"How do we come to troop ratings?" Topic

Thx David,

I read that British Guards btlns were recruited NO differently than the average Line btln, drawing men from the streets and throwing a uniform on them and drilling them into the ground. The only differences are that the Guards had preference with gaining supplies, higher btln establishments, prestigue of station and fluffier uniforms. They fought no differently than the average Line btln and in many cases it is recorded they could fight indifferently.

The Light Division however, although recruited the exact same way were constantly in the forefront of the fighting, called upon to lead the army in advance guards or rear guard actions and perform many other dangerous duties. Their commander (both of them) were probably the best British Generals of the army and the men felt an air of espree de corps above the typical British Division.

I don't own a British army (I prefer the French) however, I do like using them in battle as I do many other countries forces to learn their tactics, doctrine and style of fighting and I have to say they are an army that no matter the composition you can always depend on them in battle, especially the Light Division.

Shane.

usually ratings are based on 20/20 hindsight or on the bias of the raters.
Since no one can know all factors or even properly identify them, defining 'quality' is pretty arbitrary at best. Napoleons soldiers felt they were changing the world for the better and felt that their individual participation was important. Their opponents felt they were serving because of bad luck. This is an intangible that gives a morale boost, pick a number that you think is appropriate. Said French unit is defeated because the uncaring opposition has, say better drill and leadership-different number.
The problem is now we could be forced to factor in dozens of numbers to fit the appropriate categories. This is something that can make a set of miniatures rules look great on paper but be more like work than play. Not only that but it produces more areas of disagreement.
After all my above blather, I would say, if using ratings, base them on the agreed biases of the players as opposed to any hard wired rules. Just leave some hard upper-lower limits to keep things reasonable. Well, that solved nothing…

On Guards and the Light Division, a couple of small comments.

The Guards did have a benefit that the men got paid more than in an ordinary Line regiment, and stayed in London when not on campaign. Thus they tended to get the pick of any volunteers in the London area.

The original battalions of the Light Division had, at the start, a massive benefit no other regiments had, indeed most had the reverse. Dundas had permitted all underperforming officers to be transferred out by the commanders and the pick of the rest of the army transferred in; then of course there was the constant battle training in camp as battalions before the campaign. A luxury few regiments were granted.
If after all this they had failed to be noticeably better than standard Line regiments one would have assume training and officer quality were irrelevant to performance in combat.

But, quantifying all this is still really a hindsight art of +/- 10% than being able to say +1.7658% per quality officer or 3 days of battle training.