Cavalry Rules

[Unlucky General]

Comrades,

I was watching Military History Visualized (one of my favourite YouTube broadcasters) on Napoleonic cavalry tactics and was reminded of the rarity of cavalry v cavalry frontal contacts. I remember reading this in Noseworthy years a go. Yet every set of rules I have played seems to permit this without particular modifiers. It happens all the time in the games I have played (many but not as many as I want ... of course).

What are your experiences? Has anyone adopted house rules? I've played WRG, Grand Manner and Black Powder mainly - what do the others permit?

[Sparrow]

What you probably need is someone who rides a lot of horses to reply.

My own limited experience is that your average horse is not stupid and has a self survival instinct. As such their instinct is not to rush headlong at another horse but rather to slow down before impact (hence, if you want to aggressively charge other cavalry frontally your horses will need a lot of training). I have very limited knowledge of Napoleonic warfare but certainly the above comments are very influential in cavalry tactics (and formations) of the 1630’s and 40’s. The morale impact of facing charging cavalry en masse is very significant though (try asking participants of the Waterloo 200 re-enactment).

Hope this is of some help.

[janner]

I am very surprised that Military History Visualized would claim that cavalry on cavalry frontal contacts were rare in this period.

Whilst my academic specialisation is Medieval, my reading of histories, military manuals, and eyewitness accounts of cavalry combat in the Napoleonic Wars indicates frontal contacts were reasonably common on the battlefield. Of course, squadrons routinely manoeuvred to gain an advantage and some units chose to receive a charge at the halt and use their firearms, but the result was often still a head-on clash.

Some accounts describe the opposing files opening up as they closed, allowing the formations to move through one another, which is a feature of PG’s classic In The Grand Manner rules. However, manuals encourage units to stay knee-to-knee, retaining cohesion and causing the opposing force to disintegrate. This is something my unit try to replicate as (British) Napoleonic cavalry reenactors, but much depends on the availability of trained mounts (and riders). As an aside, my own horse will happily get stuck in and he’s a gelding - stallions were still commonly used in the Napoleonic period.

[Unlucky General]

It looks like some clarification may help. I'm talking about formed charges from both sides coming into direct contact - perhaps as slow as a trot but essentially a charge of solid formations.

It's discussed at length under 'morale' in Osprey's Elite 188 (Napoleonic Heavy Cavalry and Dragoons Tactics by Haythornthwait ) where if it occurred, both formations would essentially slow and pull up. More usually if a head-on were to occur, they would commence 'passing through' which looks to be essentially a loss of cohesion or disordering whereby squadrons, troops or files of riders diffuse sufficiently at contact to allow both sides to pass through. If they stayed and merged into a prolonged combat it was essentially in open order by this stage.

It seems that mostly one formation will break away, turn, swerve or what have you - regardless of 'doctrine' based commentary - in the face of the more determined body.

I have never seen this in my experience of wargames rules - we just have blocks of cavalry head-butting each other.

[Blackwolf]

I would have another look at the Heavy Brigades(albeit the Crimean War) action as an example,and how the Russians responded.
I think once the charge had gone through,unit cohesion and the ability to rally were all important,there are to many examples of this failing that we are both aware of ,to go into this.
The Impetus pre-gunpowder rules recreates,to a certain extent,what you are giving as an example.
Might I suggest a rule tweak in light of this;
Two opposing squadron,they charge,the winner if there is one(in the case of a stalemate the action would continue until there is a victor),would then move through,and their ability to rally and return to the combat would be the key,either sending their opponents off the field,or simply disordering the squadron,  perhaps for it to itself rally in a subsequent turn.
Hope that’s not too confusing,or that my grammar too awful.
Cheero
Guy

[SABOT]

Great discussion of a very interesting topic.

I have a game set up now. On one flank are the opposing light cavalry , pretty balanced size wise. Neither of us wants to ‘go for it’ head on etc. Just seems daft . I am hoping he’ll swing left or right , another words I want to see an advantage before I dig my spurs  in. Very hard for me to resist being ex Cavalry myself.

[vtsaogames]

Well, do your rules get into the weeds? Does the fact that both sides slow down before crossing sabers make a difference as to who wins or not? If one side goes about before contact then the other side wins.

Le Feu Sacre rules has a close combat table that takes all close combat into account (including musketry and close range artillery) in an opposed die roll. When cavalry fight each other exclusively, the first hit is ignored on both sides. This leads to things such as the losing side taking one hit and the winner none, etc. Most detailed accounts I've read of regimental cavalry fights have the winner take perhaps 4 casualties and the loser 50, unless the losers have an obstacle behind them or nasty infantry or artillery intervene with unmanly missile weapons.

The results also allow one side to break well before contact and escape without physical damage but with a serious loss of morale and cohesion.