Slitherine

Sarmaticus wrote:Is there any evidence for evasion by dragoons on the battlefield in this period?

Again, it depends on what you're talking about. If you're talking about 'shootie shootie shootie "oh, they are charging", mount up and leave the current locale' probably not specifically. Are there examples of troops harassing and retiring, almost guaranteed. But there are a plethora of things that we can do in the rules that don't have a specific real life evidence.

For example, in one game I played (in competition) a player had a gazillion guns (quite literally) the bare minimum of foot and the rest of the points in mounted. He basically spent the entire game running around the battlefield with his 3 march moves racing across the front of his own guns because his march moves allowed him to do that. Is there a specific example of people doing that? Maybe.

Because people don't use the armies the way they were historically you're in a world of hurt if you start using 'real world' examples and prohibiting use because of a terminology... in this case 'evade'... isn't able to be found in text.

A solution would be to:
automatically eliminate Dragoons contacted by mounted in clear.
Reduce the evade distance of Dragoons by 1 MU in the clear.

hazelbark wrote:A solution would be to:
automatically eliminate Dragoons contacted by mounted in clear.
Reduce the evade distance of Dragoons by 1 MU in the clear.

Gotta be super careful with this one. There is at least one historical account of dragoods mounting up and charging. I'' not sure what the target was, but if mounted it would mean you couldn't do what they historically did.

ravenflight wrote:

hazelbark wrote:A solution would be to:
automatically eliminate Dragoons contacted by mounted in clear.
Reduce the evade distance of Dragoons by 1 MU in the clear.

Gotta be super careful with this one. There is at least one historical account of dragoods mounting up and charging. I'' not sure what the target was, but if mounted it would mean you couldn't do what they historically did.

Okey's dragoons at Naseby is what you are thinking about I believe. It was right at the end of the battle, possibly into Rupert's blewcoats so infantry, but by that stage they would probably be Fragmented anyway

hazelbark wrote:A solution would be to:
automatically eliminate Dragoons contacted by mounted in clear.
Reduce the evade distance of Dragoons by 1 MU in the clear.

First isn't needed IMO as they get ridden down pretty easily as it is, and if they are to evade at MF move neither is the latter (which avoids a special case which is good).

nikgaukroger wrote:

ravenflight wrote:

hazelbark wrote:A solution would be to:
automatically eliminate Dragoons contacted by mounted in clear.
Reduce the evade distance of Dragoons by 1 MU in the clear.

Gotta be super careful with this one. There is at least one historical account of dragoods mounting up and charging. I'' not sure what the target was, but if mounted it would mean you couldn't do what they historically did.

Okey's dragoons at Naseby is what you are thinking about I believe. It was right at the end of the battle, possibly into Rupert's blewcoats so infantry, but by that stage they would probably be Fragmented anyway

Yes, fair enough, but fragmented or not, hazelbarks rule would see the dragoons eliminated had they been mounted (which wasn't the case).

Wording is VERY important.

Sarmaticus wrote: Is there any evidence for evasion by dragoons on the battlefield in this period?

By chance I have come across a possible example from the ECW where some dragoons faced with horse advancing on them at about "half musket shot" fired a volley and then "they took horse and away they run".

nikgaukroger wrote:

Sarmaticus wrote: Is there any evidence for evasion by dragoons on the battlefield in this period?

By chance I have come across a possible example from the ECW where some dragoons faced with horse advancing on them at about "half musket shot" fired a volley and then "they took horse and away they run".

It may be overly complex, but can you say 'only steady dragoons can evade'?

I can't think why we'd want to do that - as you say it adds some complexity and any benefit doesn't seem to me to outweigh that.

nikgaukroger wrote:I can't think why we'd want to do that - as you say it adds some complexity and any benefit doesn't seem to me to outweigh that.

My comment was more to do with an earlier view that the reins were all tied up and therefore hard to get to. If people are already 'confused' (by being non-steady) then 'finding your mount' etc would be more difficult.

Personally, I don't have a problem with dragoon evade as is, and also have no problem with their evade distance being reduced. I think the VMD reflects the ability for troops to 'find their mount' etc. I just wanted to throw a viewpoint out there. I agree, it's overly complex for no real net gain. Indeed, thinking about it after I posted it I realised that there would be situations where steady dragoons move up to some mounted, take a shot, get shot back at and go unsteady, and then get charged and not be able to evade. It would probably mean dragoons would skulk more than we want them to.

nikgaukroger wrote:

Sarmaticus wrote: Is there any evidence for evasion by dragoons on the battlefield in this period?

By chance I have come across a possible example from the ECW where some dragoons faced with horse advancing on them at about "half musket shot" fired a volley and then "they took horse and away they run".

Could you please advise where and when this was?

Not heard of anything like this, so would like to check out.

Thanks

Don

Arg, can't recall just where I found it - will dig.

However, it was in the west country and 1643 I think - in Richard Atkyns accounts perhaps?

Reducing Dragoon moves to 3MU when within 6MU of the enemy, while keeping everything else the same for Dragoons is a very simple fix which deals with the current issues nicely.

In the open, dragoons are much more likely to get caught by mounted so they will have to skulk in the hedgerows and rough going where they should be able to evade mounted or even stand and fight if they want to.

This seems to represent their historical use nicely.

I wonder if our view of dragoons is too Anglo-centric and focussed on the ECW? In this conflict they appear to have been relatively small units, and usually attached to the horse (in fact, I think in the NMA they were parcelled out to individual horse units - was this a more mobile version of commanded shot?). Did European armies handle them differently? Certainly by the 1690s, some European nations were using them more or less as standard infantry formations with a free ride/meal attached; others were using them as second rank horse. Does anyone have more info on this?

For the NMA I have always thought the dragoons operated separately - they certainly did at Naseby

As far as I am aware dragoons in Europe operated the same way as they did in England.

DavidT wrote:Reducing Dragoon moves to 3MU when within 6MU of the enemy, while keeping everything else the same for Dragoons is a very simple fix which deals with the current issues nicely.

Yes this is neat.

It is our favoured solution.

Certainly in the 1630s Swedish Dragoons were much like their ECW Counterparts.