Typical land battle

[Sheogorath]

-Ozzman
Thats odd, 'cause you SAID thin red line >_>
The Charge of the Light Brigade was seven hundred British cavalry and some French cavalry against an unknown number of Russian gunners.
If you want a REAL 'against-all-odds' situation, try the Siege of Petropavlovsk.


-hoom
Doing the math, thats %36 casualties, which is actually pretty heavy. And they were, mostly, fighting against gun crews once they got into the melee, there were some Cossacks, but Cossacks dont do well against organized and trained troops.
I believe the standard for most Western armies to withdraw from battle is about %10-15, which is considered 'medium' in the scale of casualties. One reason the Japanese freaked people out so much in WWII was that they would take as much as %30-40 casualties before they withdrew to regroup. That was not in-line with most nations tactics at the time.

[Lord Winter]

have you even heard about the battle of balaclava!?destroyer of hope!

Yes but that was into a fortified postion and into a nice little cross fire. It was also 30 years pass out timeline.

The fact is you didn't see frontal calvary charges or the orgianal thrust made by calvery in most battles (not counting flanking movements). They were still a fomabiable force on the battle field but they wern't the heavy "Knights" of the medivl period.

[hoom]

thats %36 casualties, which is actually pretty heavy

Yes but point being that Ozman raised the Light Brigade charge as firepower beating cavalry.

They charged into a fortified position with artilliery & riflemen shooting at them from 3 sides, probably about as good advantage as possible for the guns.

Aside from the guncrews & some infantry, they cut their way through 5000 odd enemy cavalry & still weren't stopped.

[Ozzman1O1]

just read abaout the battle of balaclava please in wiki and you will see

[Ozzman1O1]

(is every body here a nerd or just smart because there teens?im only 10)

[Noir]

(is every body here a nerd or just smart because there teens?im only 10)

I am afraid that we are the worst kind here Ozzman101: nerds in their teens (or above)

[Martok]

I am afraid that we are the worst kind here Ozzman101: nerds in their teens (or above)

Indeed. I'm 30 years old (going on 31 in a couple months), and I know for a fact that many members here -- possibly a majority, in fact -- are around my age or older.

[TosaInu]

I hope they dont make the square TOO strong, but considering how much its been mythologized as the ULTIMATE CAVALRY STOPPING WONDER FORMATION...but then, CA usually does a decent job of balancing things.

A square is also great to shoot at. So, even if they are ultimate in stopping cavalry, it will be counter balanced by being an ultimate target.

[Stuperman]

I imagine that a typical land battle will involve lining your men up against the edge of the battle map, and then waiting for the enemy to come into range, almost as exciting as watching paint dry.

[Ozzman1O1]

you know that there will be bayonet melee combat right,it wont be all guns...

[S.Selim_1]

i'm not tryin 2 be negative but muskets, cavalry and spear men and surely artillery...it sounds intresting but does it sound fun?! i hope CA work it out to make it fun coz i luv the idea of age of empire III too

[Ozzman1O1]

The tw games are not all about watching cool battles,its about making an empire and conquering the world...i just auto resolve my battles these days....

[S.Selim_1]

really...well now i know why it takes long to conquer a province...but common man...i might as well go play civilization...but it's nice to have some intresting battles..it makes u want to play the game even more, specially if the graphics are goood u know..oh and that reminds me..i gotta upgrade my computer

[Ozzman1O1]

civilization is a horable montage of history and facts,ex.in 2005 hannibal attaked the roman empire in china and killed ambraham lincoln....very.......interesing game.....

[S.Selim_1]

loooooooooooooooool...yeah it is an intresting game..i wonder y they keep "upgrading" the game every year.....somehow this game have fans

[HarunTaiwan]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tercio will be included.

[Freedom Onanist]

I hope they dont make the square TOO strong, but considering how much its been mythologized as the ULTIMATE CAVALRY STOPPING WONDER FORMATION...but then, CA usually does a decent job of balancing things.

Well, I hope they don't underplay it to pander to the "oh, look, horsies - cool" crowd. It pretty much was the "ULTIMATE CAVALRY STOPPING WONDER FORMATION". I think you'd struggle to find many examples of cavalry actually breaking through a formed square. I think there was one example in the Peninsular War. Where some KGL cavalry charged at a French square and one of the horses in dying rolled over a corner and physically bulldozed an opening for the others. Otherwise cavalry just don't stand a chnce unsupported against squares - the most obvious example being Ney's fruitless charges at Waterloo.

The tactically interesting point about squares is that they have to be formed quickly and efficiently and that a certain level of "steadyness" by the infatry is required. I hope this is represented in the game somehow. So, raw conscripts should have a serious chance of not being able to form square fast enough and/or of losing their nerve and running. Experience and possibly cost of unit (representing extra training) should be factored in - I somehow doubt this will be done, unless they extend the training time of units.

Secondly, as TosaInu points out, squares are extremely vulnerable to gunfire. So feint at infantry with your cavalry, force them into square and then bombard them with your artillery. A mix of manoeuvres that is much more interesting that taking any kind of Hollywood appoach to the effectiveness of cavalry charges.

[Trax]

Extremely vulnerable to gunfire, yes.

I remember reading about a Napoleonic battle during heavy rain, French hussars? approached Austrian? infantry and the infantry formed square. The French didn't charge, but dismounted, loaded their carbines under cover of their cloaks and fired a volley. The infantry surrendered before they could fire second time.

[Furious Mental]

It would be great if we could dismount cavalry like that in battle. Another tactic would be to gall the infantry into using their muskets by having cavalry ride up and fire on them with a long arm or pistols, which could disrupt the dense ranks of infantry.

[Ozzman1O1]

think about it furious metal,cavalry dont dismount because if you had light armor,a saber,and a pistol you would be of no use as infantry,but heavy cavalry is a nother story

[Warluster]

Most often though Cav was armed with carbines, a shorter version of a musket, and they had armor, so actually they'd be better then infantry dismounted as they have better chances in melee. Only problem is that they have no Infantry Training so I'd just stay on my horse if I was them...

[Matt_Lane]

Most often though Cav was armed with carbines, a shorter version of a musket, and they had armor, so actually they'd be better then infantry dismounted as they have better chances in melee. Only problem is that they have no Infantry Training so I'd just stay on my horse if I was them...

By this period dragoons were light cavalry used for skirmishing, foraging and screening duties. They wore amour plate to offer themselves some protection from long range fire however musket fire would easily penetrate the plate at infantry distances. Their carbines where also mainly used for defense during skirmishing with the saber being their main offensive weapon. As you say with a lack of infantry training and no bayonet I would not want to pitch them against line infantry.

[Furious Mental]

Some cavalry had bayonets, but really if you wanted cavalry to melee you'd put them back on their horses. Aside from carbines muskets, musketoons, blunderbusses, and rifles were also used. I believe only cuirassiers had armour.

[Kalle]

Here is maybe a not so typical battle (neither was cannae typical) but a battle that shows that superior tactics was more important then numbers and also that cavalry still could play the dominant role if used wisely.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Fraustadt

Wikis account of the battle might not be the most detailed but you can find more info on your own now when you know what battle to search for :)
/Kalle

[Ozzman1O1]

at the time etw takes place cav was used to make a fast skirmish force,not a band of men that charged and trampled there enemies....and dont make fun of cannea,that battle is how im here right now....

[CBR]

at the time etw takes place cav was used to make a fast skirmish force,not a band of men that charged and trampled there enemies....

Cavalry was slightly more than that: http://www.napoleon-series.org/milit...n/c_eylau.html


CBR

[Furious Mental]

Actually as far as I know it was only a minority of cavalry (flankers) that properly knew how to skirmish. And when supplies of weapons got short cavalrymen often had to give up their long arms to the infantry. Really it would be most appropriate if every cavalry unit had some flankers who could be ordered to go out ahead and skirmish. I will be irritated if there isn't a proper skirmishing mechanic for cavalry and infantry.

[Kalle]

at the time etw takes place cav was used to make a fast skirmish force,not a band of men that charged and trampled there enemies....and dont make fun of cannea,that battle is how im here right now....

I think you need to read my post again and also study a bit about 18th century warfare and tactics.

Swedish cavalry in the early 18th century was not a skirmish force (allthough it could skirmish also). It was a massive wall of wedged formed cavalry that would charge, trample and smash any formation put in front of them as can be seen if you take time to study for instance the battle of Fraustadt. And it was not a peasent mob they fought at Fraustadt it was the bulk of the saxon army with allies.

I read you are only ten but since you want us to be aware of that you should also be aware that very many people posting here are adults with academic degrees in the subjets we talk about.

To make it clear I did not make fun of Cannae, I said it was not a typical battle and Fraustadt is the Cannae of the 18th century, thus not a typical battle either.

Best regards and keep the posts coming :)
/Kalle

[econ21]

The tactically interesting point about squares is that they have to be formed quickly and efficiently ...

Secondly, as TosaInu points out, squares are extremely vulnerable to gunfire.

Great post.

I think it is these kind of interactions that this period among the most tactically interesting in terms of battles. (Once cavalry stop being a factor - around the ACW - battles become more dull until the tank arrives.)

However, it is also these interactions that will make programming the AI an absolute nightmare. It is easy to imagine a situation in which the player can always catch the enemy out of square, but feint the AI into forming squares which the player then shoots to death.

In real life, I think command and control issues precluded such micromanagement. Often a cavalry charge would work or would not work because of sheer luck. But computer games would find it very frustrating if that such "realistic" constraints were introduced to handle the problem.

[fenir]

Sheogorath,

The Charge of the Light Brigade was 660 to 675 Men, which I think from memory was 4 battalions from 4 Different Regiments. 2 x hussars regiments, 1 dragoons, and 17th Lancers (Death or Glory boys)?

And considering only about 154 where avaiable at roll call the next morning for active duty, (of which offical socures say only 132 where not wounded). Needless to say, the Light Brigade was not used afterwards due to it's casualties.

Which equates to 77% casualties, @ 154/660 or 154/670.
that would equate to 61% casualties, @ 195/660 or 195/670.
But typically casualties are all those that have been wounded, so the equation would be 132/660 which gives casualties of 80%.

Also of note: Just because this amount died, and these didn't, doesn't mean much, because more usually die within the following 7 days.

So 660 against 8200, seems to deminish your claims. (8% of total attackers to defenders).

And considering the odds, 20 Battalions of Infantry, and 5200 Russian Cavalry. Not to mention that they routed and destoryed a considerable amount. These are from offical Russian Documents by the way.

And, I have no information on these French units you claim to be involved, in fact, the French army has no record of French cavalry being Involved in the Charge as you claim.

Note: From my experiance, combat units regularly operate at between 10 to 15% from full strenght when involved in extended line action.
Eastern Front world war two, the germans didn't pull a major unit out of the line until it was 20 to 30% under strenght. And, as the war progressed, it became larger and larger.

Just some observations.

Sincerely


fenir