Help support TMP


"allies in 'General D'armee'" Topic


13 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Napoleonic Discussion Message Board



676 hits since 26 Nov 2017
©1994-2017 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Personal logo ochoin Supporting Member of TMP26 Nov 2017 1:26 p.m. PST

I'm working towards a first game using my British army.
Having some historical knowledge, I'm aware the various British armies nearly always were accompanied by allies.

The game will be set in the 1815 period in the Low Countries. So if I have an OOB of 3-4 British brigades (may contain Germans) & 1-2 Dutch brigades should I consider a mod to the command & control or just treat all the brigades as equally under the command of the force's general?

Personal logo ColCampbell Supporting Member of TMP26 Nov 2017 4:26 p.m. PST

You can't go too far wrong with actual orders of battle, especially for the 100 Days campaign. Although in French, you should be able to figure the actual order of battle of Wellington's army from here: link

The author of this web site has done a great deal of research into organizations and uniforms. This is a "go-to" site for the 100 Days campaign.

Jim

Personal logo ochoin Supporting Member of TMP26 Nov 2017 7:26 p.m. PST

My apologies, I did not explain myself clearly.

I am not after OOBs.

I refer to the General D'armee Napoleonic rule set.
Those of you who know the rules understand at their heart is command & control. The chief mechanism for this is generating enough ADCs to carry an order to a brigade general.

The mechanism works partly through historical precedent but mostly through a dice roll.

My question is that a British army (typically with 4-7 brigades I indicated) should experience additional difficulties in sending orders to allied brigades or not. difficulties in

Marc at work27 Nov 2017 4:02 a.m. PST

Interesting question. Some sort of penalty may be appropriate due to the command and control difficulties present. But another approach may be some form of random chance card

John de Terre Neuve Supporting Member of TMP27 Nov 2017 5:14 a.m. PST

My question is that a British army (typically with 4-7 brigades I indicated) should experience additional difficulties in sending orders to allied brigades or not. difficulties in

I have played 5-6 games now and it is a great ruleset. I am not really sure of probabilities (that type of maths make my head hurt) but I find the more times I have to test whether a brigade will become hesitant or not the more likely they will become so on a dice roll.

There is no real mechanism in the ruleset that affects allied brigades. I suppose you could make them hesitant on a roll of 1,2,3 rather than 1 or 2. I am not really sure who you would apply this to; the KGL, Hanoverians, Portuguese etc would be all as responsive to orders as the British. Maybe the Dutch-Belgians might be more hesitant and when testing you could use a 1,2,3 roll.

John

Personal logo ochoin Supporting Member of TMP27 Nov 2017 5:28 a.m. PST

If you look at the Command & Control mechanism, you ask yourself why a brigade wouldn't follow orders (ie not get allocated an ADC according to the rule mechanism).

I would think a delay or disinclination to comply with orders from a superior would usually stem from factors such a lack of confidence in your superiors, an inability to conform to instructions because of poor training or the local situation, failure to understand the orders or perhaps even to receive them.

Surely all nationalities could be prey to such factors, particularly in the heat of battle. However, and this is my question, would the various Dutch, Brunswick, Belgian or German brigades of a British-led army be more prey to these factors than a British brigade?

JdTN cites the D-Bs. This would be due to their inexperience, I would presume? His suggested tweak would work well, BTW.

Any examples of bloody-mindedness from the allies? Not that I'd suggest possible British arrogance would get up anyone's nose……

John de Terre Neuve Supporting Member of TMP27 Nov 2017 6:15 a.m. PST

Surely all nationalities could be prey to such factors, particularly in the heat of battle. However, and this is my question, would the various Dutch, Brunswick, Belgian or German brigades of a British-led army be more prey to these factors than a British brigade?

I find this a very interesting topic. One could also compile a list for the French allies.

I am really no expert, but as mentioned I think the German brigades would be as responsive as the British. For Waterloo I think the Brunswickers would also be rated as British. I just do not have the knowledge base to tease out the D-B brigades and their leadership which would also be key.

I should also note that the rulebook already has an process to rate poor brigade leadership in that you have to attach an extra ADC for certain brigades to test for hesitancy.

I will cross post this topic to the TFL forum. link

John

DeRuyter Supporting Member of TMP27 Nov 2017 10:10 a.m. PST

Ironically it was the DB second division commander and the Prince of Oranges Chief of Staff who decided to stay put at Quatre Bras thus holding the flank for Wellington to move up.

Keep in mind that many of the DB general officers had experience serving in the French army.

Personal logo ochoin Supporting Member of TMP27 Nov 2017 12:19 p.m. PST

I'm wondering if it might be enough simply to do this?

Put my Prince of Orange figure with the British army general figure.

When dicing for ADCs, use 2 different colours of dice: the one applying only to the British et al & the others to the D-Bs. Thus, only a "command" from PoO could move the D-Bs & the same would apply to the British/KGl.

huevans01127 Nov 2017 1:02 p.m. PST

I believe historically there was no such problem. The D-B senior officers were all pretty experienced – with the exception of the Prince himself. They had all served under Bonaparte in various campaigns!!!!!!

And the Duke of W had a sufficiently good military reputation that he was obeyed without any quibble.

Personal logo ochoin Supporting Member of TMP27 Nov 2017 2:39 p.m. PST

I believe historically there was no such problem.

Read further up the thread:

Ironically it was the DB second division commander and the Prince of Oranges Chief of Staff who decided to stay put at Quatre Bras thus holding the flank for Wellington

Contrary to orders.

Personal logo ochoin Supporting Member of TMP29 Nov 2017 1:33 a.m. PST

Somewhere down the track, we'll stage a "mega-game" with 'General D'armee': several players a side.

One of the things I am most looking forward to is when the C-I-C allocates the available ADCs & has to tell one or more of his team there aren't enough to go a round.

This should develop a little bit of genuine frisson amongst the real commanders!

Musketier Supporting Member of TMP29 Nov 2017 11:30 a.m. PST

From what I've read about the Hundred Days over the years, I cannot recall any instance of such difficulties IN BATTLE, which is what GdA is concerned with. If anything, it was the Prince of Orange's tendency to inject himself into the chain of command and countermand someone else's orders that led to minor disasters both at Quatre Bras and at Waterloo. This had nothing to do with the troops' nationality however, and would be difficult to model on the tabletop – unless you have a player that thrives on chaos, and give him a roving brief?

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.