1815 Prussian Infantry Corps

[KendallB]

For the beneft of KeefM, here is my 1815 Prussian list that may just become my convention army. Of course this means that I have to get new, nicer looking figures to replace the tired and tatty ones I have now but oh well...

1815 Prussian Infantry Corps (Initiative 2, France & Central Europe)
CC - Competant Charismatic

1st Division (Competant Charismatic)
Small AV Line + rifle skirmisher
Large AD Line + rifle skirmisher
Large AC Line + cavalry and artillery
Small AD Medium artillery

2nd Division (Competant)
Small AV Line + rifle skirmisher
Large AD Line + rifle skirmisher
Large AC Line + cavalry and artillery
Small AD Medium artillery

3rd Division (Competant)
Small AV shock Heavy cavalry
Small AD Light cavalry lancer
Small AC Light cavalry
Small AC Light cavalry
Small AD Horse artillery

ACV = 30

Army is designed to defend and only gets +3 on the dice at the start of the game. All 3 artillery work together with cavalry (especially Landwehr cav) behind them - if 2 units start to fire on one enemy then your opponent's advance begins to stall. Flanks need to be secured using terrain hopefully but the veteran line infantry helps here. I try to hide the infantry behind hills so that they don't get shot up. This means taking a couple of hills and as much sight blocking terrain as possible.

I've designed the infantry to take the least amount of skirmish fire cohesion losses as possible by reducing the enemy's effectiveness (number of dice or number of hits needed), hence the large units and especially the cavalry attachments with the Landwehr. If the Landwehr do drop cohesion there is always a charismatic general and (hopefully) rear support/hill to give them 2-3 dice for recovery.

So far I've had more wins than losses. Worst loss was having to attack over a billiard table against a French army reeking of cheesiness (and my own lack of thought). I'm thinking of losing the shock heavies so I can take one large Landwehr cavalry instead of two small ones as you have to have the same number of non-Landwehr to Landwehr bases in the division. This would let me get something else, perhaps upgrade the Uhlans to veteran with an artillery.

[BrettPT]

Worst loss was having to attack over a billiard table against a French army reeking of cheesiness (and my own lack of thought).

That would be my 1814 French fromage - featuring 2 units of newly painted Guard d'honneur - average drilled Guard LC - which I believe is the cheese of which Kendall speaks (free charge, ignore other routers, harder to hurt in combat and can't be broken in combat when fresh, can move 10MU so often initiate the charge against heavies, get to re-roll their 1's, and only 12 points a base!)

To my mind, the 1814 French list is one of the best in the book - cheap infantry filler, lowish minimums for most troop types, and killer cheapish cavalry. The generally low cost troops allow Napoleon to be fielded - for the +6 initiative roll and excellent chance of attacking (often with a 'free' unit).

While I think of it, I've sent the player's pack in for Battlecry 2014 in February, should be posted by the organisers soonish.

For this tournie (subject to any official amendments published prior to February):

(a) I've removed the 'free' charge rule for disordered/spent Guard or Shock Cavalry;
(b) The rule that Guard are excused a CT for seeing non-guard rout, is removed;
(c) Unreformed retiring infantry only show their butts if they retire 6+ MU; and
(d) We are using the same fix for skirmishers/cavalry in terrain as in previous conventions.

(c) & (d) should be uncontroversial, while (a) and (b) are to tone down the tendancy for cads like me to load up with Average Drilled Guard units and Shock Cavalry. Those who spend points on proper (ie superior and/or veteran) Guard or Cuirassiers should pass their tests so it shouldn't bother them so much.

Cheers
Brett

[KendallB]

I'm going to cheese up some Russians in that manner and give you a taste of your own medicine!

[Sarmaticus]

I was under the impression that C was deliberate: non-reformed infantry find it harder to carry out an organised retreat than reformed -who may have columns in support to cover the frontline. It might help generate an Auerstaedt- like brittleness.

[hazelbark]

(a) I've removed the 'free' charge rule for disordered/spent Guard or Shock Cavalry;
(b) The rule that Guard are excused a CT for seeing non-guard rout, is removed;
(c) Unreformed retiring infantry only show their butts if they retire 6+ MU; and
(d) We are using the same fix for skirmishers/cavalry in terrain as in previous conventions.

(c) & (d) should be uncontroversial, while (a) and (b) are to tone down the tendancy for cads like me to load up with Average Drilled Guard units and Shock Cavalry. Those who spend points on proper (ie superior and/or veteran) Guard or Cuirassiers should pass their tests so it shouldn't bother them so much.

What is (d) could you remind us?

I am not entirely sold about (a) as a change. I understand your point.
Alternatively you could make it a step in between, that they can charge if a command point is used and no roll is required.

I am even more of a belief that Guard losses should count more. You can bring them, but if they use them you better win. Which is actually historical. Say all Guard units excluding if the main army is actually a Guard designation costs double points for game point scoring purposes. Or langauge to that effect.
That would alter the calculation on how you use guard.
Also then the idea that a single average drilled guard Light Cav is ideal is less so.

[BrettPT]

The home rules we have been using for difficult are:

Fighting in Terrain

1. Skirmishing Infantry that are charged may optionally try to stand rather than evade, unless they are in open terrain (when they must evade). The skirmishing infantry unit must pass a CT to stand. If the test is failed, the unit does not drop a cohesion level but instead evades as normal.

2. An infantry unit charged by cavalry within 2MU only drops an automatic additional cohesion level if the infantry unit is in the open.

3. All pursuit moves are halved in difficult terrain.

4. Infantry in tactical formation fight as a single cohesion level lower when fighting in difficult terrain (not 2 levels lower). Infantry shooting, or fighting in extended line, count as shooting or fighting 2 levels lower when in difficult terrain unless they are in skirmish formation.

[KeefM]

Caveat: I have been using a single unit of Poor Drilled Guard light cavalry in my last 10-12 games - these views may therefore be biased

I thought Terry had already indicated that he didn't think too much change was needed in respect of Guard units other than only allowing Guard units to support other Guards units ? I seem to recall that he thought (as do I) that their impact on the game was relatively minor in as much as they are usually few in number. To my thinking the 'Guard only supported by Guards' change would go someway to resolving the issues raised to date in as much as Guards would only rarely get rear or flank suppport. Having drilled or conscript Guard units would then make them less attractive all round.

Though I certainly agree that the best feature (by far) of any Guard unit is its defensive ability to absorb hits better. Of late, my Neapolitan Garde d'Honneur (the aforementioned poor drilled guard LC) are being almost entirely employed in a blocking role at the edges of an attack these days; their consistantly poor performances (esp in rallying off their cohesion losses) in more attacking places creates weaknesses that I just don't need around my contact zone. But, I can honestly say that while they are cheap, having them in the army has NEVER made a substantive contribution to winning a game - as opposed to, say, my superior drilled French LC which, at the same prcie of 44pts for the unit, have won games (re-rolling 1's and 2's on average shifts a combat result in your favour by one level !).