Column the only formation to engage in mele

[Marquês de Alorna]

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

Ok, I will provide a list of doctrine option suggestions ASAP.

[Alfiere]

Well,maybe with some explanation is well accepted.
For me it is an argument a bit confusing

[Marquês de Alorna]

Dear JMM et al.

I think that the current doctrine editor already allows the control of many details by means of the doctrines for attached and detached units. As I said before, the parts that lacks some detail concerns the Deploy on Line order. Here is an MS Word document with additional options to control how a corps should march into position.

Nevertheless, I still don't understand why in deep order my 1st line has marched in march column.

António

[JMM]

Just a comment before stopping my work...

The unit speed is variable : for maximum to minimum : column of march, column of platoon, column of division, line.
If the reserve speed is  lower than first line one, the reserve can't follow the Corps. Not the best, but why not!

I'll work on your doc ASAP to modify both the doctrine editor and the game itself.

THX for your document

JMM

[Marquês de Alorna]

Just a comment before stopping my work...
The unit speed is variable : for maximum to minimum : column of march, column of platoon, column of division, line.
If the reserve speed is  lower than first line one, the reserve can't follow the Corps. Not the best, but why not!
I'll work on your doc ASAP to modify both the doctrine editor and the game itself.
THX for your document
JMM

Here is a more complete table with a few more options, including the option to forbid the use of column of divisions.

Besides, the doctrine already allows the definition of formation and behavior for infantry when the enemy unit is in line, column of platoons or column of divisions. But nothing is said about square and march column. How does the AI acts by default?


António

[Marquês de Alorna]

If we think about old-fashioned armies like the Austrian in the beginning of the period, probably it makes sense to have another option "platoon column allowed" instead of just the option "column of divisions allowed". For there SYW-fashioned armies, the only use of the column was in practice the march column, since the column should not be used to attack, except in very specific scenarios, which were the exception.

[Marquês de Alorna]

I update my document. The most important options in my opinion are the activation/deactivation of mixed order and of the attack columns. At least in the beginning of the period, no armies but the French used the column as an attack formation. The column of Divisions definitely a French invention of the Revolutionary Wars and  the Platoon/Company column was used as a marching formation or as a transitory formation to turn into a line (e.g. by wheeling the platoons), and so it has nothing to add to the existent "march column" in that respect. The British would use the Platoon column as an attack formation only in "confusing situations", and I would say when the narrowness of the path precluded the use of the line (e.g. during the assault of villages, fortifications, etc.).

In order to illustrate what I'm saying about the use of the column in SYW-fashioned armies, lets look at the formations that are allowed in SYW wargames, namely S&M by Matrix games: Line, March column, Square, Skirmish, Defensive. No distinction is made between column of sections (the "march column" properly said) and the column of Platoons.

Without the options to preclude those special French formations/tactics, all the armies will behave similarly, except for the options in the Doctrine, which are not enough to translate the main differences that made the French army the most innovative of its time, granting the victories of 1805.