Page 1 of 1

Formations?

Posted: Thu May 04, 2006 6:19 pm
by Capt Cliff
What kind of formations will there be? Obvious line and road march, I assume. But what about mixed order for infantry in woods and villages? What about skirmishers? Can we prolong artillery intead of limbering them up then unlimbering them? Cavalry also needs multiple formations. A mixed order for village fighting and to allow the Great Redoubt to be taken, from behind!

RE: Formations?

Posted: Sun May 28, 2006 3:29 pm
by Tim Coakley
Sorry for delay...missed the question before...

Line (3 and 2 rank)
March and attack col.
square
defensize (for occupying forts, towns...)
open (resting/recovery/working)


RE: Formations?

Posted: Fri Jun 09, 2006 7:39 pm
by amrcg
What about skirmish formations? =)

Cheers,
Antonio

RE: Formations?

Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 2:05 am
by strebe
ORIGINAL: amrcg

What about skirmish formations? =)

Cheers,
Antonio

And formations that had skirmish troops deployed out while the main body stayed in formation as opposed to units that could totally go to skirmish formation (Rifle units etc.)?

Dave

RE: Formations?

Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 3:29 pm
by amrcg
ORIGINAL: strebe
And formations that had skirmish troops deployed out while the main body stayed in formation as opposed to units that could totally go to skirmish formation (Rifle units etc.)?
Dave

This one is easy. Like in H&M, you can just abstract the skirmishers in the firepower of the unit. No need for special formations.

Cheers,
Antonio

RE: Formations?

Posted: Sun Jun 11, 2006 4:52 pm
by sol_invictus
I agree amrcg, Age of Rifles did that as well with Skirmishers. I really don't like the way HPS handles Skirmishers being detached from the parent unit. It allows the Skirmishers to much freedom to act independently with them zipping all over the battlefield.

RE: Formations?

Posted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:02 pm
by amrcg
ORIGINAL: amrcg
This one is easy. Like in H&M, you can just abstract the skirmishers in the firepower of the unit. No need for special formations.

In fact, not only "firepower". It should also influence the range at which enemy units are detected. Units featuring a significant skirmisher component should be more difficult to be ambushed.

Cheers,
Antonio

RE: Formations?

Posted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 9:59 pm
by Capitaine
I'm not sure about skirmishers adding anything to the firepower of a battalion. The light company would deploy in skirmish formation in front of the battalion, thereby screening it but also masking the firepower of the rest of the formation. As long as skirmishers are deployed in front, the rest of the battalion won't be firing. It's an either/or situation at best.

RE: Formations?

Posted: Wed Jun 14, 2006 11:28 pm
by amrcg
ORIGINAL: Capitaine

I'm not sure about skirmishers adding anything to the firepower of a battalion. The light company would deploy in skirmish formation in front of the battalion, thereby screening it but also masking the firepower of the rest of the formation. As long as skirmishers are deployed in front, the rest of the battalion won't be firing. It's an either/or situation at best.

Yes, I agree with that. Skirmishers somewhat increase the shooting range (albeit with minor power) and sighting capability of units.

Antonio

RE: Formations?

Posted: Thu Jun 15, 2006 6:23 pm
by Capt Cliff
Skirmishers I believe had a tendency to mask the main unit from enemy fire. Even from horse back you couldn't see where the main battle Battalion was located, unless you were on a hill. But you could only direct fire onto units on the "plain" with units that were on the hill. Get me? Plus Skirmisher fire had a tendency to disrupt enemy units, the added fear factor of being shot at. This needs to be modelled into the game.