The Emperor Returns COA

[Marshall]

Hello,

This is the first game of campaign series I have the chance to play in its entire course. It was really fun, and I think it could be a good start for starters.

Anyway, a question came up. Historically, was it common for marching armies to capture garrisons(with soldiers included as the 1 SP in the game)?
Why I ask that? Because at some point, we were more eager to have a big battle as soon as possible rather to go recuperate threatened garrisons. Did real armies gave up garrisons so easily?

thank you

[kzucker]

Hi there.

I am glad you enjoyed playing the game. I am not sure how to answer the question. Could you provide a rules reference so t hat I have more information?

[Marshall]

Oh no, it`s not a rule question, it`s rather a historical vs game type of question.

I mean, I was the French and my opponent the Anglo Allied army. There were many little (garrisons & 1-2 Sp cavalry units) English units set-up near the French-Belgian border. The essential of English army set-up very far in the North(Brussels). Because my opponent and I were more eager to have a critical battle rather than position our units at first, the Anglo-Allied player didn`t care very much for small units deep in the south. So he let me capture the garrisons or beat the 1 Sp cavalry that were near the French border without any any attempt to recue them. They were more the type of units to slow down my march to Brussels. In termes of game, that is totally legal. But in terms of history, did armies let their garrisons be captured so easily? The reason of this question arose for me is because when I read about napoleonic battles, authors primarely describes the major battles. They don`t talk about armies capturing garrison as a part of their routine if that was the case. So, that is why my question is to know if main armies cared for their troops left in garrison.

[kzucker]

"authors primarely describes the major battles."

One of the problems with popular history I guess.

Anyway the garrisons were not throw-away troops. They were there for a reason.

[daniel C]

TER is a short game and garrison aren't very useful, except for blocking invasion pathes of french army. I think they can be considered as detachements of bigger formations. A way to give them more importance is to give them an initiative of "1" in order to join the bulk of the army. But as unit OOB are complete, they would serve as a reserve to replace losses.
English army is a campaign army unlike the french garrisons which can composed of national guards or depots

[kzucker]

"except for blocking invasion pathes of french army."

Could be important...