"Approaching Napoleonics Part 2" Topic

I am talking about infantry only.
Passage of Line is possible in all rule systems I am aware of. In some rules a column can pass through a column which is obnoxious. Some rules allows the passage of lines during assaults, which is in my view a manoeuvre which asks for desaster to happen.

There are surely incidents where this was done, but I guess those participants were highly trained. So it could be a special rule for certain units in my humble uninformed opinion.

If the assault through troops is possible, I only need to stack troops and feed them constantly into the melée.

Is that how napoleonics should work? Is napoleonics nothing else than Roman manipels fighting with guns and bayonets?

How many rules systems are you aware of? And at what level?

I'd have said (1) probably not possible within effective musketry range (2) tricky and requiring decent training when your basic units are battalions, but (3) not too bad if the maneuver units are brigades. You CAN break a line by continually feeding in fresh units--see Wagram--but it's a pretty expensive choice.

It is my understanding that columns were typically arranged with sufficient room to either side to deploy into line, if necessary. So if the first wave of attacking columns were repulsed, the survivors could withdraw between the gaps between the second line of columns, who would then renew the attack.

Agree that if deployment room has not been provided and the columns are adjacent without gaps, then fresh troops should not be able to pass through.

Last point – unlike Roman maniples, "stacked" units closely behind another would be subject to artillery bounce-through.

Tactics vary from country to country. Austria adopting the packed hedge hog column to counter the massive numbers of Turkish cavalry. Still used it against the French but it was less effective. In my opinion due to the close horse artillery support of their cavalry.
The French mixed column was effective but rare on the table. Effective for advancing with a line in the middle and a column on each flank.
Passage of lines should depend on the troop size of units. Yes for a company but no for a different regiment.

@robert piepenbrink: Nine (V&B, Shako2, Polemos, Grand Manoeuvres, Quatre Bras (a German rule set), Black Powder, March Attack, Valour & Fortitude, Kriegsspiel)

Right now I am switching from March Attack to Valour & Fortitude, cause my gaming buddy wants to introduce his son to wargaming and there is a language barrier. As my long time goal is doing multi-player games I need clear and simple rules.
I am using 6mm miniatures, units are battalions, cav regiments and single batteries.
My favorite authors are Nosworthy and Clausewitz(because of his fine Waterloo Campaign analysis).

@Eumelus March Attack has very nice and brutal bounce through rules, if you place the second line to close it might suffer just like the first battle line.

Time scale is important as well. Is a turn 15 minutes or an hour?

dogtail- all good rulesets and I own/played several. Usually, the stacking and mass thrust is disrupted when a failure forces a leading unit to retreat and usually (in all sets I know of) at least disordering or disrupting all the columns behind it? Or the mechanic of a limited # of rounds of combat (usually 3) will end the stack-party as well.

79thPA:
You can avoid a lot of problems if you donīt define turn length. V&F does not allow a unit to shoot and assault in one turn. With my troops shooting distance for muskets is 1.2 times the length of a bataillon. A deployed line moves three quarters of the skirmish shooting distance in one single turn, but 1/8 more than the normal shooting distance.

@CamelCase
I play post 1812 Prussian and 1809 :) French (enough cavalry :) available), so my second wave is always in column. But I opened this threat to find a reference point for future arguments, cause I want to house rule that passage of line is only possible outside of musket shooting range.
As Eumelos said columns need room to deploy, I actually place my miniatures by forming a long line first and then place the bases behind the center of each batallion, so I donīt have to measure.

@dogtail
Have you tried Emperor of the Battlefield?

Designed for players to each control a Corps.
Largest battle I have been involved in had ten players.
Fantastic game. All enjoyed it.

And remember that we as wargamers tend to pack units in too close, not giving them any room to move from column to line as Eumelus stated above. dogtail's solution in his last post above is the way all of us should be placing our units.

And just to know, I'm as guilty as any by cramming units in too close.

Jim

After my last rather small battle (I was introduced to V&F) I deployed all my French miniatures but ran out of room. So I deployed a full brigade in column. As my Bataillons are 8cm long and 2cm deep (but I have to add another 2x2cm stand cause my opponents thinks that looks better) my Brigade column already was 20cm deep (5Btl ā 4cm depth). A divisional column would be 2x20cm for the Infantry, another 10 for the artillery and a single regiment of cavalry would add at least 4cm.
In Kriegsspiel you can place the small gaming pieces on top of each other, my old baccus miniatures would lose all of their bayonets if I would do that. But I think that I canīt cramm my miniatures enough (ja I know you are talking about deployment for battle, the lengthly column I described so lengthly was for marching close to the battlefield )
@Cavcmdr I think there are a lot of good rules set out there, but one of the lesser facts of life is that not everybody has the same amazing taste as me. So unfortunately there have to be compromises.For example I prefer to use single bataillons with two bases for napoleonic, for the ACW I use brigades as units (using the Altar of Freedom rule set), but that is just what I am comfortable with. For "1871" single bases for btls would be my choice. Doesnīt mean that differently based rule sets are bad, but I think optics are a huge part of the hobby.

cheers!

Men at 22" frontage [or horsemen at 36"] per man cannot pass through each other so for units to pass through they need to be in appropriate formations. As Eumelus has observed a brigade in column has gaps in it. As it moves towards combat as reinforcements the brigade already in action must fall back between the columns. It will do this is more or less order depending on its remaining cohesion. A steady unit will withdraw with divisions manoeuvring independently to pass the gaps; a less steady one will engage in a minor retreat where every man legs it. Obviously the chances of reforming the withdrawing unit will vary according to the their method.
Was the Napoleonic War the process of passing up successive lines into combat, as far as I can see in major battles in central Europe frequently yes, there wasn't the room to do anything else. In smaller scale actions it is often simpler to extend the front and try for a flanking manoeuvre. The key question is how far from the enemy and at what time interval the replacements took place. If a division 'renews the attack an hour after it's predecessor then probably out of cannon shot, if one demi-brigade replaces another within 10-15 minutes then probably just outside effective musket range.

Was the Napoleonic War the process of passing up successive lines into combat, as far as I can see in major battles in central Europe frequently yes, there wasn't the room to do anything else.

And that is why I need French and Prussian troops in bicorne cause back then blitzkrieg saw French troops running circles around hapless Prussians I guess. But I think minor clashes gave more room to manoeuvre, too. And wargaming the campaigns in Italy gives incentive to read Principes de la guerre de montagnes from Bourcet. Napoleonics is such a big theatre of War, it is actually sad that Waterloo dwarfs almost everything

Most tactical systems make some provision for the passage of lines. The key issue here is that doing it on the drill field is one thing, doing it under fire in the face of a close enemy is another matter entirely. As an ACW reenactor, I've drilled my battalions on the passage of lines many times. The ACW tactics makes it relatively simple, while the Napoleonic system is a bit more complicated. But trying to do it in the noise, smoke, and confusion of combat (even simulated combat) is something I would have to think very hard about attempting. As noted above to try and fail could lead to disaster, not just for one line, but for both. Game rules should allow it for troops well outside immediate combat with little trouble or lost time. Once inside musket range the rules should allow for the very real chance of a disaster.

This has always puzzled me. To my reading units need more space between than gamers allow. Full interval to half interval should be largely followed, cavalry as well.

@dogtail – what is this Quatre Bras german ruleset you mentioned – i am always keen to find some german language napoleonic rulesets ( there dont seem to be many – i know of Kugelhagel and thats it)

There is a download link in the german sweetwater-forum available, I ask the author if I can put it in here.

danke, ich habe gerade das Quatre-Bras Regelwerk bei jenem Forum gefunden und runtergeladen. Es gaefaellt mir was ich soweit gelesen habe, erinnert zum teil an DBN . Overall i think quite suitable for the 2-3mm scale and basing i am doing – perhaps instead of 3inches=100metres, i could do 3cm-100m which will suit my space limitations better

@dogtail
"@Cavcmdr I think there are a lot of good rules set out there, but one of the lesser facts of life is that not everybody has the same amazing taste as me. So unfortunately there have to be compromises. For example I prefer to use single bataillons with two bases for napoleonic."

That's exactly what Emperor of the Battlefield uses in Classic mode. See his photos on the website emperorofthebattlefield.com
You can also see 28mm and his Grand scale for those with larger numbers in their units.