Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

In an attempt to solve the stacking in line problem in the NAP engine, the H&R folks have created some converged bns for some rgts. This is not a good solution, imo.

Without historical evidence to back it up players will have an incorrect picture of the problems facing the historical commanders. For instance, in thier Borodino setup, I noticed a couple of the five bn French rgts having an additional two converged bns. This gives the players two additional basic units to work with unavailable to the historical commanders. If this was the historical practice, please provide supporting material. I'm aware new primary source material debunks some long held popular ideas, so I'm open to new ideas just want to see where they are being based on.

Also, the H&R team speaks of the command/control problem of the large single rgts of the French army. I would direct them to the Napoleon Series forum. On page three or four there is a thread discussing 2nd Majors and 2nd Colonels. Seems as though Napoleon, Davout and others worked out a method where those rgts were given a 2nd Major or Colonel to work with the rgt, and to command the second line of battle units when the brigade was deployed for action. In essence the GdB would control two manuevre elements; one, the first line of battle consisting of three bns commanded by the Colonel, the second, the second line of battle consisting of two bns commanded by the new 2nd Major, or 2nd Colonel. Good information provided with many linkts to original source documents, mostly in French primarialy correspondence between Nap & Davout.

Just some thoughts. Good research on unit quality it appears.

Warren does this for the Alt-Dresden scenario for Campaign Leipzig but says that he has data to back up the use of the Austrians splitting their huge battalions up into two components.

Now I doubt if they operated far part from each other but what player in this club will be prone to do THAT? Most folks would just move them where they are needed. But perhaps the Austrians did THAT too knowing how whacky things could get in combat.

_________________


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

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 4.07)

Bill, yes I'm aware of the Austrian practice of using Massen where they subdivided thier bns into two or three components. Many instances I have heard of them doing this is with a small, less than 100 meter, gap between the Massen. Also, they would leave detachments along thier LOS to guard a variety of towns and villages for depots, etc.

The English would form the bn into wings for tactical flexiblity.

The Prussians, Russians and French didn't seem to do this. Strip elites and form converged bns, form bns of march, but I've not heard of independent tactical usage of split bn components, however bns may have operated without all its companies (not sure why companies are missing.)

Looking forward to hear of some.

Joke, but not exactly...
The French sailed,the Russians looked to and the Poles were there.

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

Al,

Thanks for the info about 2nd Colonels/Majors! I've met info that brigades de marche, consisting of single battalions of different regiments, were subdivided into demi-brigades. That's about GdD d'Hillers division of "jeune conscripts". But never about such a practice in the first line troops.

Of course having a dedicated converged units seems strange. But we firmly believe that correct frontage and stacking limits are of higher importance. So we simply chose the lesser of two weevils. Variants with converged Grenadiers/Voltigiers batallions (and all the line troops being restricted to deploy skirms) were also suggested. But we have not playtested them yet.

Moreover. Looking from perspective of realistic course and outcome of action. What harm may be caused by these converged batallions? They may be used separately. Hence we need something that would prevent such an unhistorical use. The morale is made rather fragile compared to canned scenarios. This requires constant presence in leaders command range and close attention to command chain integrity. We have introduced regimental level leaders with supertight command ranges of 1-2 hexes. Anything being out of this range becomes a clumsy one shot weapon. It very much discorages independent use of batallions.

As of historical examples, I should look for them. It may take some time since all of my books are right now packed in boxes. One thing certain - Russo-Swedish war they were numerous.

_________________

Dear Bill and Al!

I understand what you say about the copyright etc. I was strictly opposed to placing these files on the web. And as was already said we do not plan to transfer large maps between titles.

On the other hand I humbly remind you that all of us are being fed with promises of an upade for NRC since 11 March 2007. It's rather frustrating. It does not spur sales neither.

_________________

Hopefully the H&R scenarios will be added to the club database .

_________________
Generallieutenant Walt GroßHerzog Moehle von Neuhardenberg
Kommandeur der Korps Artillerie-Brigade
Kommandeur der Gardegrenadier
Königlich Preußische Korps

The updates are coming. Rich is hard at work getting them out to the beta testers.

But that is no excuse to circumvent the system. Especially to publicly publish them either. I could somewhat understand if John were no longer in business.

But thanks for your NOT supporting the file set. We appreciate that. Hang in there - reinforcements are on the way!

_________________


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

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 4.07)

Anton,

I appreciate you guys are between a rock and a hard place on unit strengths. IF players WOULD use the extended line feature faithfully, then creating seperate converged units wouldn't be quite so necessary.

One thing the team may want to remember is the normal detachments made, camp guards, etc, etc, perhaps by deducting these unit strengths ... actual in rank, available for duty may fall to the total for a single hex.

It's tough, no doubt about it. If, when we can make maps then we can change the ground scale to better accomodate unit frontages. Someday.

Waiting for the updates is frustrating, but we must wait.

A reponse to the Dragoon thread, the type can be added in the engine will use them, as far as I know.

If not, we can stil refer to the original scenario names and put H&R in comments.

_________________
General-Leytenant Alexey Tartyshev
Leib-Guard Preobrazhensky Regiment (Grenadier Drum)
1st Brigade
Guard Infantry Division
5th Guard Corps


(I don't play with with ZOC kills and Rout limiting ON)

An interesting find.

"Rüchel's 3rd battalions were ad hoc battalions, not the "real" 3rd battalions of their respective battalions:

For manoeuvering, the companies, which always formed in 3 ranks, were split in two platoons each, so that a musketeer battalion consisted of 10 platoons, and a grenadier battalion of 8 platoons. The guard battalions also were formed in 8 platoons. On 1 October 1806, general lieutenant v. Rüchel changed this for the corps under his command, ordering that the regiments in his corps should be reformed in three battalions of two ranks only. The 1st and 3rd battalions of 3 companies in 6 platoons, with one cannon each, the 2nd battalion of 4 companies in 8 platoons with two cannons. However, he envisaged to combine the regimental guns of a brigade to form a brigade battery."

-From the Napoleon Series Forum (see my thread about Prussians 1806)

I knew Ruchel had played around with 2 ranks, however, I had not read he reorganized the tactical disposition of the regts, too. So here we see a commander taking two bns of nominal strength of 840 men @, and rearranging them into 3 bns with two having @ 500 and the other having @ 675 men. Interesting. His orders, like that of Mack's in 1805 came upon the very eve of the campaign's opening, so I'm not sure how well his units operated in this new structure, or if they actually adopted in in combat. It does show another example of how the allies were NOT static in thier approach to war as the popular myth holds.

Maybe making converged bns for better tactical handling isn't as far from history as I've previously thought.

When will Grenadiers be able to do what they are named????

You mean throwing grenades?
Grenades were not used during Napoleonic wars - unsure why, seems to be a very efficient close range weapon.

_________________
General-Leytenant Alexey Tartyshev
Leib-Guard Preobrazhensky Regiment (Grenadier Drum)
1st Brigade
Guard Infantry Division
5th Guard Corps


(I don't play with with ZOC kills and Rout limiting ON)

I watch Prince of Macedon an I notice that the man at war games have them do that?

There's a problem and that is not many in this club know of these games and the commanders are not telling them. That they are far better then HPS games now that's only what I think but am hooked on them! They easy and you don't need a bunch of rules to play them. I love the unit pictures up dated and large and it gives you that feeling like man this is so real !