Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

For good reason, the game has been adjusted to prevent units of less than 100 men forming square.

I'm playing a game at the moment where several squares have been reduced to less than 100 men due to combat. It would seem to me that these units would also no longer be able to hold that formation.

I believe they should automatically change formation to column.

Squares are inherently defensive formations. The men are in square for a reason and they are aware of that. If they suffer so many casualties that they are no longer able to maintain that formation, I'd suggest that the resulting morale shock would at least cause them to disorder if not rout altogether. The unit should therefore take an immediate morale check.

Finally, I believe this should happen as soon as the loss occurs. If you choose to take the risk of trying to hold your line with low strength squares I see no reason why you shouldn't suffer the consequences immediately.

Thoughts gentlemen?

_________________
Général de Brigade Dean Webster
1ère Brigade
1ère Division
4ème Corps d'Armée
La Grande Armée

-------------------------------------------------------
"I have a plan so cunning, you could put a tail on it and call it a weasel"
Blackadder

I can imagine that a unit already in square rather "shrinks" down(maybe it forms solid square) than disintegrates, and so is still able to still hold off cavalry.
Afaik even skirmishers facing cavalry tried to form a "mob" that can't simply be overrun by cavalry.

For the usual bat. that is down to 100 men or less the casualties are so high that any moral check likely will force the unit to run, just go in and melee it with something, once it runs keep it running with cavalry.

_________________

I agree with Dean.
This is waht we see in our current PBEM.
Squares as small as 30-50 men are holding up masses of cavarly and project zoc into all directions. They consistently do not fail morale checks due to quality B .

My thoughts are - squares below 100 men should not project ZOC.
I would also insrease the threshold for squares to above 100 men.
And going even further - cavalry should have a chance of deafeating a square: possibly just negate thier charge bonus but let the die roll deside.
Squares ability to hold off cavalry in 100% cases produces odd situations like a square of 100 men holding up a cavalry division being totally immune to it.
Even cavalrymen just discharge thier pistols at them (not to mentions carbines) the 100 men square does not stand a chance.

_________________
General-Mayor Alexey Tartyshev
Kiev Grenadiers Regiment (Grenadier Drum)
2nd Grenadier Division
8th Infantry Corps
2nd Western Army

(I don't play with Rout limiting ON)

Moral B shouldn't help because with the high casualties they have high fatigue and by that a lowered moral to at least D, maybe more if other things come into.
So if they don't fail moral checks something is wrong.

Anyhow, yes ZOCs by square suck, but just because of that they should be made to be insta killed just they are below a certain threshold, better the game mechanic of the ZOCs gets adjusted.
Squares were broken by cavalry but didn't happen very often and when it was mostly under certain circumstances.

Here some interesting info:
http://napoleonistyka.atspace.com/infan ... st_cavalry

_________________

great website.
but there should be a chance to break square at least. Especially for the company size squares.

PS. The 100 men squares are skirmishes parent companies. They have zero fatigue. And this is what they are good for within the game. Very gamey.

_________________
General-Mayor Alexey Tartyshev
Kiev Grenadiers Regiment (Grenadier Drum)
2nd Grenadier Division
8th Infantry Corps
2nd Western Army

(I don't play with Rout limiting ON)

Yes that is where the engine hits its limits. Usually a bat. that becomes that small would be easy to send running, but if that is a company level scenario with so small units from the start we really have a problem. But afaik such scenario are seldom in the series(I only remember them in Waterloo and afaik some of the Peninsular siege scenarios), not sure if any adjustment would be made for them.

_________________

Hi Christian,

Alex and I are playing each other and the game we are both referring to is the same one.

I think you've misunderstood. The squares we are referring to are the parent units of light infantry battalions that have detached all their skirmishers. So far I've had two separate squares of <20 men holding up lines of advance and blocking LOS.

Men grouping together for protection is one thing. This is something different and not what I believe squares in the game are supposed to represent.

As Alex said, it's a very "gamey" tactic. You could make a house rule for it, but I'd prefer to see this one handled in game.

Perhaps units less than 100 men shouldn't exert a ZOC or affect LOS. 100 skirmishers don't exert a ZOC or affect LOS, why should a 20 man square? I can't see how 500 men in line behind it are protected in any way by such a unit.

_________________
Général de Brigade Dean Webster
1ère Brigade
1ère Division
4ème Corps d'Armée
La Grande Armée

-------------------------------------------------------
"I have a plan so cunning, you could put a tail on it and call it a weasel"
Blackadder

Ah thanks for the explanation.
That raises another problem, because if you kill that parent unit the send out skirmishers can't reform and afaik recovery from rout will also not work so they will flee the battle field sooner or later. That is an easy way to kill a battalion.

But it is indeed unrealistic that such small squares still block cavalry. A line of small squares must have huge gaps between them, cavalry units should pass them in a 2-hex move, maybe with a disorder check based on square & cavalry size.

_________________

I agree with the above proposal that squares below 100 not to have ZOC.
This on itself will demotivate players to form small battalion squares and this will cover most of the unrealistic cases.

PS
To my knowledge detached light comanies of the light battalions can reform regadless of the parrent unit health and existance

_________________
General-Mayor Alexey Tartyshev
Kiev Grenadiers Regiment (Grenadier Drum)
2nd Grenadier Division
8th Infantry Corps
2nd Western Army

(I don't play with Rout limiting ON)

If that is so it would be great.

_________________