Thanks to everyone who chipped in with suggestions on my last post, there were many interesting opinions and rule ideas given. One of the ideas I liked was that of making the attacking column deploy into line if the defenders looked too hard. To simulate this, I made the following rule adjustments –
1. If a column declares a charge on a line and the line passes its morale test with good morale the column must halt and deploy into line instead of completing a charge.
2. Remove the +1 morale bonus for charging units
3. A British volley is defined as 6 or more figures firing at close range (not 12 as previously, to allow disordered units to still have a morale effect on chargers).
 |
| The French come on in the same old style, except that somehow they seem to have shot Picton! |
 |
| The Swiss make a charge on the Brunswickers who become disordered following their morale check. However, after receiving a half-effect volley and canister fire the Swiss are stopped in their tracks. |
 |
| On the other flank, the Black Watch have survived their 'unit charged' morale check forcing the 9th legere to deploy into line. |
 |
| Next move and its the turn of the Poles and 45th ligne to charge. |
 |
| Both are disordered and stopped by the enemy musketry. The French will have to settle for a fire-fight. |
It made for a very interesting little game and I liked the subtlety of changing formation while the next column moved up to have a crack at the line. It was quite satisfying to see the French attack stall and then fail, however I do wonder if this has tipped things too far in favour of the defence.
When I get more time, I will try a game with tweaked morale factors only.
11 comments:
That looked quite a good (realistic?) result but it's a small sample size so can't wait to hear how it plays out in a game. I assume the stopped column that deploys into line doesn't also get to fire in that turn?
Still not too sure about the special rules for Brits firing rather than for everyone.
Rob, the game had a nice flow to it which slightly surprised me. Yes, the column cannot fire on the turn that it deploys so the line gets a free pop at it!
Would this have worked out differently if all the columns had charges simultaneously?
WM - I guess that would have split the fire so it may have, however the rules as they stand only allow for one-on-one melees so two columns would not be able to simultaneously charge a single unit in line.
It occurs to me that if there isn't room to deploy the unit should be disordered. This would discourage that old 'wargamism' of columns marching up shoulder to shoulder to present as many muskets as the line but able to sustain more losses. Looking at the morale tables again and the failure of the Swiss to close with the DISORDERED Brunswickers then perhaps you should keep the +1 morale for charging as it's only going to happen if the target failed it's being charged test (otherwise the charging column would have to halt and deploy).
Rob, you could be right there, could be +1 for advancing in column and +1 for charging (in any formation). Good point about keeping correct spacing between columns too.
I thought you had covered off the point of advancing columns using musketry by them only shooting with 50% of their frnt rank so they are unlijely to win a firefight with a line. If you follow the grand square of Marshal McDonald in 1809 the columns have no room to deploy because they are being driven into contact with the enemy in this large formation..
And the problem with the French having shot Picton is........?
Having followed the arguments rather slowly, it strikes me that WM has (as so often) identified the rub. Which is that M & M does not allow two units to melee against one. Given that artificiality (not a criticism, just an observation), perhaps the single column should have an edge by virtue of its plus one morale throw. It's ok to laugh at the notion of two columns against one line, but I don't think Napoleon would feel estranged by it. Without the morale edge, the lone column is rarely going to get home, as you have demonstrated.
For my education, how do the rules discriminate between a British defensive line and any other?
I can't think of an occasion when two columns hit a line at the same time. I also thought the existing rules allow it but the defensive fire would have to be split between the two and having two columns gives you two chance of closing - it's just that if both closed to contact the melees would be fought one after the other - have I got that wrong?
With your new mod you could make the line test twice, once for each column, or simply include a -1 if charged by more than one unit. I would be loathe to give up the simplicity of one-on-one unit combat unless someone can come up with several occurrences of this happening as it seems most unlikely.
I think I have expressed myself badly but it is not my impression that in every battle where column was deployed against line, it was always one regiment in column aligned tidily against one in line, while flanking columns waited their turn. How often units in column actually hit the line they approached is another matter. That is why I like the idea of the attacking column having to form line where the line under attack fails to wobble.
Nigel & Rob, I changed the rules a while back to make the first turn of a melee one-on-one really just to keep things simple and help stop a column from always winning. This is an artificial constraint I agree. However, if columns did in reality keep sufficient spacing so they could deploy into line then this would pretty much tie in with one-on-one anyway. I'll see how my next round of play-testing goes!
Post a Comment