Platoon vs Rank fire

[wbamick]

Hi Barry,
A quick question regarding the rules. Do you have any modifiers to show percieved or theoretical differences between platoon fire and rank fire?
Thanks,
Bill

[barr7430]

Hi Bill,

another interesting question. I seem to remember when we started playing these rules(or their predecessor) that there was a +1 fire bonus given to British/Dutch infantry in line. Now I'm as patriotic as the next bloke but I have always been kind of anti the `British are better' approach in my wargaming. The platoon firing concepts which many writers make much of were originally I think a Dutch innovation. The Dutch themselves formed the overwhelming majority of Grand Alliance Armies. Their infantry were reckoned to be about as good as you can get.
The French, god bless 'em had been kicking - around Europe for a couple of decades and so I reckon were no slouches either. The 'British' usually formed no more than 25% of field armies and were generally infantry heavy and cavalry light.

A long winded way of saying I am not particularly in favour of fire advantages for one side or another. If individual players feel strongly about it then a +1(optional) agreed as a house amendment would work. I think the battle winning factors are more around generalship and army cohesion in the larger field affairs. This could be created on the table by downgrading many more battalions to `RAW' status and restricting the Generalship abilities of the commanders which in turn restricts movement(this has been the single biggest influencing factor in ALL of our larger scale wargames).

As an aside, I was half expecting someone to complain about my suggestion of downgrading the British Footguards to Elite status whilst comparing them to the Gard te voet or Gardes Francaises.

I think there is very strong argumentation for treating line battalions such as : 1st Foot or the Scots-Anglo Dutch Brigade as higher in morale status and ability than Guards units. These line battalions were hired guns, fighting frequently in continental battles and officered by experienced men with many years combat experience. Many household units had faced no one more dangerous than armed peasant mobs in the west country before going to Flanders. I cannot say for certain but I would guess you may learn a little more about behaviour under fire from facing three battalions of Regiment Picardie than 500 angry weavers from Dorset!!!

But then again Dorset was the Wild West in 1685!

Cheers

Barry

[wbamick]

Thanks for the update. We are on the fence on some of these issues, we like to think that the Dutch platoon fire system was an improvement over the rank fire. Ignoring how fire control seems to break down in battle it most likely was some sort of improvement.

I like to think that the French infantry kicked "a" because of their supposed elan in charging. As none of us were there all we can do is make a hopefully educated guess.

I have no problem with British guards being rated Elite and agree that there are several "line" units that were at least as good or better. Any time you give ratings some one will disagree, I like to use them as a guide to adjust as the situation or fondness of a particular unit warrent. Will you be publishing your own views as to how units/nations are rated? We waffle on the Reich units. We seem to rank the units in the pay of the marinetime powers as drilled more often than not.

As a side note we rank Britain, Netherlands (and hired troops)and usually Denmark as getting the 4,5,or 6 kill dice for 1700's the rest of the allies as 5 or 6. This is open to discussion, of course.

And finally, a rules question. Cavalry vs Infantry melee; I am a little confused by the first line under the heading. Does all cavalry kill on a 4,5, or 6 or only the French 1600's or allies 1700s?

All for now. Thanks for your follow up on my previous questions.

Bill

[barr7430]

Hi Bill,

can do on the subject of rating(another post for that I think). My opinions are probably no more valid than anyone elses!

For the other points:

All accounts rate the Danes very highly. They seemed to form the core of the Williamite Army in Ireland and were much admired for their professionalism. The Dutch hired many regiments and my own personal experience of Dutch people is that when it comes to commerical issues and spending hard earned cash they know what they want! so I reckon the Danes earned their corn in Flanders.

So, Danish cavalry killing on 4,5,6 between 1701-1714 is ok with me!

The initial kill dice for French cavalry against infantry is 3,4,5,6 between 1689-1698.

Those numbers switch to Dutch, English & DANES! for 1701-1714 with the French dropping to 4,5,6.

Remember and give Reich Kurassier one extra die per three figures fighting(dice on 50% if you have 2 figures and if you score 4,5,6 give them the extra die!).

I usually allow the Maritime powers one Cuirassier armed regiment in the army.

I allow the French to field one Cuirassier equipped unit - normally one of the senior regiments.

Hope this comes in useful for the next game.

Barry

[quindia]

Hi, Barry!

I have another rule question. The morale rules require a test when commanders are killed within 12", but I can't find a way to run the buggers down! I assume there are rules for killing these worthy gentlemen?

[barr7430]

Hi Guys,

another good question.

Let me tell you how these things are normally decided and then I'll make some suggestions for tidying it all up.

If a situation arises in our games where a Commander is in jeopardy we have a chat make some decisions and resolve.
For instance:

1. General joins melee to improve chances of passing a morale test. The unit he is attached to takes casualties. We normally calculate the % of casualties as a proportion of the total unit, roll a die and if he is in the `fallen' % then he is lost and all units test.

2. Event cards(more of which when I finish them in PDF) occasionally see a Commander/Brigadier fall victim to stray shots or snipers. Thus compelling the test.

3. Units taking shooting casualites with a general attached are subject to the same procedure as 1. above

4. Units surrounded and in retreat with a general attached `lose' the great man thus compelling a test.

5. Occasionally a general gets himself isolated or exposed and is subject to an umpire adjudication. Most notable example I can remember was when we played the large multi player OVERJISE 1705. Counter attacking French squadrons burst through the British lines and two of them found themselves face to face with Marlborough himself sans escort.
The French player declared a charge on the great man which the Umpires(myself being one of them) allowed. We then allowed Corporal John an evade option of 3 xD6 inches calculated in quarter moves as was the movement of the charging unit . As the initial seperation distance was significant.. he got away BUT if he'd been caught we'd have diced for killed or captured.

I can do an amendment sheet covering all the loose points such as this plus, capturing colours and any other bits n' pieces. It's all there either in handwritten notes or scenario notes so I'll be happy to share it.

Cheers


Barry