Jonathan I know exactly what you mean and I agree but in terms of the scale of the game it would be a little unrealistic for the following reasons:
1. The figure to man ratio is approx 1:30 which means that a 9 figure unit would equate to 270 men approximately. The average squadron during the period would be somewhere in the range 80 -140 troopers and the squadron was the basic battlefield unit(consisting of a number of smaller troops). In reality our gaming squadrons should actually be between two and five figuresstrong but these numbers are untidy and rather impractical in large scale, multi figure base wargaming
.
As an example the English in particular fielded small cavalry units often of no more than 200 troopers in two squadrons. In wargaming terms this can make a 6 figure unit(1 squadron in our currency) actually represent a two squadron English regiment!
This is where the wargaming unit size comes in. When recreating historical engagements I count one wargaming squadron of 6 as two real squadrons(as this is a more accurate comparison). You only need to have a look at orbats from the big engagments to see that the armies were fielding in some cases nearly 300 squadrons!! Now that is MASSED CAVALRY as makes Napoleonics pale into insignificance.
2. A nine figure wide unit whilst admittedly very visually impressive will be much wider in frontage than is practical and more than the frontage of a fully deployed battalion. You might find manoeuvre a very tricky proposition too!
3. It would make morale calculation difficult using the quick D6 principle employed in the rules and another mechanism would have to be employed(which of course it could)
Sorry for poo-pooing the idea but you did ask. I am very much into the aesthetics of wargaming which I think is quite obvious so I have no reservations on that front.
My suggestion as a compromise is that if smaller scale actions were being fought say using, the adapted 1644 rules then 9 figure squadrons would work very well.
Cheers
Barry
