Column the only formation to engage in mele

[Gunfreak]

Now, I've read in the manual that line formation is only used for firefights, while column are to smash into the enemy.

But this goes aginst what I've read.

The doctrine of the time was to move formations in column, then deploy to line before closeing with the musket or bayonet.
And the only times column was used to attack was when the formation didn't see the enemy and got to close to the enemy with out getting a chance to change formation.

so my question is this. is this hard coded, or can you go into the doctrine editor to make it possible to engade in mele while in line?

[CBR]

AFAIK columns were used in the later years to charge the enemy. But lack of training night have been part of the reason: IIRC some Austrian units could hardly perform a simple advance in line.

In the Revolutionary Wars the French did use columns to charge the enemy but that was only after skirmishers had weakened the enemy. Later on Napoleon said columns should only be used after artillery had prepared the way(IIRC after hearing about the debacle at Bussaco)

So yes I'd say columns could be used to "smash into the enemy" as you say. But if it is historical it really shouldn't be able to defeat a fresh unit in line.

edit: and line formation should be able to charge too, so yes I hope its not hard coded.


CBR

[Montecuccoli]

Austrian used mass column at Wagram as a formation able to attack and even defend against cavalry

[lodi57]

And the only times column was used to attack was when the formation didn't see the enemy and got to close to the enemy with out getting a chance to change formation.

And to storm redoubts and villages.

possible to engade in mele while in line?

During tests, I had some Melees engaged between units in line with original doctrine editor set up.

[JMM]

With this version, a unit deployed in line doesn't take the intiative to charge....but it's able to fight with this formation.

JMM

[Seelord]

According to what I have read column was used to charge weakened or low quality opponents. Line was used mainly for firefight. My sources are mainly osprey publications. For this particular problem Elite 159 French Napoleonic Infantry Tactics 1792–1815 http://www.ospreypublishing.com/store/French-Napoleonic-Infantry-Tactics-1792%E2%80%931815_9781846032783

same source p.26

analysis of French attacks, 1792–1815

total sample in column in line in ordre mixte in skirmish order

226 174 30 19 3

78% of attack was in column so IMHO it is in accord with game. It would of course be better to have charges in any formation. But for now I'm content with line used as firefight-only formation and column charge-only formation.

[CBR]

Let me just add that 148 (65%) were on rough or narrow ground.

I also like to point out that there are some dangers of putting 23 years of warfare in one table. One could argue that it represents at least 5 different French armies: early/late revolutionary and early/mid/late Empire.


CBR

[Gunner24]

I thought "column" attacks were mainly in the early years, but could, and were carried out in later years as well, all depending on the situation on the ground........I favour firefights over melee, but I'd not want to ONLY see one or the other, but a good combination of both used in the correct circustances.

The one thing I would hate to see is LG become a mass drawl of one melee after another, with columns or lines !.

[von_Clausewitz]

In the game, a unit in line formation can defend itself in melee if charged. Also an advancing column can stop fire a volley and then charge if you so wish (you can specify that in the doctrine editor).

Since you can control each regiment, if you absolutely want a regiment to charge and it is in line formation, you can manually change its formation.

VC

[KO|Druid]

The French published infantry regulations over the period usually have attack column (column formed on the centre companies) as a maneuver formation, capable of quick evolution into square, for use outside of effective range. Once enemy had been located or there was incoming ordnance, the centre companies would give covering fire (if neccessary) as the rear divisions ran into line formation to continue the advance.
A column of divisions, of which many types were used dependent on training, formed it companies dependent on the intended later formation evolution.

It seems (besides the untrained revolutionary armies) that no particular formation was standard for assault as any would do if the timing was right. However, cohesion being a basic neccessity for successful close combat vs formed troops, the column would be much more suitable than line, which could only keep any cohesion when halted.

[Marquês de Alorna]

I'd like to bring this issue again.
Yesterday I read that the French "Règlement concernant l'exercice et les manoevres de l'infanterie" (1791) was used with slight modifications until the 1830s. There, it is specified that the infantry units should use column to facilitate maneuvering, e.g.:
- Approaching during an attack.
- Relieving the 1st line of battalions with the 2nd during combat.

But the recommendation is to deploy in line just prior to enter enemy firing range. In fact, it seems that contrary to the myth, the French armies in the Revolutionary Wars tried to do that most of the time, with varying degrees of success, due to the already mentioned lack of training.

This is regarding the French. If we go to more conservative armies like the Austrians, I don't have enough information (could someone enlighten me on this?) but probably around 1805 they still used the battalion line formation exclusively, even for 2nd line battalions, like in the XVIIIth century wars.

So my question is how to reproduce these behaviors in HW-LG. Are the current corps order parameters and doctrine enough? Imagine the following:
- I have a French corps formed in 2 lines, with regiments in column of divisions formation.
- I want the battalion to advance towards the enemy, using the "Deploy on Line" order.
- Once the corps approaches the target location of the enemy (wichever comes first), I want the front line of regiments to deploy in line formation, while the second line remains in column of divisions.

How to do this?
Note: I don't want to use the "Defend in Line" order, since in this case, units may break the formation to look for more advantageous positions nearby.

And what if I also want the second line of the corps to use line formation a la XVIIIth century?

Regards,
António

[Marquês de Alorna]

I've been doing some experiments. Using the tutorial scenario, playing the French side, I've ordered two corps to "Deploy on line" (front line 50%, reserve 50%), one using the unit column formation (1) and the other using the unit line formation (2).

I was surprised that the front line of (1) was formed in MARCH COLUMN, while the reserve line was formed in column of platoons (why is the second line more ready for combat than the first?).  ATTN: I'm talking about the advance to the target area, not about the prior concentration movements.
When (1) arrived at the target area, the front line formed in column of divisions, which is fine. But when the enemy approached, it remained formed in column of divisions although the corps was stationary. No attempt was made to change the front line to line formation.

Regarding (2), the front line immediately formed line, followed by the reserve in line of platoons, which is correct. This was the formation used to advance to the final position.

I've tested the Austrian army and it presents the very same behavior. No difference between Austrian and French tactics.

[AJ]

MDA, you may need to check your Doctrine, you can change the formations used under certain conditions.

[Marquês de Alorna]

MDA, you may need to check your Doctrine, you can change the formations used under certain conditions.

I know, but the doctrine does not allow me to change the main things that I found weird. The manual on the doctrine editor says the following:

- TYPES OF COLUMNS FOR DEEP FORMATION: Applies to infantry corps, and indicates if
the units will form columns of divisions or columns of companies while advancing.

It does not mention "march column" as a possibility during the advance to the target. Accordingly, the Doctrine Editor does not allow you to select "March Column" for this option. So it must be an engine bug.

I think that HW-LG is already a very nice simulator. But in order to allow the simulation of tactics to be more realistic and historical, the doctrine editor must be extended with many more options, detailing the formations that can be used for front line, reserve in each phase of each type of order and in certain specific situations, such as when the unit suddenly faces enemy troops nearby (what is in modern times called Standard Operational Procedures).

I'm confident that this is a medium term objective of the team.

Regards,
António

[JMM]

Antonio, could you build a complete list of options in order to improve the doctrine editor and the game ?

Doctrine and Nation : HW uses the doctrine files to control the units, so it's possible the behaviours aren't historical!
You have to modify to get the behaviours you want, historical or not!

BTW... it's possible to share the doctrines. If you build a set of historical doctrines, you can upload into the Depot!

JMM