Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

First, let's consider the current situation, which is extremely unrealistic. The active player knows that defending cavalry will remain completely inactive and that he even can move his infantry in line adjacent to the cavalry's front hexes with total impunity. Surely this is a major gamey tactic that's totally unrealistic, detracts considerably from the gaming experience?

Anyway, how to incorporate a viable counter-charge feature:

1./ The defending player "pre-sets" those cavalry units he wants to counter-charge in his own previous turn. Ideally, for greater realism, some cavalry might be flagged "impetuous" so might be prone to charge without orders.

2./ Re-incorporate the old BG phase system into the HPS single phase game turn. This is actually something that has recently been done for the ACW series with its Alternate Melee Resolution rule which separates melees into a separate phase. It's also a common houserule used by many Nap gamers too. The actual sequence of play would be slightly improved on the old BG system as follows:

a./ The active player moves all his units, with defending units conducting ADF as currently in single phase mode.

b./ Any defending units that hadn't fired during phase a./ would now fire at 100% effectively. Ideally, the non-phasing player would be able to "preset" units to "hold their fire" during phase a./ so that they might fire more effectively in phase b./

c./ Non-phasing cavalry "preset" to counter-charge would now conduct their charge. Also defending units "preset" to form square would now do so, provided enemy cavalry were in LOS and threatening a charge. Maybe some units not actually "preset" to form square would also do so automatically if the cavalry threat was high? Perhaps defending units might also be able to be "preset" to change formation too, like in the old BG engine.

d./ The active player would now be able to conduct his own cavalry charges.

e./ Finally, melees would be resolved. First those conducted by counter-charging cavalry and then the active player's melees.


NB: "Preset" cavalry counter-charges should be able to select a "target" in advance, either an enemy unit (not necessarily cavalry) or a particular hex. This would give the non-active player greater control over what his cavalry would do when charging under A/I control. However, "impetuous" cavalry that charges without orders would not be assigned a "target" but would be controlled by the A/I and would most likely charge against the nearest enemy cavalry.

Reintroducing a well-structured phased system within the single phased mode of play would enhance realism without the need for multiple exchanges of PBEM and would reduce the scope for unhistorical gamey tactics in the currently unstructured single phase mode considerably. This more structured approach, where the gamer can't move/fire/melee freely, moving forward fresh troops to exploit a gap that he'd just created in the same turn, etc, would also considerably improve the ability of the A/I to provide a better gaming experience for those players who don't tend to use PBEM.


Lt.Col. Rich White
4th Cavalry Brigade
Cavalry Corps
Anglo-Allied Army

Hi Richard,

Your system has a lot of merit and I like the intent behind it. How easy/practical would it be to get into the system though? I supose that's a question for Bill (and John T)to answer.

One practical factor I am wondering is the time and space of such a system. If you say designated a zone of hexes that a unit would charge into if enemy entered it would that charge hit the first hex they entered or would it hit the unit an equal distance of hexes between it and when it first entered the zone? That to me would be a major considerartion especially with undulating ground (ie dead ground/unseen) and visibility of the moving tgt.

Another would be the consideration of the the type and size of a target. You wouldn't want to send a whole brigade of cav at a few skirmishers or a single sqn who entered the zone. Or visa versa send a regt into a Divisional advance? How would those issues be overcome, the decision of the commander on the spot to judge the success or otherwise of such an order with the situation presented to him?

I really think the only way to do this effectively to a players liking is the seperate defensive phase but incorporating "pre-ordered" actions or restraint of fire. Those are good ideas so you still get the automatic responses as the phasing player conducts his actions as happens now.

What is wrong with being able to move units in the defensive phase and this movement is subtracted from their total move in their next phasing turn?

Fire could be likewise split so that you decide how much % of the total fire for that turn you spend in the def phase and then have left for the next offensive phase. This would allow a full volley in the def phase and then a melee/charge in the next offensive phase (eg British tactics) as long as the attacker was defeated/repulsed in his melee/charge phase just gone.

<font color="red">There should be more chance of fire effect disordering or even stopping melee/charges continuing.</font id="red">

<b><font color="red">Just as an extra - I'm very much in favour of the increase value of Cavalry (x5)in the charge melee v infantry and guns!! </font id="red"></b>

Just my opinion and preferences. However I do like you intent and thinking on the matter [:)]

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

Hi Rich and Mike
I quite like this idea. My comments are:

We need to be careful not to reduce the power of cavalry to much. In my view its too weak already. In BG there was of course the charge phase which gave cavalry a considerable advantage. If you are going to have square forming ability and counter charges you need to probably bring this back in. Or as Mike suggests get the multuplier back to 5X or even 7x for heavy cavalry. I think a single sqd of currissers was most often enough to cut a btn of infantry to pieces in the open if they were not in square.

I argue this is a historical fact. Why else would countries of the period been prepared to pay so much for a currisser regm. I can't remember the ratio but its a huge difference in cost vs an inf btn.

That aside the other key historical feature that Mike also mentioned is the morale test to charge home. Units that fail it should not be able to melee and perhaps should also have a chance of routing.

But all these things said Bill or Rich will probably ask us if we want the game engine to make our coffee for us as well[:D]

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

This has been suggested over the years along with adding in auto-squaring and the addition of squaring and counter charges into the Manual Defense Phase form of play.

Yes, its all been suggested even a revised Single Phase that uses something more like the Embedded Melee system.

I keep bringing all of this up - so far John hasnt seen that its a huge need verses other issues on his list.

I wont pound on him about it either.

The best thing to do as a consumer is to send email to the support desk on this. If he got something like 100 emails in support of it he might consider it.

You as a consumer do more by using the Help Desk email than voicing your opinions here. Rich W. - you should know that as well. Pounding on me and Rich to get John's ear on this is futile. Its better to just send an email to John and let it go.

We have hashed this one out for hmm, about 100 times now. For me consider it a dead issue as I have done all I will on the subject.

Now if we could get the game engine to make toast .... [:D]

Or those nice English cakes for tea .... [8D]

Honestly its not like we are not concerned but hasnt this one been beaten over the head long enough?

John Tiller doesnt read this board - he will read your emails though. Why not spend your time more constructively in phrasing an email or supporting such a system directly to him?

Anyway, working on putting the finishing touches on Campaign .... er, well anyway getting another game out the door very soon! Hope to have more fun and frolicking adventures for your Summer pleasure.

Just think, sitting on the Cannes beaches and playing Campaign .... on your laptop! [:p]

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)

Perhaps an online Petition to John T et all at HPS???

Bill is right.. This horse has been flogged to the bone...




<center>
</center>
<center>
[img]</center>
<center>Monsieur le Marechal Baron John Corbin
Commanding L'Armee du Rhin
Grande Duc de Piave et Comte de Beauvais
Commanding the Division de Cavalerie de la Moyenne Garde
NWC President</center>

HPS has no involvement in the process. Send any comments you like to the Help Desk email that Rich H. oversees. Slip him a hamburger or something (how about a new job making six figures!) and he will be more amicable to pass it along!

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)