Amendment - Guard & Shock Cavalry

[dvorkin]

That's a good idea!!!

[KendallB]

Many of these suggestions will hurt guard infantry more then guard cavalry and the consensus is that the infantry work well. I'd like to see units having to test if they are within 4MU of a broken guard cavalry's rout path rather than from the point of breaking. That way there is a small hinderance but no big overhaul in the rules.

[hazelbark]

So one of the players at Historicon who understands force application showed up with a French guard cavalry divison
6 Chasseurs w/art att
4 light
4 Gren a cheval
as I recall all sup/vet/Gd

Fortunately in my game he commited them versus a large superior Hungarian square and some Cuirass.

But every game it was a powerful battering ram and every unit was spent and some were lost.

At spent they cost 2 points out of an army of 800 army points its under 10%. So he could use this battering ram at no real risk.

If we double the Army break point cost for guard cavarly it would have driven just the SPENT cost to 4 points which is pretty certain at least up to 900 points going to pop over 10% giving the opponent the time to counter strike.

Now that doesn't solve the lone guard unit. Perhaps the no rear support as well of non-guard to guard. And we are there?

[Jilu]

I think that the best solution for guards is:

make it a danger to engage them, as it was historicaly. The french Old guard was rarely engaged in combat, they were ver effective in 1814 but then at that time there was not much else left for Bonaparte to fight with.

At other times these were held behind as a reserve ... and that meant to the other troops " ok all is ok the guard is there to support usin case of trouble, the little corporal knows when and when to ingage them"

Now if the Old guard is engaged in battle and recoils/breaks....that would be dramatic for the other line / middle / young guards.

The status of guards in the other armies were different, the Prussian Guard were an elite troop, kind of upgraded Grenadiers, the Line units would see discomfort in seeing them rout, yet maybe they would want to "show" they are better than the "guys in that so called guard unit that are just guys like us but that the King likes better".

So for me:

Only non Cavalry superior - Veteran - Guard Units should cause other "not so qualified units" to test at 6 MU. To reflect the loss of these ELite units, as these are regarded by the other troops to be much better than themselves.

Cavalry is different as it is the normal thing to happen for cavalry to break-off or retreat to regroup to recover.

[babyshark]

At spent they cost 2 points out of an army of 800 army points its under 10%. So he could use this battering ram at no real risk.

If we double the Army break point cost for guard cavarly it would have driven just the SPENT cost to 4 points which is pretty certain at least up to 900 points going to pop over 10% giving the opponent the time to counter strike.

Now that doesn't solve the lone guard unit. Perhaps the no rear support as well of non-guard to guard. And we are there?

On the other hand, the Guard cavalry are freakin' expensive. Anyone taking a Guard division needs to commit them to the fight because the rest of the army is either small or low quality.

I am not convinced that there is a huge problem to address here. Looked at in another way, a lot of these proposed fixes will make Guard divisions (especially cavalry) essentially non-useable because the cost of committing them to combat is so high.

Marc

[terrys]

I am not convinced that there is a huge problem to address here. Looked at in another way, a lot of these proposed fixes will make Guard divisions (especially cavalry) essentially non-useable because the cost of committing them to combat is so high.

We haven't come to a decision at all yet - We're just discussing options.

Certainly the change that would most affect single guard units without affecting guards divisions is stopping non-guards giving rear suport to guards. (although still allowing them to give flank support).

[babyshark]

Certainly the change that would most affect single guard units without affecting guards divisions is stopping non-guards giving rear suport to guards. (although still allowing them to give flank support).

That's not a bad idea. My issues are with the ideas that tend to make it a bad decision to commit the Guards to combat.

Marc

[hazelbark]

Certainly the change that would most affect single guard units without affecting guards divisions is stopping non-guards giving rear suport to guards. (although still allowing them to give flank support).

That's a pretty small change. It doesn't effect the game or employment materially.

The problem is no matter how many dice you roll, you won't break my single guard cavalry unit. So rear support really only effects my ability to break your cavalry.

[terrys]

The problem is no matter how many dice you roll, you won't break my single guard cavalry unit. So rear support really only effects my ability to break your cavalry.

But if your opponent has rear support and you haven't you can't break him either.