For example, if the French lost 4 infantry, 2 cavalry and a gunner, against the Prussian losses respectively of 3, 3, and 2, then both sides would receive back 3 infantry, 2 cavalry and 1 gunner. The net French loss would then be 1 infantry; the Prussian net loss, 1 cavalry and 1 gunner. If during an action a formation lost its gunners and was forced to retreat, the gun would still go with the rest of the corps, and would be lost only it the formation received no gunners back 'overnight'.
Having said all that, two issues cropped up during the course of the campaign:
1. What to do about 'losses' to commanders? In contrast to the Waterloo campaign, and given the amount of action in this one, Corps and Army commanders were dropping like flies. About halfway through I decided to treat 'General staff' casualties like the other arms. Only the excess of 'GS' losses by one side over the other would be totally lost - in necessary, the unlucky wight(s) being chosen by a die roll.
2. The overall attrition rate seemed under this system to be rather too low. A badly defeated force might well get reconstituted overnight back to full strength. This happened to Prinz Louis's command very early on: almost completely wiped out at Hof, but coming back at near full strength to oppose Soult's push towards Leipzig.
My tentative solution, not used in this campaign, is to subtract one figure per arm from the overnight returns. In the example above both sides would get back 2 infantry, 1 cavalry and no gunners. French net loss would be 2 infantry, 1 cavalry and 1 gunner; Prussian net loss 1 infantry, 2 cavalry and 2 gunners. I should note that once events gets pretty lively, the daily losses are a deal heavier, but so are the returns. The only compulsory losses amount to one element only of each arm that incurs a loss.
1. What to do about 'losses' to commanders? In contrast to the Waterloo campaign, and given the amount of action in this one, Corps and Army commanders were dropping like flies. About halfway through I decided to treat 'General staff' casualties like the other arms. Only the excess of 'GS' losses by one side over the other would be totally lost - in necessary, the unlucky wight(s) being chosen by a die roll.
2. The overall attrition rate seemed under this system to be rather too low. A badly defeated force might well get reconstituted overnight back to full strength. This happened to Prinz Louis's command very early on: almost completely wiped out at Hof, but coming back at near full strength to oppose Soult's push towards Leipzig.
My tentative solution, not used in this campaign, is to subtract one figure per arm from the overnight returns. In the example above both sides would get back 2 infantry, 1 cavalry and no gunners. French net loss would be 2 infantry, 1 cavalry and 1 gunner; Prussian net loss 1 infantry, 2 cavalry and 2 gunners. I should note that once events gets pretty lively, the daily losses are a deal heavier, but so are the returns. The only compulsory losses amount to one element only of each arm that incurs a loss.
 |
| The campaign begins: French columns traversing the Thuringerwald into the plains north. |
For the rest of this posting, and probably the next as well, I hope a coherent and comprehensible narrative will emerge from the captions in the pictures I have posted.
 |
| The same from Prussia's point of view. |
To be continued...
Hi Ion, what an interesting battlefield - it would totally exhaust my building collection. The point on ‘leader churn’ being system dependent is important. I like the game Never Mind the Billhooks for my Wars of the Roses, yet I stopped using it for my WotR campaign, because it is too heavy on leader loss and my ‘characters’ would be killed off too quickly for the sake of a longer narrative that is family and title based.
ReplyDeleteDespite Augereau’s serious defeat, if the French could concentrate another corps to support Bernadotte and Soult, would that be enough to regain the initiative.
Norm -
DeleteOvernight I came up with the notion that rolling a 6 will, along with a 5 or 6, result in an infantry loss, but with a chance of a leader casualty.
As it happens, there are two French Army Corps yet to see action: Davout's III and Ney's VI. We'll see how they get on next time. The Imperial guard might have something to say as well. For their part, the whole Prussian army has seen at least some action by now.
Cheers,
Ion
Cheers,
Ion
I'm very keen to try this campaign out. When I ran your Waterloo campaign, I returned losses each day, but did it on a per Corps basis, and within each Corps it was only half the losses returned, fractions rounded down for gunners and cavalry, rounded up for infantry. That seemed to work quite well in terms of pace, but I was also using 2 hits per element, rather than just one. Anyway, I'll get this one set up at some point and give it a go. I like the idea of the intermeshed turns, that is similar to what we do for operational WW1 games.
ReplyDeleteMartin -
Delete'Per corps' loss returns would be sensible, but I made my overnight returns on a less formal basis, pretty much spreading them around. The calculation of returns led to a very low rate of attrition, especially as whoever incurred the fewer losses pretty much got the whole lot back.
Were I using a 2-hit per element loss, I'd probably not trouble with the overnight returns. I'd have to think about that anyhow.
The 'intermeshed turns' did rather depreciate the value of Napoleon's leadership - in fact there were at least two game turns in which the Prussians drew at least 6 of the number 8 (half of the 16 chits) and below. That proved very troublesome for the French! I haven't been able to think of a method of building in Napoleon's leadership (let alone that of the likes of Davout and Lannes). Napoleon did draw a chit (none of the other leaders did), could move independently, and added his own figure to the unit count in combat, but that was about it. Not much of a margin. Mind you, if he drew low and the formation he was with drew high, his could override theirs. But that chance didn't crop up very often.
Did you write up your Waterloo campaign? I don't recall seeing it.
Cheers,
Ion
Martin -
DeleteI had another look. Seems I did see it at the time.
I liked your Chancellorsville as a candidate for this type of game. Come to think of it, The ACW might have quite a few possibilities there, depending upon scale. Bragg's invasion of Kentucky and possibly Lee's first 'march north' seem to me likely candidates, too.
Cheers,
Ion
Lots of action there Ion. ⚔️⚔️⚔️ Let’s hope the Frenchies have bitten off more than they can chew.
ReplyDeletePlaying solo, if things don’t turn out “quite as I’d expect” due to unfortunate dice rolls or whatever then I tend to apply a “reasonable” adjustment. You mentioned the attrition/recovery rate didn’t seem right - well, if that’s the case, then perhaps you need to revisit that aspect of your rules.
Cheers,
Geoff
Geoff,
DeleteThe attrition rate in my Waterloo game seemed rather too high, which rapidly degraded the fighting value of the Corps formations. In this Jena campaign, the attrition rate was a trifle too low, I think. I think I might have found a possible solution.
Cheers,
Ion.
Archduke Piccolo,
ReplyDeleteI like the way your hybrid rules and the casualty replacement system work. I also like the captioned photographs, which I think explains the action easier than trying to relate the text to the associated image.
I am hoping to set up a similar campaign someday, but at the moment my table is laden with figures and vehicles whose bases I am flocking.
All the best,
Bob
Bob -
DeleteIt's all go at the mouse factory, eh? I find that the captioning form of narration adds a little drama to the story. It seems to be a good method of relating complicated action, too.
Cheers,
Ion
Very interesting so far, things still seem very much up in the air. Looking forward to part two.
ReplyDeleteCheers, Mark -
DeleteIt's not looking all that great for the French at this point: slowly advancing on the right, maybe, but held up around Saalfeld, and looking dire back behind the Thuringerwald... Napoleon got very little advantage from being Napoleon in THIS campaign!
All the best,
Ion
The Prussians are much better coordinated this time around!
DeleteWhat a great idea with the captions on tables. I have enjoyed the campaign movement much more than through other methods of explaining.
ReplyDeleteThank you! I think I might use this story-telling technique more often in future. It seems to impose a useful narrative discipline as well.
DeleteCheers,
Ion