Horse v Infantry combat

Feedback and questions from the magnificent 7 Play test groups in Edinburgh, Dumfries, Sweden, Cheltenham, Arizona, Georgia and Florida.
Post Reply
Darkman
Major
Major
Posts: 185
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 9:10 am
Location: Gloucester UK

Horse v Infantry combat

Post by Darkman » Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:19 am

With reference to Infantry v Cavalry combats we need to understand what the rules are trying to represent.

Cavalry declare a charge and start moving towards the foot. (point: do the cavalry move to a distance from the foot?)
The foot should declare what they are going to do before they test (are they going to fire or hold their fire for combat dice, The numbers say that if you still have your first fire then shooting is best otherwise it is better to withhold your fire) then they test. They then fire and the cavalry test to charge home or they hold fire and the cavalry do not need to test and charge home.
Now when they withhold their fire until combat is that assumed to be a very close range fire?
Would certain types (raw) be able to hold their fire?

Once the cavalry are in contact with the foot basically it should be all over for the foot.
Thought: if the first bound of combat is a draw then it could be said that the cavalry have not pressed home their attack and now have to fall back. This more likely to happen if the foot have withheld their fire. Which would simulate the situation correctly. (last minute volley, cavalry falter then fall back)

The horse have to be stopped before they make contact, this is done by fire and morale tests to charge home. Once they are in then unless the foot can be reinforced by horse the foot should break eventually.

Thought If the cavalry had a minus for each casualty taken in the charge how much effect on the morale would this have. First fire would more that likely stop the cavalry from charging in after that it is on average a –1 to the test.

Point: what is the –2 for firing at charging horse supposed to represent? Horse can cover the distance to the foot in the time it takes to fire one volley so a negative modifier should not be needed. Plus the horse are moving at the firers not across their line of fire.

Thoughts
Darkman
Major
Major
Posts: 185
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 9:10 am
Location: Gloucester UK

Post by Darkman » Mon Feb 08, 2010 11:07 am

Just one question.
In an All or Nothing charge of 3 squadrons they take 3 casualties now 2 are placed on the first squadron and 1 on the second. Now they test to charge home. Does the 1/3 casualties come in to the morale test for the front squadron or is it only 1/6 casualties across the entire regiment?
User avatar
barr7430
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5851
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:22 pm
Location: EK,Scotland
Contact:

Post by barr7430 » Mon Feb 08, 2010 4:23 pm

Steve,

answer below in blue

cheers

With reference to Infantry v Cavalry combats we need to understand what the rules are trying to represent.

Cavalry declare a charge and start moving towards the foot. (point: do the cavalry move to a distance from the foot?)

This is a visual 'convention' to situations clearer for those who don't want to think conceptually. Firing distance as statedi n the rules is actually 'fire effect' - the impact of the musketry, not 'fire distance'


The foot should declare what they are going to do before they test (are they going to fire or hold their fire for combat dice, The numbers say that if you still have your first fire then shooting is best otherwise it is better to withhold your fire) then they test. They then fire and the cavalry test to charge home or they hold fire and the cavalry do not need to test and charge home.
Now when they withhold their fire until combat is that assumed to be a very close range fire?

Pretty much right

Would certain types (raw) be able to hold their fire?

They get penalised enough in other factors/modifiers.. too much punitive stuff makes them unworkable. The Cameronians were Raw at Dunkeld but they heald out for a day against the Highlanders in street fighting situations.. I think we'll leave the Raw chaps alone for now otherwise they will not grow up to be big boys like the 1st Foot Guards!


Once the cavalry are in contact with the foot basically it should be all over for the foot.

Think we are on Groundhog Day with this one... the reaosn for the changes in the first place were to give the poor infantry at least a sportsman's chance of a resut. Otherwise all the modification work up to now on melee has been pointless.


Thought: if the first bound of combat is a draw then it could be said that the cavalry have not pressed home their attack and now have to fall back. This more likely to happen if the foot have withheld their fire. Which would simulate the situation correctly. (last minute volley, cavalry falter then fall back)

All covered in the melee factors etc

The horse have to be stopped before they make contact, this is done by fire and morale tests to charge home. Once they are in then unless the foot can be reinforced by horse the foot should break eventually.


Same point as last but one.. the Groundhog day situation. I was actually pretty happy with the previous mechanisms on Horse trampling down Foot but it was a volume of objection from users of BLB that got me to the altered mechanism in the first place. Are you recommending reversion to the original Steve??


Thought If the cavalry had a minus for each casualty taken in the charge how much effect on the morale would this have. First fire would more that likely stop the cavalry from charging in after that it is on average a –1 to the test.

Getting complex again I think


Point: what is the –2 for firing at charging horse supposed to represent? Horse can cover the distance to the foot in the time it takes to fire one volley so a negative modifier should not be needed. Plus the horse are moving at the firers not across their line of fire.

Fast, target, nerves, undulations in the ground, lack of visibility at points etc
If you read about aiming points on a target directly to your front British Napoleonic infantry often took aim at the enemy's knees, then thighs, then waist as they closed agaist the line. Imagine the same challenge with a heavy matchlock against fast moving Horse. That is what the -2 represents.
"If you think you can, or if you think you can't, you are probably right"

Henry Ford
User avatar
flick40
Major General
Major General
Posts: 544
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:24 pm
Location: Kansas City , Mo
Contact:

Post by flick40 » Mon Feb 08, 2010 7:12 pm

Imagine the same challenge with a heavy matchlock against fast moving Horse
Add to it the matchlock and early versions of the flintlock were not 'aimed', they were pointed.
"Is that your opinion or the game masters ruling?"
Post Reply