Tactics you wouldn’t normally think off.

[ZombieFriedNuts]

I was reading about some battles on the internet to see if I could get any better and read that a tactic at the time of empire was to charge cavalry at line infantry withdraw when they formed a square then have horse artillery get close, pound them and limber up when enemy get close.
It seems an incredibly obvious thing to now that I think about it but I haven’t read it on the forums so people ether didn’t think of it or didn’t think it was worth mentioning. So is there any other manoeuvres that seem obvious to you that nobody has mentioned but might help other people.

[joe4iz]

I must admit never trying that because the arty can't seem to make up its mind whether it wants to limber or unlimber.

I try to determine what unit the AI will chase...and send them on a flanking manuever. The AI will always show my entire line one of its flanks as they race past trying to get at some cav unit or arty piece. Sometimes, I don't even have to unlimber the arty..
It happens too many times to count...

[Tully Bascombe]

I was reading about some battles on the internet to see if I could get any better and read that a tactic at the time of empire was to charge cavalry at line infantry withdraw when they formed a square then have horse artillery get close, pound them and limber up when enemy get close.
It seems an incredibly obvious thing to now that I think about it but I haven’t read it on the forums so people ether didn’t think of it or didn’t think it was worth mentioning. So is there any other manoeuvres that seem obvious to you that nobody has mentioned but might help other people.

Napoleon thought of it first. Your infantry should be advancing in column behind the horse artillery. The cannonade from the horse artillery should keep the enemy infantry from forming up to receive the shock of the advancing french infantry. Napoleon used this complex tactic several times. Properly applied it was nearly foolproof, but there were numerous instances where one element or another went astray or arrived at the wrong time or place. The problem was keeping a sufficient quantity of all three in reserve for just the rught place and time, assembling all three arms properly and co-ordinating them. Napoleon's last gasp at Waterloo was supposed top be just such a co-ordinated combined arms attack, but the cavalry went to the wropng place, the horse artillery was never deployed and the Guard infantry launched an attack by themselves that ended disasterously.

[Marquis of Roland]

I was reading about some battles on the internet to see if I could get any better and read that a tactic at the time of empire was to charge cavalry at line infantry withdraw when they formed a square then have horse artillery get close, pound them and limber up when enemy get close.
It seems an incredibly obvious thing to now that I think about it but I haven’t read it on the forums so people ether didn’t think of it or didn’t think it was worth mentioning. So is there any other manoeuvres that seem obvious to you that nobody has mentioned but might help other people.

Yea this is an old idea :laugh4:

And don't get too close to the square :2thumbsup:

[Strategy]

Napoleon thought of it first.

Napoleon did not think of it first. The fact that infantry in dense formations were extremely vulnerable to artillery had been known for well over 300 years by this time (pretty much since the introduction of cannon to the battlefield), and it was one impetus to the development of linear infantry tactics by Gustavus Adolphus.

Adolphus (or arguably, his head of artillery Lennart Torstensson) was the Father of modern Artillery and introduced most of the tactics that were used for the subsequent 200 years. Horse artillery (the main component required for efficient execution of the tactic mentioned by OP) was developed by Lennart Torstensson during the 30 years war.

Pretty much the only military innovation that can with some credibility be ascribed to Napoleon is the use of mass artillery batteries (though even that can arguably be credited to the Chevalier du Teil - a French artillery theorist and incidentally one of Napoleon's commanders). The "innovative" Napoleonic tactic was to form the artillery into a massive battery to bombard the enemy formations heavily at a specific point (which would have a devastating effect on the troops thus targetted) and then launching massive infantry column and/or cavalry charges into the gap in the enemy line to break them. Against steady enemy infantry (or as at Waterloo - troops that had retreated into cover during the bombardment, a favorite tactic of Wellington), the tactic could be disastrous; as Ney found out at Waterloo when he charged supposedly unsteady troops with the French cavalry.

The Napoleonic tactic doesn't really work in ETW, as roundshot is simply not that effective in the game and enemy formations are more likely to charge forward and overrun the batteries than to stand and let themselves be pounded to shreds.

The tactic of forcing enemy units into square and bombarding them with artillery or massed musketry does work, if the square is close enough that cannister shot can be used (in theory - horse artillery should be extremely useful for this). However, the AI's forming of squares is quite weird (it will often form them when there is no cavalry close by and only occasionally does so when the cavalry is close enough to charge), so as a battle tactic it rarely has a major effect.

[ZombieFriedNuts]

Your infantry should be advancing in column behind the horse artillery.

very nice thanks.

[Didz]

Rather than use artillery which is pretty unreliable as its been implemented you can simply use infantry in line. The fact that the enemy has formed square means that it has reduced its firepower by 75%, so the longer you can pour volleys into them from a full infantry regiment the better.

Keep the cavalry nearby (but out of musket range) , so that if they do try and abandon the square to return fire you can ride them down.

Other Napoleonic Tactic's I've purlioned for my own benefit is what the French called 'Ordre Mixte' or Mixed Order. Mixed Order was basically an attempt to retain the benefits of attacking in a column whilst not losing the firepower afforded by being in line. It basically involved mixing battalions in column with battalions in line e.g. [Column:Line:Column:Line:Column]

The advantage was that if forced into a firefight the formation had the same firepower available to it as the enemy line, whilst it had the option to punch forward with one or all of its columns to overwhelm oart of the enemy line. The other advantage was that columns could form square far faster than a unit in line and so the columns on the flanks of the formation could actually protect it from enfilade by enemy horse. The Austrian's developed a similar idea that they called 'Massed Order'.

In ETW I use a similar formation for my Ottoman armies, combining four columns of Jannissaries (Melee Attack 13) with two regiments of muskets men. The formation will stay together nicely if everyone is grouped and it has the added advantage that the French never had. namely that ETW musketmen quite happily keep shooting even when their own jannissaries are in hand ot hand combat with the target.

As an added extra I sometimes also deploy two of the so called skirmisher units slightly forward of the main formation on skirmish so that they lure the enemy into charge range. I actually took a screen shot of this formation in use but don't know where this game stores them.

[JRCDave]

Send columns at the quick march at unit seams. Use two or three to break the seam, change face and fire down the line. The AI may be slow to respond. Try it out. Just a thought and I can't wait to try the mixed order.

[Ordani]

The Napoleonic tactic doesn't really work in ETW, as roundshot is simply not that effective in the game and enemy formations are more likely to charge forward and overrun the batteries than to stand and let themselves be pounded to shreds.

Bingo.

The reduction of artillery range and effect to make a playable game removes most of the real-world tactics associated with it, you can kind of fake it with mortars and some Eastern artillery pieces -- thus probably a lot of the outcry about Mortars in MP :>

[MikeV]

Napoleon did not think of it first.
Rocks, Paper, Scissors: Infantry, Cavalry, Artillery (only this time, with them new-fangled gunpowder thingies :laugh4: )

[Didz]

Napoleon thought of it first.
Napoleon's only real innovation was the Corps system and refinment of the army administration, everything else was invented and in practical use long before he came along.

[Kulgan]

But Napoleon did use these tactics with great succes on a regular basis which is something few generals in the years before managed to do.

One other thing Napoleon did was breaking up his army in corps d'armee, which were individual army groups who could operate individually. they would have their own artillery and cavalry. This was one of the reasons why the french army of the time was so mobile. As well on the battlefield as moving faster than anyone else through countryside.

[Didz]

But Napoleon did use these tactics with great succes on a regular basis which is something few generals in the years before managed to do.
But he didn't invent the tactic's he merely weilded them effectively. The tactic's evolved from the concept of the Demi-Brigade which in turn was a tactical solution to the problem of mixing trained soldiers with large numbers of highly motivated but undertrained volunteers. (later conscripts)

Another Tactic that works and is actually mentioned by wiggy.

Deploy infantry units in two lines with the units in the second line staggered so that they cover the gaps between front regiments.
https://img135.imageshack.us/img135/1539/straggeredlines.jpg

Now when the enemy cavalry attacks form both lines into square so that the squares form a chequer board pattern and can all support each other with fire.
https://img135.imageshack.us/img135/5277/chequeredsquares.jpg

As an added headache for the attacking cavalry form your own cavarly behind the squares (preferrably missile cavalry if you have it) this forces the AI to try and push through the squares to reach your cavalry and secures their destruction.
https://img135.imageshack.us/img135/1863/cavalrydestroyed.jpg

[Strategy]

@Kulgan:

But Napoleon did use these tactics with great succes on a regular basis which is something few generals in the years before managed to do.

I think generals like Marlborough, Leopold Daun, Marshal de Saxe, Rumyantsev, Suvorov, Frederick the Great - just to mention some of the most prominent within the game period - would be quite dissappointed to know that they did not use combined arms tactics with great success on a regular basis. ~;)

There were many, many competent generals both before and after Napoleon (and that's not even considering Napoleon's many, many subordinates - some of whom were arguably better battlefield commanders than he himself was).

@Didz:
Some would argue whether even the Corps d'Armee system can be attributed to Napoleon; the military theory of autonomous Corps and mobile inter-supporting formations was developed by various French officers during the 1770s. Though obviously, as Napoleon was the first to implement the system, I think it is fair to attribute it to him.

[Melvish]

Bingo.

The reduction of artillery range and effect to make a playable game removes most of the real-world tactics associated with it, you can kind of fake it with mortars and some Eastern artillery pieces -- thus probably a lot of the outcry about Mortars in MP :>

Just mod the game (projectiles in db folder of patch.pack)
I use a range of 500-600 for cannon and 90 for standard musket.

Check the mod tools to do it yourself to your liking
Or use my mod by clicking on the link below.
Backup your own patch.pack before replacing it.

link dead for cause of a new patch (http://www.4shared.com/file/94886337/f4bd5304/patch.html)

[MikeV]

But Napoleon did use these tactics with great succes on a regular basis which is something few generals in the years before managed to do.

One other thing Napoleon did was breaking up his army in corps d'armee, which were individual army groups who could operate individually. they would have their own artillery and cavalry. This was one of the reasons why the french army of the time was so mobile. As well on the battlefield as moving faster than anyone else through countryside.
Actually, one of the points made in Development of the Corps D'Armée (http://www.napoleon-series.org/military/organization/c_armycorps.html) was the the bataillon carré, which solved one of the key problems not simulated well in any of the :TW systems: how to locate the enemy force, and once located, how to engage it swiftly and decisively. Napoleon's innovation was the ability to spread out his force while on the move (simplifying foraging logistics), yet preserve the flexibility to converge and engage in any chosen direction.

[Didz]

Actually, one of the points made in Development of the Corps D'Armée (http://www.napoleon-series.org/military/organization/c_armycorps.html) was the the bataillon carré, which solved one of the key problems not simulated well in any of the :TW systems: how to locate the enemy force, and once located, how to engage it swiftly and decisively. Napoleon's innovation was the ability to spread out his force while on the move (simplifying foraging logistics), yet preserve the flexibility to converge and engage in any chosen direction.
As you rightly point out in the article you cite the evolvution of the corps d'armée and the subsequent adoption of the bataillon carré is based upon the theories and work of a number of individuals. However, it was under Napoleon that it was perfected in the Grande Armée .

But, I don't agree with you comment that it cannot be recreated in ETW.

The principle of the bataillon carré is to divide your army into four self-sufficient corps d'armée and then to move them in a mutually supporting square formation. ETW already has a mechanic's for mutual support and reinforcement of an army in battle. So, in theory if care was taken over army placement it ought to be possible to arrange four combined arms armies in a square formation close enough together that if the AI attacks one the others will march to the battle as reinforcements.

The advantages would be the same as Napoleon envisaged providing all round defence against an attack from an unknown quarter and rapid concentration of force at the point of contact.

It's a novel idea and not one I've actually tried but it should work. The nature of ETW tends to favour the adoption of positional warfare as described by Jomini as conducted by Frederick the Great where our armies concentrate on capturing and holding physical objectives (e.g. Towns/Forts/bridges) rather than defeating each other. This tends to lead towards the formation of single armies focussed on specific targets whereas if the object was military domination of an area then the bataillon carré would be a better strategy particularly as the AI has a habit of dispersing is own forces into multiple small raiding units aimed at specific settlements and resources which can thus be defeated in detail by an army which is dispersed but able to concentrate rapidly against each of them.

Might be worth trying this out against Russia in fact, and I'll see if it works.