Cavalry thread

Forum for the Napoleonic Battles games series
User avatar
chris_merchant
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2022 8:04 am

Re: Cavalry thread

Post by chris_merchant »

respectfully, I think the onus is on you to provide citations regarding automatic routing :-) cheers
User avatar
Verdun1916
Posts: 279
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2022 8:42 am
Location: Hässleholm, Sweden

Re: Cavalry thread

Post by Verdun1916 »

Caractacus wrote: Mon Nov 21, 2022 2:42 pm I would love to hear of just one single time that anyone who was defeated by Napoleonic cavalry in melee didn't then run or surrender. So yes I'd respectfully suggest that if you lose to cavalry then you must rout no matter who, what, or where. Anything else just isn't realistic.
Then I suggest you read up on the battle of Bornhöft on 7 December 1813. It's a good example of a cavalry charge in all it's glory that was conductet head on against both infantry and artillery. It was a Swedish tactical victory in one way as the cavalry did manage to push back and even route some Danish units even though the terrain was decisevely on the Danish side. Yet there were no mass route, norr any mass surrender and the Danish-French force could withdraw relatively intact and in good order in the end leading to be an ever so glorious cavalry charge, yet a Swedish loss on the strategic level.

I don't mean to cause offense but I do find your reasoning here a bit childish and simplistic. Cavalry was not some sort of super weapon! Nor were the use of cavalry a black or white affaire were successfull cavalry charges always lead to mass routes or surrender. Infantry squares were not always impervious to cavalry charges nor were infantry lines always doomed to annihilation when facing charging cavalry! Reality was far more complex than that!
A bucket load of factors played it's part: leadership, morale, experience, weather, terrain, accuracry and something so simple as the perfect timing for a defending unit to fire their first volley, just to mention a few, all played parts in whether or not a cavalry charge was successfull or not and whether it casued the enemy to route or simply fall back/be pushed back, or be able to hold.
User avatar
Christian Hecht
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2022 1:57 pm
Location: Bouches-de-l’Elbe
Contact:

Re: Cavalry thread

Post by Christian Hecht »

A way would be to set up a matrix and enter all possible combination of cavalry vs. enemy. I suggest that because I think that the wide range of possible situations dictates also a wide range of outcomes.
Just look here and check the squares paragraph, you see under usual circumstance cavalry couldn't break squares, but then if the circumstance were special even cavalry was able to break squares.
http://napoleonistyka.atspace.com/infan ... st_cavalry

So you can't simply say cavalry always breaks the enemy if it wins a melee. It's like Rich said, it is already a difference if a cavalry unit charges or just melees normally.
Here 3 examples of squares holding:
1. Prussian colonel Muffling mentions that in 1814 three newly raised Russian battalions were attacked by French cuirassiers. The Russians delivered volley at 60 paces killing not a single man or horse. The young recruits however stood firm and the cuirassiers turned back and retired.
2. In 1809 at Wagram, the French Guard Horse Chasseurs (Napoleon's favorite cavalry) attacked a square formed by Austrian Landwehr infantry. The Austrians delivered volley, and 10 men and 10 horses were the only casualties. It was however enough for the guardsmen as the Landwehr held their ground.
3. In 1806 at Prenzlow, a small Prussian square (approx. 400 men) repulsed 7 attacks of 2,000 French dragoons, each time delivering a volley at 20-30 paces. The French lost only 10-15 horses but the square held fast and it was enough to discourage the cavalry.


And here a very good example of the opposite:
The second day of the battle of Dresden in August 1813 was a great day for the French cavalry. The rain made most of the Austrian muskets useless in combat. Berkheim's light cavalry attacked one Austrian square from all sides forcing it to surrender. Erzherzog Rainier Infantry Regiment lost 190 killed and wounded, and 900 prisoners. Lusignan and Beaulieu Infantry Regiments suffered similar fates, they were trapped and forced to surrender. The French also captured 16 guns and General Sezenny. Austrian heavy battery was also captured. Several squadrons of Hungarian hussars made desperate charges but without success.
Simply there were too many French cuirassiers, dragoons and lancers, and Polish uhlans.
Ps. It's diffucult to say how many allied squares, or rather Austrian squares, were broken at Dresden. (Actually the Austrian infantry formed battalion-mass against cavalry as the hollow square on 3-ranks deep was considered by them as not strong enough. The battalion-mass was a closely packed column, one company wide and six comp. deep. Another anti-cavalry formation was division-mass.
Two companies broke into four half-companies, aligned themselves behind the other, and closed their ranks up to about 3 feet between the half-companies.)
Général Christian Hecht
Commandant en Chef de la Grande Armée
Comte et Baron de l'Empire

Image
Napoleonic Wargame Club
User avatar
Verdun1916
Posts: 279
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2022 8:42 am
Location: Hässleholm, Sweden

Re: Cavalry thread

Post by Verdun1916 »

A very interesting read, Christian! Thank you for sharing these accounts!
Bill-Peters
Posts: 170
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2022 8:41 pm

Re: Cavalry thread

Post by Bill-Peters »

Remember that it took a lot longer to train a cavalry trooper than an infantry soldier. You are also talking about horse losses too.

Pulling the "trigger" on when to send in cavalry is one of the hardest parts of the series to learn. Similar to knowing when to go into square or pull your guns out of the line and fall back.

The learning curve for this series is high. It gets harder when you play a human opponent who is skilled in the games too but that is the most rewarding experience.
User avatar
Cédric Monget
Posts: 165
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:56 pm
Location: Bordeaux

Re: Cavalry thread

Post by Cédric Monget »

On this subject of cavalry charges, a book has just been published in French, I have not yet read it.
Caractacus
Posts: 22
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2022 6:06 pm

Re: Cavalry thread

Post by Caractacus »

Hmm I'm obviously not getting through.

It's not about infantry or anyone standing up to cavalry. Yes that happened all the time. It's about what happens when cavalry successfully breaks into formations. The most often cited example being the Union Brigade's rout of D'Erlon's corps at Waterloo. French eyewitness accounts write that they are perfectly helpless against cavalry inside their formation and have to run away or surrender.

This happened all the time. Columns, lines, and even squares, were useless once cavalry were inside their formation. The defeated infantry didn't just blithely walk away and then somehow reform their formation 50 yards to the rear like in this game. They ran, or they surrendered, or they died.

So please think about the actual question. I'm starting to remember why I gave up on internet forums years ago. Dogpiles are childish not me.
User avatar
zovs
Posts: 488
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2022 11:38 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Cavalry thread

Post by zovs »

Being an old cavalry man myself, I am highly biased, and know that all Cavalry men are elite war fighters, whether we rode on horses of flesh or in horses of steel, we know we are the best, Scouts Out!
Image
Beta Tester for: War in the East 1 & 2, WarPlan & WarPlan Pacific, Valor & Victory, Flashpoint Campaigns: Sudden Storm, Computer War In Europe 2
SPWW2 & SPMBT scenario creator
TheGrayMouser
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2022 11:44 am

Re: Cavalry thread

Post by TheGrayMouser »

I think the controversy stem from the fact that defeated defenders troops are pushed back 100 yards and (assuming no one routs) both are disordered. It probably makes sense more for infantry vs infantry ( but even then in Napoleonics I could see the argument against) but it makes less sense for cavalry vs infantry. Ie, how could ( and why?) infantry shuffle back after suffering a defeat from horse. At least squares don’t get pushed back!

Despite this I don’t think it worth changing, I’m sure if units weren’t pushed back there could be pretty bad effects gameplay wise downstream…
User avatar
Verdun1916
Posts: 279
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2022 8:42 am
Location: Hässleholm, Sweden

Re: Cavalry thread

Post by Verdun1916 »

Caractacus wrote: Wed Dec 28, 2022 8:07 am Hmm I'm obviously not getting through.

It's not about infantry or anyone standing up to cavalry. Yes that happened all the time. It's about what happens when cavalry successfully breaks into formations. The most often cited example being the Union Brigade's rout of D'Erlon's corps at Waterloo. French eyewitness accounts write that they are perfectly helpless against cavalry inside their formation and have to run away or surrender.

This happened all the time. Columns, lines, and even squares, were useless once cavalry were inside their formation. The defeated infantry didn't just blithely walk away and then somehow reform their formation 50 yards to the rear like in this game. They ran, or they surrendered, or they died.

So please think about the actual question. I'm starting to remember why I gave up on internet forums years ago. Dogpiles are childish not me.
Well the Swedish cavalry did successfully break into the Danish formation during the battle of Bornhöft on 7 December 1813, yet there were no mass route nor mass surrender by the Danish. Some Danish soldiers did indeed run away in panick, while others held fast even after the Swedish cavalry had broken into their formation, continuing to fire their rifles and muskets at the Swedes and using their bayonets to defend themselfs. Others withdrew in orderly fashion. Off those who routed some were cut down by the cavalry while the majority were rallied around the Church in Bronhöft ca 2000 meters to the north. And in the end the entire Danish force withdrew in good order even though the Swedish cavalry charge had broken into their formations. Danish losses were 11 dead, 35 wounded and 75 taken prisoners out of a force of 2 500. The Swedish cavalry doing the charging consisted of 700 officers and men, or 700 sabres as the historical sources phrases it, out of which 13 were killed and 46 wounded.
This is clearly an example of a successfull cavalry charge breaking INTO an enemy formation yet not causing mass surrender nor mass routing. It's also a good example of how limited the losses could be even when cavalry managed to break into an enemy formation.

You say it's not about infantry, yet you have mentioned infantry several times in this very interesting discussion. In one of your previous post reply you wrote:
I would love to hear of just one single time that anyone who was defeated by Napoleonic cavalry in melee didn't then run or surrender. So yes I'd respectfully suggest that if you lose to cavalry then you must rout no matter who, what, or where. Anything else just isn't realistic.
That was what I was responding to in my previous reply and that is what I am again refering you to now since you do not exclude infantry in that post reply. I gave you an example of exactly what you asked for then and now I have done so again with some more detail.

Bornhöft is an example off exactly what you asked for: an example of when anyone (the Danish-French force, consisting of infantry, artillery and cavalry under the command of prince Frederik of Hessen) were defeated by Napoleonic cavalry (the Swedish cavalry division under the command of Anders Fredrik Skjöldebrand) breaking into their formation, that did NOT result in any type of mass route or mass surrender.

So no, I do not agree with you that a successfull cavalry charge should always result in an automatic route in this game series! Your statement regarding this: "Anything else just isn't realistic" is simply wrong! Bornhöft is an historical example from the Napoleonic Wars proving that your statement does not hold up. No matter how you twist and turn it. And it also shows that an auto-route rule/function in game for every formation that gets defeated by a successfull cavalry charge would be unrealistic and historically inaccurate.

Cheers and happy holidays!
Post Reply