This figure kind of sums up my progress on this topic.
First up, thanks for all the comments on the previous post on this topic and the discussions I have had with people who read the post and talked to me directly.
A mix of types of markers might be best.
I have made progress on casualty markers.
But first a recap on formations used in Napoleon's Battles, to show how the individual unit bases are arranged to depict formations.
An infantry brigade or regiment of some 2,000 men in March Column.
Great for movement and staying in command (which facilitates movement).
Hopeless for combat.
The same unit deployed for maneuver, called a Column in Napoleon's Battles.
Good at movement and long range fire combat,
Same unit has taken one casualty.
My casualty marker is actually a base that is swapped in for a standard base.
This way it won't get left behind,
because if it is the unit will be down four casualties. :-)
This has caused me some additional thought. Why don't I have such a base from the start?
If I do I could also make it the base with the unit's label. Is it best to count down (as in diminishing strength points) or to count up casualties. I chose the latter option as this is consistent with the markers the new casualty base is replacing. (Of course when I play Impetus the casualties count down against the unit's initial strength.)
I'm now thinking that my casualty base looks a bit sparse and might in future populate them with an extra figure, particularly the mounted base. This idea goes well with some of the interesting figures you can get from AB. As it is the figures I am using were all spares.
The unit has now deployed in line.
Line is the nomenclature used in Napoleon's Battles.
Not so good at moving, but best for close combat (against other infantry).
Apologies for blurry photo, I was having lots of problems with focusing
and keeping still while failing to realise my camera was on manual rather than automatic.
Another two casualties have been received and a base removed,
this being the casualty base.
Suffering two casualties has caused the unit to become disordered
and a disorder marker has been placed.
Disorder is temporary and doesn't affect the formation. A unit recovers its order by remaining still for one turn. If it is in command it could move half distance, but would remain in disorder. Being disordered means it cannot fire or initiate close combat (and can only make a half move). So there is not much risk of the unit moving and leaving its disorder marker behind. It just requires some discipline in following the the sequence of play (and very important as I still use the original passage of lines rules and so the only embuggerance to that practice is if a unit is disordered and to remove disorder the unit must remain stationary the whole turn, or, in other words, the disorder marker is only removed after all movement is completed). At the end of this post I discuss No Move and Half Move markers. Being disordered is an automatic half move if it is in command, otherwise no move.
A deployed 16 figure unit takes two casualties and becomes disordered.
Counting figures becomes a slight problem with my casualty bases, but then I have some bases that only have three figures as that is either all that would fit or what was available (curse those Essex six figure command packs!)
My solution: if there is a base then it represents 4 figures, unless it has red dots, in which case you lose one figure for each read dot.
The same unit takes four casualties, loses a base and is routed.
The higgly piggly bases give a good visual representation of rout.
Using this method to depict rout saves a marker.
The casualty base stays with the unit.
A disordered marker is added for effect
and to be ready if the unit rallies as it then returns to a disordered state,
but in a formation of its choosing.
Aside: some people I have played with considered routed units should be removed, but that is just nomenclature/semantics. In Napoleon's Battles units are removed, or dispersed, when they have taken a specific number of casualties based on their class and size (in the case of this typical unit which started with 16 figures and is C class, it would disperse when it is reduced to 8 figures).
The unit rallies and is placed in a formation ready to maneuver back into battle
(or not - it is only two figures from dispersal and maybe it is time to pull it back it
rather than risk losing it and have it count against army morale and fatigue levels).
After remaining stationary the unit is now in good order
and ready to go (provided it is in command).
When threatened by cavalry it can form square.
This pattern of arranging the stands is called a fancy square
and while it might look pleasing,
it has the disadvantage of taking up a different physical footprint on the table.
A non fancy square.
The non fancy square formation change leaves the footprint of the unit unchanged if it had been in column. If it had been deployed in line, the shrinkage in frontage can cause some potential problems, but so it goes. The only issue that springs to mind is where a unit in line is charged by cavalry, forms square, but is then, due to the cavalry covering its front, saved from being contacted by an enemy infantry unit. Due to the flexibility in contacting (only a touch is required) this would be rare and frankly, as it says in the 4th Edition, coordinating combined arms attacks should be harder than they are in the rules (however I don't use their optional rule as getting in combined attacks is not always that easy and tends to use up troops). A more serious consequence can be the unit contracting itself out of command range. Such is the heat of battle!
Cavalry
A cavalry unit represent around 1,000 sabres in march column.
NB has a different figure ratio for cavalry (1 figure represent 80 men) compared to infantry (1 to 120). While I have never been too happy about this, it does seem to work (which seems to be the basis for its adoption by the rules). Infantry units can be considered to have intrinsic regimental or even divisional level guns as part of their makeup, but this is not the case with cavalry as horse artillery is represented separately.
I have a bigger issue over what cavalry line and column formations represent. The difference in factors between the two formations is small - line is an extra 1 or 2 close combat factors while movement is an extra 1 or 2 inches. However the foot print is very different. At least with the 4th Edition and its support for small units (those of just two bases) the big 16 and 20 figure cavalry units can be broken up into more manageable units.
Cavalry deployed in line (whatever that means).
The formation is two hundred yards deep and really each base is more like two squadrons, each in two ranks, one up front and one in support behind - without getting too technical. Each real cavalryman takes up about 1.3 yards. A cavalry base is 100 yards wide in NB and that gives a frontage of around 80 men. Rafael Pardo on his
site in this
post has an interesting discussion on his approach to using NB for 20mm scale figures, particularly representing cavalry and that got me thinking when I was researching this post.
The units takes two casualties and is disordered.
More than with the infantry casualty base, the cavalry casualty base has a lot of open ground, or bare canvass, that the use of shrubbery just seems unable to disguise. AB do some lovely energetic cavalry figures and a couple of them might be the way to go.
Does it look any better if the casualty base is put in between the other bases?
Maybe, maybe not.
I'm more worried about my disorder markers looking too small.
The riderless horses were a freebie (thanks Dave). AB horses don't have shabarachs and so are of no use, although other figures could be used - I have some of their dead horses and as long as I use a round base, they could be more visually appealing.
Just some spare photos
Did I mention I had camera troubles? Well, operator problems really, but I tried a few times with varying degrees of success and here are some spare images that seem too nice just to delete.
Where to next?
Casualty caps cuts from black straws still remain a very cheap and easy option.
With casualty, disorder and rout markers more or less successfully tackled/resolved, the next easy one are markers to cover No Move and Half Move. My current thought is just to have printed labels to put down when command is being adjudicated. There would be Full Move or Half Move. Absence of one of these labels would mean no more or that the unit had moved. There is a rule in NB that states once you take your hand off the unit it cannot be moved again. I like that as it speeds up play, allows for more blunders, and I believe would be better facilitated by this use of Full Move / Half Move labels. Better still, as a player conducts his move the labels would be progressively removed from the table meaning a less cluttered display as well as helping to reduce the question "Have I already moved this uni?" or the more unpleasant accusation "You've already moved that unit!"
For React markers I'm thinking an officer or musician figure or maybe just a pin/paper flag. It would be on a round base.
That just leaves limbered artillery as a challenge. In part this is peculiar to Napoleon's Battles as limber bases are used to show artillery in March Column, but on the battlefield they get around limbered or unlimbered. Often this is shown by facing, but that is not perfect.
