A follow up on some observations on cavalry - a bit of evidence

The above quotes is from Warnery's "Remarks on Cavalry" and is a description of how a cavalry charge works. It lists the various stages that a charge goes through, what it does not list except for the last part is the distances involved. Now while a horse can accelerate quickly upto a gallop. A unit of cavalry is required to be perfectly dressed at least at the start and only at the last 20 paces should maximum speed be reached as it will minimize any disorder that occurs.
This would suggest that there is a case for treating cavalry like a ranged weapon with different effectiveness according to the distance traveled. It might worthwhile at this stage to see if anybody else has implemented a similar system and the complexities involved.

Some observations on cavalry

I am currently reading "His Britannic Majesty's army in Germany" and I just read his section upon the Battle of Minden. The battle is unique because of the attack of the British and Hanoverian infantry upon the French cavalry and its defeat of them.

This is considered an unusual feat of arms as infantry rarely attack and defeat cavalry. So how could it happen? Cavalry's power lies in its mobility and if you rely upon the sword as did the French cavalry it is specifically the ability to move forward and charge. The redcoats are described as moving swiftly forward and by moving across the front of another French unit achieved a measure of tactical surprise upon the cavalry. The French cavalry had to either charge or allow the redcoats to close to musket range, well I suppose they could also have have retired. Forced to charge the now stationary infantry a single volley was enough to defeat these cavalry for the day. This was no fluke as the French committed their second line and it suffered a similar fate. After this the redcoats moved forward pushing a bulge into the French lines and allowing access to their flanks and rear. The French now launched a third attack with their reserve cavalry to take advantage of that opportunity. Now assailed on all sides the redcoats held firm while supporting troops came upto their support and helped drive off the French. Three times infantry defeated fresh cavalry including some of the best in Europe.

Well again how could it happen? The thing that struck me was that the infantry were moving forward and forcing a response from the cavalry. Normally we assume that cavalry as a shock weapon gains its benefit as moves into contact with the enemy and functions as a single fixed value that never changes. But cavalry is a weapon based upon mobility what if as the speed of the horse changes so does its combat power. So it functions more as a ranged weapon with a short range of reduced efficiency as the unit accelerates to the charge, a medium range of maximum efficiency as the unit is at full charge speed and long range as the unit fails to maintain speed and cohesion.

Just something to think about for the moment.

A command system

Here is an idea for a command system.

It explores a couple of ideas that interest me as capturing the nature of fighting a battle.

The first is that a small unit activates easier than a large unit, the counter to that is that a large combat unit has greater combat power.

Second is that players are generals and that they are now in direct competition as commanders not as fighters. 

Third the level of combat intensity is to a degree within the players control.

Now to illustrate this I will use a stylised representation of command  with a major general commanding a brigade, a lieutenant general commanding a division, a full general a corp and you the player controlling the army.

Give each player an activation chit for each general in his army.

Players roll a competitive die roll. Winner selects a command to activate.

Roll a D10 to activate general and his command

• 10 all fail
• 9 MG activate
• 8 LG  and lower activates
• 6 General and lower activates
• 1-6 all commanders activates

A failure to activate means the chit is lost and the cycle begins again.

A successful activation allows that commander to move all his units. A higher level general will be able to exclude sub-commanders and their troops from the move. All those troops selected to move will conduct a single move with everybody moving the same distance and direction.

If there is no combat then you begin again.

If there is combat, begin resolving them. Now if the non-activating player wins a combat they will get the opportunity to force the active player to lose his activation chit by asking for another activation test. This will force the current chit to be lost. The currently active player must select the general he currently has engaged in combat.

If the active player successfully wins all combats  the activation chit is lost and new test begins. He will have the option to use that command again.

Once all the chits are used then the turn is over.

There that's the basic idea. I think it has some merit and it is ready for scrutiny.