Page 1 of 1

The Cavalry on Napoleon Age

Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 6:09 pm
by jastaV
[SIZE="2"][CENTER]The Cavalry on Napoleon Age[/CENTER][/size]

I’ll not deal with the details: I assume we all know that!
I’m just looking to point out some aspects, possibly to help a future improvement of the Battle Resolution engine in NCP and some Cavalry related issues in the Campaign game.

Cavalry roles
Light Cavalry: recon/scouting; troops movements screening; enemy pursuit after battles.
Medium-Heavy Cavalry: shook troops; enemy pursuit after battles;

The Campaign
Friendly troops movements screening & recon/scouting duties are already represented in NCP by Detection and Hide values.

[color="Red"]As a way to improve Athena, AI should detach Light Cavalry units from Corps and use then to scout adjacent enemy controlled region in advance for own movements.[/color]

THE BATTLE

The side with Light Cavalry advantage should get some bonus at battle start: that will simulate knowledge of enemy deployment/position gathered by recon and the obstacle to enemy columns movements in the phases that prepare the battle.

Opposing sides Cavalry were employed to engage each other to gain the cavalry superiority on the field: We should have Cavalry vs Cavalry engagements in the first rounds of battle.
Winner side getting the Cavalry advantage should gain some bonus for next battle turns.

Cavalry was used to outflank enemy batteries, without infantry protection. Nailing enemy guns was a common practice when gunners under menace of enemy cavalry charge were fleeing for safety within infantry squares. This should be already present in NCP after its update to WiA standard!

Heavy Cavalry was trained to charge infantry lines and columns to breach enemy frontline and havoc them. Cavalry was used to menace, hamper, slow down enemy infantry movements on the field. In game term this could be represented as an obstacle to opponent forces closing up during the battle.

Cavalry forced enemy infantry to enter Square formations bud did not charge square. Kept in squares by unopposed enemy cavalry, infantry was very vulnerable to musket and artillery fire and to assault/melee from enemy infantry columns. In game term infantry entering square should be protected by enemy cavalry but very vulnerable to ranged fire attacks. Cavalry should not receive damage from enemy squares: major losses to cavalry came from ranged fire, (artillery and muskets) and by melee with enemy cavalry.

Major losses in Napoleonic Age came from pursuit after battle: that highly increased loser side casualties: guess that should be already represented in NCP game: may be worth to check and rework it. The Battle report has not a field for pursuit losses AFAIK.


Having to thank Pocus and AGEod in general for all effort aimed to improve NCP in the past, hope enlisted points will help future improvements, whenever it could be. :love:

Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 6:20 pm
by FM WarB
Careful; we do not want to turn cavalry into Panzers. The efficiency of light cav of all nations in the recon role was patchy at best. Most famous heavy cavalry charges were battlefield expedients, due to shortage, or disorder of infantry troops. Spiking cannon was less prevalent than some think. How would you like to dismount to spike a gun with bullets flying or angry artillerymen nearby? Jena is the prime example of cavalry pursuit after victory. More often, the friendly forces, including cavalry were too tired to conduct a vigorous pursuit.

Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 7:06 pm
by Maqver
Careful; we do not want to turn cavalry into Panzers. The efficiency of light cav of all nations in the recon role was patchy at best. Most famous heavy cavalry charges were battlefield expedients, due to shortage, or disorder of infantry troops. Spiking cannon was less prevalent than some think. How would you like to dismount to spike a gun with bullets flying or angry artillerymen nearby? Jena is the prime example of cavalry pursuit after victory. More often, the friendly forces, including cavalry were too tired to conduct a vigorous pursuit.


I agree for the most part. However, pursuit after the battle is an important feature, whether tired or not. A little pursuit - or the threat of it - meant much more than none at all. Scouting and pursuit and threat.

In battle it was all about morale. If the enemy infantry was relatively stable and formed the cavalry would not charge them, even if they were in line (yes, there were instances - Wagram off the top of my head - but for every instance there were innumerable occasions where they didn't, you just don't hear about those). This is where a lot of Nap games get it wrong. Charging a well formed line in the flank or rear, sure....charging it head on...suicide.

Cavalry?

Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 7:17 pm
by tagwyn
Ever heard of the "The Charge of the Light Brigade!" Into the "Valley of Death!" :)

Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 7:36 pm
by jastaV
This thread moved me to post:
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=11718

Cavalry losses are till a trouble!
But that I tried to enlarge the subject in a compendium of all issues related to Cavalry in NCP.
I never said I want a panzer-like cavalry!

The point I [color="Red"]red font marked[/color] can be of great importance. In many hours of testing I noticed AI is in trouble when loosing contact with enemy: it seems to stand without trying to advance. Recentely I also noticed Athena uses sometimes Army HQ stacks as scouting forces witha suicide move of them in enemy territory. It's importan to improve AI at first, giving AI cavalry the scouting duty it was proper of Napoleonic age cavalry!

Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 7:49 pm
by Maqver
Ever heard of the "The Charge of the Light Brigade!" Into the "Valley of Death!"


With regard to battle, the cavalry was most effective when the enemy was shaken, disorganized, not formed up, etc. And the commanders of the time knew it. They would not, in general, waste their cavlary on well formed troops unless the need was pressing (or they were idiots who wanted to see their cav get blown to pieces before they ever reached their objective at the end of the Valley of Death). So, as a postive suggestion rather than seeming if I am just carping, I would suggest that in battle a cavarly's combat effectiveness should be the inverse of the enemy's morale and cohesion with possible disastrous results if they are both high.

Posted: Mon Dec 15, 2008 8:19 pm
by jastaV
Maqver wrote: I would suggest that in battle a cavarly's combat effectiveness should be the inverse of the enemy's morale and cohesion with possible disastrous results if they are both high.


Good suggestion: it could help to preserve Cavalry from severe combact losses!

Posted: Tue Dec 16, 2008 11:40 am
by Pocus
Thanks for your report JastaV. I'm starting to rework the AI so I hope some improvements will appears in early 2009.