Cavalry Tactics

[david53]

Hi There

After our 1st 800 point game I've become aware how fragile Cavalry are.

Being new we both dashed of our Cavalry to fight each other on one flank after the combat half the units were disorded and half Wavering all being spent.

Has anyone else found this whats the best tactic for them hold them back or let them ride off.

Sure I would'nt make a good cavalry commander.

Dave

[Blathergut]

We have found similar. Unlike earlier times, this horse is a one-shot tool unless hitting something already close to going down.

>Good to cause CTs on foot, esp. if somehow you end up within 2MU, but making foot that is disordered take a test can be great if timed right. So it seems the horse is better for that, causing or threatening to cause cohesion tests, than charging into relatively prepared foot or even other cavalry.

>Cavalry + artillery attachment could be interesting facing unreformed infantry without skirmishers.

[SirGarnet]

The horse could be used to persuade the enemy infantry to form squares, the better to shoot them or assault them with guns or foot, or on the other side position to intercept attacks on defending infantry and guns so they could remain in line. WIth Cavalry the threat is more versatile than the execution.

[deadtorius]

I agree they are more threatening than a constant weapon. I am finding them useful in the Austrian army to move up and keep the Froggie skirmishers back, causes dice loss on their medium range shooting.
Aside from managing to kill a Corps commander once who was silly enough to join in the melee of Hussars (theirs) vs Cuirassier (ours) they seem to pretty much charge in and then are done for the rest of the game so keeping them as a threat seems the best use of them, or try to get them into a wavering/ disordered enemy.

[KendallB]

If you want reusable cavalry you need to get shock heavies as they do not need to test to charge when they are spent. When you add in the POA and dice modifiers they get, they are worth the expense. I have Saxon cuirassiers (Superior Veteran shock heavy cavalry). Expensive at 80 points for a small unit but they are going to be smashing two units per game.

[pptheos]

Cavalry being almost a one-shot weapon is something I really like in FOGN.
Very different to that "Double-Based Knight General" concept...

I find cavalry usefull in:
1. skirmishing (light cavalry in single rank)
2. driving off enemy skirmishes, reducing dice in medium range
3. forcing enemy inf to form square
4. fighting lesser enemy cavalry
5. flanking, capturing LOC (especially if with attached officer)
6. taking out isolted enemy artillery batteries
7. charging weavering units, pursuing enemy broken units

One must be very carefull with the use of cavalry as it plays a great role in the overall victory points.
At the end of the game one must have fresh cavalry left as this can turn a victory to major victory. Also, spent units correspond to points lost.

[panda2]

Large scale cavalry battles in the Napoleonic period were more often than not decided by reserve lines and the ability to reform quickly once disupted. Whilst none of the games I've had so far have featured a large scale cavalry v. cavalry action as yet, I expect (or maybe hope) that this will be true in FOG N. Certainly the rules on rear support combined with ease by which cavalry become spent may mean that where you have 3 units v. 3 units the optimal solution is to only commit 2 units and keep one in reserve, rather than charge in with everything.

Andy D

[viperofmilan]

I second almost all that has been posted. Cavalry appears to function like the German "fleet in being" in WW I - most useful as a potential threat.

Not sure that we will ever see sufficient quantities of cavalry on the table to accurately reflect grand cavalry tactics such as, for instance Murat's 40+ squadron charge at Eylau. In a corps-size action, a player will at most have a small attached cavalry division, perhaps more often a brigage. In such small quantities I am not sure cavalry can ever hope to be anything but a support arm (though I have yet to see a combined arms assault - that could be very interesting).

Kevin

[BrettPT]

If you field a Cavalry Corps you can have lots of chaps on horses.
Two cavalry Corps fighting each other wuold be a grand old dustup.

[SirGarnet]

On combined arms, my question was whether a Cavalry DIvison could break infantry alone with help from guns. Cavalry with an artillery attachment can engage squares without response at medium range, but on a 4-6 to hit there is only a 1/4 chance of Disordering the square. I thought about having two Cavalry with guns attached, as with 4 dice the prospects of disorder are favorable, but in the Rulebook lists only the British or Prussians would be allowed that within a single division.

Add infantry firepower, and it becomes simple in principle and a matter of traffic management and a static opponent in practice to get a lot of shooting in. Cavalry don't need the attached guns and can hang back but within assault range while the enemy is softened up.

Cavalry charging infantry in line from the front has an important advantage but is still uncertain. Just 1 hit and they must CMT to advance. 2 hits forces Disorder that loses the extra 2 dice in an ensuing combat and makes it more likely the Cavalry will Waver and be repulsed in Combat. Good British infantry in line with attached guns and re-rolls seem to have little problem getting 2 hits. Or 3 hits, which throws back the horse (4 hits would expend Cavalry). Mediocre infantry without attachments would obviously be vulnerable.

The huge advantages of squares are in having favorable rather than unfavorable Combat POAs and in that the square does not retire - it stands until broken. The infantry in tactical formation can be forced to retire, though if they come through just Disordered and retire the Cavalry can't pursue them. Waver, however, then with a D6+2 roll there is a 1/6 chance they will fall back 3 MU and be automatically hit by Cavalry who pursue, and a 5/6ths chance for both infantry and cavalry to move 4 MU or more, which for the British infantry means ending facing away. The Cavalry have the same D6+2 pursuit roll so have a reasonable chance of hitting the foot in the rear. If they fall short, the infantry are facing the wrong way to shoot in the next shooting phase. It seems to me that only desperate or very good infantry should consider receiving Cavalry in the open without using squares.

I did get bogged down in the details of pass-through and second lines - starting out, it seems wise not to use battle arrays one does not understand.

[donm]

but on a 5-6 to hit there is only a 1/9 chance of Disordering the square.

I think you may have missed the +POA for the infantry being in square, so hitting on 4,5 or6. much better odds.

I find a unit of horse artillery a must to support my attacking wing. 6 dice on an infantry square should help greatly.

I am more than happy for my opponent to waste his cavalry on my infantry squares, but you must support them with cavalry to avoid the situation above.

Cavalry v cavalry combats are too risky unless your opponent is down at least a level.

Don

[SirGarnet]

You are right on the POA. It was late and I was misreading the POA at Long Range only in the QRS rather than using p53. 25% is still not impressive, but, as you say, a whole unit of horse artillery would do the job steadily. Edited the change in above.

[hazelbark]

I think people are under rating the Cavarly. First being steady but spent is not the end of the world. You still are giant threat to infantry that doesn't form square.

If a player isn't careful a mounted wing can stave in a flank and once the flank is turned either infantry is falling back to prevent the cavarly from getting in the rear or at a minimum the enemy have a hinge where you can concentrate a lot of firepower.

I've seen 3 games where a cavalry flank assault was decisive creating a 30 or 40% victory. In one of them it was a dice random effect where two equal sides had one totally collapse.

Enemy cavalry effectively prevent a safe advance.

That said I think i prefer at lower points to have cavalry as the reservce behind my infantry line. As gaps appear in both sides a unit of Dragoons or even chasseaurs can threaten quite a frontage and creat a great opportunity to exploit an entire area of the battle.

[SirGarnet]

The greatest low risk dividend is the wet blanket that a local cavalry reserve in second line casts on enemy shooting at medium range even if they can't charge them. If the other side is lacking in its own horse, there is a powerful incentive to either retire or advance the infantry to close range to even up the firefight.

A advancing hanging enemy flank without Cavalry can be slowed to a crawl or crippled by a Cavalry unit lurking off the flank threatening a flank or rear charge, forcing commitment of a unit to face it unless the end unit advances and takes its chances.

I've also tested further and found that British veteran foot in line can do a good job (though risky) of shooting up and driving off French cavalry with the style of Fredrickian veterans. Stand and fire if steady when the French horse first charge - but even veterans are at hideous risk if already disordered - fail the CT to stand (or to form square) and it is now a Wavering target at risk of being broken with a mere 2 hits from the Cavalry. If the line can remain steady, however, it can knock down the cohesion of the Cavalry with a volley and force them back to recover.

So the Unreformed veterean armies of the 1790s can still use the linear system. Good!

[nigelemsen]

At Britcon this year and my first foray into FOGN, I found also spent was not the end of the world. Especially when it was my Dutch guard lancers. As mentioned below, infantry where dropping into squares and I sent my spent cavalry hunting down my opponents unspent cavalry. On average I managed to get 2:1 trade off.

Course this didn't stop me finishing somewhere in the bottom 1/3

[LeslieMitchell]

At Britcon this year and my first foray into FOGN, I found also spent was not the end of the world. Especially when it was my Dutch guard lancers. As mentioned below, infantry where dropping into squares and I sent my spent cavalry hunting down my opponents unspent cavalry. On average I managed to get 2:1 trade off.

Course this didn't stop me finishing somewhere in the bottom 1/3

but that was due to your guard infantry being broken more than Spent cavalry, at least in the game I played against you.

Leslie

PS cavalry cause a big problem when back up with artillery and Foot which can shoot infantry squares to death

[nigelemsen]

Getting the guard infantry in all arms is what needs to be polished off. Large units of old guard supported by the guard heavy division is going to help next time.