Honour Forums

Discuss the Honour system.

1. Rupert of Hentzau
   Member

   One of the dominant points of discussion here in New Zealand is the difficulty of playing with British Armies in general, and the problems in winning as the defender.
   I was wondering if the problem is how we calculate victory?

   With the desire to change the parameters by the minimum possible I would suggest that they remain as they are for armies that attack. As Cam has pointed out in the past most people choose the "Attack" option to try and get the extra units and general.

   Perhaps we could play it that the Defender would count a draw result as a win, and thus there would be no draw?

   Therefore if choosing or forced to attack, the onus is on the attacking player to break his opponent. I would suggest we might need to modify the test used to bring on off table reserves for the attacker to help them do this.

   The Defender is now placed in a position where they are being called on to thwart the enemy attack, possibly so their army could attack with extra numbers on another part of the battlefield. This would then give defending British armies the option of employing historical delaying tactics.Also their lack of Organic cavalry will be less of a hindrance as they will be less concerned with breaking the enemy.

   To me this seems more prferable than trying to hinder attacking armies use of cavalry. Though I felt the use of Disc tests to do combined arms charges worked very well.

   Again any thoughts? Bryan

   Posted 1 year ago #

2. Peoples_Republic
   Member

   Hi,

   I've played other game rule sets. And they seem to all have this problem. Wellington never lost a battle. But I've found British lines very fragile (or nations lines in general) and inferior, to 2 or 3 coloums attacking it because there all ways outnumbered when it comes to the melee's. And they only usaully if the're lucky get 1 chance to fire (throw dice) until contacted. This made them hard to win with.

   Another reason that isnt simulated in most rules is if coloums were staggared or halted or disorganised that was it for the whole attack. they would usaully have to reform back in a safe area after retreating. Most wargames have coloums relentlously battering away, attack after attack which if my reading is correct, wasn't the general case.

   British lines also counter attacked at an important point in the contest. But you wont usaully do this here because 1 line again will be again contesting 2 units in melee (out numbered again) and exposing flanks.

   but if you take the british you do have to understand your taking a defensive army that took advantage of cover (edges of woods walls hedges ectra) to whitle down the opponets attack.
   A good tactic is to take the light cavalry brigade. Put it on the side where there is no cavalry or less cavalry of the opponent. And on that side just as the couloms come into musket range hit them or threaten them in that side or rear with 4 light calvary and stall there attack. Firing at them for a few turns with the line ifantry in front. being defensive and avoid contact on the other flank. this will defenitley break up there nicely formed coloum attack. but im giving away my secrets. lol.

   Cheers

   Posted 1 year ago #

3. Prinny
   Member

   I guess as others at this weekends event have pointed out, the objective has no advantage for the defender, and means nothing to the attacker.

   Yes the defender is only rolling 4 dice if they lose it but by then the game will be over anyway.

   I still think that there has to be something to force the attacker to go for it, they get an extra sub general and more troops, the defender gets to select an extra piece of terrain but I dont think that it balances out.

   Though I could be wrong......

   But I like your idea Bryan, but as my British will never see the light of day at another lasalle comp im sure the Russians will enjoy this rule to try out.

   Posted 1 year ago #

4. Rupert of Hentzau
   Member

   It is a great shame to think your Brits will not play again.
   They are a great looking army, we just need to get the balance right.

   If you played as a defender and managed to stop my Austrians from breaking you, it is currently a draw. If my idea was adoped it would be a win.

   I guess the real question is, would it feel like a win to you? or would you want to break my army to really have that feeling?

   Posted 1 year ago #

5. Prinny
   Member

   I think if I held the objective at the end of the battle and was not broken then yes I would feel like the winner.

   After all I do have the objective and have held off the more numerious force.

   Posted 1 year ago #

6. Bernhard
   Member

   What if a defending unit within a certain distance of the objective receives an increase in elan?

   Posted 1 year ago #

7. Nick the Lemming
   Member

   See my proposed optional VP system in the proposals forum for a possible solution. :)

   Posted 1 year ago #

8. Russell Briant
   Member

   I like the ideas to improve the lot of the defender and make the Attacker work for his extra general and units.

   So think having the defender earning a Marginal victory if the Attacker hasn't broken them (failed a moral check) AND they retain control of the objective is a good idea.

   If the attacker has captured the objective in that situation then they instead have a Marginal victory.

   As noted by Prinny, that then gives the objective more purpose for both parties.

   We were discussing whether we should think through New Zealand tournament scenario/s. This could be one of them.

   Russell

   Posted 1 year ago #

9. seldon
   Member

   Yes I also added my VP system to "The Lemming's" post :), and it sort of carries the same idea you guys mentioned above as a consequence of the VP system

   Posted 1 year ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.