Buildings!!!!

[bahdahbum]

One question about entering a building : a unit gets out of a building and so has it's rear touching the building . As things are getting hot , the same unit would like to move backwards ( CMT) to enter the building .

May itdo so BACKWARDS .

[terrys]

FAQ1 on buildings states:
• If not moving along a road in column, a unit may only enter a building if they begin their move in at least in partial contact with it, except that infantry cannot enter a building if in square.

So the answer is yes!

[bahdahbum]

Thank you

PS any idea for the small corrections and errata's ....

I still wonder about the russian nguard cossacks ...reguliar lancers ..guard of course ?

[terrys]

I still wonder about the russian nguard cossacks ...reguliar lancers ..guard of course

?

...... and while working on our upcoming refight of Austerlitz - Russian Uhlans in 1805 (2 regiments available)

The problem I have with the guard cossacks is that it had only 3 Sotnia (each of 100men) until 1815 - Therefore it doesn't really require a full unit - more like 2 bases. They could perhaps be used to make the hussars a 'large' unit before 1809 (paid for as half lancers), and either the Hussars or Uhlans after 1809.
One Sotnia each from the Black sea and Orel were added in 1811 - which would bring them up to about 500 men - so could just about justify a seperate unit. Given causalties and stragglers they are still more likly to be half a unit. It wasn't until 1815 that the guard cossack regiment was increased to 7 Sotnias.

A more logical representation of the Russian Guard Cossacks is to delete them entirely, but allow the following:
Guard Hussars may be used as a small or large unit with half their bases as lancers.
OR
Guard Uhlans may be increased to large.
In either case 2 or 3 bases of Guard Cossacks should added to each.

[bahdahbum]

Well reading your message I found it hard to find info butyou do seem right

I think both proposal ( with hussars or large Uhlan ) are good solutions . Give the choice to the players so everybody will be happy .

[Jilu]

I still wonder about the russian nguard cossacks ...reguliar lancers ..guard of course

?

...... and while working on our upcoming refight of Austerlitz - Russian Uhlans in 1805 (2 regiments available)

The problem I have with the guard cossacks is that it had only 3 Sotnia (each of 100men) until 1815 - Therefore it doesn't really require a full unit - more like 2 bases. They could perhaps be used to make the hussars a 'large' unit before 1809 (paid for as half lancers), and either the Hussars or Uhlans after 1809.
One Sotnia each from the Black sea and Orel were added in 1811 - which would bring them up to about 500 men - so could just about justify a seperate unit. Given causalties and stragglers they are still more likly to be half a unit. It wasn't until 1815 that the guard cossack regiment was increased to 7 Sotnias.

A more logical representation of the Russian Guard Cossacks is to delete them entirely, but allow the following:
Guard Hussars may be used as a small or large unit with half their bases as lancers.
OR
Guard Uhlans may be increased to large.
In either case 2 or 3 bases of Guard Cossacks should added to each.

ok well i must say i dissagree....even if Jacques is an opponent of mine sometimes,...

there were the guards and also the guard units of the Atamann....and more than one. Cossacks were feared and not all were irregular.

a friend of us Serge Ademine is doing very extensive research on cosacks ...as soon as he is done with it we will give you the info.

[terrys]

there were the guards and also the guard units of the Atamann....and more than one.

Most regions had Ataman regiments as a guard for the commander (Ataman) of the region. They were not part of the Imperial Guard and were not considered to be regular.
The Imperila Guard cossacks were considered to be regular - and in 1811 consisted of:
Lifeguard regiment (Don cossacks) - 3 Sotnia
Lifeguard Black sea sotnia
Lifeguard Ural Sotnia
This gives us 5 Sotnias, which would justify a small unit (if at full strength).
The Black Sea and Ural cossacks were not part of the Guard before 1811.

Cossacks were feared and not all were irregular.

Napoleon himself considered the cossacks to be the best light cavalry in the world. However, on the battlefield they were not so useful - as recounted in the following quote:
" The Cossack fears horsemen of no nation, except the Turks. For the Polish lancers he has admiration, because these were capable to fight in closed, as well as in open order, and because he had to cope with them almost all the time during the latest war. The French, as long as they possessed cavalry, held back their own in closed order and sent forward the Polish for light duties. The German and French light cavalry are not feared by the Cossack. He will not stand and oppose their formed attacks, and in open order he will surpass them in
manoeuvrability."
- Austrian officer A. Prokesch ‘Ueber den Kosaken, und dessen Brauchbarkeit im Felde’ "

This tells me various things:
1) Non-guard cossacks should not be as good as regular light cavalry in battle.
2) They didn't fear the French and German light cavalry because they could easily keep away from them - NOT because they could defeat them in combat.
3) We should allow Polish light cavalry to change into skirmish formation.
4) TheTurkish irregular light cavalry in skirmish formation are (and should be) a match for the cossacks.

[bahdahbum]

Thanks JILU but I did many research on the cossacks so if Serge needs something I have it

Remember : the russian army is the army I have been playing since 1989....and I received books from russia

[KendallB]

3) We should allow Polish light cavalry to change into skirmish formation.

Should they be the only regular light cavalry that can?

[terrys]

Should they be the only regular light cavalry that can?

Good question. Before we considered anything like this we'd need to do some more research.
We'd probably only need to consider eastern european nations where light cavalry was an inherent skill.
Turks already have skirmish cavalry as do the Serbs.
Hungarian hussars are worthy of consideration.

[bahdahbum]

To answer a few of the questions should we not create another topic : cossacks . I would suggest to move the end of the 'building" discussion somewhere else but cannot do it .

The attaman's guard unit was the personnal Bodyguard of PLATOV and could be considered an elite light cavalry unit but they were "only" +/- 870 horsemen . It would be a small unit of perhaps supérior irregular or if felt so regular light cavalry . But you need a skilled/exceptionnal charismatic leader and some other cossacks around and that leader is charismatic only for cossacks ) . It should be noted that in 1813-1814 dragoon or hussars squadrons were attached to Platov's command .

And as Terry found out , the guard cossack unit was composed in 1811 of more or less
the lifeguard regiment : 542 horsemen
The Black sea stonya :100 horsemen
The Ural lifeguard cossacks stonya : 125 horsemen.
Whicj justify a small unit but only from 1811 . i would consider them as lancers, capable of SK same as irregulers . But the corps commander must be "competent" as that unit was considered bodyguard for the Czar . So the Czar is there and if he dies, you loose

Prokesch writes: "... the lance is their main weapon. He knows how to use this weapon with great skill and security, nevertheless the fact that it is one and a half foot longer as the Polish lance. He knows how to use his sabre just as well; officers and NCO’s practice them for use against the Turks. The pistol is of less value to him. He considers it not really as a weapon, but only as a tool to scare the enemy. He fires only to fire, not to hit anything, and in common there are few Cossacks which use their pistols... Tettenborn armed his Cossacks completely with French muskets... The Cossack loves the use of a firearm, because of the reason that he fears the one of the enemy. He wants to take artillery with him, and the name Poushki (cannon) is for him a word of joy, as well as of fear...A tenth of every squadron consists of marksmen; Strelki. Rifle and pistols are mostly Turkish or Persian booty." (Prokesch - "Ueber den Kosaken, und dessen Brauchbarkeit im Felde")

Now, for the cossacks we wait for your decision Terry

As for other nationalities, I have not enough information to had something usefull except : the Polish light cavalry was regularly used to counter cossacks and not always very successfully. I would guess it was +/- 50 % . The cossacks would flee if a fight seemed useless , not because they feared the ennemy but they had space to trade and would wait a better opportunity .

[Sarmaticus]

This tells me various things:
1) Non-guard cossacks should not be as good as regular light cavalry in battle.
2) They didn't fear the French and German light cavalry because they could easily keep away from them - NOT because they could defeat them in combat.
3) We should allow Polish light cavalry to change into skirmish formation.
4) TheTurkish irregular light cavalry in skirmish formation are (and should be) a match for the cossacks.

This is where I make myself look very foolish but I really don't understand the purport of point three:
In the (very badly laid out) rulebook I can't see any mention of a cavalry skirmish _formation_. I can find an infantry skirmish formation and in the glossary, that all Irregular light Cavalry are skirmishers, as are Regular light cavalry in Extended Line.
As Regular light cavalry in Extended Line are already skirmishers, as are Irregular light Cavalry Cossacks, I don't see why any special rule would be needed for Poles to change into skirmish formation (which doesn't exist for cavalry) to count as skirmishers: in Extended Line they are skirmishers already.
Re Prokesch's verdict on the Poles, I don't quite see how it could be true: Marbot, who served throughout 1812-14, laments that while they were in eastern Poland/Western Russia (long story) Poles weren't attached to Grand Armee units as scouts and interpreters. His corps had some and found them very useful. Marbot was something of a sarmataphobe, so this is praise indeed. His testimony would seem to indicate that most French formations did not have Poles to push forward to face the cossacks. Prokesch might be generalising from the Krakus (Krakhaus, in FOG:N ) but they were few.
In any event, is there reason to believe that Prokesch is discussing battlefield behaviour rather than the war of outposts and foraging (at which the Poles excelled in 1812, sometimes at the expense of the French, so Marbot says)?

[bahdahbum]

Dear Sarmaticus ,

Marbot , as you said was not always the best source . What I see is that everytime we have some positive information on a non-french army, general ...people say no it's not possible ...the french are the best, they are better, they know what they say . And when you have access to other sources ...well it's not so thrue anymore .

The french generals were the best, that's why in 1813, when Napoleon was not there they were regularly beaten ....not always, but often.

We should be open minded and not always put the austrian, prussian, russian sources away.

And what does Prokesh write : that cossacks are very good with the lance . Nothng more . He does not write that cossacks are better than polish lancers .

They are numerous fights where the cossacks avercame the french and allied cavalry, and as many where they lost or just fled ....

History is an uneasy thing .

[Sarmaticus]

I don't see how begging leave to doubt one Austrian's account of Cossack versus French and Poles, constitutes throwing away non-French sources: as most French Corps didn't have Poles in them, I can't see how they could have had a policy of pushing forward the Poles. Marbot has plenty that's good to say about Germans, Russians and Spaniards - he just had a few bad run ins with Poles: You might see from my nom-de-plume where my own roots lie

[bahdahbum]

Hy,

Any news for the russian guard cossacks ? part of the hussars and or uhlan ? as there will be an E&E update it might get interesting to know what ( Ok guard lancers come latter ...)

[terrys]

Any news for the russian guard cossacks ? part of the hussars and or uhlan ? as there will be an E&E update it might get interesting to know what ( Ok guard lancers come latter ...)

When we post the latest errata for ToN - in a couple of weeks - The Russian guard will get Jaegers and the guard cossacks will be drilled instead of irregular.

[bahdahbum]

Thank you;

By the way any errata for the rules ?

[terrys]

As will the lists I'm continually noting changes that 'might' be made.
After I've finished ToN 'll concentrate on the rules, but with a holiday booked in August they probably won't come out before end of august or early september.

[bahdahbum]

Have a nice Holiday

By bthe way, in January 2014 we have another FOGN tournament

I'll be i UK in october and play Leipzig 1813 with some 30-40 other people . Local rules, 6mm bataillon level

[terrys]

By bthe way, in January 2014 we have another FOGN tournament

I'll be there - Last years tournament was really good.