REVISED MELEE FACTORS
All, Revised melee factors for your consideration: Dragoons = +3 Lancers = +3/+4 (+3 vs. Cavalry. +4 vs. Infantry & Artillery. The additional +2 vs Infantry modifier has been removed.) Infantry / Artillery =+2 Cossacks & Skirmishers/GB = 0 Formed Infantry in Column = +1 / +2 (+1 vs. Infantry. +2 vs. Cavalry) Outnumber Enemy:50% or more = +1. 100% or more = +2. Finally General Leading Attack =+1. DB

I like those, particularly the reduction from the present +2 to +1 for infantry in column against other infantry: some of my previous posts have highlighted our groups ongoing discussions regarding the difficulting in engaging/pausing columns, particularly French massed columns. For the lancers -v cavalry did you consider whether their ability to get up to charge speed had an effect. I'm sure I've seen somewhere that lancers if not able to get up to charge, rate about the same as other light cavalry.

I like the reduction in bonuses for lancers. Other than in wet weather, when infantry could not fire their muskets, I am still to be convinced that lancers were any more effective against infantry than any other cavalry. The artillery bonus is interesting. A large battery may well see off a small infantry brigade if I'm reading this right (although I do have the flu - not the swine variety - at the moment and the mental faculties may not be what they should!). If the column only receives +1, will British infantry in line still get +1? Finally, will the casualties table remain the same or be altered? I do feel that a steady square vs cavalry takes too many casualties at the moment. Anthony

Looks Ok , Another idea. Allow cavalry in good order to re-roll one dice if fighting infantry in the open. Heavy Cav vs Light re roll one dice . Gives you a better chance and some insurance agaisnt the bad dice roll skewing the results.

Keith, Our group has often commented on the seemingly frequent occurrence of "extreme" results. However, this comment is often made after a string of double 6's or a string of cavalry with "superb discipline" riding over multiple targets. However, there must be some chance. There are many battlefield factors that the rules can't specifically cater for as these are too many and too varied. Minor undulations in the ground may favour one side or another, the horses may be exhausted by a forced march the previous day etc. There are instances of hussars seeing off cuirassiers. Also, cavalry combat in GdB does not reflect all the nuances of mounted combat. Squadrons may be committed piecemeal with a reserve being held back. A reserve squadron may be able to work in against a flank of the enemy who is already engaged against the rest of the regiment. In a straight fight between light cavalry and heavies there is only a 24% chance that the lights will win. If it is cuirassiers against lights the odds change to only a 16% chance of victory. If these cuirassiers are elite the odds drop to 10%. To allow a re-roll would skew things heavily. I would rather see the double six results and risk to general rules relaxed a little. Ants

CC, I, like you, am less convinced by the 1970's belief that lancers were some form of super trooper. A slight edge yes, hence the revised factors. If the column only receives +1, will British infantry in line still get +1? All FORMED British infantry will get a +1 fire modifier. Finally, will the casualties table remain the same or be altered? Musketry & Artillery casualties will remain the same (except the musketry table will lose the 42+ figures firing row). I do feel that a steady square vs. cavalry takes too many casualties at the moment. Cavalry vs. "Unbroken Infantry" will now inflict casualties at the 1 per 12 ratio. DB

DB, Sorry, I was meaning the +1 Formed British Infantry in Line bonus in melee rather than the firing bonus. Will infantry being charged by column still get -2 in the unit morale test? Ants

CC, Sorry, I was meaning the +1 Formed British Infantry in Line bonus in melee rather than the firing bonus. Yes, yes - the fire / melee +1 represents their general fire discipline throughout both fire and melee. Will infantry being charged by column still get -2 in the unit morale test? Oh yes! :twisted: This is where, I think, the columns bonus really is - it’s scary when a load of hairy arsed Frenchmen are advancing/charging in column - however if the defenders stand then the column advantage dissipates somewhat. DB

Sounds about right. By the way, thanks for allowing us to have input. Looking forward to 3rd edition. Ants

Far better I think. Yes the columns can be very hard to stop and massed columns nearly impossible. I play both sides and I can say that this will make you think more about where and how you assault.

DB, the discussion regarding columns got me thinking about the way columns are employed against line. We often strike a player deliberately charging on the oblique to contact a line at the extreme edge thereby limiting the bases that can fire. Could we not have all units charging do so in a straight line for the last half of there move (please don't tell me this rule already exists and we have just missed it). Then, on a slight tangent, we also see units frequently ingnor their nearest enemy to slip between a couple of units and charge a target which is somewhat to the rear to take advantage of some bonus or other. Just as there are firing target priorities, should there be charging priorities? Possibly, must engage nearest unit to the front (within 22 degree arc) or something similar. Ants

A, With regard to attacking lines at an angle - this was a tactic in the Nap wars - though obviously a wargamers ability to get his column in at an oblique angel is far better than the poor old real brigadiers! Re: Just as there are firing target priorities, should there be charging priorities? Possibly, must engage nearest unit to the front (within 22 degree arc) or something similar That is a good idea - I was wondering who would think of that first!! :wink: Will have to play test this - but I get the feeling it could be included straight off. DB

Given the nature of the Napoleonic battlefield (lots of smoke limiting both visibility and communications), it seems most unlikely that a an attacking unit could do anything other than charge the unit immediately to its front, unless it had been specifically ordered to do something "interesting", such as sneaking around a flank and charging someone in the rear. Even in the latter situation, I suspect that there would be a high probability of the unit engaging the first enemy that they came to. As to slipping between units to attack another in the second line, this seems most improbable, unless the gap was rather massive. We do play a house rule that is essentially the same as Ants' suggestion.

C, Re: As to slipping between units to attack another in the second line, this seems most improbable, unless the gap was rather massive. Errr...surely not!! :evil: :evil: DB

Along these lines: 6.6 CHARGE PRIORITY TARGETS. Charging units must charge the nearest enemy target, they may not ignore a nearer enemy unit in order to charge a unit that is further way. Exception: Cavalry may ignore formed squares in order to attack other targets. Exception: All units may ignore skirmishers in order to attack other targets. DB