Mixed order for coalition corps ?

[Franciscus]

Page 77 of the (english) manual states that the this formation is exclusive to units under French command. Nevertheless coalition troops (Russian, Austrian, etc.) also have this formation available.

Is this a manual error or a game bug ?

[Marquês de Alorna]

This is precisely what I mean when I say that right now HW-LG does not distinguish neither between French and Allied tactics, nor between different sub-periods for Allied tactics. In fact, not even the attack column (either platoon or division) should be allowed for Allied armies until 1807 at least.
I think that this requires additional parameters in the Doctrine editor. I had already a few email exchanges with JMM. But right now, this seems not to be the priority (and indeed, bug resolution and things such as Brigade/Division orders are in my opinion more important RIGHT NOW).

[Franciscus]

(...)
I think that this requires additional parameters in the Doctrine editor. I had already a few email exchanges with JMM. But right now, this seems not to be the priority (and indeed, bug resolution and things such as Brigade/Division orders are in my opinion more important RIGHT NOW).

I agree with you, Marquês. But it does not seem to be a difficult thing to implement - apparently "all" that is needed is to remove an option (mixed order) for one side.

Best regards

[lodi57]

Page 77 of the (english) manual states that the this formation is exclusive to units under French command. Nevertheless coalition troops (Russian, Austrian, etc.) also have this formation available.

Is this a manual error or a game bug ?

Mixed order were used by Russian army when in defence (see the order of battle in Pulstuk, Eylau, etc.). The Russian mixed order was : one battalion in column by platoon, one battalion in line, etc.

[lodi57]

In fact, not even the attack column (either platoon or division)

There was no column by division in coalition armies. Columns are by platoon.

[JMM]

Page 77 of the (english) manual states that the this formation is exclusive to units under French command. Nevertheless coalition troops (Russian, Austrian, etc.) also have this formation available.

Is this a manual error or a game bug ?

The concept in the game is "You are the Commander in Chief" so all is enabled... You can order all organizations/configuration used during this epoch.

In the manual, maybe there is a confusion (sorry for that). Generally speaking, the French Army only used the mixed order (organization).. and it's the idea in the manual... but again you are the CinC.. all is possible!

So no real bug.. maybe a text without connection with the game.

Do you agree?
JMM

[Franciscus]

The concept in the game is "You are the Commander in Chief" so all is enabled... You can order all organizations/configuration used during this epoch.

In the manual, maybe there is a confusion (sorry for that). Generally speaking, the French Army only used the mixed order (organization).. and it's the idea in the manual... but again you are the CinC.. all is possible!

So no real bug.. maybe a text without connection with the game.

Do you agree?
JMM

You are the game designer and I respect your design decisions, of course.
On the other hand, if only the French Army used historically the mixed order, as you say (I confess my total lack of knowledge), IMHO this should be reflected in the game, if, as I believed,  one of your chief objectives is to reflect historical "reality".
I personally do not agree that everything should be made possible to me or to my (AI) opponent (for instance, I will never make a "super-hero" army in the OoB editor composed only of elite and guard units to beat the AI, although I can do it). If I played to win at all costs, that would make sense. That may make sense to the multiplayer community. But that is not I approach this game and I thought that this was also not the idea behind your game design.

Finally, if "everything is possible", I would like to be able to forbid the AI, if she is playing the allies, to use non-historical organizations. As I have no deep knowledge, but I use your game to learn (as I do with other games), I would also like that the game would direct me to what I could or could not do if I was a army commander in Napoleon's day.

Regards

[JMM]

I don't think I make a mistake in the design because you are a Commander in Chief and you can use all formations.

Maybe my mistake is to limit the list of options... so why not a new option to disable the mixed order for all countries except for France.
I'll work on a new list of options to increase the control on the Armies and the units behaviour....

JMM

[Gunner24]

I will never make a "super-hero" army in the OoB editor composed only of elite and guard units to beat the AI, although I can do it). If I played to win at all costs, that would make sense. That may make sense to the multiplayer community

It makes no sense to you playing v the AI in soslo and it also makes no sense to the MP Community, this has been reported (by me) to JMM who has said he will fix this OOB problem, where too many Guard/Elite can be selected for even small size OOBs, in a later version.  

At NBC have a "rule" that ONE Guard/Elite is possible for each 25ceh, so if you have a 150 ceh army, you get 3 Guard and 3 Elite.....the MP Community (contray to popular belief by some of those who only play solo) want quality games, not micky mouse games.  Six may, or may not, be the right amount for 150ceh, but it seems to be working well in MP games for the last month or so and I've not heard a single MP player complain about that "enforced" restriction.

On the other hand, if only the French Army used historically the mixed order, as you say (I confess my total lack of knowledge), IMHO this should be reflected in the game, if, as I believed,  one of your chief objectives is to reflect historical "reality".

Not sure about this, I don't use that formation much, I can see why it would be allowed, and also why it maybe should not be - I admit not a big deal one way or the other for me.

[Franciscus]

(...)
I'll work on a new list of options to increase the control on the Armies and the units behaviour....

JMM

Thanks, JMM, I think taht is the right wat.

@Gunner:
Sorry if I have offended you or your community. It was not my intention and I was not referring to anyone in particular. I was only trying (probably unfortunately) to show what we can do if "everything is possible".

Regards

[Gunner24]

I'll work on a new list of options to increase the control on the Armies and the units behaviour....

That's good, so in MP would that mean the game host will be able to make "historic" tactics enabled or disabled......if so that is a very nice little  improvement to look forward to.

Sorry if I have offended you or your community

No need to be sorry, I understand what your getting at, and I agree about 90%...maybe not 100% becasue I never forget I'm playing a "game" but you are right, if things are possible, some people will do it, rightly or wrongly may be a matter of opinion.....that was why I explained about our little "rule" - which we hope is temporary.

[Hook]

I'm going to agree with JMM that you are the CinC and should have the ability to order any formation your troops are capable of achieving.  Any commander can specify that in an advance to contact, 1/3 to 1/2 of the battalions should be in line, the rest in column.  There is nothing in national doctrine or physical ability to prevent such an order from being carried out, although the poorest quality troops won't do well in any attack.

If there was a switch to limit it to the French army, then the Russians couldn't use their version as mentioned by Lodi57 above.  In any case, some form of mixed formation would have been used more times than they were mentioned in historical documents.  Generally, the only time such things are mentioned is if they are very common or very unusual.  Limiting mixed order to the French army is an old wargaming convention that may or may not be totally valid.

Hook

[Montecuccoli]

I understand the historical concerns, but i have to agree with JMM.

The main concept is that the player is in command so he dictates the doctrine of his own army a sort of:

"If i were on Kutuzov shoes i will have implemented mass column formations or even mixed order"

[Marquês de Alorna]

I'm going to agree with JMM that you are the CinC and should have the ability to order any formation your troops are capable of achieving.  Any commander can specify that in an advance to contact, 1/3 to 1/2 of the battalions should be in line, the rest in column.  There is nothing in national doctrine or physical ability to prevent such an order from being carried out, although the poorest quality troops won't do well in any attack.

I also agree with this view as far as options are provided enforce historical behavior.

In fact the CinC could not order everything, every maneuver. Most of the time this was hampered by the official training that the army had. And I'm not talking about poorly trained troops. I'm talking about well trained troops... But trained according to old-fashioned directives and manuals.

I would suggest 3 options:

- Column by companies/platoons on/off
- Column by divisions on/off
- Mixed Order on/off

Someone said that the colalition armies used the column by platoons. That is true for later periods, but until 1807/1808 (depending on the specific army) the column by platoons was only used as attack column is very special situations: storming fortifications through a narrow breach, moving through particularly broken terrain, etc. So, an option to switch it off should be there too. 

Regards,
António

[Hook]

- Column by companies/platoons on/off
- Column by divisions on/off
- Mixed Order on/off

And if you turn all three off, it leaves nothing but line, right?  I think we've been through this one before.

Hook