Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

On light and regular infantry

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> John Tiller's Battleground Series >> On light and regular infantry Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
On light and regular infantry - 4/30/2008 9:19:44 PM   
Rhetor

 

Posts: 116
Joined: 1/31/2005
From: Gdansk, Poland
Status: offline
In Napoleonic BGs the difference between line and light infantry is rigid. Only "light" units (V in oob file) can deploy more than one skirmisher company, all the others (I in oob file) can deploy only one, and that only at full strength.

However, on the battlefield quite often entire line infantry battalions deployed in skirmish order for special tasks. This is impossible in BGs. In BGs especially Polish infantry loses much of its combat capability due to the lack of proper skirmish force (no Polish regiment was named as "light"), even though at the actual Borodino battle better part of Polish 16th Division fought as a one huge skirmish force. I shall not bother you with Polish books, but there is a nice site on this:

http://napoleonistyka.atspace.com/polish_army_2.htm#polishinfantry1

The question is, was it really so that only "light" Napoleonic regiments could deploy entirely in skirmish lines?



< Message edited by Rhetor -- 4/30/2008 9:20:23 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: On light and regular infantry - 5/4/2008 2:33:21 PM   
Ashantai

 

Posts: 137
Joined: 10/16/2006
Status: offline
I believe it is done more for gameplay purposes. Sure, units could do this or that, dragoons could dismount and so on, but it'd be impractical to have a whole army turning into skirmishers.

Besides, there's nothing stopping you editing all of the OOBs....

(in reply to Rhetor)
Post #: 2
RE: On light and regular infantry - 5/4/2008 10:46:39 PM   
Rhetor

 

Posts: 116
Joined: 1/31/2005
From: Gdansk, Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ashantai

I believe it is done more for gameplay purposes. Sure, units could do this or that, dragoons could dismount and so on, but it'd be impractical to have a whole army turning into skirmishers.


I believe that even if it was possible, it would be impractical to have a whole army turning into skirmishers :D


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ashantai
Besides, there's nothing stopping you editing all of the OOBs....


I do that all the time :)
Currently I am vainly trying to decrease the "strength point" from 25 men into 10 men. Someone has done it in Civil War Battlegrounds; in Napoleonic BGs id doesn't work well; maybe I am missing something in the pdt files; the only help I have found is for HPS Campaign pdt's, which might be slightly different.

(in reply to Ashantai)
Post #: 3
RE: On light and regular infantry - 5/5/2008 2:36:34 PM   
Grell

 

Posts: 1064
Joined: 4/1/2004
From: Canada
Status: offline
It is my view that in some cases entire French divisions deployed in skirmish order, especially in the early years. Neither Matrix BG games nor HPS games reflect this fact.

Regards,

Greg

_____________________________


(in reply to Rhetor)
Post #: 4
RE: On light and regular infantry - 5/8/2008 3:30:00 AM   
Ashantai

 

Posts: 137
Joined: 10/16/2006
Status: offline
Maybe they don't, but nor do they reflect every fact. It is a game, remember, it must be playable. For the same reason that ACW infantry are not disordered by woods, so turning a whole division into skirmishers would be very...unusual, to be sure.

Rhetor, there is a PDT explanation on the old http://www.hist-sdc.com/ site for the TS games.

I once did a massive rework, doing it by 5 man incriments. The problem is that you have to completely rewrite the fire and melee tables, extend them out to 60x60, which is long and complex. It can be done, it is just complex.

(in reply to Grell)
Post #: 5
RE: On light and regular infantry - 5/8/2008 8:59:27 AM   
Rhetor

 

Posts: 116
Joined: 1/31/2005
From: Gdansk, Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ashantai
Rhetor, there is a PDT explanation on the old http://www.hist-sdc.com/ site for the TS games.


The only one I have found is the one for HPS Waterloo Campaign
http://www.hist-sdc.com/waterloo/pdt.html

I have been using the pdt file explanation from Stephane Chicouri's page:

http://www.cobexlaw.com/engineering/eng%20pdt.htm

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ashantai
I once did a massive rework, doing it by 5 man incriments. The problem is that you have to completely rewrite the fire and melee tables, extend them out to 60x60, which is long and complex. It can be done, it is just complex.


I have changed the entire oob file for one of Katzbach scenarios into 10-men strength points. I have changed the stacking data and the strength factor in line 6 of the pdt file. But when I launch the scenario, all the units strengths are about 1/3 - 1/2 of their nominal strength (the numbers show in yellow, as if the unit had many squadrons detached or sustained heavy losses; right mouse button click reveals the correct initial strength; all in 10-men units). At that I have given up trying.

(in reply to Ashantai)
Post #: 6
RE: On light and regular infantry - 5/9/2008 2:51:32 AM   
Ashantai

 

Posts: 137
Joined: 10/16/2006
Status: offline
That's the problem, you have to make your own, new maps, as the old ones will show the strengths the game was designed with.

(in reply to Rhetor)
Post #: 7
RE: On light and regular infantry - 5/9/2008 8:12:48 AM   
Rhetor

 

Posts: 116
Joined: 1/31/2005
From: Gdansk, Poland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ashantai

That's the problem, you have to make your own, new maps, as the old ones will show the strengths the game was designed with.


I wonder what is the difference in Civil War BG - Norris and Frost's scenarios with 10-men strengths work fine on every map.

Edit: I got it! I just have to edit the strengths in the scenario. Too bad the editor files were not included in Matrix release - luckily I still have the BG:NIR CD.

Edit2: A quick test showed that I can redo the game in 1-men strengths as well. But that would require a really massive changes either in fire/melee tables, or in weapon effectiveness.

< Message edited by Rhetor -- 5/9/2008 9:23:19 AM >

(in reply to Ashantai)
Post #: 8
RE: On light and regular infantry - 5/11/2008 10:37:02 PM   
Ashantai

 

Posts: 137
Joined: 10/16/2006
Status: offline
That's true. You'd need 300 lines across to do that. While it would be possible to do...would you really want to?

(in reply to Rhetor)
Post #: 9
RE: On light and regular infantry - 5/11/2008 11:10:20 PM   
Rhetor

 

Posts: 116
Joined: 1/31/2005
From: Gdansk, Poland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ashantai

That's true. You'd need 300 lines across to do that. While it would be possible to do...would you really want to?


I shall stick with the 10-men strenghts. Anyway, fatigue is way more important a factor than actual losses of a unit, since it is fatigue that increases the possibility of getting disorganized or routed. In my current pdts casualties are significantly lower (I have somewhat reduced the losses + each point means now 10, not 25 men), while chance of causing fatigue is higher. Fatigue recovery rates are also beefed up.
Therefore while reducing actual losses, the units still suffer very badly when under heavy fire.

(in reply to Ashantai)
Post #: 10
RE: On light and regular infantry - 5/13/2008 4:48:10 AM   
Ashantai

 

Posts: 137
Joined: 10/16/2006
Status: offline
That's a good policy.

(in reply to Rhetor)
Post #: 11
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> John Tiller's Battleground Series >> On light and regular infantry Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.176