| Merovee63 | 21 Mar 2017 3:43 a.m. PST |
Good evening,
We are writing a rule house and I ask myself some questions about supports.
By studying the napoleonic tactics, we notice that for the mixed order for example,the battalions in column of attack which is on sides allow of protect on-line battalion and to support him.In our rule as in many of the others, we give +1 no support for the battalions which are in side or back support until +3.
Did the battalions in support really bring a fire power or was it more a question of morale to feel steady?
Indeed, I wonder whether all the troops around the fight, in a reasonable distance, could bring a support? |
| 21eRegt | 21 Mar 2017 7:55 a.m. PST |
The idea of "mixed order" really stems from the Revolutionary days. The new demi-brigades had one battalion of Ancien Regime troops that normally served in line and provided the firepower base. The columns were the Sans Culottes and other poorly trained troops. Each mutually benefited from the formation. Should the firepower cause the enemy to waver the columns were ready to charge in and break the line. So the emphasis was less on firepower from the supporting battalions, than skirmishing and potential shock action. |
| Merovee63 | 21 Mar 2017 10:15 a.m. PST |
Yes but did the battalions in support really bring a fire power or was it more a question of morale to feel steady?
Indeed, I wonder whether all the troops around the fight, in a reasonable distance, could bring a support? |
 McLaddie  | 21 Mar 2017 11:30 a.m. PST |
The mixed formation was basically a way to protect the flanks of the battalions in line formations, particularly protect them from cavalry. You see this formation used any number of times during the Napoleonic Wars. Myer's brigade at Albuera used it, for instance. |
| Sparta | 21 Mar 2017 11:43 a.m. PST |
It is a persistent myth that the early volunteers fought in column. Whereas they propably foght in swarms or a la debandade. Paddy Griffiths describes how the order mix might just as well be first line in line or en bataille with second line in columns of waiting |
| Chad47 | 21 Mar 2017 11:53 a.m. PST |
The new Demi-brigades were reorganised at company level. My understanding is the The 2:1 battalion mix was the embrigadement not the amalgame and preceded the latter. Lynn quotes a source that makes it clear that some demibrigades consisted of volunteers only. |
| vtsaogames | 21 Mar 2017 12:04 p.m. PST |
I think the amalgame is pretty much anything after Valmy. |
| von Winterfeldt | 21 Mar 2017 2:27 p.m. PST |
regardless of what tactical formation, there were usually two or three battle lines, they were essential in case the first line was broken to form a tactical reserve – also with the ordre profond it provided not only a reserve but any tactical option
I agree with Chad47 – that the new demi brigades de bataille were re organised at company level, but in 1794 it was at least aimed for one regular and two volunteers battalion, but the battalions were broken up and out of those three basic battalions three new ones were formed. |
| evilgong | 21 Mar 2017 3:22 p.m. PST |
The OP's question is hard to answer in ignorance of other parts of his rules. Generally speaking I'm suspicious of 'support = +1' style rules, but that might depend on the scale of representation and what the 'combat' rules are meant to encompass. For example are they combat and reactions combined, or is there a separate morale process. Units support each other for a reason, to cover flanks (perhaps against cavalry as mentioned above), to be a refuge for retreats, to be ready to exploit success, etc. So in one sense, depending on the scale of depiction, you don't need 'support' rules as players will so position units and see the advantages conferred through the command and control rules. regards David F Brown |
paints the Dogman from the Flintloque starter set.
