Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

Greetings,

Could anyone point me in the right direction to find the point value of given units in a game or a scenario in the BG games (Artillery, cav...etc...) I browsed through the help without success

Thank you

Marc

Capitaine C. Marc Lanero
4ème de Ligne
7ème Division
II Corps
Armée du Nord
"Volontaires de la Nouvelle-France"

You mean points for (25) men lost? That is in the .scn file, lines 4 and 5. In sequence infantry;cavalry and artillery for either side, French first.


Generaal
2de Brigade
2de Nederlandsche Div
I Corps
Anglo Allied Army

Thank you General,

Much appreciates

Marc

Capitaine C. Marc Lanero
4ème de Ligne
7ème Division
II Corps
Armée du Nord
"Volontaires de la Nouvelle-France"

In my last game I helped with (Jena-Auersteadt) I added in a table that gives you the entire formation points breakdown. Thus for any formation in the main OB you can get an idea of how many points each brigade, division or wing is worth. I plan on doing this with all future games I produce in this series.

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]

Has John Tiller ever thought about awarding casualty points based on a formula that uses unit quality? For example, destroying 500 Imperial Guardsmen of quality 8 now earns the same number of points as destroying 500 militiamen of quality 2.

Comments?

FM Sir 'Muddy' Jones, KG
2nd Life Guards, Household Cavalry

Yes I've complained about this incongruity for ages. It encourages the Guards to be thrown away from the outset rather than being held back.

Generaal
2de Brigade
2de Nederlandsche Div
I Corps
Anglo Allied Army

Ken - we talked about this quite a bit in playtesting if you remember. Yes, we have forwarded this idea to him and provided he goes for it and has the time to implement it I am sure that its something we can look forward to seeing.

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 doubt this is something that will be incorporated into this game engine (or the ACW one either), as it would need to be retro-fitted to earlier titles, which could be very awkward and time-consuming.

But perhaps it's possible - remember the GUI OOB editor for the BG games? This could make a distinction depending on troop quality and weaponry too. I believe heavy cavalry might be worth more than light and light infantry more than restricted units.


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

Naw Rich, all John has to do is add in a determination of the morale, multiply it by a multiplier and then come up with the points lost by that side.

Thus: VP = (Loss/25 * Type) * (morale modifier)

Or: 50 Legere morale 6 (Jena) = (50/25 * 3) * 1.1 = 6.6 pts.

Its not rocket science!

[:D]

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]

Rules we used with min fgs were so simple Gd = 10, French modifier =4, leader =2= 16vs Reg Inf =5 no modifier. 5-16 = 11 to die roll how easy can it get why is this so different?

Col de Art 6/3 II Corps AN Marbot CS

Right Clifton, I dont see the addition as that much of an issue but then again I dont know all of the code either.

Rest assured that this is one thing we are looking to add and I hope to see it in the next title.

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]

Hi Guys,

Yes definitely agree with all that. I feel that type of value scoring would go along way in obtaining more historical use of troops and in the flow of battle.
Now if we can just stop frontal melee attacks on steady troops that would really be a leap forward! [:D]

Mike Ellwood
Konig Regt
1 Bde, 22 Div
VII Saxon Corps

Hi Guys
Not sure where this fits in but I want to just say that victory in Napoleonic battles was not really determined by how many of the other guys you kill. More the breaking of morale or overall cohesiveness 'the will to fight'. I recall Napoleon summed it up with 'Once the equilibrium is broken the rest is nothing'

Not sure if this matters in context of the possible rule you describe but it needs to be thought about. For example Napoleons numerically inferior army at Austerlitz would have a majority of A grade or better infantry, with famous regm's like the 57th perhaps A++. Would this disadvantage the French under such a rule?

Perhaps the solution is VP goals need to be set carefully depending on the quality of the armies. Which does seem to defeat the purpose of changing the unit kill vp’s.

The thing to also remember is that the holding back of the guard by Napoleon was often a political act hard to replicate in our games.

His guard literally guarded his ability to rule his Empire. This was the primary reason he did not commit them at Borodino. Namely his throne was really only created through his military might unlike the inherited rights of Alexander, Francis etc. In later campaigns when everything was on the line such as 1814 and 1815 he used the guard liberally. The somewhat flowery Anatomy of Glory is a useful reference on this. (and full of beautiful plates as well [:D]).

The guard was generally held back to attack in the 2nd half of these later battles not so much for political reasons as in the earlier battle but more because of the operational method Napoleon employed.

Namely he would fix his opponent across the front then seek out the decisive blow. This blow being delivered by elite troops.

At Austerliz Vandamme and St Hilaires Divisions were of such high quality they could do the job. By Waterloo the Btns of the guard formed the strike force.

Just some thoughts for the discussion.

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

That's all true. However in game terms we all know the Guard is thrown in at the outset against the usually crappy quality allied armies. Simple attack-rout-isolate-capture routine which leads to major losses. By making Guards worth more, a player, like the Emperor, may be rather more hesitant in chucking them all forward.

Generaal
2de Brigade
2de Nederlandsche Div
I Corps
Anglo Allied Army

Andy I would agree for early battles say up to 1809 and the first part of 1812 but after that the guard became pretty much another albiet high quality unit. It's size grew as the quality of the line formations dropped. To punish the French player for using the guard at Waterloo does not seem right. Just my opinion.

The attack type you describe is not just one the guard can deliver. Any unit can do that if handled well I think.

Best regards
Colin



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