Cavalry vs bayonet musing

[nikgaukroger]

In the grand tradition of having completed an update and then starting to think about possible other tweaks here is a thought on whether bayonet should count against Cavalry. I think it has been touched on before, but what the hey

In fact this comes out of a possible list update that I have spotted.

Currently the Hapsburg Austrian Imperial, almost uniquely for western armies of the period, does not get Bayonet for it's Imperial Infantry - this is because when the list was written the info I had suggested they adopted it very late. However, I think that may be wrong and they adopted the bayonet in the 1690's rather like most others. (BTW I have not included a list update on this in the published Update as them not having bayonet is a nice difference in the lists) I also note that after our period in 1711 the Russians (who had bayonets of course) when campaigning against the Ottomans finally ditched their pikes but did use chevaux-de-fries to counter the Ottoman cavalry.

At the same time they seem to have started to abandon the pike. Oddly this seems to have been something that started in the east where they were fighting the mounted heavy Ottoman armies, however, they consistently used chevaux-de-fries against the Ottomans (and continued to do so past the end of out period I think).

This rather suggests that (a) small numbers of pike were not effective against the Ottomans and also that, (b) the bayonet was not enough either on its own or in conjunction with small number of pikemen. Obviously the Ottoman mounted is mainly Cv and not Hse or Det Hse which suggests that Cv might well be treated differently here.

This leads me to speculate on a couple of things:

1. Maybe Pike & Shot BGs which start with just 1 pikeman possibly should not get Protection against Cv (although this may not be elegant to keep tack of in an actual game), and
2. Maybe Cv should get the + PoA against MF in the open even if the MF have Bayonet.

[RonanTheLibrarian]

I think as various armies abandoned the pike, they were probably a bit nervous initially as to how foot would deal with horse AND of course we are talking about plug bayonets rather than the later socket variety (adopted just after FoGR ends), which means the musket cannot be fired once it is fixed - something the rules currently do not take into account. Hence the use of chevaux-de-frise (which, incidentally, should also be allowed for post-1686 Bavarians, as well as Saxons in the Later German States list - I have a reference for this, btw), which quite possibly were used to protect the flanks as often as/instead of the frontage of the "owning" unit. Incidentally, RB-S point blank refused to allow me to form square with bayonet-armed troops (no integral pikes at all) at the Godendag event in 2015, which may be some sort of indicator (I still think he was wrong, though).

Rather than give mounted troops the PoA, sshould we handle it in the same way we now handle the inferior armour situation and drop the infantry one level? Should we perhaps require the owning player to declare whether or not his foot have "fixed bayonets" prior to a melee (rather like "general fighting/in front rank"), and prevent further firing for one full turn after melee to represent the bayonets being "unfixed"?

[nikgaukroger]

Hence the use of chevaux-de-frise (which, incidentally, should also be allowed for post-1686 Bavarians, as well as Saxons in the Later German States list - I have a reference for this, btw)

You have clearly not read the army list update document ...

[RonanTheLibrarian]

No I haven't.....yet.