Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

In my "copious spare time" I am putting together a new OB, PDT and SCN files for Eckmuhl Campaign that incorporate the 10 minute turn format as well as squadrons.

For the OB I am attaching a sample of how they will look. I am using John Gill's volume 1 of his series on the 1809 campaign as my source. He has good footnotes for each of the formations. Here are some changes to the OB format:

1. Howitzers are now in the game. I simplified it by having howitzer sections in the reserve artillery. Mostly they are drawn from the heavy batteries.

2. Large Austrian battalions were given the "Bajan Treatment" - that is they were divided into two parts as per how Warren Bajan felt that that they should be portrayed. This results in more Austrian infantry "Maneuver Units" but also means that:

a. Less gaps in the line when one of them routs
b. Better opportunity to stack them with guns

3. For the most part I left the battery size unchanged. Players may use the "Extended Line" option for the larger 8 gun batteries if they like. It does reduce the impact of so many guns firing at once but it allows the players to spread out the fire more and cover more firing lanes much like how it was done historically anyway.

Note: The Archduke Karl did not retain the 3lb battalion gun concept instead putting them into batteries. Thus the Austrian regiments will not have a 3lb battalion gun section like other armies of this period. Napoleon later took captured 3lb guns and handed them out to the conscript battalions to shore up their morale. It was only partially successful as could be seen at Wagram where there were instances of mass routing. Bottom line: the battalion gun concept had run its course. Instituted back in the days of the 30 Years War (probably by the Swedes) it was no longer working with the column tactics of the period. The guns were more or a nuisance than a help.

John Gill's notes were very helpful. He even adds in a regiment (IR#10 Mittrowsky) that was not in Bowden's OB. Other units have been removed which Gill said were not present. The cavalry is parceled out in typical Austrian fashion to the Advance Guard. Overall its a more historical OB.

The default 15 min. scenarios will not have this newer OB data incorporated into the game. It would take far too much time to go and redo the scenarios. I am doing this as a personal project for a game we all enjoy playing. Given time I also plan on adding in more farmland as well. The fields at this time of year would not block line of sight but would be a minor movement hindrance. Small buildings representing farms and the usual orchard/wall/hedge treatment will also be added in. This new map will be a COPY of the original so as to not impact games in progress. The players are more than welcome to copy any of the 15 min. scenarios and change the map reference to the new map file if they like.

The long scenarios (multiple days) will not be reflected in the new project files except for "Five Days in April." Most players have commented that the 10 min. format does not work well with 3-6 day scenarios. Those who really want to play the longer format "Five Days in April" scenario will have that opportunity.

The scenarios and PDT files will have "10M" added into their filename so as to make them easy to spot.

Basically using this format all scenarios will have a total of 1.5 the usual game turns. Thus a scenario that is 16 turns (4 hours) using the 15 min. format will be 24 turns using the 10 min. format. A 32 turn (8 hours) scenario will have 48 turns. This means more casualties of course.

Someone has said that there should be less fire power for the 10 min. turns than the 15 min. turns but I do not wish to reduce the artillery values as a lot of players say that artillery is not powerful enough. I look at the "instances of combat" as when forces collide and often the action was sharp and decisive. Thus instead of an hour of combat which decides the small actions there would be approx. 40 mins. instead. Units rout, charges are made, commanders realign their fronts, new units get fed in.

Stacking will remain at the usual 1600 men. I toyed with the idea of reducing it down to 1000 men but you guys are welcome to "Mod" the scenarios as you will. This is an attempt to standardize the older games of EC and WC (up next) to the format I unveiled in Jena-Auerstaedt and which has been used ever since.

(note: this is an announcement - I wont be discussing the update project in this thread - folks are welcome to comment but this post is informational - not where I am looking for feedback at this point)

So grab the attached file to see how the new OB format looks like. Cavalry is now in squadrons. There are howitzers for the heavier guns. The PDT files will use the typical 10 min./squadron format once they are done.

I should have this project finished sometime early next year if all goes well to coincide with the release of the (final) Eckmuhl Update (from me that is .. JTS Software may release future updates as needed for technical reasons). I plan on playtesting some of the smaller scenarios to see how they turn out. In particular I am interested to see how the Teugn-Hausen and Hunt for Davout scenarios turn out.

For the club: I believe that the DoR has the "stock scenarios" entered with the total amount of game turns listed and that turn count is a maximum (meaning you can't use a 15 min. scenario listing in the DoR for a 10 min. scenario). Therefore I will provide a list of the scenarios for the club admin to use in adding them to the DoR so that the new turn amounts can be used.

There will be a different numbering system used for these scenarios. They will be in the format of "001" "002" etc. A reference to the older scenario title will be made in the Scenario Description. The filename will also use a name that fits the scenario title. Thus something like "004. The Battle of Teugn-Hausen" will have a filename of "004_Teugn-Hausen_10m.scn instead of the older format which was difficult to discern which action/battle was being represented. A scenario list (finally) will be published for the next update as well to not only list the new scenarios but the older ones as well. Will definitely help all of us when going to find scenarios in the EC game.

A Wagram update project of the same order is planned as well. Again it will be slow and steady.

_________________


Generalfeldmarschall Wilhelm Prinz Peters von Dennewitz

3. Husaren-Regiment, Reserve-Kavallerie, Preußischen Armee-Korps

Honarary CO of Garde-Ulanen Regiment, Garde-Grenadier Kavallerie

NWC Founding Member

For Club Games: I prefer the Single Phase mode of play. I prefer to play with the following options OFF:

MDF, VP4LC, NRO, MTD, CMR, PR, MIM, NDM, OMR (ver 4.07)

Th-th-thank you, master.
I have never ever played Eckmuhl. Maybe worth a try now. Would be cool if all of it's patch releases could be found for historic comparisons.

Looking forward to this.
OOB example looks fine.

_________________

Yay!!!!
that is all....

_________________

I second Jim's ( Yay!!! )

_________________
General de Division Thomas Moore
26ème Régiment de Chasseurs à Cheval
Brigade de Cavalerie Légère
4ème Corps d'Armée
La Grande Armée

Thanks for scratching the itch Bill.

From what I've read, Warren was right about breaking the larger battalions down into more maneuverable and controllable elements, much like how large Federal ACW regiments were split into battalions half a century later.

I do have a question about howitzers and licornes. It seems the different game titles treat howitzer/licorne fire differently. Weapons Effect Chart for a Russian 10 Pdr licorne in Leipzig: 13-6-5-3-3-2-2-5-4-3-2-2-1-1 versus the older Jena-Auerstadt title parameter data: 9 at 1 hex, 7 at 2, 6 at 5, 3 at 7, 2 at 11, 1 at 14.
The older title treats the licorne just like a six or twelve pounder without the mid-range increase in effect seen in Leipzig.

Thanks again for all you do for the series. We're lucky to have someone so dedicated after product release.

_________________
Feldmarschall Jeff Freiherr Mathes von Krain
50th (Stein) Infantry Regiment
Dritte Brigade
Austrian Korps

The mid-range indirect effect is simulating the fused cannister/spherical-case 'sweet spot' I believe. It's hypothetical and if anything I find it confusing. I'm not going to memorize the supposed sweet spot of ammunition of a unit when it's fire is a 500m radius. If the battery were direct laid than still the firepower pattern should be from strong to weak. The early (pre-1812) non-british indirect fire guns should all have very limited range because they would be using quite worthless unaerodynamic cans packed with balls and powder. With a fuse that would 'misfire' 50% of the time even after sighting shots through an observer.
The French probably towed their early 6po howtizers in their mixed batteries around because they lacked anything else. They could be used for close-in direct fire and if they needed to besiege something then gather all their howitzers for the BBQ. The licorne wouldn't have been fired at high angles like actual howitzers. Any large gun though like the licornes could be used to fire over low ridgelines as long as they were positioned well and a signalman could help directing fire.

edit: I use to many adverbs and find my own posts annoying.

Jeff - the howitzer ranges/fire effect values were brought on by Warren (he strikes again). There are differences between the games. I really should decide here and now which format to use .... Warren said that the mid range values should be higher. All I know is this: I am glad I was on on those battlefields! ROFL

For Eckmuhl I want to keep it simple. Leipzig is a VERY complex set of PDT files. CEF is much simpler. Saves me a lot of time with the PDT file lines. Leipzig had a lot of duplication that should have been avoided. I was gung ho in those days.



Honestly though: over the next 4-5 mos. I need to think about standardizing the games I helped develop so that the value for an Austrian 6lb gun is the same throughout. I doubt that the Austrians improved on their artillery. The French, on the other hand, made changes to their Artillery arm. A 6lb in 1792 is not the same as one in 1809.

The 6lb vs. 8lb gun debate for French artillery:

1. 6lb gun studies showed that it could deliver more fire thus more casualties than the 8lb gun.

2. 8lb gun had better range .... Garde horse artillery crews didn't like the idea of giving up their beloved 8lbers.

Not sure I want to tinker with the values between those two types at this late hour but its something I have considered ....

ROF does not factor into the series enough.. A slower firing fort gun could not fire as often as a 12lb gun. Just dont be near where the round from that fort gun when it lands! ROFL

But what I am mainly getting at is to come up with a set of figures that are the same throughout similar periods such that:

RBR and Marengo are identical

AC, JC, CEF, EC, WC, LC, BC & 1814 are all the same.

Does this sound correct? Not so much worry about the values .. but just make sure that they are the same.

CEF is not out yet so changing those to be the same would not be hard. The other games will get updates.

BTW - I hope to make these next updates the last I have to do on this scale. Yes, if a scenario needs to be corrected I will do it but this will be the last set of updates where I do this much work.

FYI - I still have to do the Eckmuhl MOD project. Similar to the Wagram MOD project posted on the SDC the Eckmuhl MOD will used corrected OBs (no values changed - just artwork numbers) such that the images are correct. I would like to see about getting the Wagram MOD files added into the next Wagram update so that the artwork is finally correct for the game. I just have to run this by Rich Hamilton and Mark Adams. I did a lot of artwork changes for the Wagram mod and it really came out nice. Images for the 3D were finally sorted out to where they are closer to what they should be. For those of you that play 3D its nice to see a uniform image for the Info area that matches the 3D image on the map.

_________________


Generalfeldmarschall Wilhelm Prinz Peters von Dennewitz

3. Husaren-Regiment, Reserve-Kavallerie, Preußischen Armee-Korps

Honarary CO of Garde-Ulanen Regiment, Garde-Grenadier Kavallerie

NWC Founding Member

For Club Games: I prefer the Single Phase mode of play. I prefer to play with the following options OFF:

MDF, VP4LC, NRO, MTD, CMR, PR, MIM, NDM, OMR (ver 4.07)

Technologically artillery ranges could be exact for 1796-1801. 110% 1802-1807. 120% 1808-1814. Problem is that a 12lb lourd is quite a different animal than a 12lb leger which you could just ignore. French armories spit out thousands of 6lb bronze cannon not for their sustained rate of fire (over-heating made them terrible) but the initial shock of having more guns per km than the enemy. Things should definitely be simplified and comprehensible though.
Training and experience is the major factor in ROF and sighting therefore, should be what quantifies artillery FE. That really mixes things up but could be done on a spreadsheet. You could isolate all the artillery batteries in a campaign OOB and give them FE adjustments based on the average quality (A+++ - F) you chose for that force's artillerists for instance. 1805-1807 French artillery would probably be the same excellent values.

Bill, I think Warren's point regarding howitzer fire was that it was most accurate at optimum range (the 8 and 9 hex range in Leipzig) and became less accurate with further distance. The closer ranges accounted for canister fire or reduced accuracy with shell was my view on this.

I wouldn't tinker with the artillery. It seems about right. I only brought up the licorne/howitzer issue because of the difference between the newer and older titles in the series.

_________________
Feldmarschall Jeff Freiherr Mathes von Krain
50th (Stein) Infantry Regiment
Dritte Brigade
Austrian Korps

Pictured is what Bajan was after I believe. It is a pretty poor assumption that there was a sweet spot for cannister and spherical cased shot. Really, artillerists would measure different fuses for different ranges (which includes elevation * range trajectory). So there is no reason that a Napoleonics game should model some higher mid-ground bombardment quality in howitzer fire. There is an illogical effect on direct laid fire which howitzers and licornes would have used 90% of the time in field battles this series portrays. Switching ammunition to fused cannister or case shot might be considerable. A series-wide artillery FE and range evaluation deserves it's own thread. I'm gonna read up on Napoleonics artillery before I fool myself though.

Jeff - then should we go with the howitzer approach that Warren advocated for the rest of the games the used the old standard "H" weapon? Let me know ... I had actually changed them all back to the standard values ... I can reverse it and go back to what Warren offered if you like. But it has to be "across the board." I dont want one game looking one way and another saying something else.

If you want to discuss this "offline" in email let me know.

_________________


Generalfeldmarschall Wilhelm Prinz Peters von Dennewitz

3. Husaren-Regiment, Reserve-Kavallerie, Preußischen Armee-Korps

Honarary CO of Garde-Ulanen Regiment, Garde-Grenadier Kavallerie

NWC Founding Member

For Club Games: I prefer the Single Phase mode of play. I prefer to play with the following options OFF:

MDF, VP4LC, NRO, MTD, CMR, PR, MIM, NDM, OMR (ver 4.07)

Bill, I've been reading Osprey's Artillery Equipments of the Napoleonic Wars and I believe it supports Warren's viewpoint. If you have the volume, the section titled "Performance" is germane to the discussion. As range increased accuracy suffered which is why the hex values used at Leipzig are more valid (for howitzers/licornes) than the earlier titles' values which follow the linear values of the other smoothbore cannon, circumventing the actual capability of the howitzer/licorne.

In game speak, howitzer/licorne ammunition selection would have been canister/case shot out to 6 or 7 hexes followed by shell for more distant hexes with accuracy and effectiveness degraded as range increased.

_________________
Feldmarschall Jeff Freiherr Mathes von Krain
50th (Stein) Infantry Regiment
Dritte Brigade
Austrian Korps

Depicting the difference of the gun type sounds fine to me, is just a question of how strong it will be.

Besides this, what scope are we talking about?
- France had these mixed batteries with 2 howitzers included so depicting them extra will surely not happen.
- Prussian & Austria I think had mixed batteries too.
- Russia had more indirect fire capable guns as the unicorns number 4 in batteries of 12 guns, depicting them extra makes sense, not only as there a re 4 but the large 12 gun batteries can be place better.

_________________

Might want to cross reference it if it is an Osprey - I've got Ospreys that have the German Light Cruiser Emden at Pearl Harbor, and another of the Graf Spee being scuttled claiming that it was an Italian Cl in Tobruk Harbour... would never go solely with them due to their editing record.

Not saying it is wrong so much as saying I don't trust their editors to catch things.