French cavalry beating fortress defenders

[Arnaud_Bouis]

I have the AI-controlled Murat attacking my fortress of Magdeburg and throwing his cavalry at the walls of the city, beating Brunswick and inflicing massive losses on the defenders (see attachment).

Doesn't look realistic at all (cavalry climing walls on ladders ?).

Ok, in the scenario the Prussian commanders are all a bunch of incompentent unmilitary lunatics (0-0 ratings), which partly explains the massive losses of the defenders, but should Murat throw his horsemen at the walls of a fortress ?

[Jagermeister]

Unrealistic, peharps not, the general Lassale taken the fortress of Stettin in 1806 with 500 cavalrymen.

[Asberdies]

lol thats really look like a bad joke
Despise being winter, against a fortified town the french horse gun did more dmg than the Prussian overwhelming artillery
There is really some serious disfunction in the engine

[Pocus]

Not a technical bug so moved to the NCP main forum.

What is the shape of your Prussian? Cavalry functions at 50% I believe against fortresses. And it seems you routed.

[Arnaud_Bouis]

Unrealistic, peharps not, the general Lassale taken the fortress of Stettin in 1806 with 500 cavalrymen.

Yes but in my case, Magdeburg is being defended by the whole Prussian army and Murat is attacking at less than 1:4 odds (and winning).

[Arnaud_Bouis]

Not a technical bug so moved to the NCP main forum.

What is the shape of your Prussian? Cavalry functions at 50% I believe against fortresses. And it seems you routed.

Well-rested and well-fed. My prussian corps have been waiting in Magdeburg for weeks, while Murat has been marching throughout Germany.

> There is really some serious disfunction in the engine

Or maybe it's the effect of the database, where Prussian leaders are opera dancers (0-0 ratings).

[Pocus]

what told your the battle log? There must be a logical explaination I guess.

[Arnaud_Bouis]

what told your the battle log? There must be a logical explaination I guess.

Here it is. I went through it but I don't understand. I am drowned by the amount of data.

It's not an accident, Murat defeated Brunswick in Magdeburg twice.

Ok, I'll take further similar threads to the beta-testers forum. I wrote it here because I am not using a beta-bersion. I am using v1.03.

[Pocus]

The second battle has nothing special, Murat succeed in disengaging at round 2, so the only one round seems to be an exchange of artillery fire, where Murat is particularly lucky (many good dices from what I see).

More interesting would be to get the first battle report, but you are not in error logging mode, so not all infos are stored... Send me the whole save I'll take a look.

[Kev_uk]

Only 8% of your forces were inside?

[Pocus]

81% actually, but I missed that ... I now wonder if the combat was not against the 19% outside (this means 25 elements nonetheless), which got butchered by the French cuirassiers, and then Murat ordered a retreat after some hours. Having done significantly more losses, he is credited with a victory...

[Pocus]

Darn! That is the solution: 19% of 129 means ... 24 and how much losses the Prussian took??

Thanks to all who gave their appraisal of how buggy the combat module was supposed to be

[Jabberwock]

So the problem here is really that the battle report shows all the units in the province, whether they were engaged or not. This is a recurring one.

[Pocus]

Not enough room to show round per round the commited forces. We would need a major overhaul of the battle report (planned for VGN) which would allow you to see either the forces at start, or engaged during a given round (which means redoing completely the battle report save format as a big side effect!)

[Adam the VIth]

A) very interesting discussion;

B) I think the fact that the engine differentiates between the forces inside and outside a fortress is excellent!

C) If I had the whole Prussian Armee in a fortress and some French cavalry came up -- I'd send out a Corps to push them away. Then my clown corps commander would make horrendous tactical dispositions and decisions, and get routed. But my weight in #s would eventually prevail.

hmm.....the engine re-created that exact sequence.....I think the engine deserves the applause, and the Prussian deserves the ration of ....well, you know.

[Jabberwock]

True that.

[Jabberwock]

A) very interesting discussion;

B) I think the fact that the engine differentiates between the forces inside and outside a fortress is excellent!

C) If I had the whole Prussian Armee in a fortress and some French cavalry came up -- I'd send out a Corps to push them away. Then my clown corps commander would make horrendous tactical dispositions and decisions, and get routed. But my weight in #s would eventually prevail.

hmm.....the engine re-created that exact sequence.....I think the engine deserves the applause, and the Prussian deserves the ration of ....well, you know.

True that.

[Arnaud_Bouis]

81% actually, but I missed that ... I now wonder if the combat was not against the 19% outside (this means 25 elements nonetheless), which got butchered by the French cuirassiers, and then Murat ordered a retreat after some hours. Having done significantly more losses, he is credited with a victory...

The combat report says that the forces engaged are 129 Prussian elemens vs 43 French elements. If only a fraction of those prussians were engaged, then I suggest the game engine shows those that took part in the battle. So that the player will be able to understand what happened.

Here are the complete log files (showing both battles at the end) and the saves files (I guess that by taking the save in backup 1 you can replay the engagements).

[Arnaud_Bouis]

Darn! That is the solution: 19% of 129 means ... 24 and how much losses the Prussian took??

Thanks to all who gave their appraisal of how buggy the combat module was supposed to be

Nobody says the engine is buggy. What many of us say (and you should not believe we're bashing the game, we only want to improve a nice game and help, we also spend *a lot* of time on this) is that sometimes the battle reports do not let us understand what happened.

For instance, if the prussian disaster happened because only fraction of the prussian force fought (the other fraction being inactive in the fortress), then :
- how can we know this happened,
- how can we know how many troops a fortress can shelter,
- why do the two forces not help each other ? Why did a huge Prussian force stand idle while their friends were getting massacred by Murat ? Did they fail some leader roll or is there some explanation ?


A few obscure things around. Not necessarily buggy, but not explained (for instance, pursuit losses).

It's possible that the combat engine is great, but what counts is what the player perceives. I guess you've put a huge amount of work in it. If it's great but the results seem strange, then it looks bad.

[Arnaud_Bouis]

Not enough room to show round per round the commited forces.

An idea would be to add buttons on which you would click to see the details of specific things (in pop-up windows), like committed forces, failed leadership rolls, the pursuit, etc. So that the report would be readable and in a single window, but details would be available.

[Pocus]

re-buggy: the actual terms, which are not from you are "bad joke" or "serious disfunction".

You know how many troops are inside (and thus outside) with the icon, you had a number for that: 81% of troops were inside.

Indeed, if you have troops inside, they won't help troops outside, unless you have clicked on the order "sortie". I don't think you had, otherwise this would be a bug if the Prussian inside did not help the Prussian outside.

It is indeed a display problem, all troops are shown. It can be misleading yes. Be sure that this will be improved when time allows.

Thanks for your input!

[Arnaud_Bouis]

Continuing on the thread because some suggested another problem, and I think he's dead correct.

There is no way a 100% cavalry force could have defeated a combined arms force in reality. Murat would have been quite helpless against infantry formed in squares, with artillery.

Is combined arms taken into account in the combat routines ? Seen nothing about this in the manual.

[Bis]

Continuing on the thread because some suggested another problem, and I think he's dead correct.

There is no way a 100% cavalry force could have defeated a combined arms force in reality. Murat would have been quite helpless against infantry formed in squares, with artillery.

Is combined arms taken into account in the combat routines ? Seen nothing about this in the manual.

You'd be correct most of the time, but what about low quality/morale troops. Perhaps they didn't form quick enough or have the nerve to hold.

[Walloc]

Ill have to go with Arnaud here. Ok u can maybe overrun some of the force a btn or 3 in pitched battel, but not all of them. Since the the french losses half its cav u cant really argue that there would have been an element of supprise that caused it.
With that kinda losses it was a pitched battle. As Arnaud says the french lacking combined arm, and being twice out gunned, I dont think the result eliminating the 19% is particular credible.
What would have happend is a stand off, but question is can the engine handle that. Having a battle without having a battle.
The french lacking the combined arms cant really get to grips with the prussians. The prussian would have squared up, no reason not too since no enemy infantry is in the battle and u arent supprised. Then use ur massive art superiority to hold of the french guns. So the french would have the majority of times elected just to watch or maker smaller attacks if an oppertunity presented it self.
If there had been no prussian guns ok then u could force squares and use ur own guns to make combined arms.
Like wise the prussian wont be able to come to grips with the more mobile french force.
With no supprise in such a situasion the only real outcome would have been a stand off.
Such a situasion is a frequently occuring situasion in the era. The number of times infantry square up and march of a battlefield is countless.
Instead it turns into a bloodbath. 100% prussian casulties and 50% of french cav. In it self are very unusually outcome.
If by some way the french would/could have overrunned cuz or low moral or other factors that would have made the prussian unable to stand up, the french cav should have taken much less casulties.

If it was 1 off situasion then ok. Odd things happens in war so some times u can expect things out of the norm to happen. Problem is when the unlikely becomes the norm.
I dont think the combat engine handles cavalry very well. Either the cav is overly succesfull and bloody, or make headless overly excesive bloody charges, dying in drowes for no reason what so ever.
Either way the cav ends up takes way to many casulties and some times tho still in generally unhistoricly so IMO its offsetted by as bloody massacre on the opponent.
Its like there is no way, but forward, no matter what.

Cavalry reserves tend to stay in reserve waiting for the right moment to be commited. While i assume we all can agree there are examples of this happening some succesfull some not. If u compare to number of battles where it could have happend, but situasion was never deemed right, such commitment is overall uncommon.

I've the first 25+ times seen all elements at 100% strength cavalry corps, some times even more than one full strength corps be entirely eliminated in 1 battle. Since there is no historical presendence for that at all, IMO it has to be said to be an unlikely event. Non the less its every day stuff as is atm in NCP.

Are there times where cavalry alone crushed a combined arms force. Yes but they are very rare and far in between, when we talk this kinda size force. 10+ btns, +80 guns and cavalry tho in small numbers.
Some kinda factor really have to play into it other than just the battle.
An army alrdy beat and in disarray, weather, but again this cant be a Dresden type situasion. The prussian way outgun the french so thats not credible.


Kind regards,

Rasmus

[Le Tondu]

Are we by chance forgetting about the Horse Artillery that is with French Cavalry?

I know that an element can be a squadron or a regiment, but 43 elements still seems like a large amount of cavalry. At the very least that is what --11 regiments or 8000+ sabers. Maybe 2 Cavalry Corps worth?

[Walloc]

Are we by chance forgetting about the Horse Artillery that is with French Cavalry?

Quoting my self.

If there had been no prussian guns ok then u could force squares and use ur own(read french) guns to make combined arms.

Then use ur(read prussian) massive art superiority to hold of the french guns.

As Arnaud says the french lacking combined arm, and being twice out gunned

Hmm, no i think i was very aware of those 7 horse batteries, but if u outgunned 42 to 80 pieces that negates very much ur ability to use those effectively on a napoleonic battle field. Means u cant just run/ride ur batteries in close to effectivly counter the squares with cannister.
Again if it had been an artillery advantage or just even they could possibly have been more of an use in combined arms. Especilly considering a quality advantage for the french artillery, but in this case they'r heavily outnumbered.

I know that an element can be a squadron or a regiment, but 43 elements still seems like a large amount of cavalry. At the very least that is what --11 regiments or 8000+ sabers. Maybe 2 Cavalry Corps worth?

I thot about that and cant know for sure. I guess Arnaud could go in and check, but since half of the french cav elements are dead(16 out of 33) and the entire loss for all the french are 3600. So even if we assume that every single loss was on the dead elements. Which isnt likely even if its the major part of them. It suggest that the elements gota be very understrength or squadrons else 3600 dead wont equal 16 dead elements.
If the remaning cav have same strength then there would be no more than 7300' ish cavalry men and then the 7 batteries of combat forces. In all no more than 8000 men, which is actually less than what they eliminated. Thats more than impressive.
Again this is partly speculation, but the evidence at hand suggest that.

From those numbers it doesnt seem to suggest as the prussian had 8500 troops, that the french had any numerical superiority. Even if they had its really more a question about are u able to employ it. I can find u the first 100 cases of squares wandering of battlefields while being stalked /surrounded by superior numbers of cavalry. Its a question of a tactical deadlock.
On the other hand i cant find u many battles of above that certain size where i find bloodbaths with a casulty rate of 100% vs near 50%, in a single battle.
Especially given the operational situasion. Read forces at hand, and the other overall factors Arnaud points too in his posts.

Again i wouldnt mind if this was a single example as said in above posts. Some times chit just happens, but if u have 10 cases and 5-6-7 of them turn out odd. Then it cant a question of it being the exception, since now odd is the norm.


Kind regards,

Rasmus

[Pocus]

Actually the ratio of arts is 10 for the Prussian and 7 for the French.

It is also indicated that all 24 of the Prussian elements routed, so this means that the massive cuirassier shock, with Murat to guide them, against the Prussian led by a very poor leader resulted in a climatic battle indeed. If you feel it should not happen, then it boils down to adjusting numbers and figures, no problem.

[Arnaud_Bouis]

Pocus,

Does the game engine take combined arms into account ?

That is, do the combat routines penalize those who have very little cav, or very little infantry, or artillery ?

[Pocus]

No, there is no such penalty. One can say that a combined arms bonus is given in games with a too low granularity in details though. For example I don't recall seeing this bonus in the old boardgames (SPI and such) I played on the Napoleonic era (distant memory though) which depicted one single battle (one counter being a bataillon generally)

What is exactly the nature of this bonus for you, I mean practically on the battleground? The engine implicitely functions with a combined arms system in my opinion, some examples:

a) artillery and infantry. If you don't have enough infantry, then your artillery can be assaulted. If you have enough, then your infantry prevent that.

b) cavalry charge. Cavalry seeks to charge weakened or shaken infantry elements. Generally this is done by firing on them with artillery or infantry, and then at close range your cavalry will do the charge. Remove the infantry (or elements having a range), and your cavalry won't be used optimally because all enemy regiments will still have their full discipline and cohesion for contact.

c) too much artilleries. The frontages rule stipulate that you have a max amount in line elements and in support elements. Using only artilleries without infantries is thus suboptimal.

I'm open to debate, really, but be sure to discuss something (combined arms) which is not an artificial construct done in games which don't have enough details in their combat engine to innately represent it.

[Walloc]

Actually the ratio of arts is 10 for the Prussian and 7 for the French.

In ratio batteries yes, but not in ratio of guns. As french horse batteries only have 6 guns per battery. 7*6=42.

It is also indicated that all 24 of the Prussian elements routed, so this means that the massive cuirassier shock, with Murat to guide them, against the Prussian led by a very poor leader resulted in a climatic battle indeed. If you feel it should not happen, then it boils down to adjusting numbers and figures, no problem.

As said this could happen, but given the combined arms issue the chance should be very slim. Im protesting not that it can happen, but that it happens way to often. So yes in that i think numbers should be adjusted.
A combined arms force or infantry of a certain size or bigger. Very rarely would totally disintegrate. 1-2 btns might be supprised, but not 100% with faced cav with alone. Yes i say cav alone again cuz the ratio of guns would negate tactical use of the french horse art. I mean in in battles where teh spaniard totally rout and is pursuited for miles. That happens numerous times tbut they hardly never take over 50% of the total force. More so if counting retreat casulties but still overall counting that rarely over 50% in all.

This is '06 but a pre Jena situasion. No loss of cohesion through national moral loss. Its a fresh army. This really cant compare with the post Jena surrenders of the prussian army as the NM level would make the prussian units so low in cohesion that such was possible. Thats not the case here.


Accepting that the fact that the prussian could have routed for sake of argument and the fact it can happen.

Second point is then if all the prussian units routed, why so high french cav losses?
Any reason in engine that makes that happen?

50% is ALOT in a battle especially if against a routed enemy. I'd expect closer to a few hundre.

b) cavalry charge. Cavalry seeks to charge weakened or shaken infantry elements. Generally this is done by firing on them with artillery or infantry, and then at close range your cavalry will do the charge. Remove the infantry (or elements having a range), and your cavalry won't be used optimally because all enemy regiments will still have their full discipline and cohesion for contact.

This is perfectly fine and if u had all combined art thats how it works in theory and better in general in the engine, IMO.

If u dont have full combined arms situasion the above would rarely happen.
Just having art along aka as ur ranged element in the above, dont force the descriped situasion.
Assuming the opponent doenst have any art ok then u could shoot up the opponent inf and make it ripe for charges.

Problems comes from no counter battery fire included.
In case u have 2 sides.
1 with art and cav
Other with inf and art.
95% of times side with cav and art can use their art since counter battery fire will happen and if the attacking side would try and get close with own art chances are they would be shoot up by opponets art, unless superior numbers of art meaning enemy cant cover all of the front.
Leading to a stand off. Neither can come to grips and hurt the other side. A factor out of the ordinary would would have to be present to change that tactical deadlock. Weather, supprise or some thing else.

Question can engine handle a stand off type battle?
Or does the above descriped non combined arms sitasion happen as a rule.
The Cav and art side automaticly have its art shoot up the opponets inf making it ripe for charge. Since there is no provision or having art being pacified/ negated/locked in counter battety fire with by other sides art. There is a general adversion to bring own art in close if exposed to art fire.

If that it true it reverts to my original issue. The majority of times in which Arnauds battle example occures u dont see a stand off but a situasion as happens where art fires on inf = ripe for cav attack = result ends as arnauds battles examples does. That it simply happens to easily.

My statement is that such a situasion that will happen very rarely. Tacticaly cuz of the combined arms.
Ok combined arms isnt included in engine i get that since its really above that.

What can then be done since neither combined arms nor what happens tacticly can or should be represented in the engine. To allow for when such an situasion happens operationally as with Arnaud battle example. To make sure that the end result is more in line with what a end result would be Historicly. Read that stand off would happen in teh far majority of such cases.

Im short how does the engine handle/ whats is end result, in battles where there isnt present all arms on both sides.

Second problem.
In battles with all arm present on both sides that falls within the category of a ordinary type of battle
Does cav charge to much? / is the conditions for it to happen, set to high.
Just look at the battle results in Ltrs excellent AAR. Again there are the examples of cav dying in drows as is more or less my experience in near 50% of all battles i fight.
Either they charge to often or when they do, the die way to easily or more likely a combination of those.

From read some of my battle logs but i wont claim to be an expert.
Im a run of the mill type of battle, with all arms present at both sides, the following happens.
1. Art fire on enemy which triggers the cav to charge since enemy is "shaken".
2. Cav charges forward but since no counter battery fire happens it becomes charge of the light bde. Right into the mouth of the unshaken enemy art.
3. The mothers of the dead cavalry men, cries. As numerous at times 100% full strength regiments is wiped from the digital face of the earth.

Problems with that. Making any attack against unsuppresed art is deadly. The majority of times u engage in counter battery fire too supprese the other side's art. At leased part of ur art would in preperation for an attack to try and supprese oppoents art. Assuming he has any or u have superior numbers in art.
If other side started to lose the exchange and pulled art then we can some of the conditions for an assult is present.
That would naturally reduce cav charges since few examples of shaken inf with unshaken art would be present.

Are there example of it happening any way, ofc. Nothing is certain in battle.
Case 2. Cav attack in such a case would naturallly tend take more casulties then if an enemy was nysuppresed, but still not as bloody as present. I hardly go by a battle with out a cav regiment or numerous is eliminated from 100% strength.
This never happens in history. Elements/regiments would have to be below strength or be only part of regiment.
Leading me to think that the conditions in which cav breaks of a charge is to high. A regiment or what ever force would break of the attack a long time before reaching 100% casulties.


I agree om the frontage rules as such. The prussians might not by that have been able to deploy all of their guns. Non the less and it might be a thing to look over. If frontage is pure a question of elements.
In this case u gave 43 french elements with 7 of them art.
While prussian have 24 and 10 is art a very high percentage. Still in actual man at teh field teh look is different.
The french elements per element is very weak, where as prussian compared are much higher. Since tho 10 are art they have 8500 men present. More than the french or very close so by that they should be able to at least field as many guns if not more than the french.

Kind regards,

Rasmus