"A standard tactic you consistently used in your games" Topic

let me start by saying that my happiest and most enjoyable wargames ever were the many large scale battles we have played in 15mm Napoleonics through the last 46 years.
There is hardly a historical battle we have not played at least one as well as many campaigns.

Did you ever have a tactic you consistently used in your deployment and plans ?
Mine was to set up in a defensive posture, wait for my enemy to move and commit/reveal their plan and then attack. I would almot always keep a large cavalry reserve with the figure representing me -- so as to exploit any obvious weakness. I ran over an entire French grand battery once with 6 regiments of Austrian currsissiers when the battery was left on a ridge with virtually no support.
I had very good success with this tactic through the years although some of my more erstwhile opponents began to develop counters.
What about you ?

Best regards
Russ Dunaway

You can tell by my screen name that I love cavalry and I will always ride to the sound of the guns! People always say the are ready for it, but they rarely are.

For both historical and fantasy gaming, really for any period or genre…I like overloading a flank and attempt to overwhelm the opposition facing them and roll the line. I try to keep things simple and maintain the initiative. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.

If I know the players,
I usually screen/probe the more defensive players
and weight the attack on the other flank.
Because most players play the same way regardless of the period

Maneuvers and feints with light cavalry to draw the opponent into shifting position and opening up a weakness for the actual attack.

Why the assumption that we don't still play?

Two or three really. One was to mass pretty well every gun I had together and destroy enemy units opposite one at a time in succession. Six or eight foot batteries would normally destroy a line battalion in one move from 800 yards. The opponent either sucked up the losses or hastily rethought his dispositions, either of which was a result.

To counter this when people started doing it to me, I would form hussars in skirmish order, manoeuvre towards one end of the gun line and then charge the endmost battery. The cavalry would usually reach it unscathed, massacre the crew, then move to the next, by which time the gun crews would be starting to rout in succession. Alternatively I would send whole battalions of riflemen forward in skirmish order to shoot up the gun crews. At some level of loss the gunners would be forced to test morale. As soon as one crew retreated or routed, the adjacent crews would all do so in sympathy.

The most gamey ruse exploited the fact that columns took 1/4 a move to form square, but cavalry were committed to their charge (i.e. could not stop) after half a move. So I would advance three or four battalions in echelon towards the enemy line to trigger a cavalry charge. Once committed, i.e. at the halfway point, the cavalry had to continue, but I still had time to form squares. So I'd be in square by the time the cavalry arrived. They would flow ineffectually around the squares and get shot up by all 12 or 16 faces. Once the cavalry has routed, the squares reform back into column and resume their advance.

The first two above you could actually have done, but not the third.

Keep my eyes on the prize. Work to secure the objective and have my opponent react to me.

Basic Hammer and Anvil when I can

I also used a Grand battery tactic where I would try to lure my opponents into counter battery fire as I moved my armies across the field unmolested by art. fire.
It worked several times.

Russ Dunaway

None really.
What I learned was that the 'gamesmanship' of rules usage was greater than the effort to produce an historical type game.

After years of losing so many and often (WRGx ) I left competitions and became an organiser instead- facilitating others enjoyment ;-).

The with emergence of 'thought' games and D&D it was obvious- umpired and organised 'moderated' historical games became the norm (call them quasi-campaign based) and I believe I've managed to convert a few people to this less frustrating, more interesting and thoughtful application of their knowledge. Or given them some when they were novices of the era…
d

I don't do or never have done competitions. Our group has used the very heavy modified WRG musket and ball rules for many years.
We feel that our rules give very reasonable results one could expect for a period.
We have never jumped from rule set to rule set -- instead modifying so we feel they give a reasonable result.
Including such options as the possibility thunderstorms, ammo trains not catching up with the army, etc.

Russ Dunaway

losing…

I used to attack one flank and then rush units particularly fast moving units to the opposite flank to outnumber the enemy.

I stopped when my opponent said "you always do this" so that it was no surprise at all.

Feint a flank attack and hit a "joint" in or near center. Massed artillery before the infantry attack—I play French or Russians.

I simply hide my strength behind a hill, town, woods or off table. I show a small weak force in the open and invite the enemy to use their strength and overwhelm me. Once I see the enemy advancing I start to withdraw into the rough terrain behind. A fight occurs in the rough terrain but I continue to withdraw. The enemy excited by their success pushes forward everywhere they can. Their attack is broken up by their eagerness to overrun me and the rough terrain. As they slowly emerge from the rough terrain in a broken up formation I unleash my main force in a sold formation with artillery support, cavalry and tear them to shreds. Works almost every time. Sometimes I have to send forward my advance weak force to draw them in. That always works.

One time after a council of war with my team we realized that our starting force was too weak to hold a solid front line until reinforcements arrived. So we divided the command into the standard three sections. Two wings and a center. The two wings would show strength, which they had. I commanded the center with a weak force and would show it. All reinforcements would be directed to the wings. The plan was to entice the enemy to attack the weak force in the center and later when at full strength the wings would attack (i.e. Zulu attack, horns of the bull).

When the enemy saw our dispositions they decided to ignore the weak center as they surmised it was the same old thing (i.e. Glenn shows a weak force but has a massive reserve behind him). So they put their full weight on one flank (hidden) and displayed a strong center and flanks. The flank they attacked was able to hold them back and our other flank was able to overrun their flank, game over.

I always seem to try and get my horse round a flank then hit their centre.
Well, that and take a large left wing outflank?!

I like massed cavalry in huge outlying sweeps that upset and threaten the opponent in the flank or rear, drawing away forces from the center and giving me the initiative.