J Hutton
Posts: 10
Joined: 6/20/2003
Status: offline
|
Yes, other than Leipzig and Borodino, there were few massive (120,000+ a side) stack battles through the Napoleonic period. But these two battles show that not only could they happen, but that they should be allowed to happen in the EIA rules, and I think the rules work in this respect.
I think that there is a tendency in the way people play EIA to seek out the decisive battle with the big stack, while failing to do other things such as try to occupy enemy territory and cities and defend or cut supply lines. Historically, say with the invasion of Russia, there were two main thrusts - one north and one south of the Pipit (sp?) marshes. By the time Borrodino happened many French troops were deployed to defend the supply lines, or to besiege Riga, or other cities elsewhere - the battle only represented about a fifth of the French army. But the Russians did a pretty good job of not allowing France to come to the big stack battle until the eve of winter - they actively threatened French supply lines, etc., had much of their own army fighting elsewhere. Borrodino was not a battle the Russians really wanted anyway.
But in the early part of the period (1805-1809), the number of troops being deployed at Austerlitz, Ulm, Jena, etc., appear pretty much what you would expect in an EIA game. I list some battle numbers below (not entirely accurate, so be careful).
Perhaps the problem is that players are not rewarded enough (or penalised enough) for taking and holding local capitals (as suggested elsewhere, perhaps a financial bonus - 1/2 income no manpower for the invading force holding a provincial capital, but why not also a -1 pp adjustment for the loss of a provincial capital without any friendly troops in the province (either as corp or garrisons - showing a willingness to defend territory should be rewarded, although this is pretty mean). Such mechanisms would encourage the sending off of smaller forces to defend territory, or harrass the enemy.
Don't forget also that by the time Napoleon was fighting in 1809-1812, there was also a good sized force in Spain being tied down by the British/French. Napoleon was trying foolishly to fight on two fronts, and the relative size of the force that he was able to bring to battle in Austria/Prussia reflected this. No doubt the battles would have been larger if France was not in Spain. Don't forget also that the 1808-09 battles vs Prussia and Austria followed from some very destructive engagements in 1806-07 - their armies had hardly time to recover.
The big-stack problem is more a latter-game aspect when countries did not batter each other sufficiently in 1805-09, and thus had more of a chance to build up. But what's wrong with a game where there are five or eight Leipzig equivalents in 1811-1815 - thats just the way the history might have played out.
My only gripe is that the mechanisms allow the filling up of corps, then the deployment of massive garrisons without any ongoing "levelling out" of manpower and recruitment - hence the suggestion for a small cost to garrison numbers and the ability to get a bit more money in exchange for manpower. These are not radical suggestions, but would have a longer-term effect.
Some battle numbers:
1805 Austerlitz 85,000 Austrian/Russians vs 66,000 French
1805 Ulm 40,000 Austrians surrounded, 27,000 of whom surrendered
1806 Jena 40,000 French, reinforced by 50,000 vs 35,000 Prussians, reinforced by 15,000
1807 Friedland 61,000 Russians vs 80,000 French
1807 Eylau 74,000 Russians vs 50,000 French (reinforced later in the day by Davout)
1809 Aspern-Essling 95,000 Austrians vs 24,000 French, reinforced across river (more a Cordon) by ??? as the day progressed
1809 Wagram 155,000 Austrians vs ??? French, but 80,000 casualties under both sides
1809 Talavera 55,000 British and Spanish vs 46,000 French
1812 Salamanca 50,000 French vs 48,000 British
1812 Borodino 120,000 Russians vs 133,000 French
1813 Bautzen 100,000 Allies vs 115,000 French under Napoleon reinforced poorly by 85,000 men under Ney
1813 Lutzen 110,000 French vs 100,000 Prussian/Russians
1813 Leipzig 200,000 French vs 400,000 Allies
1815 Waterloo Anglo-Allied 68,000, reinforced by 89,000 Prussians vs 72,000 French (not reinforced by 33,000 men under Grouchy, although admittedly he was tied down for much of the day fighting a Prussian rear-guard)
|
Printable Version
- 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread