Wish List

[lodi57]

:arrow:The only thing I cannot get used to is that I see many 'individual' battles going on. I think the one thing the game lacks is a dicisiveness! I want to order an assault on the enemy line and if it is well coordernated I want to see it smash the line as one or be repulsed as one! At the moment I am not seeing this... Of course it could well be something I am doing wrong like the length of my deployment lines? Mmmm!

Corps or divisions are composed of regiments so when two lines meet, it is not a fight opposing divisions against divisions but individual fights between regiments. In a line some regiments are better than others so when some regiments break some others don't ; the breaking regiments step back to reform behind the ones that stand and so on until there is more stepping back regiments than standing ones, then all line is pulled back by enemy and it may continue till the corp break up. But a line smashing another in minutes exist in popular belief only. If you have the occasion to read the very interesting "La campagne de 1809" from Commandant Saski (don't know if it exists in English) that assembled hundreds of official reports from chief of battalion to marshals, you will have a more understandable view of the mechanisms of napoleonic warfare. To have read it, I can say that fighting seems to be chaotic with some infantery and artillery firefights, infantry and cavalry charges, advancing, moving back, counter charges, rallying and so on. These mechanisms are, in my opinion, well reproduced in LG.

[Hook]

Lodi, I would dearly love to read that book.  What year was it published?  I'm guessing it's in French.  A book like that could be as useful as Nafziger's "Imperial Bayonets" for wargamers.

english007, if you can imagine the difficulty of getting a mile wide corps formation to all advance at the same time, try to imagine how much more difficult it would be to get them all to retreat at the same time while they're still engaged with the enemy!

I would have expected the battle line to be a bit less chaotic, but I don't know how it could be otherwise.  Some attacking battalions will win their fights, others will lose theirs and retreat, and the well formed lines will break down into individual fights at some point.  Victorious units will turn to face enemy units on their flanks... probably; it's a difficult maneuver under fire.  A battalion that finds itself with no friendly battalions on either side is likely to retreat to avoid being cut off.

Hook

[lodi57]

Lodi, I would dearly love to read that book.  What year was it published?  I'm guessing it's in French.  A book like that could be as useful as Nafziger's "Imperial Bayonets" for wargamers.

You can buy it there : http://www.decitre.fr/livres/Campagne-de-1809-en-Allemagne-et-en-Autriche.aspx/9782916473062 or there http://www.editionsquatuor.com/campagne_1809.php

More info : http://openlibrary.org/b/OL6908287M/Campagne_de_1809_en_Allemagne_et_en_Autriche

[LegerDesOnheils]

Very interesting piece of literature, not really in the "Nice Price" category though.

[Hook]

You can read it online.

Now to learn to read French.  Oy.

Hook

[LegerDesOnheils]

Thanks Hook for pointing that out.

I find myself in the situation that I have te learn French anyway, this is a good incentive.

[lodi57]

not really in the "Nice Price" category though.

I agree. That's the problem in France with all renews of this kind of studies  .

[englishoo7]

Corps or divisions are composed of regiments so when two lines meet, it is not a fight opposing divisions against divisions but individual fights between regiments. In a line some regiments are better than others so when some regiments break some others don't ; the breaking regiments step back to reform behind the ones that stand and so on until there is more stepping back regiments than standing ones, then all line is pulled back by enemy and it may continue till the corp break up. But a line smashing another in minutes exist in popular belief only. If you have the occasion to read the very interesting "La campagne de 1809" from Commandant Saski (don't know if it exists in English) that assembled hundreds of official reports from chief of battalion to marshals, you will have a more understandable view of the mechanisms of napoleonic warfare. To have read it, I can say that fighting seems to be chaotic with some infantery and artillery firefights, infantry and cavalry charges, advancing, moving back, counter charges, rallying and so on. These mechanisms are, in my opinion, well reproduced in LG.

War Is Chaos... Mmmm. Yes I can see your point. With the smoke and the noise it would have been difficult to get an overall picture of what was going on. I have played a full battle now and I can see more and more that that the game mimics the chaos of battle. The  (somewhat smaller) problem I still have though is that divisions/corps would not just keep fighting until they all ran away. They would retreat (in the army we had a start line/a position from where we would launch our assault) back to a safer distance - reavaluate, re-organise and then perhaps renew the action or withdraw or form a defence line or whatever else.
The demo has grown on me more and more, it has very many good points, brilliant points, but a battlefield where the enemy just leave a regiment at a time is not realistic. Armies did break and flee en-masse.
This is only one bad point for me that is outweighed by very many good points!

[Franciscus]

Wish list:

A hotkey list 

[englishoo7]

Thanks for the tip for the book... I am always interested to read good books about the Napoleonic wars era. Unfortunately I can only find French versions. I can't read French so that's that! 
Thanks anyway.

[lodi57]

War Is Chaos... Mmmm. Yes I can see your point.

It's not my point, it's just what transpires from reports and military mémoirs of this period.

With the smoke and the noise it would have been difficult to get an overall picture of what was going on

Not only because of smoke and noise but moves too : charge, counter-charge, retreat for rally or not, fleeing units, etc.

Armies did break and flee en-masse.

I can't agree with this.In Austerlitz, Allied left wing and center fled but right wing under Bagration retreated in order ; in Montmirail French left wing was overwhelmed and fled but the center and left wing retreated in orderso so it's wrong to say tha an army break and flee en-masse.

where the enemy just leave a regiment at a time is not realistic

I advise you to read how the left Allied wing units was engaged in Austerlitz.

[englishoo7]

Thanks for your reply lodi... I will read up again on Austerlitz.

[Gunner24]

Armies did break and flee en-masse

Regardless of this being true, or not, game play wise it won't be a lot of fun if your Army packs it's bags and heads off home.

[englishoo7]

It's not my point, it's just what transpires from reports and military mémoirs of this period.

Not only because of smoke and noise but moves too : charge, counter-charge, retreat for rally or not, fleeing units, etc.

I can't agree with this.In Austerlitz, Allied left wing and center fled but right wing under Bagration retreated in order ; in Montmirail French left wing was overwhelmed and fled but the center and left wing retreated in orderso so it's wrong to say tha an army break and flee en-masse.

I advise you to read how the left Allied wing units was engaged in Austerlitz.

At waterloo the French Army broke and fled en-masse! Also I think you reinforce my point, you say that. 'the French left wing was overwhelmed' and then the go on to say that the center and left wing made the decision to retreat. Rather than flee I should have said 'withdraw' perhaps. Either way this is a dicisive result. The Army elements recognise they are defeated and withdraw. (The player may contest this withdraw though). If not we are left we 'peices' of units left all over the battlefield attacking, deploying etc.

[lodi57]

Also I think you reinforce my point, you say that. 'the French left wing was overwhelmed' and then the go on to say that the center and left wing made the decision to retreat.

I don' think I reinforce your point saying that because your point was this :

Armies did break and flee en-masse.

I just showed by examples that it may happens but it's not a rule as you submitted it.

The Army elements recognise they are defeated and withdraw

Recognise the defeat and withdraw does not necessarily mean en-masse or all together at the same time, you may also withdraw by echelon (like in Montmirail).