WSS - Rank vs Platoon fire

[Last Hussar]

Is it worth modelling - was the actual difference in effect that much - and if so how?  I am using Black Powder, but if you use different rules feel free to explain.

[Chad]

This was dealt with very thoroughly on the TMP forum some time ago.

As I recall the overall conclusion was that whilst there were different fire systems, there was no significant benefit to any of them over the course of a battle. It appears that other nations had an equivalent system to the platoon firing, even the French and Russians. It was also maintained by people far more knowledgable on the period than myself that not only was the much quoted Malplaquet incident by Parker 2nd-hand (he was apparently not at the battle), but also that the two regiments involved were actually on different parts of the battlefield.

Personally I ignore it. Professor Duffy's work on the Prussian army of the SYW clearly illustrates that the much vaunted Prussian fire drill could not be maintained under battlefield conditions and I assume therefore that it was less likely to be maintained 50 years earlier.

Chad

[Grenadier]

 I agree with Chad on this.  I don't believe platoon fire could be maintained during an extended firefight and it's benefit would only be realized in the first couple of volleys before fire disipline would dissolve into"fire at will".  The platoon fire system could be represented in various ways depending upon the rule set.  As most rules give an "initial or first fire" bonus for any formed unit, platoon fire units could be given two "first fire" bonus's which must be used consecutively. Having a "first fire" bonus makes sense as we all know that the muskets are all loaded, clean and ready to fire and about 100% will fire.  Of course, the number of muskets firing after the first shot decreases as does their effectiveness probably almost exponentially with every volley thereafter!  What I don't like about the first fire bonus is that if a unit has it's first fire early in the engagement and doesn't see action again until late in the day, it cannot gain another "first fire" bonus even though it could have cleaned and readied their muskets to pre battle condition in the interviening "hours". Of course, this would be hard to keep track of, so I accept that only one first fire bonus is do-able on the table. 
  I do like the Fire and Fury style fire system using modifiers and die roll to determine fire effectiveness and a modifier could easily be inserted for platoon fire units and the detrimental effects of repeated volleys.
  I have just ordered six different sets of rules for this period to ponder as I am searching for the perfect rules.  I imagine I will be combining elements from nearly all of them.
Blackpowder was not on my buy list, although I thought about it!
Grenadier

[Jens Glad]

When we played in the old days, we (Danish Military Historical Society) had battalion order sheets. Here orders where issued to the battalion. On the same sheet firstfire was noted. If the wery same battalion didn't move or was involved in any action, it would recover its first fire after 4 gameturns. Same thing would apply for example cavalry. The first charge should be with a benefit like the first fire for infantry, only as a charge benefit. If the cavalryunit did noting (or wasn't involved in any action for 4 turns) the horses would have rested sufficiently to gain the full momentum when atacking again. This was ofcorse in the "good old days", but one could easily apply some sort of account on a sheet of paper noting different things for the battalion in question....maybe even incoorperate in in a order of battle.
Not sure if this could help in any way what so ever, but we sure had a lot of fun with it back in the day

[Frantic]

For Black Powder we are using the following rules:

Rank Fire - We use the First Fire rule

Platoon Fire - We use the Sharpshooter rule (yes I know their not sharpshooters, but the effect of re-rolling 1 miss hopefully shows the constant shooting effect)

[sunjester]

Not that Platoon Fire will have any impact on the games Last Hussar and I play, Mark's got the British Army has only had the figures for a year. It took him over two years to paint a 10mm Afrika Korps force for BKC! I expect the British to take the field sometime around 2015.   

[Wkeyser]

I would disagree a little here, perhaps the fire did not make a large difference but there was some. The real difference is of course in the frontage of the units. A French unit would be deeper than an English unit, however, the number of men in a battalion was about the same. Given that then the French battalion would have up to 50% less frontage, if you then look at a number of units in line this starts making an impact on the battle.

Take a look at Captain General, or Ga Pa I think both model this. In the now more common "simple" rules like Black powder the idea of modeling a specific period is lost in the concept of one size fits all and if it does not just make it up as you go. Well the Captain General is written by a couple of very knowledgeable guys who write a lot for the Pike and Shot society magazine. They really know the period.

Captain General is great set of rules designed to look at a specific period and does that really well, I would recommend this to all those looking at the League of Augsburg range.
William

[Chad]

William

I tried Captain General some time ago, but found the Fire Combat results very strange. My units just seemed to advance towards the enemy and then retreat on almost every fire result. It began to look more like a formation dance team than a line of battle. It became almost impossible to achieve an advance that would have effect. I assume I was doing something wrong in terms of the rules but I don't know what. If memory serves (and often it doesn't these days!) the artillery table had an unusual dice table, which did not seem to reflect the probability of rolling a particular number.

You seem to have had better results.  I still have my copy and would not be averse to having another try.

Chad

[suntzu777]

for those interested have a look at this link

http://www.battlefieldanomalies.com/lauffeldt/02_tatics.htm

Rob

[Wkeyser]

Hi Chad
It does kind of look like you described, however, take a look at the CPs needed to reform. Then it starts to be problem as units Rout out side of the command distance of the Brigade commander then it cost 3 CPs to attempt to reform.

The idea of not removing casualties is a very interesting one and not many rules use it. It actually works quite well in these rules.

The highlight of the rules for me are the command and control aspect of the rules, where you are issuing and activating orders and on top of that aspect of the rules you then have CPs that you can use in various ways from activating orders to adding a bonus to your reform check. Lots of desisions to make in a turn.

They also show the differance between the differant methods of cavalry charges.
William

[Hertsblue]

The real difference is of course in the frontage of the units. A French unit would be deeper than an English unit, however, the number of men in a battalion was about the same. Given that then the French battalion would have up to 50% less frontage, if you then look at a number of units in line this starts making an impact on the battle

Totally agree. If, as suggested in most sources, the French deployed in four or five ranks, the rear rank(s) would have had great difficulty getting their muskets to bear without injuring the men in front (even with the front rank kneeling or even lying down). It would surely have needed a certain amount of shuffling around to bring the rear ranks to bear. Three ranks, on the other hand, properly "locked" would have allowed every man to fire at any one time.

[Frantic]

We use 3 stands wide for Platoon fire (2 ranks of figs), 2 stands wide for rank firing (3 ranks of figs).

[Chad]

Rob

Followed your link. The discussions I referred to in an earlier post on the Pike & Shot Society also discussed Parker's Malplaquet incident. If memory serves the conclusion of the knowledgeable participants (not me I hasten to add) was that this incident was not considered accurate on 2 counts. First, Parker was not there but recruiting in Ireland and second that the 2 regiments involved were not on the same part of the battlefield. Again if I recall correctly, this incident was considered to be recruiting propoganda. I think there was also reference to the fact that if platoon firing was regarded as so effective, why is it not referred to in other battles as being so effective.

It was those discussions that persuaded me not to give it any significant impact on games for WSS.

Chad