As readers of the current run of issues know, I’m in my “reaction mode”… after the active side moves, the opposing side is given an opportunity to respond to the movement… perhaps to fire or to have one of its own units move. The response procedure is for the reacting side to allocate a certain number of “Reaction Points” (RP) to a unit, and then, having assigned the points (supposedly replicating the sending of an order to the concerned unit), to then toss percentage dice to see if the order actually arrived. There is an 80 percent chance that the order was received and can be carried out. With this in mind, I drew up a set of Napoleonics rules with all sorts of opportunities for reacting… my thought was that if a little bit of reaction and response was good, then more would be better. Don’t you believe it. I set out a 15mm British-vs-French battle… each stand was defined as a regiment, and up to 5 regiments were joined as a brigade. The brigade was the maneuvering and firing element, and 4 or so brigades (around 16 stands) formed a division. The Brits had 5 infantry divisions plus cavalry, while the attacking French had 6 infantry divisions, plus 2 cavalry divisions. Each infantry division had what I termed ‘divisional artillery’ (one stand of guns), and each division had a supply of Reaction Points (RP). I started off on the wrong note in an attempt to get the game going faster. Units were given ‘actions’ to move and to fire, and at the start, I temporarily defined an action as a 10-inch move, and so a unit assigned 2 actions could move up a distance of 20 inches. On the third turn, with the game fully underway, I went back to the rules as written, and redefined the action as a normal 5-inch move. Unhappiness resulted The guys thought I was gypping them… “My brigades moved 10 inches and now they can only move 5! Unfair!” Whenever a brigade was active, either in its normal movement phase or by reacting to the enemy, it was assigned 2 actions, and the sequence kept the players busy. There were 8 phases in all for the half-bound: Phase 1 Here, the active side received 2 actions. It could use them for firing (each action could be termed a volley) or for movement. This was the phase which made the participants unhappy when I cut the movement distance back, from 10-inches to 5-inches per action. Phase 2. This was a reaction phase. More than that, it was a reaction cycle. First, the non-active side could use its RP to react to whatever had occurred on the first phase. Then the active side could use its RP to react to the reaction. And then it was back to the non-active side to react again. And so on. When both sides decided they had finished reacting (or ran out of RP), the phase was over. Phase 3. During Phases 1 and 2, brigades could advance into contact, and on this phase, melee was resolved. Phase 4. This was a simultaneous fire phase. All units on the field opened up on the opposition. Phase 5. Note that on the first phase, the active side received 2 actions for each of its units. An action gave a unit, any unit, the capability of moving 5 inches. This meant that on this first phase, infantry and cavalry moved the same… all units could advance 5-inches per action. Then how did cavalry get its additional movement? I’m glad you asked. It was on this phase, Phase 5, that cavalry of the non-active side, received another 2 movement actions. Which meant that when a side was active, the cavalry advanced for 2 actions. Then, on the next half-bound, when the side was non-active, its cavalry received its additional movement. Phase 6. This was similar to Phase 2… it was a reaction cycle. Since the non-active side’s cavalry had just moved on Phase 5, the active side could now use its RP to react to the movement. If the cavalry had come into contact with a brigade still in line, the brigade could use RP to attempt to form square. If it was successful, the ‘reaction initiative’ went back to the non-active side, and it could use its RP to halt its cavalry charge and draw back from contact. Phase 7. This was a melee resolution phase. Phase 8. This was an ‘administrative’ phase. Here, units received their comeuppance for all the casualties they had taken during the 7 previous phases of the half bound. All divisions renewed their supply of RP for the next half-bound. This final phase, Phase 8, was my basic paper work phase. Whenever a brigade was hit on any of the previous 7 phases of the half-bound, I recorded its Loss Points (LP). I had rigged up a huge bulletin board on which was noted every unit on the field. During firing and melee, and morale test failures, I would note down the LP received by the unit in question. There were a total of 14 divisions on the field, each one with around 4 brigades, hence I had over 50 brigades to track. During the half-bound, when a unit took losses, the players would call out “20 LP for the 4th Brigade!”, or “10 LP for the 31st Heavy Cavalry!”, and I’d note it down On Phase 8, I would look at all the numbers I had recorded. Each player, for his division, had been given a small 1½ by 3 inch card simply listing the units in his division. Every time a brigade lost 30 LP, I would tell the participant to place an “X” on the card next to the unit in question. This small card was the only data record kept by the participants… I was the one doing the bulk of the work on my bulletin board, and I thought that this procedure would greatly decrease the clutter on the table. It did, but I don’t recommend it unless you’re a glutton for punishment. The X’s that the players marked on their cards were important… at the appearance of the fourth X, the player knew his brigade was in trouble… the chance that the brigade would flee the field was 25 percent. For the 5th X, it was 50 percent, for the 6th, it was 75 percent, and for the 7th, off would go the unit. As indicated, for this game, I focused on the use of Reaction Points. To this purpose, the firing procedures were simplified… simplified to the extent that the participants found fault with them. For example, each time a brigade used an action to fire a volley, it tossed two 10-sided dice. The size of the brigade was immaterial… an infantry brigade could have 3 stands in it, and it tossed 2 dice… it could have 5 stands in it and it tossed 2 dice… an infantry brigade could be in square and it tossed 2 dice… an artillery battery tossed 2 dice. Everyone and anyone tossed a universal 2 dice. A hit was scored when a die showed a result of 1-to-5. To differentiate between targets, the following Loss Point (LP) scale was used. Target in the open Score 10 LP per hit Target in cover Score 5 LP per hit Canister fired Add 10 to the total score It was suggested that I should have given each stand that fired its own die. Thus a larger brigade wold inherently have more fire power. And when infantry in square tossed 2 dice against an opposing unit, there were unkind comments… “Everyone knows that infantry in square have less fire power than a unit in line!” Lots of unkind comments… “Another one of Simon’s silly rules sets!” Not to worry… it was the use of Reaction Points (RP) in which I was interested. About the only participant that used his division’s RP in a manner I had envisioned was Bob Liebl. On the very first turn, as the active player, the brigades in Bob’s division were given their 2 actions, and he moved them up the field. One of Bob’s victory objectives was to grab, and hold onto, the town of Cara, and so on the next phase, during the reactive cycle phase, he assigned 3 RP to one of his brigades, tossed percentage dice to ensure the order was received, and directed the brigade to continue its advance. A brigade can be assigned a maximum of two orders during a reactive cycle, and Bob allocated another 3 RP, saw that the order was received, and the brigade advanced again. In this fashion, by the end of the second half bound, Bob’s infantry brigade had outdistanced the rest of the units in its division, and had entered Cara, there to stay for he remainder of the battle. In contrast, Jim Butters’ (one of the British commanders) use of his RP was, in my mind, too conservative. A French cavalry division (3 brigades) appeared within charge distance of two of Jim’s divisions, and in response, Jim ordered all of the infantry units in both divisions (6 brigades in all) to play defensively, hold position, and form square. Normal, everyday, Napoleonic tactics, you might say, and you’d be correct. I thought that Jim could actually have advanced a brigade or so toward the cavalry, advancing and firing, attempting to drive the horsemen back. If the cavalry charged one of his units, Jim could have used his RP to form square (and if he did, so, the cavalry commander, via use of his own RP, could have attempted to abort the charge). Jim was the British commander closest to Cara, and when his units went into square, it virtually assured that Bob Liebl’s French brigade, occupying Cara, would have no effective opposition. And how, in general, did the RP procedures go? Not too bad, but once again, I proved the inaccuracy of the statement “If a little bit is good, more is better.” Simply put, there were too many RP’s floating around. I wanted the RP procedures to represent what I termed ‘local initiative’ on the part of individual brigade commanders. Use of RP’s, in essence, gives a side a bonus action for one of its units, and with too many RP’s, the ‘bonus’ isn’t a bonus any more… it becomes a right. Back to PW Review August 2000 Table of Contents Back to PW Review List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 2000 Wally Simon 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