Cavalry Activities

PK House Rules

by Jeff Kayati

Cavalry Maneuver

I would suggest allowing cavalry to move fully and maneuver up to 45 degrees at no increased impetus cost. A maneuver of 90 degrees would be possible at a half move rate and a cost of 2 impetus. This would allow cavalry a greater freedom of movement than their infantry counterparts and would force those advancing lines of infantry to give greater forethought to the lurking units of cavalry.

PURSUIT

I would prefer a different method of handling pursuit. I believe pursuit was handled the way it is in PKII because they didn't want to add another table to the chart. For those of us with the electronic form of the chart this will be easy to change.

Proposed 'house' rules (with many of Andy's ideas)

1. Add a new chart or table to the quick reference sheets. (Easy enough)
2. Unit's check based on their MELEE value vs. a D6 (or D8?).

Things that can modify this value:

a. Commander within command radius
ABYSMAL = DOWN2
POOR = DOWN1
AVERAGE = NC
SKILLED = UP1
SUPERIOR = UP2
If the cavalry is not within the commander's command radius DOWN2

b. National Characteristics as per Andy's e-mail.
Certain nationalities were more prone to reckless pursuit. This should be reflected in the rules.

c. Should the type of unit broken cause a unit to be more likely to pursue?
For instance, would a cavalry unit be more likely to pursue a broken infantry unit than a broken cavalry unit?

d. Check for pursuit before every additional move.

e. One pursuit move is done immediately upon failing the pursuit check.

Remember, if you don't like these house rules you can always use the rules from PKII.

I do have a problem with infantry charging or pursuing any defeated foe, in the Horse and Musket period. For instance, infantry would be highly unlikely to pursue a defeated cavalry foe. I would probably restrict any pursuit tests by infantry to militia/conscript units or units known to pursue. (i.e. Scots or Turks or Croats) I would tell all the players which units are prone to pursuit checks before the game begins. Of course, artillery never pursuits.

PROXIMITY CAVALRY CHECKS

From the PK Mailer

c) Infantry approaching cavalry: In Archon, there is a rule which says that cavalry cannot approach within 1 move of enemy elephants. Why not a similar idea in Horse and musket era games to prevent infantry moving to within 4 of enemy cavalry in Type 1 or 2 terrain? Alternatively, to make such a move, the infantry must pass a difficulty check, using their morale rating v D8. The morale rating should be modified by Up 1 die type if in square, down 1 if in line, and down 2 types if in skirmish order. I would still not allow infantry to initiate melee with enemy cavalry.

I thought the proximity check by cavalry in PKII corrected this issue. It has in our games. We had two French Legere units disordered by an Austrian Uhlan unit during or Two Sides of River scenario using this procedure. One thing I was thinking about tinkering with is that the test are D4 for light cav, D6 for medium cavalry, and D8 for heavy cavalry. I would propose that you use the un-adjust melee value of the cavalry, this would increase the die rolled by UP1 for most average cavalry. I was also thinking that you could make modifiers for multiple cavalry units in the area.

For instance, if their were two cavalry units within 4" of each other then you can give an UP1 for each additional cavalry unit present. So for instance, my French Legere infantry advance in line against 3 Austrian cavalry units. Two hussar D6 melee units, while the other is an Uhlan unit with a D8 morale. Under my suggestions the Austrians could force one check or multiple checks on the advancing French. Start with the D8 for the Uhlans, add UP1 for each Hussar unit within 4". Both Hussars are within 4" of each other (and facing the advancing French). This gives them a D12 (D8 + UP1 + UP1) vs. the French modified morale. Thoughts? Flames? (I feel myself being tied to the stake right now!) OPPORTUNITY CHIP AND OPPORTUNITY FIRE (From the PK Mailer)

(d) Without turning Piquet into a MCM game, I am beginning to question the rule as to why only 1 unit (if Prussian), or up to 4 (if French) units can fire in the opponent's turn, due to the opportunity limit. It seems to me that the decision to use peak fire effect would depend on the battalion commander on the spot, not the CinC. My suggestion is that a player can bank any no. of impetus points in his initiative to use for opportunity fire, cavalry reaction charge and/or cavalry opportunity morale check. This prevents the opponent from KNOWING that he can advance up to an enemy unit in absolute safety because the enemy has no opportunity chips left.

I think this suggest is too liberal. Being able to bank as many impetus as you desire will give the defender a huge advantage that isn't needed. Unfortunately, I've got to go. I'll try to comment on this further. The opp fire chips is a great limitation in my opinion. If you are going to change anything you should make it a difficulty other check vs. a difficulty other check. That way it is not guaranteed that unit can opp fire, as opposed to your banking of impetus points. By using the Diff Other the nationality difference will still come into play.

For instance:

Your Prussians would be a D6 vs. a French D8. This would also lead to a lot more die rolling. Maybe a better option would be to give the Prussians another Opp chip if you feel that strongly about it. One Opp chip in a Horse and Musket period is rather harsh. I'd definitely give the two opp chips if they were on the defense. Just some thoughts. Now I'm late and I really have to go!

AF: if you are on the defensive with "loaded" units, there should be a risk that any advancing attacker will walk into a hail of lead on the approach, whoever has the initiative. Maybe 1 opportunity chip for the Prussians is too restrictive. However, I think the decision to fire at an attacker is a "battalion level" one rather than one for the commander. Perhaps every loaded unit should have to pass a difficulty test NOT to fire any time an eligible target comes within range. The only problem with difficulty tests is that they slow down the game. Hmm...back to the drawing board.

Bob M: Give the defender more morale chips to start the game, but may only replenish to the normal level.

Maybe a better suggestion is just to keep the number of opp fire chips a secret - then the enemy never knows when it is safe to advance, and you solve the problem w/o any rules changes. I suggest keeping the number of MC's secret as well - adds more tension to the game when you don't know how close the enemy is to falling apart. Adds realism, too - every battlefield commander is much more aware of the disintegration of his own army than that of his enemy.

Having said that, if you're set on increasing the opfire chip limits, here are a few options that come readily to mind:

i) you may exceed your opfire chip limit by one chip per impetus won

2) increase opfire chip limits by 1 per skilled commander, 2 per superior commander

3) increase opfire chip limits by 1 per elite/ guard rated unit

However, I think the decision to fire at an attacker is a "battalion level" one rather than one for the commander. Perhaps every loaded unit should have to pass a difficulty test NOT to fire any time an eligible target comes within range. The only problem with difficulty tests is that they slow down the game. Hmm...back to the drawing board. Remember the 'fire' abstraction in the system - those units probably are firing as soon as the enemy comes within range, just not firing at 'peak effect'. Also remember the 'undisciplined fire' card - what you propose is already in the system (although IIRC that only effects poor quality troops). OTOH, requiring a unit to pass a difficulty check in order to opfire isn't such a bad idea.

Tom

FROM: Gary Coyle

Try basing the number of oppips on the number of units in the army, using the CDT number. An army gets the same number of oppips as it gets characterization cards. And always keep the number of stored oppips and MC secret.

FROM: Bob Ed

I'm leery of increasing opportunity pips for fear of giving players too much flexibility, and restoring some of the "helicopter view" that the rules have done such an excellent job of eliminating. I like the idea of keeping the number of op pips and morale chips secret.

More PK House Rules

Back to Piquet Dispatch Vol. 1 Issue 4 Table of Contents
Back to Piquet Dispatch List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Magazine List
© Copyright 1999 by Piquet, Inc.
This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com