Napoleonic Battles - Optional Rules Guide 1.4(4.06)

[devoncop]

I agree with most of these General.

Any reason that you don't have "Rout Limiting" ON and "No opportunity Fire v Skirmishers" ON ?

With the latter turned off skirmishers can be used by exploitative players to waste ammunition of both infantry and Guns.

Thanks for the response either way.

Ian (devoncop)

It's a good argument to have skirmishers rule ON but on the other hand it always irritates me when skirmishers are parading in front of my line unmolested. So I prefer not to use this rule but not a problem to play with it either.
Far more important is Rout Limiting. In my experience in a sister ACW series I find that when this rule is ON it is hard to rout enemy units (especially those with higher morale) even if you give them an enfilade fire. Sometimes it can look very unrealistics, especially when Flank Morale Modifier is also checked. When RL is OFF it forces the player to play more cautious and to keep his units well within the command range of their commanders.

That is a good point 're the Rout Limiting.

I am happy to play with it on or off in that case.

As I said at the start of my posting on this subject it is mainly Movement Threat Disorder and No Detached Melee I have the issue with.

Cheers
Ian

[-72-]

@ devoncop
I would like to see some of these examples were cavalry is detached.
If such units were purposely detached then they may better be depicted as own formations with own BG leaders.
If it was not, the C&C has to be reestablished. If that happens by the units moving or the BG leader isn't the matter.
Regarding cavalry leaders it may indeed be more troubling, unfortunately we do not have a higher command range for them like the CW series has, there afaik the cavalry leaders have some hexes more then there infantry counterparts.


@The_General
And you do not mind that formed units can go low/out of ammo when your opponent dances in front of them with skirmishers?
I guess this may be more a question if you have an opponent who does gamey things or not.

I think what he is talking about are situations where the OOB was coded and then engine changes came along later --- in those situations I don't generally think that the OOBs would have been re-coded to make detached units work as detached units -to take advantage of a new set of command rules.

You are correct, I think, that in that sort of situation the OOB would need to be recoded and those independent units would be needed to be put into an independent command structure (possibly just of themselves alone with maybe some sort of a leader).  By and large though the command rules, I think, had allowed for way too much flexibility - in that it sort of is mostly about how big of a footprint that sized unit (say brigade for example) took up on the battle fields -and how far away from its commander that it could effectively function.  In my own project I had wanted a 0 command range prior to this rule - as the formations I was coded were not that flexible and had a limited footprint on the battle field - as such - this rule allowed me to go with a command range of 1 (which was good- because a command range of 0 would have meant arguing a business case for an engine change --- and not arguing those in favour of changes you can actually get is usually a better place to spend your time on.

I love that you took the time to put these together, BD66, (and I think you probably had done it before this ...) - it isn't something that is all that easy to extract from the documentation that comes with the titles - so I know how much effort went in to this.  Nice work, sir. :)

[BigDuke66]

I love that you took the time to put these together, BD66, (and I think you probably had done it before this ...) - it isn't something that is all that easy to extract from the documentation that comes with the titles - so I know how much effort went in to this.  Nice work, sir. :)

Many thanks, I hope it will help the community to get into action quickly without lengthy discussions. At least it will be a base from which they can apply change like they see fit. As noted, some ORs will more or less just shift the preference one would like to see, like the optional melee & fire results and flipping these ON/OFF is just fine.
And yes there was an old outdated version that I removed as there was no sense in updating that.

[KG_RangerBooBoo]

If I use the flank morale modifier then I keep rout limiting off. If having a former unit on each flank stiffened your resolve then seeing one of them don't should have the opposite effect in my mind. As far as someone dancing skirmishes in and out of range to draw fire then that becomes an opponent that I just don't play again

[devoncop]

If I use the flank morale modifier then I keep rout limiting off. If having a former unit on each flank stiffened your resolve then seeing one of them don't should have the opposite effect in my mind. As far as someone dancing skirmishes in and out of range to draw fire then that becomes an opponent that I just don't play again

I think KG that your last sentence probably applies to most opponents who try to game the system.. Sensible.

[BigDuke66]

In regards to the skirmisher OR, I guess if you say you want it and your opponent is strictly against you may already know what type of player your up against, saves you time & trouble.

[KG_RangerBooBoo]

I prefer turns because by using phased play the enemy has a chance to move in sight of your batteries or infantry and at the end move out of sight without being fired upon.  Yes, automatic fire is halved but if those units can fire on units they couldn't fire on units at the end of the enemy's movements then I'll take it.  I also don't mind them firing repeatedly as how many volleys could an infantry unit get off in 10 or 15 minutes?  How many shots could a cannon get off in that same time frame.  Also, those same units will get a chance to fire at 1 unit at 100% if they are being meleed as well.  I'll can live with those parameters and be glad to get the faster turns.  This is one of those rules that is going to have folks in both camps so it all comes down to personal preferences.

[BigDuke66]

Afaik the 100% isn't in regard to the randomness but in regard to the fire value. So if fire is trigger as response to a melee being set, then fire is done at 100% and not the usual 50%.
That is at least some improvement to the overall weak defense in turn gameplay.

[TheGrayMouser]

I prefer turns because by using phased play the enemy has a chance to move in sight of your batteries or infantry and at the end move out of sight without being fired upon.  Yes, automatic fire is halved but if those units can fire on units they couldn't fire on units at the end of the enemy's movements then I'll take it.  I also don't mind them firing repeatedly as how many volleys could an infantry unit get off in 10 or 15 minutes?  How many shots could a cannon get off in that same time frame.  Also, those same units will get a chance to fire at 1 unit at 100% if they are being meleed as well.  I'll can live with those parameters and be glad to get the faster turns.  This is one of those rules that is going to have folks in both camps so it all comes down to personal preferences.

I think this is a very important consideration, with MDF-ON you eliminate interdiction fire.

Ideally we could have the best of both world.,  phased based play on the active players turn coupled with the elimination of defensive fire phase ( so when the active player moves, shoot or melees in the appropriate phases, opp fire is triggered by the non active player, just like in MDF-Off )

If I'm not mistaken, is this what the Civil War titles have as an option?

[BigDuke66]

On 01.12.2021 this guide was updated to 1.1 adding 3 new optional rules.
- Auto Defensive Fire
- Night Movement Fatigue
- Mixed Organization Penalty
While the later 2 are recommended(just like they are in the CW series) the Auto Defensive Fire is not as it is still less effective then the manual defensive fire, BUT please use phased gameplay & the Auto Defensive Fire as this is still better then turn gameplay. So all the turn gameplay guys that usually only do it because to save time should use this combination to get phased gameplay but still be as fast as under turn gamplay.