HistWar
HistWar (English zone) => General discussions => Discussion démarrée par: Alfiere le 04 mars 2012, 13:36:05 pm
-
Only a curiosity.
Has someone saw a fight Cav vs INF square ?
If yes , taken a screen and post in forum, very rare.
I think that in history, it is possible that Cav win a fight vs INF square also without guns support.
At least in 10-20% cases.
I think of yes,otherwise why cav attack a INF square ?
Has someone some notice in history about this ?
-
There was a very long discussion about that some times ago on the forum after the release of the game.
JMM said he made some choices for cav vs inf engagement and cav vs square appeared too rare in history to be included in HW.
-
the link
http://www.histwar.org/forum/index.php/topic,5458.msg71609.html#msg71609
-
Thank thilio for reply.
I do not know this long discussion.
Anyway at Waterloo Ney attack very often INF square,it is not so rare.
Ok ,it is enough for me,good to know.
-
There was a very long discussion about that some times ago on the forum after the release of the game.
JMM said he made some choices for cav vs inf engagement and cav vs square appeared too rare in history to be included in HW.
Im inclined to agree here
-
Winning against all odds :
You are certainly right...most of the time ;
But there are many ( not so many ? ) exceptions like Quatre Bras, some in Spain, Eylau (? ) ... where the cavalry broke the square : sometimes it was formed too late, or the infantry was of poor quality ( bad moral, tired,etc..) or begins to run out of ammo , or the weather was bad : wet powder and short visibility - ...
When infantry was reduced to bayonets, killing a horse could fell him and his man in the defenders and disordered them (spain) so cavalry was fired at short distance (50-30 meters) but not too close, timing being of essence :!:
So, I think it is true to consider - in normal circumstances - that infantry square is safe against unsupported cavalry, but various factors may decrease his effectiveness....So, using percentages ( difficult to compute, I agree ) it is possible to give a variable chance to cavalry .
After all, military history is full of events where David killed Goliath or 400 hoplites broke the charge of thousands ......and that is the best part of wargaming (in my opinion ) :roll:
-
Very well said, oster1815.
I like to think that in future ,it is possible see a cav winning vs INF square and leave amazed all players. ;)
Hello
-
Thanks Sir,
Years ago some wargamers ( probably from Wargames Development Group) devised a system called EDNA for Ever Decreasing Numbers Aleas....
Could play like this : a volunteer for a dangerous (suicidal) mission started at 100% -if fit, fed and properly equiped- then every time he moved toward the objective, or sneezed, or hit a branch... his number decreased on a dice roll . Then the sentry get a chance to watch or hear (dice) , then a patrol moved (dice) etc.....
At this time of hand paperwork and brain computation, it was soon boring _ but it worked :)
Imagine the same with today computer and the endless opportunities like : having a good safe night or not, hot breakfast or muddy water, horses fed or diarreics, dry or boggy ground etc....Etc....
In the end you can have a 5% chance of result...and give up _ or a better one and Cry Havoc :mrgreen: :twisted: :mrgreen:
-
In the game, the cavalry can't charge a square.. but..
In the game, sometimes, the infantry can't form the square... and takes the flight... before the cavalry charges... ;)
JMM
-
Yes, and this is probably realistic....
Quibble : Yesterday, I tried a short Maida with intention to watch the movie .....
I saw one Scottish rgt form a perfect square when the cavalry was just in sight. The horsemen wheeled and move away to find some weaker prey......OK
Then the Scots advanced in square, with two lines (front and rear) and two sides in column (?) all facing the same direction and walking very fast.... :shock:
I know it was possible to move squares , but all accounts report it was very slow and difficult to maintain order.
Another point : in this map, there are small woods and some isolated trees ... when units move close to or in the woods, the scale is correct (in 1/1) but when they are close to the lone trees, the scale is distorted = a tree is about 12 times a man ie 24 meters average ....Maybe you can scale down those trees or replace by small copses from the woods ????
Otherwise, it looks great and you were right when you said it'ld run on my compi :!: Congratulations and Three Cheers for the Chief :p :p :p
Ps : je suis toujours en : Version.EXE 2.3 C1 - qu'est ce que je dois ajouter qui ne me détruira rien ? ( au vu de qq messages récents sur le dernier patch...) Merci
-
Very well said, oster1815.
I like to think that in future ,it is possible see a cav winning vs INF square and leave amazed all players. ;)
Hello
I think this is a question of probability. No sane commander would send cavalry against a formed square because there was a very high probability that the attack would fail. So either we have an insane commander (and some might say that Ney at Waterloo acted without reason) or a desperate commander and yes, sometimes, these attacks will succeed. So you may well see a square broken by cavalry alone, but on 99 other times you will not.
-
I think this is a question of probability. No sane commander would send cavalry against a formed square because there was a very high probability that the attack would fail. So either we have an insane commander (and some might say that Ney at Waterloo acted without reason) or a desperate commander and yes, sometimes, these attacks will succeed. So you may well see a square broken by cavalry alone, but on 99 other times you will not.
-
All we have about this is reading battle reports or "mémoires from X.."
From this , we know that you're perfectly right most of the time but ....we know also that sometimes the cavalry succeded: there were various reasons and it was uncommon, so the % chance is very low.....*
Now, if you look at Ney's charges, it seems that in the first attempt the cavalry charged infantry they don't expected to be ready in squares, because it was hidden on reverse slopes, some was lying and there was smoke everywhere......and few squares broke......From accounts of both sides, it seems that after the first charges it became so messy that horsemen were no longer in command and fought by individual rage like berserkers....some Brits or Allied leaving the squares to cross bayonets or kill fallen, etc.......Trumpets, bugles and drums or officers shouting were useless to recall :mrgreen:
Sometimes the story reminds of Agincourt , with dead horses and men like walls and bowmen sneaking to kill and plunder when fresh knights tried to charge again :!:
Is this playable on tabletop, or on screen, is another story........ :)
We can just say good Luck to JMM and wait ;)
* And remember Fuzzy-Wuzzy "because they broke the British square" ...... :twisted:
-
Now, if you look at Ney's charges, it seems that in the first attempt the cavalry charged infantry they don't expected to be ready in squares, because it was hidden on reverse slopes, some was lying and there was smoke everywhere...
I agree with you in general and JMM has a real problem to know how to model this form of action.
But with the reverse slope/ smoke etc - surely every battle featured smoke and Ney should have known all about Wellington's use of reverse slopes. There was nothing new in the British tactics but the French had not learned from them. So I don't see this as a excuse. I have always thought that if Napoleon had moved a corps to threaten Wellington's right then the British would have moved very fast to secure their exit to the Channel ports, but as Wellington said afterwards "They came on in the same old style..."
-
I agree with you in general and JMM has a real problem to know how to model this form of action.
But with the reverse slope/ smoke etc - surely every battle featured smoke and Ney should have known all about Wellington's use of reverse slopes. There was nothing new in the British tactics but the French had not learned from them. So I don't see this as a excuse. I have always thought that if Napoleon had moved a corps to threaten Wellington's right then the British would have moved very fast to secure their exit to the Channel ports, but as Wellington said afterwards "They came on in the same old style..."
Yes, My Lord,
And the controversy is almost 200 years old :roll:
Reading again some witness , I fell on a British arguing that Ney was seing people moving ( running ) on Brussels rd and considered the Allied were begining to give ground.....don't forget that Ney was under contradictory orders, disagree with Soult and Napo, and was probably in a dangerous state of mind...so, true to his legendary Personnage, he ordered "Forward"......But, he was probably stunned like his men when he saw all the squares_ even if he thought there were some, but not all, the Brits unshaken......
Fortune of war was not on his side....and you lost your leg.....* :twisted:
C'est la Vie :!:
and my gr.gr.gr.grand father and homonym, was in the 6th Cuirassiers ......
-
I guess they will arguing about it 200 years from now.
> and my gr.gr.gr.grand father and homonym, was in the 6th Cuirassiers ......
I regret I can make no such claim. But I do live very near to Uxbridge, on the western edge of London.
-
I have had a rethink on this.
It doesnt matter if Cavalry charge the square, I mean why should they. It would be suicide, besides the horses have a lot of bearing on this, as they will not run willing run into rows of bayontes.
The tactic was to force the infantry into square, of course if they could not they would route. But the main reason, was that and especially in Waterloo, there suppose to be infantry support to back up the charge! There was not. Ney charged without Infantry support!
Infantry attacking a square is far more devastating, artillery especially horse artillery is suppose to support a Cavlary charge as well, that too can deliver a far harder blow on infantry square, and then when the sqaure routs, the Cavalry just folow them up, and destroy, and or capture.
In waterloo Ney didnt enough support of either Artillery or infantry if at all!
-
It doesnt matter if Cavalry charge the square, I mean why should they. It would be suicide, besides the horses have a lot of bearing on this, as they will not run willing run into rows of bayontes.
Hello,
I also had new rethink about this fascinating topic :shock:
It is difficult to think like a horse but consider : Steeple chase with stone walls and thick thorn hedges, Charge of the Light Brigade against guns blazing behind fieldworks, less than 200 lancers against 3000 mahdists in Omdurman, etc...... We consider these facts as suicidal in cold blood but, I guess, for the men IN, it was adrenalin - and the horses were so trained and excited as to move forward in mass until it was too late to turnback _ hence the many anecdots of horses ...and riders crashing in the square if they survived long enough to reach bayonets..... :mrgreen:
Was it of any military value is another story ? :arrow: but they did ......
Now, about Waterloo and particularly Ney's Command, I think it was an exceptionnal moment in History were most leaders lost their reason and led their men to carnage : the British cavalry acted almost as foolishly and the Old Guard was wasted for naught......so, it'ld be "sanctuarized" in memory but not considered as a normal military lesson _ save perhaps for a cold mind and big bataillons winning in the end :!:
But this is a very personnal view of an elder ;)