This article will examine Rudy Nelson's rules for the simulation of early Nineteenth Century Napoleonic warfare by late 20th Century wargamers. The stated purpose of these rules is two fold. Firstto provide realistic and playable rules for Napoleonic period and secondly to provide a viable tournament vehicle for competition. Asa proponent of military art for the sake of military art, i.e., historical wargaming for historical interest and simulation, I'm not at all that wild about competition. I like to win, but I hate to encourage rules lawyers and nothing encourages them as much as competition. But these rules will allow little room for "legal maneuvers" so there may not be much of a problem forthose who can apply common sense, but that is not the normal brain mode for rules lawyers.
The scale for the rules is the standard 1:60 with one inch equalling twenty five yards for 25mm and fifty yards for 15mm or 5mm. One turn equals fifteen minutes. The core of the game is simultaneous movement which the author recreates with movement chits (not provided with the rules; as Rudy points out the players can make them much cheaper than he can). He provides a list of suggested codes and some ways to prevent "sharpies" from identifying an upside down chit.
The GUARD DU CORPS' sequence of play is divided as follows:
Command Phase - Change of facing and formation - Initial Artillery phase - Declaration of charges phase - Movement phase -Seconclary Artillery phase - Musketry fire phase - Objective combat phase - Field Melee combat phase - Temporary morale loss recovery phase Weather check, once every four hours, 16 turns.
The majority of the mechanics are similar to other popular rules of a few years ago with a few exceptions. The most important two items are components of the command phase and the objective combat phase. The Objective Combat or melee phase is very different than the mechanics employed in what the author calls the "field melee" phase.
The field melee rules are a little difficult to understand for the beginner; the results are not decisive in the manner of WRG or other rules. During our simulation, on two occasions, "engage results" tied up units for two full turns. The "ebb and flow" of cavalry that Nelson hopes to recreate was not very evident in this case. The melee system is very similar to the system employed in EMPIRE II. The melee grades of the two units are compared on the Melee Chart; there are ten possible melee grades (1-10) giving 100 possible outcomes. Each outcome on the matrix represents a percentage that is then modified by situation, tactics, and status. The result is a percentage that must be checked against a percentage die roll by the attacker. if the attacker rolls less than the percentage indicated to win, hewins. If he rolls higher, the defender wins. The winnerthen rolls a percentage die for the results of the melee. Our results in the campaign tended to be less than spectacular, but appear realistic. Losses on both sides tend to be heavy, which works in favor of larger units. Even though the mechanics do not duplicate the process of battle exactly they do duplicate the results satisfactorily. As Ned Zuparko said, in a recently published article (see MINIATURE WARGAMES, April 1987) all war games involve some degree of detached reality. The level of detached reality in GUARD DU CORPS is about right.
The morale values assigned units gowell with the melee grades. This gives a nice mix of units. An average line unit's melee grade is a five or six while the morale grade can range from "G" to "C". A "C" morale grade would be excellent while the "G" grade is despicable. This morale grade reflects the unit's "devotion and experience". Each morale grade has a corresponding percentage chance to pass morale tests. These range from "A" at 5% and "G" at 35%. The basic morale percentage is modified by such standard,items as the unit's condition and the attachment of generals to such items as weather and the unit's occupation of an objective zone (Key terrain). Units failing morale can be forced to retreat 200 to 600 yards and be unorganized, disrupted or routed; or a unit just "hesitates". Its activities may be restricted as well. The author doesn't over rate the British, for which I, for one, commend him. British line is still respectable at "6C" while French line is "513" to "W'. Also morale and melee grades vary by year. The French Old Guard is a healthy 10A for those interested.
The Army and Nationality tables provided in the back of the rules include morale grade, melee grade, number of figures per Battalion or Regiment or Artillery Company, plus the number of such units fielded by that nation during the period.
One of the more interesting concepts developed by Nelson is what he calls Operational Objectives. Operational Objectives are buildings, light works, key terrain such as bridges, villages and cities. Each is assigned a troop capacity value and "traffic ability" value. "Traffic ability" is the number of movement phases required to cross the objective; most are 1 or 2. The troop capacity is the total number of battalions the objective can hold. Troops placed "in garrison" are assigned a sector and removed from the playing area and placed in a representative holding area (a box top). Units attacking the objective are assigned a sector to attack and the fun starts. The attacker is blind to the capabilities of the defense and combat is conducted without benefit of dice. Losses occur in a programmed manner. The commander loses control and both sides pound away until one or the other gives. Losses on both sides are heavy and the concept usually encourages both sides to the commitment of reinforcements into the combat. The combat soon takes on a life all its own outside of other events.
In our simulation, a Bavarian Infantry regiment defended a "B" class objective from an attack by the 95th Rifles, the reverse of Hougomont. The results were about the same. This is an excellent vehicle for simulating urban combat.
The cavalry charge distances are quite long in relationship to other factors. Light cavalry can charge up to 1500 yards or 30 inches for 15mm which means that cavalry can pose a threat over a considerable range. Impetus is alsoan important factorto consider. There are also movement penalties for changing formation or facing which I'm not sure I completely concur with based on my training in drill and ceremonies and the fact that most of the regular units practiced these maneuvers constantly. It does have some aspects that are attractive as far as playability and understanding.
Some of the terms used in the rules describe similar concepts in other rules. Cavalry Recall, Regimental Integrity and Permanent and Temporary Morale Loss are all understood easily. The Command and Control rules are a different matter and include a warning from the author that players new to the concept of Napoleonics should understand the basic mechanics of the rules before using the command rules. The command and control rules limit the player's ability and reduce his omnipotence. They can be quite humblingto thosewho do not plan ahead. They are not as sophisticated as Jim Arnold's GENERALSHIP but are quite good at recreating the fog of war.
Back to Table of Contents -- Courier Vol. VIII No. 1
To Courier List of Issues
To MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1987 by The Courier Publishing Company.
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com