Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

Ok - before I make any appeal to John Tiller on this matter I would like to hear from you guys on how you think it should work.

Would you prefer:

A. All infantry would try and square up if in the charge cone of a cavalry unit that successfully charges (doesnt disorder). Disordered cavalry would NOT cause a unit to try and square. Only is ONE good order cavalry unit is charging.

OR:

B. ALL infantry in the charge cone attempt to square despite the order of the cavalry that is CHARGING.

Please answer yes or no and then give a reason below your answer for each.

1. Do you think that the pros outweigh the cons in this issue? In other words do you think that such a rule is worthy to be included in the engine and its presence outweighs any issues that arise such as a player abusing the rule?

2. Is it better to have Auto Squaring as an Optional Rule like the Leader VPs, Optional Melee Resolution and Increased Fatigue Recovery? (my gut answer is yes as if players dont like the rule then they can turn it off)

Historical point: infantry almost always went into square when charged. There are exceptions to the rule. In some cases they tried to use a volley to break the charge and alot of times with disastrous results.

Oberst-Lt Wilhelm Peters
2nd Kuirassiers, Austrian Army

Autosquaring as an optional rule sounds good to me. I'm not sure if the rule is open to abuse or not until it's been tested.

My view is to opt for A. Disordered cavalry are no threat to infantry. The biggest problem is what constitutes a cavalry threat. Would a dozen cavalry force a unit to square? Would it be practical to set a minimum number of cavalry to constitute a threat?

Like Andy I'd go for option A, and as an optional rule. Even if it was open to some abuse not all players would abuse it. It's good that this is being discussed seriously.

<font color="gold">Major Antony Barlow
CO, 2nd British (Union) Brigade, Anglo-Allied Cavalry Corps.
Guards: 4th (Royal Irish) Dragoon Guards.</font id="gold">

It's definitely best as an optional rule, but one that I feel should be a standard feature of the game - in other words players would have to select "no square forming" as an optional rule rather than vice versa.

<b>All</b> infantry in the charge zone should test for square forming - if they fail the test then:

a./ The infantry might remain in line and attempt to halt the charge by firepower. (More effective at Balaklava when the "thin red line" had rifles than it's likely to be in the Napoleonic era)

b./ The infantry become disrupted but hold their position. They can still fire at the approaching cavalry and might just be lucky enough to disrupt it.

c./ The infantry rout. This is what militia will probably do as they can't form square anyway.

(Maybe at some point you could also have the additional feature of skirmishers next to a formed unit or adjacent to difficult terrain attempting to run for cover, but this might be awkward to code in)

Lt Rich White
4th Cavalry Brigade
Cavalry Corps
Anglo-Allied Army

<font color="orange">Again, I don't own any HPS title but...</font id="orange">

My personnal opinion concurs with Andy's in the sense that auto-squaring should occur only if the size of the charging cavalry justifies such a formation change. I wouldn't like to see the program make my 600 strong battalion attempt to form square because of 100 charging horsmen.

Being one of those "nasty" opportunists, my tactics would be to make the ennemy form square only to let some infantrymen attempt to melee and disrupt the square with the purpose of pinning it down. [^]

If some of above mentionned concerns are taken care of, I would also prefer auto-squaring as part of the regular engine but <u>with</u> the availability of an optional rule enabling to disable that feature (Like Richard's suggestion).

BTW, the possibility of militia routing even before melee makes a lot of sense to me!

...

<font color="orange">After all of these implementations, I will seriously consider purchasing all of the HPS titles at once! [;)]</font id="orange">


[url="mailto:pyguinard@hotmail.com"]Lt Pierre-Yves Guinard[/url],
6e Division, II Corp

AdN

I would have to concur with both Richard and Pierre-Yves. Auto-square forming as a standard feature with the option of turning off this mechanism if mutually agreeable would be my preferred choice. Again, I think there has to be a correlation between the size of the potential cavalry threat and the strength of the individual btns in the charge zone, although this may be a more difficult matter to quantify. Remember, battlefields were places of great confusion, noise, smoke etc, nothing like the clear and concise birdseye view we are presented with. Who is to say that a single squadron visible through the detritus of battle would not be sufficient to force the commanding infantry officer to form his btns into square? Would he really want to take the risk?

I find the idea quite an exciting concept as it would offer a serious dilema to players who prefer to stack hexes to the hilt. If one btn fails its check then all are disordered!

Option A for me.

<font color="gold">General de Brigade Comte Greg Morgan
2eme Brigade
3eme Division de Cavalerie Legere
III Corps
L'Armee du Nord</font id="gold">

I think we also need to consider the effect of this on the dynamics of the game. A turn-based game attempts to recreate a situation where both sides are moving simultaneously. At present, if you think your infantry are threatened by cavalry, you can attempt to form square in your turn. This has the effect of severely limiting the mobility of the infantry in that sector - which is the intention in threatening them with cavalry.
If there were an automatic attempt to form square during the other player's turn, no one would ever form square in their own turn. Thus, the cavalry would need to actually charge to get the intended effect. Even if they didn't press home their attack, the cavalry therefore would be not effective as a deterrent to infantry movement next turn, as they would be disordered.
I would propose that if automatic square was adopted, an additional change should be cavalry can elect to pull out of a charge after say 3 hexes, without becoming disordered. (As Bill noted, the first movement in a charge would have been a slow trot, to dress the ranks and establish the direction of the charge, so pulling up at that point should not be a problem.)

Capitaine Neville Worland
7ème Régiment de Dragons
Ier Corps de Réserve de Cavalerie
Army du Nord

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by ndworl</i>
<br />I think we also need to consider the effect of this on the dynamics of the game. A turn-based game attempts to recreate a situation where both sides are moving simultaneously. At present, if you think your infantry are threatened by cavalry, you can attempt to form square in your turn. This has the effect of severely limiting the mobility of the infantry in that sector - which is the intention in threatening them with cavalry.
If there were an automatic attempt to form square during the other player's turn, no one would ever form square in their own turn. Thus, the cavalry would need to actually charge to get the intended effect. Even if they didn't press home their attack, the cavalry therefore would be not effective as a deterrent to infantry movement next turn, as they would be disordered.
I would propose that if automatic square was adopted, an additional change should be cavalry can elect to pull out of a charge after say 3 hexes, without becoming disordered. (As Bill noted, the first movement in a charge would have been a slow trot, to dress the ranks and establish the direction of the charge, so pulling up at that point should not be a problem.)

Capitaine Neville Worland
7ème Régiment de Dragons
Ier Corps de Réserve de Cavalerie
Army du Nord
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Neville - I would say then it would be more like a Hollywood fencing scene. The guy puts up his blade and the other guys attacks it (being a fencer I note those things). I coundnt disagree more and that is why some of us think that a Auto-Square rule would be nice - but OPTIONAL.

I do not agree with your cavalry idea. The infantry could and did square up once the cavalry got to a gallop. Try stopping 400 men on horses who are at a gallop. The unit is ALMOST disordered by that time anyway. What we need for cavalry is a WINDED result. Not disordered. The horses were tired from the energy spent. The men could reform very well after a charge IF they could be recalled. Try starting a charge with English cavalry and get them to pull out of a charge.

Couldnt disagree with you more on that concept. The cavalry would just go after other game. Like the Lancers at Waterloo they would swirl around the square.

I do think that a square should have NO ZOC though. That would allow the historical 'swirling' to occur. Otherwise you have to stay TWO hexes away from the square. If you had adjacent squares then that would block the cavalry from moving by these units anyway. Wouldnt suggest that we change the engine so that they move THROUGH them.

Sorry - dont mean to sound terribly negative - send in the cavalry must be done with the idea that some of the units could square.

While I dont live by this rule I prefer to attack disordered infantry anyway, especially since the new change to the Eckmuhl/Wagram games where units are 2/3 value if disordered. Why attack infantry that is not disordered (unless you know that they have high fatigue or something)? That sort of goes against the historical doctrine of the period. Well Ney, went against the doctrine of the period when he had the French cavalry attack the British at Waterloo but for me that is not a classic battle to study for how to handle your cavalry.

Oberst-Lt Wilhelm Peters
2nd Kuirassiers, Austrian Army

Well, you attack when the tactical situation favours it, which may include an all-out assault on the biggest nastiest infantry battalion in the world, if there's nothing behind it but some gun batteries facing the wrong way. (Doesn't happen often I admit, but one lives in hope).

No, I'm solely concerned about the effect on the game. I would be sorry to see a change that allowed a line of unsupported infantry to frustrate a proper all-arms attack, by moving up with impunity, being able to form square - after having expended their entire movement value - if threatened by cavalry. Most of that objection would be dealt with by removing ZOCs from squares. However, with the game engine, this would be a BIG move, as infantry in square could then be isolated and eliminated in one turn. (Alternatively, as you suggest Bill, the squares could be beside each other. This would then present a beautiful target for concrentrated fire, routing some and disordering the rest, leaving them vulnerable to elimination.) In fact, the more I go through the possibilities, the more I like the idea.

So, a big YES to automatic square formation, but only if in conjunction with squares having no ZOC.

Capitaine Neville Worland
7ème Régiment de Dragons
Ier Corps de Réserve de Cavalerie
Army du Nord

Players tend to throw their cavalry about too much and too early - this is the easiest way to lose a battle. As Bill points out, it's usually best to wait until the infantry are disordered and highly fatigued before sending in the cavalry. But perhaps even disordered infantry should have at least <i>some</i> chance of forming square, especially if high quality troops? Maybe the fatigue level, as well as a unit's quality and whether or not it's disrupted, should be factored into the probability of successful square forming?

Lt Rich White
4th Cavalry Brigade
Cavalry Corps
Anglo-Allied Army