Triumph of Nations Errata

[bahdahbum]

No way

The thing is I am living 500m. from our army museum and 20 KM from Waterloo ....I have access to a lot of info .

[LeGrognard]

Hy grognard ,

There were no mixed dragoons and cuirassiers divisions, but one mixed corps with a drgoon division and a cruirassiers division . I would read the list limitation as , the division must either be cuirassier, either dragoons, either light as it was historical .

From rereading quickly the 100 day campaign, it seems that cavalry divisions in infantry corps just worked that way . Divisions . And those divisions where not temporary arrangments but official divisions .( but everybody knows how flexible Napo could be )

Hi Bahdabum,

From my original post:

Yet the 11th Division of Kellerman's III Reserve Cavalry Corps was a mixed division of Dragoons (2nd & 7th) and Cuirassiers (8th & 11th).

As supported by Shadowdragon.

My question relates to the Reserve Corps Cavalry and the Special Instructions written for it, not the infantry corps.

I still feel the Special Instruction is a typo as it prevents you from creating the historical divisions, but let's you get away with doing something completely non-historical as I posted on 31 July;

Which gets me back to the first part of my original question.

Should the "Special Instruction" on page 128 read, "Heavy cavalry and Light Cavalry..." vice the current statement of "Cuirassiers, Dragoons and Light cavalry..."?

This would allow you to field a division comprising both Cuirassiers and Dragoons (historically accurate) and meet what I believe to be the authors' intent of not mixing your heavies with lights in the same division.

As it stands I cannot place Dragoons and Cuirassiers together ala III Reserve Cavalry Corps, 11th Cavalry Division but because it is not mentioned in the "Special Instructions" I can create a completely ahistorical division comprising Carabiniers with Chevau-légers.

Unfortunately, I've still not had an official reply to this query or my one about the Brunswick contingent.

Guess everybody has gone to the Olympics.

[Blathergut]

Terry is on holidays until after Britcon.

[shadowdragon]

My question relates to the Reserve Corps Cavalry and the Special Instructions written for it, not the infantry corps.

LeGrognard,

I think there are also some questions with respect to the cavalry for the infantry corps as well. It seems to me that the minimum of 12 bases is pretty high - especially since one can't form a division with the infantry corps cavalry.

The "target" troop to base ratio for cavalry is 165 troopers (i.e., 55 men per figure) yet it seems that the minimum / maxima has been determined by 1 real cavalry regiment = 4 bases (except for the 2 carabinier regiments as the maximum number of bases for the carabiniers is 6 bases).

From this site:

http://centjours.mont-saint-jean.com/index.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_b ... o_Campaign
(I've seen some different figures from other sources but they aren't too different from the above.)

I have the following strengths for the 2 sites / bases (assuming 1 base = 165 troops and rounded up but if an odd number I chose the next higher even number) for cavalry plus the number of bases using 1 real regiment = 4 bases

I Infantry Corps: 1506 / 1624 Light Cavalry (10 / 12 bases); 4 regiments = 16 bases

II Infantry Corps: 1838 / 1840 Light Cavalry (12 bases); 4 regiments = 16 bases

III Infantry Corps: 1017 / 1019 Light Cavalry (6 bases); 3 regiments = 12 bases

IV Infantry Corps: 814 / 666 Light Cavalry (6 / 4 bases) and 814 / 712 Dragoons (6 / 4 bases) - in 1 division (only 1 brigade of dragoons and not a dragoon division as stated in ToN); 2 LIght cavalry regiments = 8 bases and 2 dragoon regiments = 8 bases (Note: according to ToN even with 8 dragoon bases one would need to have 12 light cavalry bases.

VI Infantry Corps: No cavalry

I Cavalry Corps: 2512 / 2666 Light Cavalry (16 bases); 6 regiments = 24 bases

II Cavalry Corps: 2707 / 2847 Dragoons (16 / 18 bases); 8 regiments = 32 bases

III Cavalry Corps: (Broken down in detail by type)
1110 / 1111 Dragoons (8 bases); 2 regiments = 8 bases
1582 / 1584 Cuirassiers (10 bases): 4 regiments = 16 bases
847 / 792 Carabiniers (6 bases); 2 regiments = 8 bases (note that ToN has a maximum of 6 bases)

IV Cavalry Corps: 2791 / 2981 Cuirassier (18 bases); 8 regiments = 32 bases

I think from this it's clear that, except for the carabiniers and the light cavalry for III Infantry Corps, ToN uses "the regiment = 4 bases" as the rule for determining minima and maxima. (Note that is equates to about 100 troops per base for the line cavalry of the Armee du Nord.) Given that I'm not quite sure why the infantry corps cavalry cannot be used to form "cavalry divisions" or why the minimum light cavalry isn't 8 bases. There is also LeGrognard's question about separate "light cavalry, dragoon and cuirassier" divisions versus "light and heavy cavalry divisions" for the Reserve Cavalry Corps.

More or less I think what ToN has done is okay for tournament play or friendly games with an overall "feel" of the French army's cavalry for the 100 days. Of course, if you're playing a historical or historical what-if battle, then just use the actual ORBAT with a troop-to-base ratio that is consistent for the game.

I hope that detail helps the discussion and provides a little bit of a historical ORBAT for people.

[LeGrognard]

The "target" troop to base ratio for cavalry is 165 troopers (i.e., 55 men per figure) yet it seems that the minimum / maxima has been determined by 1 real cavalry regiment = 4 bases (except for the 2 carabinier regiments as the maximum number of bases for the carabiniers is 6 bases).

III Cavalry Corps: (Broken down in detail by type)
1110 / 1111 Dragoons (8 bases); 2 regiments = 8 bases
1582 / 1584 Cuirassiers (10 bases): 4 regiments = 16 bases
847 / 792 Carabiniers (6 bases); 2 regiments = 8 bases (note that ToN has a maximum of 6 bases)

Hi Shadowdragon,

Thanks for the last post. I agree with your layout as above. With respect to the III Reserve Cavalry Corps, the figures should then be divided within the Corps as follows;

- III Corps Commander (Kellerman)
- 11th Cavalry Division:
- Division Commander
- 2 x Regiments of Dragoons (4 bases each) = 8 bases
- 2 x Regiments of Cuirassiers (4 bases each) = 8 bases
- 12th Cavalry Division:
- Division Commander
- 2 x Regiments of Carabiniers (4 bases each) = 8 bases
- 2 x Regiments of Cuirassiers (4 bases each) = 8 bases

However, the problem with the special instructions is that it forces you into some ahistorical formation such as this;

- III Corps Commander (Kellerman)
- Dragoon Heavy Cavalry Division:
- Division Commander
- 2 x Regiments of Dragoons (4 bases each) = 8 bases
- Cuirassier Heavy Cavalry Division:
- Division Commander
- 2 x Regiments of Cuirassiers (4 bases each) = 8 bases
- Heavy Cavalry Division:
- Division Commander
- 2 x Regiments of Cuirassiers (4 bases each) = 8 bases
- 1 x large Regiment of Carabiniers = 6 bases

Not only are you penalised by being short-changed in the Carabiniers, you have an extra division taking up a slot because you now have to separate your Dragoons and Cuirassiers, and you are losing points to buy a third division commander you should not need.

[bahdahbum]

The only thing that realy bothers me is the impossibility to form CAV divisions in an infantry corps .

For the rest, I would say it is an army list designed to create armies you will use in competitions or friendly games . Even in friendly games you can change what you want and if you play an historical battle you do what you want .

Another exemple can be the armies at Borodino 1812, check the armies on both sides and the list you can create ...it is all very different . You have very small divisions the campaign having taken his toll, soe bigger, mixed cav corps with heavies from 3 different nations , a french corps with a prussian cav unit , big russian jaegers units ...not always 3 units of infantry + ART in one russian division ..and so on .

[Philip]

One more for the TON errata:
page 11, Austrian Infantry Corps, Army of Italy and Bohemia, 1809.
Grenzers Light Infantry Average Irregular should be 8 points.

[terrys]

The only thing that realy bothers me is the impossibility to form CAV divisions in an infantry corps .

None of the Infantry corps had more than 2,000 cavalry - which equates to 2 units of 6. Therefore making the infantry corps a mixed corps.
Since we allow any number of mixed corps this works out fine.

847 / 792 Carabiniers (6 bases); 2 regiments = 8 bases (note that ToN has a maximum of 6 bases)

My information gives less than 4,000 cavalry (some sources 3,400 and some 3,700) in the 3rd cavalry division.
Sources also give a total of less than 900 for the carabiniers. Since the carabiniers were 1 of 4 brigades in the corps this seems reasonable. Sources also report only 3 squadrons in each of the 2 carabinier regiments. This would very reasonably give a maximum of 6 bases for the carabiniers.

Regiments are NOT 4 bases when using historical orbats. Each base is approx 165 men. (55 per figure).

I agree that you cannot make the (historical) 11th division with a mix of dragoons and cuirassiers when using the lists, but as we state on page 110:
"The usual rules for the creation of divisions will of course be discarded, with the actual orders of battle (OOB) being used to create an historical organisation for the army."
The lists are not designed to allow every historical formation to be used. If we did that, then you would see all the strange and unusual ad-hoc formations that generated some minor advantage being used all the time.

[bahdahbum]

Hy terry ,

Are you not supposed to be on hollyday till AFTER britcon .

yes orbat is correct . i misread something ( too much work, not enough sleep ) .

As for the cav division it does not work fine as it is unhistorical

But everybody will have it's own opinion and if I design a scen, as we play now quatre-bras, there might be a one large cav unit division ...because that was the strenght of that division at that time ( cav or inf )

[LeGrognard]

I agree that you cannot make the (historical) 11th division with a mix of dragoons and cuirassiers when using the lists, but as we state on page 110:
"The usual rules for the creation of divisions will of course be discarded, with the actual orders of battle (OOB) being used to create an historical organisation for the army."
The lists are not designed to allow every historical formation to be used. If we did that, then you would see all the strange and unusual ad-hoc formations that generated some minor advantage being used all the time.

Hi Terry,

Thanks for the update. However as it stands, you cannot mix Cuirassiers with Dragoons, but you can mix Carabiniers with Dragoons...and light cavalry!

[terrys]

Hi Terry,

Thanks for the update. However as it stands, you cannot mix Cuirassiers with Dragoons, but you can mix Carabiniers with Dragoons...and light cavalry!

It should read "Shock Cavalry" instead of Cuirassiers. I still often refer to shock cavalry as cuirassiers out of habit. Apparently that is true when I write as well.

[LeGrognard]

Hi Terry,

Thanks for the update. However as it stands, you cannot mix Cuirassiers with Dragoons, but you can mix Carabiniers with Dragoons...and light cavalry!

It should read "Shock Cavalry" instead of Cuirassiers. I still often refer to shock cavalry as cuirassiers out of habit. Apparently that is true when I write as well.

That's just....(you KNOW that I just HAVE to do this!)..."shocking"...

[bahdahbum]

Pg 50 : effects of ennemy cavalry :it just states thatif ennemy CV is within 6 MU the INF loses 1 or 2 dice for firing . It does not state that it is only at medium range and so may confuse people . It is only stated pg 49 in the chart .

[shadowdragon]

Page 76: French Infantry Corps Autumn 1813:

Baden Light Dragoons are listed as having 4 bases in a unit while the Hesse Darmstadt Chevaulegers are listed as having 2 bases in a unit. The maximum for both is 4 bases. I assume this means you can have a unit of 4 Baden light dragoon bases or a unit of 2 Baden light dragoons plus 2 Hesse Darmstadt chevaulegers.

Page 881: French Imperial Guard Autumn 1813

Velites of Turin and Florence are described as "light infantry" but their cost is that of "line infantry". I note that in lists for earlier years (1812 and 1813 Spring) they are "line infantry". I assume they are supposed to be "line infantry".

[terrys]

Page 81: French Imperial Guard Autumn 1813

Velites of Turin and Florence are described as "light infantry" but their cost is that of "line infantry". I note that in lists for earlier years (1812 and 1813 Spring) they are "line infantry". I assume they are supposed to be "line infantry".

The errata changes their points value to 12. (so they are Light)
I'll check with Mike, but I think we decided that they no longer perfomed a 'light infantry' role by 1812.

[BrettPT]

Hi Terry

There is a typo in the French 1814 list on page 113.
The conscript infantry have a minimum of 16 bases and a maximum of 12.

Are you able to let me know which of these numbers is incorrect?

ta
Brett

[terrys]

There is a typo in the French 1814 list on page 113.
The conscript infantry have a minimum of 16 bases and a maximum of 12.

The numbers are reversed - should be minimum 12 and maximum 16.

[BrettPT]

Thanks Terry