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 Sat Sep 30, 2023 1:27 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue May 23, 2023 12:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 4:46 pm
Posts: 335
Location: Malta
By gathering numerous sources together, it can be generalized that:

1. Squares could provide cover for individual gunners, but not for batteries as integral units.

2. Gunners seeking refuge in a square would not have been able to continue firing.

3. The process of taking cover in a square would severely disrupt a battery for the rest of the day, leading to a loss of command and control as the battery would be disintegrated into several parts: the artillery train would be sent to the rear, battery horses would be sent to the rear, some men would make it to a nearby square, some gunners would pack up and head home for good, and the unlucky ones would attempt to take cover under the guns with questionable odds of surviving the day. Overall, such a battery would be scattered, unmanned, out of ammo, immobilized, and with damaged, misplaced, or captured gear.

"Quite often, when the gunners were immediately threatened by cavalry, they simply left the pieces and ran from the battlefield. After Waterloo, Wellington wrote that the gunners who ran into squares before the cavalry and then returned to serve the guns once the charges had passed were rather the exception than the rule."

4. For the aforementioned reasons, the common tactical response of artillery commanders threatened by a cavalry charge was to pack up early and reposition, rather than risking the disintegration or loss of the battery.

As of version 4.06 and given a 100-meter by 100-meter hex environment, the game engine handles the above points differently:

• Even a small square of 100 men, with a maximum possible front of less than 7-8 meters, provides guaranteed anti-cavalry cover for any battery, regardless of its size. However, the historical deployment of a typical 8-gun battery would require a significant amount of space: around 100 meters to the front (the space for the guns and intervals in between) and between 30-100 meters in depth (depending on the situation), allowing for the limbers, the battery's draft horses, and the artillery train wagons with their own horses. Thus, a typical 8-gun battery deployed into battle would require nearly a full hex to operate as a unit and could not have been protected as an integral unit and covered by a battalion square of any size.

• As of version 4.06, if a battery is located within the same hex as an infantry square, it will continue to fire as usual without any negative fire modifiers. The "behind the scenes" processes of gunners taking cover in squares and the act of sending an artillery train and battery horses to the rear are not being modelled, and there is no negative impact on the artillery battery's cohesion, rate of fire, ability to manoeuvre, etc.

________________________________

Considering the existing engine capabilities, perhaps the better way to handle batteries in the same hex as infantry squares would be either:
1. "Uncrewing" the battery if deployed in the same hex as an infantry square.
2. Preventing artillery from firing if deployed in the same hex as an infantry square.
3. Applying a severe (-90%?) negative fire modifier if deployed in the same hex as an infantry square.
In my view, option 1 is a more realistic representation, while option 3 is the most generous to the artillery.

_________________
Polkovnik (Colonel) Alexey Tartyshev
Kiev Grenadiers Regiment
2nd Grenadier Division
Russian Corps


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue May 23, 2023 5:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2013 10:55 am
Posts: 1571
Location: Bouches-de-l’Elbe
I guess if the engine gets changed to disallow the "square protection" then at least the function "Artillery Retire By Prolonge" from the CW series would need to go in, maybe the artillery capture rule to followed by the function to re-crew it. The later leads to a pretty bad artillery unit as it acts like having a Moral of F along with the lower fire value.

But I guess at first the square needs to be modeled in more detail, if cavalry would be allowed to charge past the square but still thru the hex with the square/artillery then you could model that the artillery has no protection.

_________________
Général Christian Hecht
Commandant en Chef de la Grande Armée
Comte et Chevalier de l'Empire

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed May 24, 2023 4:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 4:46 pm
Posts: 335
Location: Malta
I am not familiar with CW series but if such mechanic already exists within the engine then I hope it becomes even easier to implement. But even throwing a negative modifier to artillery within the square should be fairly simple.
And yes, squares not having ZOC for the purpose of the charging cavalry would be on my wish list too.

_________________
Polkovnik (Colonel) Alexey Tartyshev
Kiev Grenadiers Regiment
2nd Grenadier Division
Russian Corps


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed May 24, 2023 10:51 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 5:34 pm
Posts: 291
Cavalry on the marching or in charges, should not, cannot be stopped by squares, columns or lines of battalions of infantry, by ZOC. Of course, they get salvos of musket from infantry, but the cavalry just passes away them by driving past with some losses.

Cavalry on the marching or in charges, should not, cannot be stopped , surrounded and destroyed in the rear of the enemy. The front line of enemy, I mean of standing or moving lines, columns, squares are with intervals between them. Always. Cavalry squadrons, all or few will always get to their back area with losses.

_________________
Général de Brigade Cezary Pluskwa,
17ème Régiment de Dragons,
1ère Brigade,
4ème Division de Dragons,
3ème Corps d'Armée,
La Grande Armée.


Last edited by Cezary Pluskwa on Fri May 26, 2023 8:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed May 24, 2023 12:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2013 10:55 am
Posts: 1571
Location: Bouches-de-l’Elbe
Yea but getting ride of ZOCs that stop cavalry demands that the units that are passed get at least a chance to fire on the passing cavalry, or what else could/should be done?

_________________
Général Christian Hecht
Commandant en Chef de la Grande Armée
Comte et Chevalier de l'Empire

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu May 25, 2023 3:55 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 4:46 pm
Posts: 335
Location: Malta
Christian Hecht wrote:
Yea but getting ride of ZOCs that stop cavalry demands that the units that are passed get at least a chance to fire on the passing cavalry, or what else could/should be done?


So let them fire on the charging cavalry and normal defensive fire rules apply. But charging cavalry just should not be stopped by ZOCs from squares.

But on itself this change is not going to change tactics dramatically as players will keep sticking artillery batteries with squares decimating cavalry attempting to pass at close range .

_________________
Polkovnik (Colonel) Alexey Tartyshev
Kiev Grenadiers Regiment
2nd Grenadier Division
Russian Corps


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2023 8:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 10:18 am
Posts: 6012
The code for something like this exists with the Panzer Campaigns series where the armor is not protected by bunkers and fortifications. Might be something in concept that they could add as well BUT for now the crews are not a separate unit. In the Squad Battles game you have men carrying weapons. A manpower value could be added to the artillery unit line which would make the entry looking something like this:

French GD horse artillery unit --> U 8 160 7 C B 24 1 1/Gd Horse Art. --- where 160 is the crew size

I dont see this happening so for now about the only thing you can do is just ask for a House Rule whereby your opponent and yourself do not stack guns with infantry in square.

I know I use this tactic a lot and am using it right now in a Battle of Austerlitz game. We could go back to the tactic of having a checkerboard formation of squares with guns in separate hexes. I would be up for that.

_________________
Image

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, former WDS Scenario Designer

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 4.06)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2023 1:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2013 10:55 am
Posts: 1571
Location: Bouches-de-l’Elbe
Giving artillery units a menpower value would also relief us of the single melee value per artillery piece that we have in the PDT, that could then simply be based on the menpower of the artillery unit, that would be a better and more detailed depiction of artillery in melee.
And we could set VP for guns based on menpower, by that the bigger pieces with the larger crew would yield more VP compared to smaller pieces, again more detailed VP giving.

Bill's idea seems pretty interesting and beneficial!

_________________
Général Christian Hecht
Commandant en Chef de la Grande Armée
Comte et Chevalier de l'Empire

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat May 27, 2023 6:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2005 4:46 pm
Posts: 335
Location: Malta
My guess was, its an easy fix as mechanics of negating square benefit vs cavalry is already there: when column/line/cavalry packed with squares.
So just adding an artillery to the list would be fairly simple. In this case we dont even need to play with artillery values as players will not be incentivised to stick artillery with squares.

Well, will have to stick to house rules then.
At least its a simple one to follow.
The engine has been evolving constantly over the years and to me it’s already very impressive representation of Napoleonic warfare - fixing artillery within squares is a massive step further towards realism. Maybe one day..

_________________
Polkovnik (Colonel) Alexey Tartyshev
Kiev Grenadiers Regiment
2nd Grenadier Division
Russian Corps


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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:  
cron
POWERED_BY
Localized by Maël Soucaze © 2010 phpBB.fr