Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">When a unit suffers casualties due to combat, it will take a Morale Check to see if it Routs or becomes Disordered at the end of the Phase. In addition, units with Fatigue level 90 that take a Fatigue loss also are required to take a Morale Check. The Quality value of the unit is used as the base value for Morale by converting A+++ to 9, A++ to 8, A+ to 7, A to 6, B to 5, and so on to F to 1. Modifiers are applied to this base Morale to obtain the final Morale value for the Morale Check. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Once a morale check is required, a six sided die result is compared to the morale of the unit plus modifiers to determine if a disorder or rout results.

So I assume it is correct that any unit equal to or greater than A+ morale (7+) cannot be disordered or routed without special modifiers such as enfilade fire, fatigue or ammo problems. Is this correct?

Finally during a fatigue test, I had an A level unit plus leader suffer a disorder result from frontal fire without modifiers. It shouldn't have been possible. An "A" morale unit plus leader equals a 7 morale unit. How did I possibly get a disorder result?

Am I missing some factor that makes it possible for 7 morale or greater units to fail morale checks?

Jagger,

If your test unit took the morale test from the enemy's Offensive Fire then DISORDER means you passed, had it failed the unit would have ROUTED.

If your test unit took the morale test from the enemy's Defensive Fire then DISORDER means you failed, had it passed then unit would have remained NORMAL.

So it all depends on what type of fire you took.

Colonel Al Amos
1er Dragoons
AdN

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> The resulting Morale value is compared with a random Die Roll from 1 to 6, and if the Die Roll exceeds the Morale value, then the unit fails the Morale Check.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Actually the fire took place during the defensive phase.

However how did it fail the morale check in the first place?

As an A morale unit, it has a 6 morale. Also a leader was with the unit providing a plus 1 modifier to the morale. Giving the unit a 7 morale. A six sided die cannot produce a number higher than 7.

An A rated unit with a leader, should never fail a morale check to fire unless a -2 modifier, such as enfilade fire or high fatigue, is present to reduce morale to 5.

Even without a leader, an A rated unit should never fail a morale check unless a firing modifier is present. A six sided die roll cannot produce a number higher than 6. Only units rated B or less can fail a morale check without any modifiers present. A die roll of 6 would be greater than 5.

I have double checked modifiers and none were present. I don't get it. I wonder if there is something added into the engine to make it possible for units ranked 6 or greater to still fail a morale check.

Here are the modifiers. None were present.

If the unit is stacked with a Leader, then 1 is added to the Morale.
If the unit is Low On Ammo or Out Of Ammo, then 1 is subtracted from the Morale.
If it is a Night turn, then 2 is subtracted from the Morale.
If the unit has Medium Fatigue, then 1 is subtracted from the Morale.
If the unit has High Fatigue, then 2 is subtracted from the Morale.
If the unit has been fired upon Enfilade, then 2 is subtracted from the Morale.
If the unit is Disordered, then 1 is subtracted from the Morale.
Skirmishers have 1 subtracted from the Morale.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> If your test unit took the morale test from the enemy's Offensive Fire then DISORDER means you passed, had it failed the unit would have ROUTED. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Al is this correct? Are you saying if a morale check is generated during offensive fire, the only result for the defending unit is disorder or rout. In other words, a morale check generated by offensive fire must result in disorder or rout.

I thought the result was during defensive fire. But if the above is correct, then the fire must have been during offensive fire.

PS: I just doublechecked. The fire was Offensive Fire.

Jagger,

If the fire came from the front, but not straight line through the two front-facing hexes, then the program considers it enfilade fire.
In other words if the firing unit was not in the affected unit's Fire Cone then it is enfilade fire.

Could that be the case here?
---

Jagger,

I checked the manuals for all three game engines (ACW, EAW & NAP), and did not see anything to back up my statement, but I am fairly positive it is true.

If someone has the BG Waterloo manual, look in it. I believe this is where I saw this explination. If so, then it is a carry over from there.

Colonel Al Amos
1er Dragoons
AdN

It was not enfilade fire.

And I just doublechecked. The fire was definitely OFFENSIVE FIRE.

If the only possible results for defending unit taking a morale check from offensive fire is disorder or rout, then that would explain the disorder for a A morale unit with leader.

I never realized that.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">A unit that fails the Morale Check during Defensive Fire becomes Disordered, while a unit that fails the Morale Check during any other situation becomes Routed.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

The users manual left out a sentence explaining that crucial distinction. I just assumed that a unit that passed the morale check during offensive fire retained good order just as in defensive fire.

But thanks, now I know it.

Jagger,

Scratch that. I just played three turns of Getting Started firing cannon each turn (Offensive Fire) and none of the targets hit DISRUPTED or ROUTED.

The effects I stated must have been from the BG Waterloo. Sorry.
-----
WAIT! HOLD THE PHONE!

Turn four British report stated that '0 out of 1 unit routed.' So I checked and the unit was DISRUPTED! [:D]

<s>So then not all hits causes morale checks? hmmmm.....

During British Turn 4 I fired at 3 French Infantry Bns, and hit all 3. In the French Report for Turn 5 I saw the '0 out of 1 unit routed', and found 1 unit DISRUPTED, but why did the other 2 units not take a morale check?

Okay, I think I figured it out... Morale Checks appear to be tied to stacking points. Of the 7 units (4 Br, 3 Fr) being fired at it wasn't until turn 4 that two of them (1 Br, 1 Fr) exceeded losses equal to 1/2 or greater stacking point cumulative. That would explain why only 1 unit in each army checked morale from recieving Offensive Fire, both passed therefore becoming DISRUPTED.

I assuming that Morale Checks are only taken when a unit crosses over another Stacking Point thresh hold, or fails a percentage check based on the percentage of a Stacking Point lost. If this is correct, then a unit that takes small (single digit losses) each turn won't be taking Morale Checks every turn, but only when the cumlative loss approaches a Stacking Point level (25,50,75, etc. I would guess 13 rounds up in this case.) However, a unit that takes a big loss (13 or more) each turn will then trigger a Morale Check each turn.

This programming subtlety would nicely illustrate the effect of a large number of casualties in a short amount of time vs. a few casualties spread out over a longer time. Nice.</s>

Scratch part of all that, I just read the COMBAT RESULTS section of the rules where it explains when a unit takes a Morale Check. hehehe... Simply elegant. [:D]

Colonel Al Amos
1er Dragoons
AdN

Hehe, sometimes the hard part is getting the morale check required in the first place.

You take the number of casualties/(number of casualties x number of men/10) to determine the need for a morale check.

Say a 500 man, Morale B unit takes 25 casualties.

So 25 divided by 25+50 produces your need for a morale check. 25/75 produces a 33% chance of morale check.

Once the need for a morale check is done, then you do the morale check.

So a Morale B unit has 1 chance of 6 to fail a morale check. That would be 16.7% chance.

So total chance of failing the morale check would be 33% x 16.7% which equals 5.5% chance.

During defensive fire, the result would be 5.5% chance of disorder. And 94.5% chance of retaining perfect order.

During offensive fire with the same number of casualties, the result would be 5.5% chance of rout. But there would also be a 27% chance of disorder since a required morale check means a unit must disorder or rout. So only a total 67% chance of retaining perfect order.

In this particular situation, 25 casaulties is approximately 6 times more effective as offensive fire than defensive fire in producing disorder or routs.

Just looking at these results, offensive fire is far more effective than defensive fire.

PS: I am using HPS rather than BG.

I wonder why the system makes offensive fire so much more effective than defensive fire? Casualties are casualties and would have the same impact on unit cohesion whether occuring during offensive or defensive fire.

With the short ranges of Napoleonic muskets and considering defensive fire is at 1/2 effectiveness, wouldn't it be better if defensive casualties were just as damaging as offensive casaulties in terms of causing a rout or disorder?

It would definitely help in cutting down all those melee attacks. And I wouldn't have to mod down all the morale levels of units.

I agree.

Colonel Al Amos
1er Dragoons
AdN

Defensive fire isn't as damaging in our HPS games as offensive fire because the unit defensively firing can possibly defensively fire more than once in a turn. If they made defensive fire as affective as offensive fire, then the game might end up being too weighted towards the defensively firing unit with more devastating volleys than the offensively firing unit. That wouldn't be fair, IMO.

The way that I see it, this is one problem with any <font color="orange"><b>You-go-I-go </b></font id="orange">format. All these actions are essentially taking place at <b><font color="green">one time.</font id="green"></b> What happens first? What happens second? In a <font color="orange"><b>You-go-I-go</b></font id="orange"> format that unfairness is inherent even though attempts are made to minimize it.

The <font color="red"><u><b>only</b></u></font id="red"> <font color="black"></font id="black">format for wargaming where it is totally fair to both sides is a <font color="orange"><b>we-go</b></font id="orange"> format where all the actions happen based upon minute impulses --one at a time over a period of time. Each action taking it's "turn."

By doing things that way, only so many volleys in say ---a ten minute game turn is possible. Whether they are offensive or defensive volleys doesn't matter any more. They will happen at full strength when appropriate.

Luckily for us, a Napoleonic game like that is on the horizon. For those that do not know, it is called <font color="orange"><b>Black Powder Wars: Battles for Napoleon.</b></font id="orange"> It is somewhere between alpha and beta stages right now and you can see more about it here: http://www.doubleshotdesign.com/ The older DSD forum has a lot of information about the game while Matrix's forum about the game will have developing information.

Hopefully, our club will support it and allow members to play it like the 1NWCG has announced.

Cheers,
Rick
[:)]

<center>Chef de Bataillon Rick Motko
1er Bataillon, 33° Régiment d'Infanterie de Ligne
2eme Brigade, 11eme division
IIIe corps, Armée du Nord</center>

Rick,

Jagger and I aren't arguing for Defensive Fire to be as EFFECTIVE as Offensive Fire. We want Defensive Fire to be able to be able to cause ROUTS as does Offensive Fire. I would like any morale check to be able to cause ROUTS.

"A unit that fails the Morale Check <b>during Defensive Fire becomes Disordered</b>, while a unit that fails the Morale Check during any other situation becomes Routed."

Essentially, I would like to see the highlighted part of the above quote, taken from the game documentation describign how the engine works for Morale Checks, removed from the game engine so that any Morale Check that fails becomes routed, and any Morale Check that passes becomes DISRUPTED. This is because not all units that take hits actually have to check morale. See Jagger's post below.

Colonel Al Amos
1er Dragoons
AdN

Al,
Count me amongst the supporters for your morale test idea. It would be a big plus in my mind. Now, how do we get it done?

Rick

<center>Chef de Bataillon Rick Motko
1er Bataillon, 33° Régiment d'Infanterie de Ligne
2eme Brigade, 11eme division
IIIe corps, Armée du Nord</center>

I absolutely agree with Rick and Al.

A major advantage of a defending formation is its fundemental capability to shock the enemy with those first steady and braced vollies. As the attacking formation loses officers, NCO's and men, the formation can lose cohesion and either disorder or rout before even initiating its own fire at the defending unit.

It seems logical, the attacking formation must survive the first major checks of morale before gaining the ability to harm the defending unit. Within the game, it is the opposite-the offensive formation gets in the first substantially stronger hit, in terms of disordering and routing, rather than the defending formation. It doesn't make sense.

Although it does explain why lines can't stop columns.

IMO, the risk of disorder and routing should lie first with the attacking formations rather than the defensive.

And yes, how do we go about getting it changed?

Or maybe I am missing something here. Is there a rationale to the current process which makes the system logical? I have tried to think of one but without success at the moment. Any supporting arguments for the current system?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Al Amos</i>
<br />Rick,

Jagger and I aren't arguing for Defensive Fire to be as EFFECTIVE as Offensive Fire. We want Defensive Fire to be able to be able to cause ROUTS as does Offensive Fire. I would like any morale check to be able to cause ROUTS.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">


Al

Interesting idea, but I think that there may be a problem. If I advance my units in formation on my move and a couple are routed by defensive phase fire, this could leave holes in my formation that could be exploited by my opponent on his move and a very quick end to the battle!

The logical consequence as I see it, is that it would be better to sit back and await your opponent to advance.

I may be wrong but that is how I visualise the batle progressing.

Rather than rout, I would prefer to see advancing units 'frozen' (not necessarily disordered), just by trying to move into high threat zones. This would seem a more reasonable way to disrupt a player's advance.

Just a thought

Mark
VII Corps