The question of large losses

[Grengel]

How do you feel about large and unrealistic losses in close combat?
I play often in the MP and notice the absolutely fantastic results of the battles between the cavalry detachments.
Two squadrons of Cossacks with losses of 36 people caused horse grenadiers to lose up to 50 people. This is a complete absurdity. A few more such fights and regiments will be gone.

[Chosen Man]

How do you feel about large and unrealistic losses in close combat?
I play often in the MP and notice the absolutely fantastic results of the battles between the cavalry detachments.
Two squadrons of Cossacks with losses of 36 people caused horse grenadiers to lose up to 50 people. This is a complete absurdity. A few more such fights and regiments will be gone.

It depends on a number of factors elevation, facing and of course luck.  Cossacks are poor in general but not complete rubbish.  Attack with sufficient numbers and they will be gone but there is a tipping point.

[Sgt_Rock]

A lot of us have felt for some time that the cavalry losses are too high. It won't change but yes, its too high.

[Gary McClellan]

One of the always tricky issues is "what is a loss?" Is it a KIA/SeriousWIA? Or is it someone who has run for the day? Perhaps a cavalryman whose horse is too badly injured (or dead) to continue, but can't get back to any spares in a timely way?

In the end, "losses" are a way of looking at how the units effectively degrade (among other things). It's always kind of nebulous and hard to quantify it when you think about that though.

[geoff]

I'd wager that Napoleonic Battles has been doing at least as well as Panzer Campaigns in recent sales. It is about time that the parameters for NB were updated. One necessary inclusion would be the basic low and high combat value integers for artillery, non-artillery fire and, melee. The melee rule set and limitations on changing them are the greatest hinderance to making the scenario's realistic whatsoever.
As far as this example it wouldn't be unrealistic for a more numerous Cossack regiment to rip apart a squadron of the Grenadiers a Cheval. Melee should always be more dynamic and chaotic but, the actual high cavalry losses were due to a disorderly retreat being pursued and cut down. The first minutes of fighting was just charging around trying not get pinned by the other cavaliers.

[Grengel]

I'd wager that Napoleonic Battles has been doing at least as well as Panzer Campaigns in recent sales. It is about time that the parameters for NB were updated. One necessary inclusion would be the basic low and high combat value integers for artillery, non-artillery fire and, melee. The melee rule set and limitations on changing them are the greatest hinderance to making the scenario's realistic whatsoever.

I agree. I consider it necessary to add the parameter Combat Losses (Attacker Low Value and Attacker High Value) which has been used by the Panzer Campaigns for a long time. Why they did not add such a parameter is not clear to me. The inability to edit melee parameters sucks.