were able to take advantage of this because of tactical doctrine or training, but the inherent advantage of having the opportunity to use firepower was a result of superior generalship.

Regarding evidence, the experiences of combat described in Rory Muir's "<i>Tactics and the experience of battle in the age of Napoleon</i>" pretty well support Pieter's view. The British would be placed in a great location, wait until the French column got close enough, hit them with a series of volleys and then charge through the smoke. Again, it seemed to happen too often for this to be an accident. Wellington and his commanders found that it worked, adopted it as a tactic and refined it over time, to include creating enfilading fire by bending the unengaged part of the line around the flank of the French column - most famously to the French Guard at Waterloo.

Lt Colonel Neville Worland
Chef d'Etat-Major
Ier Corps de Réserve de Cavalerie
Army du Nord


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 10:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 10:18 am
Posts: 6156
Pieter and Mike - I use as my authority "With Musket, Cannon and Sword" by Brent Nosworthy.

First, you cant miss at close range. Anyone in this period could fire pointblank like the British did and knock down the front rank (and then some) and disorder a battalion.

Second, the British in melees are well known to have the Celtic ferocity factor over the French. Ships too.

The French just were not a match for the British in melees.

You can reflect that in morale grade. The British usually have better morale. B vs. C as the average.

I have advocated for wagons for artillery supply but so far no dice. We will try for it next round (pun). Wont be in the next release.

I also totally agree on the different types of cavalry/morale grade being worth more points for VPs.

Anyway, nothing here that we havent thought of before. I dont get into deep discussions on the engine anymore. I just toss out the ideas to John, he implements a couple per title and I move on. I dont argue with him about the games like I used to (nor will I argue here either way).

For instance I got rather insistent about Road Columns but John is dead set against them. Frankly I like the idea. It would curb the blitz in the 15 min. games a bit. I also like the idea of cavalry being in Line or Column. However, the function assigned for cavalry to change formation is now used to dismount any troops with the "D" type (Dragoons). Thus that is pretty much done with. I like cavalry in column for road movement and in line for movement on the battlefield (but the Austrians appeared to have used it alot).

Cavalry skirmishers ... not impossible to advocate. Of course only L and K types could use it.

Onward ho!

But always good to hear ideas!

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)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 2:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 5:21 am
Posts: 594
Location: New Zealand
Hi Bill,

I notice the fire effect and moral the british have in the game and think it is definitely warranted. Also notice these topics and your answers spring up with regularity, i think both are a good thing.

Totally understand the enviable position you are in with us and John/HPS [:)].

Nosworthy is great. A couple of other works that might help your persuasions are :

<i>Tactics and Grand Tactics of the Napoleonic Wars </i>- George Jefferies
The Courier Publishing Company Inc.
<i>Tactics and The Expierence of Battle in the Age of Napoleon </i>- Rory Muir
Yale University Press (New Haven and London)
<i>Warfare in the Age of Bonaparte </i>- Michael Glover
Pen & Sword Books Ltd.
<i>The Art of Warfare in the age of Napoleon </i>- Gunther E. Rothenburg
Indiana University Press

A MUST is
<i><i>Waterloo: New Perspectives </i>(The Great Battle Reappraised)</i>
David Hamilton-Williams
Arms and Armour Press


So a bit of light reading if your in the mood and have time on your hands. [:D]
I recommend these books to anyone looking for a deeper understanding of the battles and how commanders and troops behave in battle.


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


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 18, 2008 3:56 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 10:18 am
Posts: 6156
Have Muir and Rothenberg. Also have Hamilton but hear that he is not trustworthy in areas. Prefer Hofschrorer for the Waterloo campaign. His two volume set is a must.

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)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests


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:  
POWERED_BY
Localized by Maël Soucaze © 2010 phpBB.fr