"Runaway" stats.

[Gunner24]

Does anyone think the number of routers/runaways looks a bit high ?.



I notice in most, if not all, battles, this figure looks very high.  I presume it's well calcuated and is an "historic" reality based number.  I've read many Nap books over the years but never seen much information about the number of men who left the battlefield in this mannor. 

Does anyone know of somewhere on the web where this is discussed / recorded.

[Formaldehyde]

I'd be interested in hearing more about the calculations in general as well.  I was curious to read that there is no randomization in the game's calculations.  HWLG certainly introduces some solid historical concepts (retreating before combat when faced with melee, etc.), but I'd like to hear about the sources for the numbers we end up with in game, and how JMM incorporated them. 

Can we manipulate/mod these numbers in the final version?

[Pariente]

All losses, behaviours are determined by calculation, except a commander's death and a loss of a flag which are random.

During a battle, when two infantry lines were facing each other, the volleys of shots killed few men, wounded hardly more and produced a lot of smoke. Battalions used to be routed by the loss of confidence : few men step back, and their neighbours followed them.

Most of soldiers « out of fight » were either wounded or running away. In the aftermath of a battle, some may get back to their army, especially if it has been victorious.

If you look at the 3D view, regiments usually move back after sustaining little losses : it is coherent with the percentage of sustainable losses.

In my opinion, that is reason why routers are more than dead or wounded.

Friendly,
Pariente.

[CBR]

I presume a unit that has reached its max allowed losses will have its remaining men count as routed.

The 3rd corps under Davout took more than 1/4 casualties at Auerstedt and most if not all of his units were still standing when the battle was over. That is going to be rather difficult to recreate in LG.


CBR

[Gunner24]

In my opinion, that is reason why routers are more than dead or wounded.

That is to be expected, but the numbers are VERY high, 30,000 per side, over 30% routed, it looks like too many but I can not find any information to prove these kind of numbers are right, OR wrong ??????.

The 3rd corps under Davout took more than 1/4 casualties at Auerstedt and most if not all of his units were still standing when the battle was over. That is going to be rather difficult to recreate in LG.

It would seem so.

I've not found anything about soliders running away from the action, maybe because it's a difficult subject.  Was any "action" taken against soliders/units/formations that routed from the battlefield, or was it accepted as a fact of battle ?.

[Count von Csollich]

I've not found anything about soliders running away from the action, maybe because it's a difficult subject.  Was any "action" taken against soliders/units/formations that routed from the battlefield, or was it accepted as a fact of battle ?.

I've read some stories about the British dealing with this in the Penisular campaign: For example, you weren't even allowed to help a wounded comrade back from the line(Officers excepted, of course ), and if you did so nonetheless and it took you too long you were seen as a coward and treated as such by your fellow comrades...

But as to the huge amount of runaways... it would have been a rather bizarre picture having 30000 men wondering around the battlefield...

One incident is konwn to me though: Aderklaa at Wagram: an area where reported thousands of Saxons and Austrians were wondering around during the battle, long after the failed attacks of Bernadotte to retake the earlier given up position...

a real reference though would be really helpful!

[Gunner24]

For example, you weren't even allowed to help a wounded comrade back from the line(Officers excepted, of course ), and if you did so nonetheless and it took you too long you were seen as a coward and treated as such by your fellow comrades...

I have also seen some of this kind of thing in isolated cases, which if it were true, and followed to a conclusion, would mean there would never be any large scale "routs" but there clearly were.......

I can well understand in certain circumstances these king of figures would be seen, but not on BOTH sides ?????.....if one side had a massive advantage I can see the other side breaking, but the same figures for both sides is a little suspect, and if it's the same in every LG battle it may be something worth looking at in future......just maybe something might need a tweak to reduce this number.

[Count von Csollich]

I have also seen some of this kind of thing in isolated cases, which if it were true, and followed to a conclusion, would mean there would never be any large scale "routs" but there clearly were.......

This was of course the order of things worked out by "masterminds" at Horseguards back home... as a casestudy that this was sometimes carried out would be this famous regiment I seem not to remember right now which Wellington used to plug the gap at Talavera (I believe  ) which sustained more than 2/3 casualties and still hold the ground...

and of course there was Aspern, as we call it (as this was the village we had taken for good at the end of the day), or Essling (as for the French) when the columns of Hiller, Dedovich and Rosenberg repeatedly charged both villages and used every time the regiments already employed in the preceeding failed charge reinforcing them with battalions of yet untouched regiments.
I've got quite a detailed account of their numbers as some of my ancestors were in charge of these attacks and I have been reviewing the official reports at the austrian war archives including the "relations"...


As to any conclusions: Orders seem to lose their importance when the officer in charge loses control of his men...
I don't know if you ment it that way...
I would be surprised if you would have... 

[Count von Csollich]

The 3rd corps under Davout took more than 1/4 casualties at Auerstedt and most if not all of his units were still standing when the battle was over. That is going to be rather difficult to recreate in LG.

not concerning runaways but we might have the same problem with Austerlitz, as to replaying the exceptional luck the French had at the right wing holding up Kienmayer long enough for Hulins advance guard to arrive at the nick of time and then of course catching the far superior Russian units at Tellnitz of guard, routing them in the process and adding another 30 minutes or so in favour of napoleon's plan... these fortunate coincidences continued throughout the entire battle (6 12lbers of Soult's corps artillery arriving to support Thiebault against Kamensky -1's attack from the flank...)

And of course the perfect example would be the replayed version of Austerlitz as reported on this forum using HWLG where I believe the "wrong" side one  ... a strong casestudy for any sandbox general telling stories about: "if we would have been there, then we would have been able to this there and this there and of course this would never have happened if... ...


I know this post wasn't exactly to the topic but i had to get it of my mind ...sorry guys 

[CBR]

I've not found anything about soliders running away from the action, maybe because it's a difficult subject.  Was any "action" taken against soliders/units/formations that routed from the battlefield, or was it accepted as a fact of battle ?.

One could look at early (right after the battle) and later casualty reports for units. IIRC at Waterloo a few units had something like 20'ish % of the "casualties" that were merely missing and who came back later on. We could call them lurkers or stragglers or something like that: individuals who had helped wounded but not returned, panicked soldiers who had fled or played dead or simply become lost in the chaos of combat. It is my impression that such soldiers were not punished as there could be all kinds of valid reasons for their disappearance unless it had been some obvious cowardice that was witnessed by someone.


CBR

[CBR]

not concerning runaways but we might have the same problem with Austerlitz, as to replaying the exceptional luck the French had at the right wing holding up Kienmayer long enough for Hulins advance guard to arrive at the nick of time and then of course catching the far superior Russian units at Tellnitz of guard, routing them in the process and adding another 30 minutes or so in favour of napoleon's plan... these fortunate coincidences continued throughout the entire battle (6 12lbers of Soult's corps artillery arriving to support Thiebault against Kamensky -1's attack from the flank...)

There are certainly loads of examples of units that were still fighting on after taking losses that would be similar to what Guard units in LG can take. Without any other external factors it would be a rather poor unit that would give up at just 20% casualties.

[Count von Csollich]

Without any other external factors it would be a rather poor unit that would give up at just 20% casualties.

many times it took much less to rout an entire regiment or even more... just keep the charge of the polish lancers in Spain in mind... routing 6000 Spaniards from a strong postion (with what - some 96 men...)

and 20% casualties was quite something in a normal firefight...

[CBR]

Yes it was easy enough for units to rout when they felt everything around them was falling apart with routing friends, feeling outflanked or outnumbered.

Spanish troops in the Peninsular War were generally not considered that great. But they did great at Albuera where you also going to find a heavy firefight that left a British brigade still standing after 50-60% losses.

In LG a Line quality unit is going to rout with just 5% losses. It will obviously rally and can do it a few times before it is completely finished at around 20%. It would be a lot better if the mechanic was for units to fall back instead of turning into a defenceless mob that can be captured by cavalry, that along with being forced to do it after just 5% is hardly realistic.

[Count von Csollich]

Yes it was easy enough for units to rout when they felt everything around them was falling apart with routing friends, feeling outflanked or outnumbered.

That is what I also ment, though I had thought that such factors were included in "external factors"...

Spanish troops in the Peninsular War were generally not considered that great. But they did great at Albuera where you also going to find a heavy firefight that left a British brigade still standing after 50-60% losses.

That was what I ment with my earlier post of this regiment at Talavera(or so?) there is always the exception and of course we historians or interested people will get to know those glorious and galant fight more often... I think it is very difficult to actually implement some sort of parameter as to when a unit has the courage to stand and fight to death (perhaps as the know that they are the last unit standing between a organized retreat and a complete rout...) or when a unit just breaks and routs at the first enemy contact as they are just allied troops or they are weakened by decease or their commanding officer didn't earn their trust etc....

I believe it to be impossible to review every single regiment in order to get definitive parameters for their performance in battle (they might have fought bravely once and taken flight the next time...)
[/quote]

In LG a Line quality unit is going to rout with just 5% losses. It will obviously rally and can do it a few times before it is completely finished at around 20%. It would be a lot better if the mechanic was for units to fall back instead of turning into a defenceless mob that can be captured by cavalry, that along with being forced to do it after just 5% is hardly realistic.

I totally agree with that, of course with exceptions that shall we say rarely but randomly or in connection to some factors they would still do so...

[Gunner24]

Interesting stuff, do you all think 30% in the screen shot in the first post is too high for BOTH sides ?.  I would not be surprised by this figure for the side that was well beaten.  Have others seen these kind of figures in their games ?.

In real life, if a whole Division "routed" what did this mean for that Division after the battle ?.

It would be a lot better if the mechanic was for units to fall back instead of turning into a defenceless mob that can be captured by cavalry, that along with being forced to do it after just 5% is hardly realistic.

I agree.