National characteristics

[Grossi]

French national character in our games is
Reliable in attack column like in main rules so French are +2 Command in attack column.

French can do mixed formation.

We have done a Brigade Column. To be a brigade column infantry units in a brigade must be in line, one behind another. All rear units can provide rear support to the front one in hand-to-hand. So a French infantry unit can receive up to +3 combat result from units behind. It looks cool to.

+1 attack column morale saver is only for shaky troops like 1813 conscripts who are 4+ morale in attack column and 5+ morale in line or square. So conscripts fight in dense columns but aren't supermen.

[ady2650]

French national character in our games is
Reliable in attack column like in main rules so French are +2 Command in attack column.

French can do mixed formation.

We have done a Brigade Column. To be a brigade column infantry units in a brigade must be in line, one behind another. All rear units can provide rear support to the front one in hand-to-hand. So a French infantry unit can receive up to +3 combat result from units behind. It looks cool to.

+1 attack column morale saver is only for shaky troops like 1813 conscripts who are 4+ morale in attack column and 5+ morale in line or square. So conscripts fight in dense columns but aren't supermen.

Nice

[Alan Charlesworth]

Many rules sets provide for individual units to have certain distinct characteristics. BP is very good at that.

When it comes to so called National Characteristics, many rules sets make these into National Caricatures and stereotypes. I prefer something a little bit more subtle.

However, what is totally lacking in rule sets generally is any national doctrine that would affect how an army deploys, the intervals it would use between units and formations, grand tactical doctrine employed etc.

Most games I see played with BP or other rule sets for that matter take no account of these factors. Players will tend to play in their own style, whatever nationality they are using or whether the army is from 1800 or 1815.

Just an observation, not a criticism

[ady2650]

Many rules sets provide for individual units to have certain distinct characteristics. BP is very good at that.

When it comes to so called National Characteristics, many rules sets make these into National Caricatures and stereotypes. I prefer something a little bit more subtle.

However, what is totally lacking in rule sets generally is any national doctrine that would affect how an army deploys, the intervals it would use between units and formations, grand tactical doctrine employed etc.

Most games I see played with BP or other rule sets for that matter take no account of these factors. Players will tend to play in their own style, whatever nationality they are using or whether the army is from 1800 or 1815.

Just an observation, not a criticism

I think your right tactical doctrine is a must for example the shift in Austrian linear doctrine to columnular (is that a word ) from 1805 to 1809 then 1813. What is harder to do is the actual specifics of deployment , I don't think you can force a player to be so restricted , eg taking austrians again , forcing Austrian players on the defensive to deploy in a chequer board formation in columns , it's what they did late war but games would become very boring IMHO

[grant]

Can't force, but it makes for a better opponent if one tries to be true to the character of the army deployed.

I have a decent sized game of Fench vs Austrians planned for two weeks from now and will be responding here with results, as well as hopefully a battle report.

[ady2650]

Can't force, but it makes for a better opponent if one tries to be true to the character of the army deployed.

I have a decent sized game of Fench vs Austrians planned for two weeks from now and will be responding here with results, as well as hopefully a battle report.

looking forward to it

[ady2650]

Oh and I defo agree with your first comment grant

[Greenjacket]

Austrians are on my list of things to do - things I like about them are:
1. Large units of stoic Austrian white coated infantry.
2. Avant-Garde brigades which mix fierce Serbo-Croat Grenzers and dashing Hungarian Hussars and wurst artillery.
3. From what I can tell from my limited reading, rather cautious plodding generals. Like an army commanded by civil servants who expect their orders to be decided after consultation by committee and written down in proper format.
4. Batalionmasse - who needs to form square when your infantry can fight off enemy cavalry in a dense column!

[Jammers]

Now "4" would be interesting to a certain player in our group!

[ady2650]

Now "4" would be interesting to a certain player in our group!

He is catered for my friend with the special rule 'Battalion Mass'