Honour Forums

Discuss the Honour system.

1. rpardo
   Member

   Hi
   This a proposal for an optional rule about the assault on bridges, fortified gates and other defiles. It was proposed by Scruff.

   A march column can assault a bridge or a similar defile.
   All the modifiers of the rule-set are of application, but additionally:
   - It adds a -2 for "bad terrain".
   - It halves their dice.
   - The enemy never halves their dice.

   Evidently it can be re-written to improve the english!
   I hope 'Le Grand Fromage' will appear to aprove or forbide it.

   Regards
   Rafa

   Wargaming with Napoleonic Miniatures
   Project Leipzig
   Alkaid Ediciones

   Posted 1 year ago #

2. Sam Mustafa
   Le Grand Fromage

   If you allow march columns to charge across bridges, then why can't they charge at other times? Down a road? Into a town? Through a mountain pass? Would there be any times when a march column is forbidden to charge, and if so, when and why?

   Are they allowed to wheel prior to charging? And if so, how does that work? Do they swing their long columns around behind them first?

   Given the very generous movement allowance of march columns... are they allowed to charge all that way? Because that can be a considerable charge, from out of nowhere.

   I assume they have to obey the Mandatory Charge rules? What if you have a bridge over a fordable river, and the enemy has placed another unit closer, and to their front, but on the opposite riverbank... Can the march column still charge across the bridge, or must it now charge into the river?

   Posted 1 year ago #

3. Peoples_Republic
   Member

   Hi
   Well there were successfull fire fights and charges accross bridges without artillery particaruly in spain so whats the solution?

   Perhaps a solution would be to alow units to be come irregular within 6 inches of bridges if they choose and allow them in any formation they can fit into 2 deep. A lot of cities are built around rivers with narrow bridges leading into them but they were still captured by Napoleon even though its more difficult.

   Posted 1 year ago #

4. John de Terre Neuve
   Member

   I feel it is always best to find a solution within the body of the rules. I have nothing against scenario specific changes to the rules and maybe that should be the option for this specific problem in this specific scenario, but it sure could be a slippery slope as I believe Sam is pointing out.

   John

   Posted 1 year ago #

5. Max Shadow
   Member

   How about we just allow attack columns to charge across bridges. Ok the funneling effect of the bridge may make it look like a march column at the head but they aren't marching they are assaulting. Defending infantry could just apply the normal +2 for defending obstacle or cover or what have you.
   Max

   Posted 1 year ago #

6. Russell Briant
   Member

   Perhaps the solution is to use all of Scruff's deductions above but the attacking formation is a line (to cater for those that have linear tactics limitations) or attack column.

   There is an abstraction that needs to be made either by having some of the charging teams on the bridge and others in the water, or temporarily formation is allowed to fall out of shape so all teams keep their feet dry. I don't have a preference.

   This then allows bridge and defile charges to occur.

   Additionally I think, the charger should only ever contact and be contacted by one enemy unit because, at best, the attacker only has a frontage of one base (they may be receiving fire from several defenders as they charge home).

   cheers

   Russell

   Posted 1 year ago #

7. Alan Charlesworth
   Member

   I think this is better left as a scenario specific rule rather than a core or optional rule.

   A Lasalle base is around 30m wide. I doubt if there were any bridges that wide in this period. So even if you have a single column of bases going over the bridge it is a significant abstraction of what is happening in terms of fighting frontage.

   The accounts I have read of attacks over bridges seem to have specific features unique to the circumstances. This is better catered for by having scenario specific rules that reflect what you want to have happen in that setting rather a generic bridge rule that may not be appropriate for the circumstances being modelled.

   In an AB game the time frame being represented i.e. around 2 hours is quite likely not sufficient for the preparation and build up that surrounded bridge assaults, to take place.

   Having said all that I did quite like the original suggestions and I am sure I will play around with some adaptations of them for my own games.

   The only bridge crossing home rules I have tried so far was to give the defenders a no go zone on their side of the bridge which gave the attacker sufficient space to cross the bridge in march column and then deploy and then fight with normal rules from there. The defender still has a massive advantage as he can concentrate several units against one so the storming unit is quite likely to get destroyed.

   Posted 1 year ago #

8. Russell Briant
   Member

   Hi Alan

   Would you like to suggest a scenario specific rule for the first of the game set up scenarios "The River Crossing" on page 88?

   Or is the solution in that scenario for the Attacker to put down a ford which they contend is of sufficient width for a unit to fight across in an attack formation?

   cheers

   Russell

   Posted 1 year ago #

9. Alan Charlesworth
   Member

   Hi Russell

   The board on page 88 is not a scenario based game it is an AB game. Regular readers of my posts will know that I don't play AB games but prefer scenarios/table top teasers.

   I started a thread about bridges some time ago (about 3 months back) that mentioned the 'The River Crossing Board'. Sam posted a reply that answers your question from his point of view:

   "We've played a couple of games with that map, and the attacker almost always chooses fords and/or bridges for his terrain options. But the river on that map also runs diagonally, so there can easily be crossings on the attacker's side of the board, long before he reaches the defender's lines."

   Hope that helps a bit.

   Regards

   Alan

   Posted 1 year ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.