Wish List

[Hook]

... we cannot reproduce an attack like D-Erlons!

The following quote is from a document named Army Level Kriegsspiel:

... a study of detailed battle accounts, and the statements of senior Napoleonic commanders, who commented that they had rarely seen more than half a dozen battalions (or squadrons) engaged at one time. Sometimes where battle accounts mention attacks by a division or corps, it is evident that only one or two brigades were actually involved – the remainder being held in reserve for exploitation (or recovering from previous attacks).

They're saying here that everyone didn't attack at once.

Earlier we had someone complaining that the regiment was the smallest level in the game, and that it would march together, fight together, and even rout together, when he thought it should have been battalions.

Now we've got someone who is complaining that the corps doesn't act like a single regiment, fighting together and routing together.

Do you play miniatures, and if you do, how do you handle one line of battalions or whatever attacking another?  What happens if one battalion in the middle wins its fight and the enemy in front of it runs off, and there are no enemy reserves?  Do they stand politely around waiting for the units on either side to either win or lose, or do they add their firepower to an adjacent attack?  What happens when more enemy retreat?  Do they keep their lines or does the whole line break down into individual attacks?

Hook

[Gunner24]

The point you are missing however is that we cannot reproduce an attack like D-Erlons! Or at least I cannot and I have yet to see anything near that on any video

I'm not 100% sure yet, but I think we may be seeing it in most battles, but it's not like we expect it to be.  Waterloo was a very small battlefield compared to other major Nap battles and the troops were very packed together.  I don't remember how many Battalions there wer in total, but if I re-call they attacked in four large Divisional Columns, I bet there is a way to re-produce that in LG, but I don't know how - yet.

and the statements of senior Napoleonic commanders, who commented that they had rarely seen more than half a dozen battalions (or squadrons) engaged at one time

I agree with this, it's the same in any period of warfare, if you read about Normady it might say the x and y divisions attacked between a and b....but in reality it was only perhaps a few battalions from each division in the front line leading the attack.  With others behind to take over and other further behind in reserve, not EVERY battalion in the Division all went charging off from the start line at the same time.  Same thing at Kursk, the German Panzer divisions never had every last man and tank in the front line all attacking ay once.

A Divisional Command would be a good addition in the future - perhaps, but by then we might all have gotten used to the Corps Command and worked out how to use it correctly, so it might never be needed anyway.

There will also be a big difference in the full game when the Corps could be a LOT bigger, in the demo some of the Corps are not that large.  How about putting two large Corps one behind the other and giving them a deploy order behind the enemy, what would happen then I wonder ?.

[englishoo7]

Woa... Hold the press! I listened to advice, punched a hole in the enemy artillery and put in a fair sized infantry assault. IT LOOKED FANTASTIC!

  The regiments rolled in right onto their defence line. There were problems... yes, only the second battalion on the attacking columns appeared to fire, (not the first?) and a couple of bayonet charges seemed to miss their intended target? But do you know what, it didn't matter. It looked great. It should of rolled through but didn't. But the main thing was that for the first time it felt right! The above posts came true, regiments were not all firing, some were coming on, others deploying, others being repulsed, the defender tiring from constant volleys.
  I wish I could post it. I think it was Gunner who said in another thread, that we didn't quite understand the game and thought some things we did not expect were bugs and others, that part we had not mastered, sometimes frustrates us. I am begining to believe that is true.

I wonder if those 'bugs' I found were indeed 'bugs'. Has anyone else come accross them?

I will re-create D-Erlons attack one day, I just have to wait for the British expansion! 

[englishoo7]

JMM I have e-mailed you the above file with details. 

[Gunner24]

Can you post it here, I'd like to see this one if possible.

How did you form up the troops attacking and what order's did you use ?.

It's these kind of things we all need to post when they work, to learn from each other how to get the best from it.

[Gunner24]

A very small thing and perhaps of no importance, but "unit attacked" covers anything at the moment, it would be so much better if it said "unit under artillery fire" when it is.

[englishoo7]

I would post it if I could. I can find the file but wouldn't know how to place it here on the forum.

I was able to pull off a co-ordinated infantry attack by placing a Corps with Mortier's artillery Corps to its right, both in defensive line in the open North area of the Montebello Map. Once Mortiers strong Artillery had pretty much silenced the enemy artillery (except I think for the rather large Russian Guards batterie) I deployed another two corps of almost entirely infantry in front of the previous defence line a little closer to the enemy. This was my 'start line' for my planned attack. I did give the order for one Corps to be to the right of the other but this did not happen, the Corps commander deciding that slightly to the rear of the front Corps was better for defence? These two Corps moved through the first defence line (it is interseting and realistic that it takes a while for one Corps to wind their way through another) and once my new defence line was in place I gave a deployment order along part of the enemy defence line. (this was a very short deplyment line). My Regiments came on winding their way up the slope into the waiting enemy defence line and a large firefight grew. There were problems with the attacks (bugs?) as I have mentioned in my previous but I had proved to myself that this 'swirl' of units I often see in video's does not need to happen all the time if we are more exact and thoughtful with our orders. I don't know but hope that playing a human opponent would be even better?

[englishoo7]

I could be wrong but didn't JMM or a beta tester write somewhere that the regiments card should read 'attacking' or something along those lines and that it will be changed in the future.

Sorry to be so vague

[von Döbeln]

You can upload the file to a free file sharing site like www.filefront.com or www.mediafire.com and then post the link here.

LvD

[Hook]

I could be wrong but didn't JMM or a beta tester write somewhere that the regiments card should read 'attacking' or something along those lines and that it will be changed in the future.

'Twas me.  The proper translation is "Unit engaged."  It's obvious from looking at the French version.

I'm wondering if "Unit disinclination" should be "Unit wavering" as well.

Hook

[von Döbeln]

English is not my mother tongue but IMO "wavering" reads better than "disinclination".

LvD

[englishoo7]

You can upload the file to a free file sharing site like www.filefront.com or www.mediafire.com and then post the link here.

LvD

Thanks Von Doebeln... I will try!   

[englishoo7]

http://www.filefront.com/15088291/Montebello-091207-20H07.sav

I doubt I have done it right but there you go. 

Look to the north after about 1 o'clock. The attack goes in there and should also show the problems (bugs?) with some of those attacks I have mentioned before.

[von Döbeln]

Download link works fine.

LvD

[englishoo7]

Cna't get it to run on mine using that link but whatever I have it on my saved battlefiles!