You can always tell when a rules set is being played on a consistent basis. Articles on tactics and also scenarios appear in the more perused magazines and newsletters. It is this format that MWAN comes into its element and thanks to Hal for giving all of us this "paper podium" in which we can speak our minds.

Having read Dennis Daughatee's article "Napoleon's Battles Misuse of Combined Arms" (MWAN 85) I felt some clarification on a few points needed to be pointed out before we modify rule 8.4.4.

First, Dennis points out, correctly, that a unit within an inch of the target unit does interfere with squaring or actually any formation change. sideways movement. etc. He then states that this conflicts with the design notes of mass firepower/melee or the threat thereof. If you dig a little deeper and browse the fire modifiers NB rules Page 19 and also page 12 of Intro to Miniature Gaming you will reach the conclusion that the target unit is being pinned as a result of skirmisher firing/harassment along with divisional artillery which is not represented by figures/models in the garne. In numerous historical texts this is shown to be very effective especially by the early French armies.

Secondly, moving deeper into his article he states that the sub-units within a figure stand do not represent "homogenous soldiers evenly spread" over the base but "randomly placed". I read random as something that is placed without order or thought and I don't see that even according to the sample picture of page 12. As Dennis shows us NB is a balance between playability and realism and I think we both agree that the line was probably drawn to keep things moving in a "game" sense.

Thirdly, now I want to get to a very fine point of play that only popped up after many hours of play that is not pointed out in the rules clearly. But you win see used by the Great Masters of NB and pointed out I might add by the designers themselves. As Dennis states the rules show that you can pin with infantry and then hit with your cavalry in your game phase. Again this seems to conflict with history and all great authors of the Napoleonic period. We then have to ask of the rules set: do you negate all bad tactics by making them illegal or unusable? I would think games would be quite boring if all you could do is exactly what history allowed. i.e. Union/Confederate infantry can only charge in line and not in column? Shouldn't dice be thrown out because they randomly generate results instead of a predictable outcome? I have strayed a bit but I had to make this point.

Getting back to the infantry pin and cavalry charge. Charging your cavalry in your phase is not the most effective tactic. What you want to do is hit the target in the react phase of his turn. This does a couple of things. First, he is forced into a purely defensive formation (square) throughout your approaching turn. This means you get 2 chances at a +2 modifier to really do some casualty damage\disordering. I would trade that -2 attacking cavalry modifier he has at you with a -1 firing modifier for being in square anyway.

Don't forget also that a square can only inflict I casualty on a cavalry unit before it bounces as opposed to being routed in an up and up melee. Second, by doing this and hitting him in your upcoming phase with infantry your lowering the casualty rates on your cavalry which will be needed later in the game to swing victory your way. NB rewards the side that has healthy cavalry at the end of the game as opposed to those that don't.

By using the pinning method a player is using his cavalry in the wrong phase Hereby allowing the enemy more freedom of maneuver to attack your formation during his turn. Believe me a side attacking has a lot harder time of it if your side has all the react markers and his side has little or none. NB gives cavalry great power but only as long as it is properly handled and conserved for that moment of decision.

And so we come to house rules to fix a supposed "flaw in the rules". As some may remember I wrote "In Defense of Purity" in MWAN 75. I hope Dennis has looked at each possible ripple effect this might cause. I have thought if this is allowed would cavalry ever take losses due to the modifying unit rules as infantry is almost always larger in stands than most cavalry units. Doesn't that reinforce bad tactics instead of making the right game play or strategy?

In conclusion, I want to thank Dennis for taking the time to submit a thought provoking article that we all enjoyed and look forward to more from him in the future.

Napoleon Battles: An Inch Away from Agreement (#97)