Cav Question (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Crown of Glory



Message

ahauschild -> Cav Question (7/13/2005 5:51:19 AM)

I was wondering, how come Cavalry has range, and how come it uses supplies.
Ok, I can see if you had some Dragoons with carbines, those may actuly fire back, at very reduced rate.
But Hussars, Curasiers, Lancers and such, this guys had absolutly no way of firing back at range. They also had absolutly no reason to resupply, unless you consider lancers possibly breaking their lances in a charge.

Just want to understand the what I consider odd aspects of the game versus my experience with miniature battles and such.



Uncle_Joe -> RE: Cav Question (7/13/2005 5:57:23 AM)

I was wondering about that myself. My guess is that in full divisions of cav, you are assumed to have some mix of different types. I'm not sure if it was really done that way at the divisional level or not though.



ericbabe -> RE: Cav Question (7/13/2005 4:37:40 PM)


I think I've mentioned before in the forums that I considered the cavalry's range attack also to include probing charges against localized points of disorder. At the division level charge/fire are fairly abstract anyway.


Eric



ahauschild -> RE: Cav Question (7/13/2005 5:55:07 PM)

Bit to abstract for me, I guess its not a game breaker for me, but it is certainly a damper. That combined with the fact how cav is almost useless against formed units, EVEN if it is heavy and manages to charges them in the rear. All they do is make them form square or if the inf dont form, causes the cav to lose massive troops.

One of the Game problems now against the AI is that he rushes with his cav ahead of the ground troops, and charges any formed unit. This causes him to lose his fresh rating, only to have units out of range of his inf to form square. All I do then is next round reform to colum or line and have the non affected units blow the crap out of the cav. 90% of the time the enemy cav is shacken, out of fresh or even disordered or routed before the enemy inf and art ever show up in range.

Everything I have read so far about Nap times is that the following happend in general.

Infantry was used to wear down and lock other infantry in position, causing them to waver or to be non manuverable. Artillery was used in general to soften up defensive positions, wear down advancing troops and such.

Heavy Cav and Lancers where used to break enemy formations, especialy if they where tied down by infantry one way or another. Heavy was not designed to pursuit, as the horses tired vey fast.

Light Cav (Hussars) where used in general to pursuit fleeing enemy elements, giving the coupe de grace.

Irr. where used to harraz the supply lines or to pursuit a fleeing army on a stratetic level.

Of course scouting was a big part of the cav, they where the eyes of the army in the stratetic level.

This does not seem to happen currently, again, not a game breaker, but not a accurate depiction of nap warfare as I understand it. But then again, I could be wrong.



Reiryc -> RE: Cav Question (7/13/2005 6:45:07 PM)

quote:

One of the Game problems now against the AI is that he rushes with his cav ahead of the ground troops, and charges any formed unit. This causes him to lose his fresh rating, only to have units out of range of his inf to form square. All I do then is next round reform to colum or line and have the non affected units blow the crap out of the cav. 90% of the time the enemy cav is shacken, out of fresh or even disordered or routed before the enemy inf and art ever show up in range.


I don't think I've ever seen an AI in any game act in a manner except something similar to this.

Now if one were to play a human, then I'd bet you wouldn't see too many charges out in front of the main body without the infantry being in reach. Maybe the AI could be tweaked to only charge when X number of infantry units could be in range to either fire the same turn or move and fire in the same turn on the unit being charged. I don't know how easy that would be to code however....




Mr. Z -> RE: Cav Question (7/13/2005 7:07:49 PM)


quote:

Bit to abstract for me, I guess its not a game breaker for me, but it is certainly a damper.

Just to touch on this point for a second, remember that it's the representation of the units on the map that's a little abstract. In other words, units are "really" spread out a bit more than they appear to be. The hex they're in more-or-less represents the center-of-mass, if you will, of the division--so there is "really" a bit of ebb-and-flow that you're not seeing. That's why you see "ranged" lancer "fire"-attacks against "distant" units.



ahauschild -> RE: Cav Question (7/13/2005 9:08:06 PM)

No problem there, just takes some getting used to that this would be the case. I think that is one of the reason most Nap games on a tactical level are more played out at Brigade level.

Divisions consisted on paper with 2 to 4 Brigades of 2000 to 3000 man. In reality most Divisions had 2 combat Brigades at probl 1000 to 1500 man strength while a 3rd division was actuly used for training recruits and often never expected or even be present in battle. This is hard to reflect in the game at the moment. To often we see complete full 10k brigades make their appearance on the battlefield.

Also Cav was very very expensive to muster and to maintain. Maybe overall Horse Production needs to be reduced, but cav itself needs to be more usefull from its current point of route chasers and square builders. This of course would mean that Inf should not need horses to be build.

Also I think units that get depleded should take a long time to replenish. Posssibly to half strengh easy, to 75% strength hard, and then from 7500 to 10000 men it should almost never happen unless they sit in the capitol for a long time.

could look like this.

up to 5000 they will replenish 1000 men max per month maximum
from 5000 to 7500 they will replenish 500 per month maximum
from 7500 to 10000 they will replenish at 100 per month maximum

A system like this would ensure that battles are more often fought with partial divisions, rather then with the current 90 to 100% full divisions.

I dont know, just ideas I am throwing out there.



Alaric_31 -> RE: Cav Question (7/13/2005 9:18:09 PM)

greetings, i do not agree with this replenish rate, because the given attrition system is very tough already, is what i think, i like more the default replenish rate from draft, if the replenish is so limited, then attrition is much more tough, you can lose in one month easily what you have got in many months.

with regards,

alaric.

side note.- Also remember that a unit at 4k or less men in quick combat automatically takes a morale check each turn.



ahauschild -> RE: Cav Question (7/13/2005 9:33:03 PM)

Maybe my proposed numbers are to harsh, but it still feels wrong that very often armys meet with full divisions, something that hardly ever happend historicaly.



Naomi -> RE: Cav Question (7/14/2005 1:03:30 AM)

Simply reduce (or remove) the fire-back ability of saber-wielding units, to further distinguish dragoon-like units from them.



Ralegh -> RE: Cav Question (7/14/2005 2:49:15 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Naomi
Simply reduce (or remove) the fire-back ability of saber-wielding units, to further distinguish dragoon-like units from them.


Hmm - how about we give saber units an even shorter range? If musket fire is effective to 4 hexes, perhaps saber units should only be effective to 2 hexes (on fire back as well as normal fire).

quote:

ORIGINAL: ahauschild
Heavy Cav and Lancers where used to break enemy formations, especialy if they where tied down by infantry one way or another. Heavy was not designed to pursuit, as the horses tired vey fast.


Great idea! - Can we give Heavy Cav and Lancers a bonus to break the enemy formation against a formed enemy? And - perhaps - improve their ability to reform afterwards?



Naomi -> RE: Cav Question (7/14/2005 2:54:58 AM)

Such tinkering is good, really giving more colour to differing types of horsemen.



Uncle_Joe -> RE: Cav Question (7/14/2005 7:05:13 AM)

quote:

And - perhaps - improve their ability to reform afterwards?


I'd like to see the chance for all Cav to reform accumulate from turn to turn at least to a certain level. Nothing is more frustrating than having a 20 or 30% chance and 'missing the roll' repeatedly, half the time revert back to 'shaken'.

Also, at night the chances seem to hover around 10%. So, since night turns are longer, it can take hours to reform. I would think that 'standing down' a unit at night would cause it to recover faster, but that does not seem to be the case.

I still view Cav as mostly a one-shot weapon. If they manage to reform...great. I think this might be appropriate in some instances, but I think they should reform faster in others.



GreenDestiny -> RE: Cav Question (7/14/2005 1:09:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ralegh
Hmm - how about we give saber units an even shorter range? If musket fire is effective to 4 hexes, perhaps saber units should only be effective to 2 hexes (on fire back as well as normal fire).


This is the first wargame that I've ever played in which you could saber cut and slash the other side from across a lake.



Reg Pither -> RE: Cav Question (7/14/2005 1:15:00 PM)

I can accept that, because of the deceptive scaling of the detailed battles, cavalry can have a 'ranged attack' due to elements skirmishing, but I also think that the different types should have different ranges. And that all should be reduced anyway.



GreenDestiny -> RE: Cav Question (7/14/2005 1:19:33 PM)

Why have deceptive scaling??? If your going to go there then why not have some magic powers also.



Hard Sarge -> RE: Cav Question (7/14/2005 3:13:27 PM)

Hi Uncle Joe
yes I also see Cav as a one shot affair, but with the thinking that Cav can be the winning edge to the battle if and when used at the right time in the battle, if so, then that is all you need is the one shot

if they are used for the first unit you see, and then are out of the battle, then shame on you (not meaning you)

for the rebuilding of Divs

I had one game, where I was kicked out of a country once it surrendered, I had a depot in the city I was in and one to the side of it, so I just left the armies there to rest and refit and see what was going to happen next

the next turn, both depots went poof (no enemy troops, had no ememies) I lost over 61 K in troops that month, and took over 7 months to rebuild to the point that I could leave that city and engage, the now two countrys attacking me

so, not sure if the build rate is too fast or too slow

(really, really don't like the disappearing depots)

(also, really, really and I do mean Really, dislike the idea that a Div of troops can match into a city area, that is defend by a Army with 130 K in troops, and get it's butt kicked and still destroy the depot that is supporting the troops there, if I lost the battle, yea I could see it, but not when I win and it was a oops moment for the AI)

HARD_Sarge



GreenDestiny -> RE: Cav Question (7/14/2005 3:20:10 PM)

Hey... Hard Sarge lets stick to the subject of this thread.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.421875