Rule question: How broken is broken when a unit breaks?

[JW Boots]

In many rules, nowadays, broken units get removed from the table. It is simple, it speeds up play, and prevents the tabletop from getting messy with all sorts of broken units running around, despite battles being bloody messy, and bloody, and messy.

But I wonder? how realistic is this? In particular for larger games.

For example the entire battle of Waterloo. In Adkin?s excellent ?The Waterloo Companion? there is the description and depiction of D?Erlon?s attack. There is also that on the struggle and capture of La Haie Sainte. Both feature the French 13th L?g?re. In D?Erlon?s attack it is the second in Donzelot?s column. The one overrun by the Inniskilling dragoons. So, the whole division was broken. But then the 13th L?g?re seems to be the regiment finally capturing La Haie Sante much later in the day? so not removed from the game, so to say, after being hit by the Union brigade? begging the question: how broken is broken when your unit is broken, really?

What say ye?

[Aaron]

I play a lot of the Library of Napoleonic Battles games by OSG (Kevin Zucker). They are boardgames that cover a wide range of battles from the period. Units are brigades for the most part, so an elimination doesn't mean that every man was killed or wounded. Rather, they have reached the state where they have lost effectiveness as a fighting force for the time being.

When a brigade is eliminated in those games it is also removed from the map, but there is a chance the unit can reorganize and return to play anywhere from a few hours later to overnight. Reorganized units return with reduced strength either with or next to their leader. You could easily port something like this over to a miniatures game.

[fred]

It's not realistic - but is a practical step for playability.

I think if your units represent large numbers of troops, and your timescale represents hours then units being able to recover feels fine.

But I have played some rules were units just can't recover, and their remnants are just pointless moved back each turn - in these cases simply removing them is much simpler.

[FierceKitty]

I find their being able to block shooting and to cause demoralisation is worth preserving. Some routers are also a significant danger to their own side (elephants in particular - decisive in at least two important battles).

[mellis1644]

One of the interesting rules in Peter Pig's ECW set (using this as an example) - which you do not see too often (may be not often enough in general), is that if a cavalry unit is massively victorious and breaks on opponent, it risks being removed from the game as well. This reflects the pursuit and lack of control of victorious cavalry very much seen in the period. Even if not it will tend to have to come back on the board later and not be in the exact same position as it's victory.

Usung this to state that the reverse of this likely an issue as well.

Not only is a broken unit not destroyed but just fleeing, but many victorious units should likely not be able to do much for a while (more than a turn or so) as they chase the defeated and then have to reorganize after their success.

[Inkpaduta]

The one thing I feel is missing in rules is that battle lines and units get pushed back.
Lines bend ect. Most rules you move you figures up to the enemy and both sides
keep firing until one breaks. No one ever falls back or is pushed back.

[sultanbev]

"The one thing I feel is missing in rules is that battle lines and units get pushed back.
Lines bend ect. Most rules you move you figures up to the enemy and both sides
keep firing until one breaks. No one ever falls back or is pushed back.2

Fire and Fury Regimental does this very well - units that are disordered by firing quite often end up falling back "beyond close range" when they do a manouevre roll on the disordered table. "Beyond close range" tends to be outside of musket range, or where rifle fire is halfed, and out of canister range.

We keep retreating units on table in whichever period we game, they can disrupt units that they retreat through, and there is always a chance to rally them. We do have a routed state beyond retreat where the unit is removed, either it surrenders if the enemy are near enough, or is just completely dispersed and defects, disappears into the civilian sector or hides in the rear area supply echelon. Kellys Heroes probably has more truth to it than armies would like to admit.

[JW Boots]

Thanks for all your thoughts. I like the fall back additions, which is another interesting topic to expand on.

On broken units? could it be an idea to have broken units make at least one flee move instead of being taken off the table immediately? This way you get one opportunity to rally such units,failing of which indicating that they are dispersed beyond recovery? and perhaps the former is what happened to the 13th Legere at Waterloo and the latter to the rest?

[jon_1066]

I would say that us the wrong way round.  They are much mire likely to rally behind friendly units.  So I would take it off the board then maybe roll for its return in a later turn and it come back as a reinforcement.