Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

Hi again all
Just a further comment on the stacking. I am a French player and it is my side that is disadvantaged by the potential change to this rule, however I would not change it in Jena.

Why? I here a cry [:p]

Simple really the attacking side is favoured by greater stacking. As the overall game engine favours attacking (eg you cannot rout from defensive fire). I believe that the new stacking made it more realistic I don't really care which side it favours.

I for one will not apply a patch that could ruin HPS's best work on the Napoleonic period to date [:D]. By the sounds at least Muddy will play me. Any other allied players I can add[:D][:D]? I jest really but I do feel strongly that you have it right now Bill.

The French players are only wining because they are not used to having to not rely on Cavalry and massed infantry melee attacks, which Napoleons army never relied on as the core means of offensive operation,

Indeed firepower for fixing an opponents army prior to the decisive use of shock combat is the essence of the Napoleonic system. To fix the use of a firefight is essential as the erosion of the enemy and the attacker must be more gradual.

As for cavalry multiplier I think it was too low before. In most Napoleonic battles a cavalry charge by a single heavy cavalry sqd against an Infantry unit that did not manage to get into square in time would be a slaughter. 1 sqd generally equalled 1 btn in melee fighting power. The cost alone of maintaining heavy cavarly is proof of this. Why would you waste money on a regimient of heavies if a btn can defeat them at 1/10 of the Franc cost.

I would argue it could be even higher.

Again all just my opinion.

Salute!

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

Ma comrades in arms let us never forget the brave names of the 57th 32nd 18th eme and the 9th and 10th legers! For this were their years of glory. Whole true to the truth and let the new members be moved by history not by gamesmanship. For not long from now this will be forgotten as the great wars are to our grandchildren. Vive la France Vive l’ Emperor!

Col de Art 6/3 II Corps AN Marbot CS

This is an interesting discussion.
Bill is correct, units take more of a pounding from artillery with 10 minute turns (I think 10 minute turns have made these games A LOT better). Cliff is correct that this was the French army at its peak and it should be rated much better.

However, there is the issue of playability. Also, maybe I am bad with cavalry and too cautious, but I think the Prussian cavalry advantage is over rated here. The Prussian cavalry is poorly organized (a lot of it is in divisions with infantry) and not as flexible as the French. The French cav is still excellent and almost as numerous.

In the 1809 games, both sides troops are overrated, but that, of course tends to balance itself out.

And my vote is that sure, go ahead and let dragoons dismount <i>where appropriate</i>. I am far from a napoleonics scholar, but I can't think of this happening in any of the big battles...

Feldmarschall Jim 'Prinz' Pfluecke
Commander, Austrian Cavalry Reserve
3 Graf O'Reilly Chevauxleger Rgt
Hahn Grenadier Bn

The Napoleonic Wars were less about linear warfare than the preceding periods. The 1800 allowance will allow the French to stack more optimally but still limit their large battalians to a degree.

It was obvious in a game I played with Tomasz that there was no way I would ever win a melee against a Prussian super stack. He put two battalians in most hexes and it was impossible to move them. It was almost impossible for me to make combinations of two bns. in one hex unless I broke light bns. down quite a bit.

If you like you can reduce the stacking to 1050 and that would create more of a linear warfare effect. Just toggle the cavalry stacking factor to 2. That would allow you to have 500 cavalry and 1000 infantry in one hex. I think that the largest French bn. is less than 1050.

Of course you wouldnt be able to stack guns with infantry using that lineup.

If we find that the morale change doesnt work then I will adjust BOTH armies down. The French to where they were and the Prussians down a level.

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)

[url="http://www.fireandmelee.net"]Fire and Melee Wargame site[/url]

I think in Jena the Prussian morale is where it should be. They fought hard and stood under a lot of fire at Jena, and had bad leadership but still fought decently at Auersted. The bad leadership ratings combined with high moral work exactly as designed.

If there is anywhere to lower the moral of both armies it is Eckmulh. But even then, not by much.

Large stacks have mixed value. They pack a melee punch but get socked by artillery.

Feldmarschall Jim 'Prinz' Pfluecke
Commander, Austrian Cavalry Reserve
3 Graf O'Reilly Chevauxleger Rgt
Hahn Grenadier Bn

I agree with Jim if you get 2 units stacked isolate it by flanking as you will be able to spread out more and then role those horse batteries up and canister it.

My argument is essentially if you have 10 btns 2 to a hex and I 10 at 1 to a hex I can always outflank you. Probably on both sides.

I agree the Napoleonic wars was less about linear than the preceding period but the game system in for example NRC makes for entirely column based combat on the whole. Its a balance thing really. Thats why I like the existing Jena setup so much as its got the balance right IMHO. Creating the more realistic overall simulation at a MACRO level. Sure you can pick mirco holes in it but that is true of anything.

And Cliff this is not gamesmanship quite the contrary I am in favour of a realistic overall game.

Regards




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

Mon General I did not mean that there is anything wrong with gamesman ship for it is a partner to Generalship ability to me. I feel that being able to play well speaks well of knowing your history it was that that kept me going at the table tops for so any years and it is that which makes a bon commander such as your self. My fight is for the truth in gamming and the future that my gran children will look at the men not the beast that took the World under his control for twenty years. The men Mon, General of Jena the men at Austerlitz! From my point of view I owe it to them to keep it real as my gran’s say real that they fought as a unit for the Glory of France and the 18th and 57th and 32nd 9 and 10 legers were elite unites not mere soldat’s and the Guard was the elite of the elite a reward for service. We need to reward them that stand when others ran those that held the line when others broke. Ju knew that I would reply [:D]

Col de Art 6/3 II Corps AN Marbot CS

Cliff I see where you are coming from I agree with you. I am playing Austerlitz at the moment and moving the 57th is of special signifigance.

Salute

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

Bill,

There is an old programmers joke: a littel boy asks his father-programmer "Daddy! Why does the Sun rise on the East and droop on the West" "Are you sure?" "Yes" "Did you test it?" "Yes!" "DON"T EVER TOUCH A WORKING SYSTEM, BOY!!!!"

I see no reason why you should change a system that works well. And Prussians already have only minor chance to win the campaign. You always talk about cavalry advantage. But I can't see one. When I see French cavalry brigade of 6 squadrons with quality A or B and 3 leaders and compare it Prussian light brigade of 10 A+ squadrons, 2 light batallions and 2 leaders I have to say that french are much more effective. Prussian leaders have decreased command range and hence with such a number of subordinates they merely can't keep them all within the command range. In battle it means that it would take 3-4 turns to recover after a single charge! While French will do so within a couple of turns!

One more point. All the campaigns are made in anticipation of Prussian or Russian reinforcements arrive. But When they do what will we see. I didn't survive any battle to that point yet, so based only on the review oob scenarios but still. Reserve prussian formations have even less leaders. Brigade Winning of Ruchel's corps has only two leaders for 2 line and 2 light batallions, 20 squadrons, 4 independent coys and 2 batteries. I have no idea how can such a heterogenous force be kept in any type of order in battle with only one leader and one subordinate who is useless for disorder recovery. 1st division of reserve corps has only one leader for 14 batallions, 3 coys and 2 batteries. 1st brigade of 1st cav division East prussian corps has 1 leader for 20 squadrons, and 2nd brigade of the same formation 1 leader for 15 squadrons. Overall this division has 35 squadrons and 3 leaders! To compare 1 brigade 2 div 1 corps of the French army has 2 batallions and 2 leaders. Same for 1 brigade 3 div 1 corps. Corps cavalry of 1 corps 9 squadrons and 3 leaders. All 6 brigades of 2 and 4 dragon divisions have 6 squadrons and 3 leaders. What cavalry advantage are you talking about? One can use these Prussian troops in melee only once. Then they become disordered, unable to melee effectively, unable to defend effectively and even unable to run away! Just a moving stack of VP for enemy to take!

Even worse with Russians! units are smaller that decreases their value, leaders have even smaller range. I could never understand why should leaders have different ranges. In EAW series British regulars and American Militia have leaders with the same range. Russians have even less leaders. For example 2 cav brigade of 6 div has one leader for 25(!!!) squadrons. I shouldn't say this leader if of the worst quality possible. Golden rule for any model is to count any effect only once. As it is now Russian leaders are useless and the whole army is just a mob!

So why should one ask for the quality increase for the French side? To make the action that is merely impossible to win for the Allies a mere picnic for the French? And if such a thing is done may we hope to see at least normal command structure for BOTH Prussian and Russian armies? With SAME command range and SAME number of leaders. Let them be of worse quality. But put them on the field!

PS Colin, I remember about the turn. After all the administrative stuff done hope to get to it within a couple of days.

<center></center>
<center><b>Eyo Imperatorskogo Velichestva Leib-Kirassirskogo polku
General-Mayor Anton Valeryevich Kosyanenko
Commander of the Second Army of the West </b></center>

Anton,
thanks for putting my thoughts on cavalry into detail! The truth is, the French have to play really, really bad to lose this one. General Mack bad. I have yet to play a frenchman in this club who is bad enough to lose this one.

Feldmarschall Jim 'Prinz' Pfluecke
Commander, Austrian Cavalry Reserve
3 Graf O'Reilly Chevauxleger Rgt
Hahn Grenadier Bn

I added up the cavalry from both sides:

French: 28,832
Prussians: 43,847

Hmm, who has the cavalry superiority guys?

If you cant win with a 15,000 cavalry advantage ...

Now add in the Russian cavalry: 8,867

Yes, the French have the infantry advantage but what you fail to point out is that the Allies outnumber the French by quite a bit in artillery.

The Prussians do very well in the open. With so much cavalry at their disposal its impossible to get a great advantage against them unless you absolutely overwhelm them with numbers.

Quality wise the Prussians have alot of 8 rated Kuirassiers. The Russian cavalry is mixed bag of course and I dont even count them as a factor.

But the artillery advantage is huge. The average French corps has about 28-32 guns. There is no army artillery reserve at this point. Then look at the Prussians. While they have those smaller battalian guns they have a decent amount of artillery and then you have reserve batteries as well.

In the hands of Tomasz the Prussians did very well. And continue to do so! His guns tore huge holes in my ranks and I cant win in the open against him with his huge cavalry advantage. So I crawl through the woods?

I cant get a decent stack of infantry to attack his as mine are larger bns. Sound familiar (Eckmuhl for you Austrians)?

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)

[url="http://www.fireandmelee.net"]Fire and Melee Wargame site[/url]

Bill respectfully is the new patch based only on your experiences?
Has this been game tested by a group. There are some pretty experienced players here not agreeing. That said I recognise the market is bigger than the NWC.

I am not sure I agree with everything Anton said but I still believe the stacking should not change nor the French morale.

As for not being able to move in the open Bill I have not expereinced this, a systematic manuever is required for sure but only moving through cover is not the case. Maybe Tomasz could comment further as he is playing Auerstedt in our guards challenge with Anton and Antony Barlow.

By the way I cannot agree that its unwinnable from the Prussian side though. It's fine as is I think.

Regards

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

Bill,

If you would like some figures. I calculated all the guns present in review oob scenario. Here are the results in form 4lb-6lb-8lb-12lb-Howitzer/Licorn-Sum:
Prussia 122-86 -52 -78-16-354
Russia 0 -112-0 -32-92-236
France 28 -125-102-75-0 -330
Take into account that french 8lb gun is almost as effective as prussian 12lb, french 6lb is approximately equal to prussian 8 lb and so on. Take into account that prussian Hw is approximately as effective as 6lb, that about 30 12lb prussian guns are concentrated in Saxon division of Hohenloe army, that 20 12 lb guns of 50+ guns are in reserve corps. We already saw what an "effective" formation it is. Russians will arrive after several hundred of turns. Please tell me more about Prussian artyllery domination! I adore fairy tales!

As for the cavalry. Well I already wrote that it takes much more time for Prussin commander to undisorder his cavalry. 2-3 times more! And not because of the skill. Just the scenario is set up this way. Hence French can make 2 times more charges and have EFFECTIVELY about 60 000 prussians. Knowing that disordered units melee attack with 1/3 strength and prussians are most of the time disordered their effective strength in melee calculation terms is about 15000. Same in defence but the number is 30000. It's a very vague assesment, just to show that the figures you gave do not yield all the information.

<center></center>
<center><b>Eyo Imperatorskogo Velichestva Leib-Kirassirskogo polku
General-Mayor Anton Valeryevich Kosyanenko
Commander of the Second Army of the West </b></center>

BTW, Bill, I sure you know that but when I counted the guns noticed that in Russian Horse coys you placed 6 6lb and 6 Ru Licorne, in
Battery coy 4 12 lb and 4 Ru licorne and in Light coy 8 6 lb and 4 ru licorne. But it should be a bit different:

Horse and Light coys 8 6 lb guns and 4 10 lb licornes
Battery coy 8 12 lb guns and 4 20 lb licornes.

<center></center>
<center><b>Eyo Imperatorskogo Velichestva Leib-Kirassirskogo polku
General-Mayor Anton Valeryevich Kosyanenko
Commander of the Second Army of the West </b></center>

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Kosyanenko</i>
<br />BTW, Bill, I sure you know that but when I counted the guns noticed that in Russian Horse coys you placed 6 6lb and 6 Ru Licorne, in
Battery coy 4 12 lb and 4 Ru licorne and in Light coy 8 6 lb and 4 ru licorne. But it should be a bit different:

Horse and Light coys 8 6 lb guns and 4 10 lb licornes
Battery coy 8 12 lb guns and 4 20 lb licornes.

<center></center>
<center><b>Eyo Imperatorskogo Velichestva Leib-Kirassirskogo polku
General-Mayor Anton Valeryevich Kosyanenko
Commander of the Second Army of the West </b></center>

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

Thanks for the info. The sources all contradict one another for this period. I had one that said that the Russians had twelve 12lb guns for a battery. Not much I can do about it now that I have laid out over 80 scenarios that use the Russians.

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)

[url="http://www.fireandmelee.net"]Fire and Melee Wargame site[/url]