Regarding French artillery, I'd say that during the revolutionary period, it was the finest arm available and had both high ability and morale. Especially the new horse artillery units considered themselves absolute elites and looked down on all other arms, outswaggering even the hussars.
I would also reconsider using mountain artillery and siege artillery. Neither played a big role in battles in the era. Especially siege artillery as it was practically useless on the battlefield and was too slow to march along with field armies. They belonged to siege trains wich followed the field armies as seperate entities and were used exclusively to batter fortifications. When faced with enemy forces, the siege train was lost. It did not fight a battle.
I would second the idea that the hussars deserve a bonus of some kind. They were indeed considered a notch above the chasseur regiments. Their equipment was similar to chasseurs and included the carbine which was used for skirmishing and outpost duty.
I don't see why you would add a seperate category of line lancers. No such thing existed historically. The chevaux legere lanciers were created from chasseurs and dragoons but received the same training, role and eventually the same (replacement) horses.
You might want to give the "Polish"lancer units a bigger bonus than the "French"lancer units. Despite popular imagination, lances were not easy to master. The polish units (Guard, Vistula and Polish-trained Dutch "red"lancers) were adapt with them while the French units were less so.....
I would stay away from the dismounted cavalry concept. Beyond outpost duty, cavalry remained mounted in combat. Even the dragoons. While they were issued the dragoon musket (e.g. a larger carbine or a smaller musket) that did not really change their role as medium cavalry, capable of both light cavalry roles and heavy cavalry roles. Hence their popularity; they were versatile and relatively cheap. And were hardly ever used on foot. The famous foot dragoon divisions were a failure and the troops were mounted as soon as horses became available.
I would not add Gendarmerie. There were "police" troops, deployed in small units and were not seen on any battlefields. Their job was anti-smuggling, anti-banditry and counter-insurgency. Considering the scale of NTW, they don't fit. If you're thinking of the Gendarmes dÉlite of the Imperial Guard, these were MP's and special purpose troops, normally assigned to guarding the emperor's baggage and headquarters. Not combat troops and thus seldom seen on battlefields (although it did happen, they were too small in number to be relevant in NTW).
Why demote the Carabiniers? They were the elite of the regular cavalry (and never let anyone forget their special status). While their original status was indeed as light skirmish cavalry attached to the line cavalry, that was far in the past. They were heavy cavalry and nothing else. Giving them the dismount ability would be plain silly, akin to giving grenades to the Grenadiers a cheval because they are named grenadiers...
I'd also question any functional differentation between the grenadiers a cheval and the dragons de l'imperatrice (or horse grenadiers and empress dragoons
). Both were brigaded together, used as shock cavalry and given the same type of horses (with blacks going to the grenadiers and bays to the dragoons).
Lastly, there are very few accounts of cavalry units using their firearms in battles. Most end badly but all have in common that they are noted for being so rare. I would therefore recommend eliminating the firing ability of chasseurs etc. I realize this will make the chasseurs less unique so its a choice of gameplay vs. historical accuracy, I suppose.
French Infantry Overhaul:
As much as I like your idea of simulating low supplies, lack of ammunition is not the way to do it. It will impact actual game play and force even more melee combat (which was extremely rare unlike blazing musketry duels). And I'd be hard pressed to find accounts of armies lacking sufficient bullets or cannonballs during battles. The fact is that armies carried enough to see them through a battle or two. Only multiple day battles or during sieges would this become an issue if the supply was cut. Otherwise, magazines established in central depots provided enough ammo. Usually administrated by the artillery branches, they proved far more effective than quartermaster services.
I also fail to see the reason for different sizes of infantry units. There was no numerical difference in a light battalion and a line battalion. And converged grenadier or foot dragoon units were also usually similarly sized to line battalions. The Imperial guard battalions would be even bigger than line battalions!
If grenadiers are supposed to be better than line troops, why give them less men so their better qualities are undermined by their inferior numbers?
I am also not sure what you intend with your "line regiments". How do you intend to include voltigeurs and grenadiers in a fusilier/line unit? And why would you want to increase melee? This is the culmination of the musket & horse period, not the pike & shot. (Actual) Infantry melee is rare, fire fights should be the norm.
When modelling skirmishing ability in line and light units you consider game play and balance but not when modelling other units/categories? That seems strange and inconsistent to me.
Why don't you add conscript line infantry? Troops which are comparable to the Militia or National Guard but can form square. That would make the original fusiliers of the line comparable to the well trained troops of 1804 trained in the Army of England.
When modeling the Imperial Guard, you have to realize there were 3 distinct guard phases. The 1802-1809, the 1810-1814 and the 1815. In the first, the guard started small and was steadily if erratically increased and decreased in several economy drives. In the second phase, it was steadily enlarged, both by adding Dutch guard regiments and by more and more Young Guard regiments, eventually leading to the rationalization of the Voltigeur and Tirailleur regiments. And then in 1815, it was rationalized with 1-4 regiments of grenadiers and chasseurs and 2 divisions worth of Young Guards.
Some of these regiments you want to model were actually the same unit under a different name, like the fusiliers and middle guard grenadiers. I also think you are underestimating the fusiliers. They were also elite troops, with only slightly less demanding entry qualifications than the Old Guard. And they did most of the fighting up to 1812, so you could say that the reputation of the old guard was actually earned by the middle guard. So I'd place them rather more ahead of normal elites. If you really want, I can give you a proper breakdown of the guard and its various units but its boring stuff
.
[/QUOTE]
Foreign Regiments System:
- 10s of new "Foreign Units" will be introduced to be recruitable in the territories conquered by Napoleon. They will take the place of normal French Units and will all be territory or region specific. For instance, Italian Guard Grenadiers would replace normal line Grenadiers in many Italian cities. The Grand Armee was comprised of a great mix of uniforms/cultures/units and I hope that the new Foreign Regiment System will model that.
- As well as replacing the standard roster units, individual foreign units such as the Jagers of Wurttemberg will be available.
- List Coming...
- The units in different regions will have slightly altered stats to represents regional strengths/weaknesses.
- The Imperial Guard will most likely only be recruitable in France, and these foreign regiments will all have unit caps, though they may not be severe.
This seems like a nice idea.
Possible Additional Changes:
Artillery:
- Remove bonuses of french artillery that make no sense (morale bonus?)
Well, the French artillery was considered the best in Europe at the time. Either they are modelled to shoot better or they have better morale I suppose.
Army of Napoleon: Bringing the French Military Up to Snuff. *New Units* *New Textures* BETA now available!
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by richardsharpe
