Heavy Cavalry -??"Shock""??

Started by Last Hussar, 12 June 2020, 11:09:03 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Last Hussar

The Sunjesters have kindly invited me to 'Bubble' with them (Mrs Sj says its because I am vulnerable due to being a  high functioning autistic single middle aged man with depression, but we know Sunjester just needs a victim for his dice rolling), so I introduced SJ to Fields of Glory Napoleonic.

Part of the discussion about the rules was what is Shock Heavy Cavalry? The 1st ed army lists have these classifications

Austrian Army list has Cuirassier as 'Heavy Shock' and HEAVY Dragoons as just 'Heavy'
All other cavalry (inc 'dragoons') is Light.

French the same with the addition of Carabiniers as Shock, along with the Guard Grenadier a cheval/Gendarmerie d' Elite

German allies add Garde d'Corps, which are just Cuirassiers with seniority if SYW memory serves.

Ottomans have weird s...tuff such as Sipahi Oglans which are Heavy, Shock, Guard, LANCES! (So Teutonic Knights then?  ;D)

Technically the British don't have any Cavalry after 1792 (Dragoons are paid a penny a day per man less, so they were reclassified from Cavalry to Dragoons – "Do the same job for less pay, chaps"), but units such as The Horse Guards (Max 8 bases) or Dragoons (not 'Light Dragoons') – So the Scots Greys -  are Heavy Shock in 1815. The 100 days army has no British non shock Heavy.

It appears to be 'do they have a breast plate or a reputation' . 1st ed glossary says 'generally the biggest men on the heaviest horses', but I'm pretty sure its just a piece of 'gamerese'.

Is there any justification for 2 types of Heavy?
I have neither the time or the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

Lord Speedy of Leighton

Tried those rules, didn't get on with them. Sorry, cannot comment fairly.

However, I am hoping to playtest some new rules, very, very (hurry up with my order),  soon.
You may refer to me as: Lord Speedy of Leighton.
2016 Pendraken Painting Competion Participation Prize  (Lucky Dip Catagory) Winner

Last Hussar

Don't worry about the rules - its more the concept of Shock Heavy v Heavy - what's the basis for the difference
I have neither the time or the crayons to explain why you are wrong.

paulr

Volley & Bayonet have the concept of Shock, for Infantry that are particularly good in melee and for cavalry charging disordered troops.

I suspect FOG is using it as shorthand for cavalry that gets stuck in...
Lord Lensman of Wellington
2018 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!
2022 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!

O Dinas Powys

Quote from: paulr on 13 June 2020, 12:34:12 AM
Volley & Bayonet have the concept of Shock, for Infantry that are particularly good in melee and for cavalry charging disordered troops.

I suspect FOG is using it as shorthand for cavalry that gets stuck in...

Not a period I'm familiar with, but Heavy implies bigger, stronger, more resilient whilst Shock - as Paul says - implies more impactful on first contact. 

So, to answer your initial question:

Quote from: Last Hussar on 12 June 2020, 11:09:03 PM
Is there any justification for 2 types of Heavy?

Yes, if there's sufficient difference between their battlefield capabilities/role to justify it within the scope of the rules set in use  :-B
(I know, even though it's fantasy  :o  ;)  )

T13A

Hi

Just my tuppence worth.

For most of the 'horse and musket' period I believe that 'heavy' cavalry were by definition used as 'shock' cavalry, so no difference in my opinion. Depending on the level of the rules used then having a cuirass might make a difference. However, in the two 'heavy' brigades that hit d'Erlon's corps at Waterloo none of the units had cuirass' and even if they had I really do not think it would have affected the outcome in any way.

I think the issue of dragoons is more complicated and nuanced i.e. during the Seven Years War I'm not sure I would count French dragoons as 'heavy' however I certainly would at Waterloo.

As I said, just my tuppence worth.

Cheers Paul
T13A Out!