Ulm Campaign - Design Notes & Battle Guide

24-25 October 1805

Document Revision 1

This document provides a guide to the scenario Battleground Expansion: Ulm Campaign. The goal of this document is to help gamers maximize enjoyment and improve understanding of the scenario and its design.

I. SCENARIO DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

Battle Overview
Gentlemen, this scenario was many months of work and thought in the making. If deep thinking is why you play these games, this one is highly recommended. The nature of this battle is a mixture of Borodino, Waterloo, and a river defense -- with a subtle twist. It presents a complex and difficult tactical situation to both French and Austrian player and is recommended for advanced players. It is similar to Borodino in that the Allied player is in a fortified defensive position in which the French attack. It is similar to Waterloo in that the Allied player receives reinforcements on the flank of the French later in the day. The river defense has five bridges, two of which can be "blown" during the game. The starting conditions of corps at start of the battle are shown in Figure 1 by rectangles, while reforcements are represented by circles.

Figure 1. Ulm Campaign Battle Overview

This scenario represents the battle that should have been fought by the Austrians if FML Mack was not so massively incompetent! In this alternate history, the Austrians remain concentrated near Ulm throughout October and decline fighting premature minor engagements, instead preserving their strength and morale while improving the fortifications in and around Ulm. Given this situation, around 10:00 AM on 24 October 1805 the French II, V, VI, Cavalry Reserve, and Imperial Guard Corps (70,000) under direct command of Napoleon arrive a few miles east of Ulm and south of the Danube. Napoleon's intent is to force the Austrians to battle. The French 1st Dv of the VI Corps under Dupont is north of the Danube. The Imperial Gd and Artillery Park are several miles east of the mapboard, represented by the interior of the land bridge. FML Mack has -- perhaps surprisingly given that he botched this in actuality -- arranged his army (70,000) into four well-organized, combined-arms columns under commands of FMLs Wernek, Riesch, Klenau, and Jellachich, respectively. The Russian army (31,000) under Kutuzov aggressively force marches from the southeast and successfully eludes the French IV Corps, reaching Ulm a week earlier than historical (Mack surrenders a few days later). The Russians arrive on the southeast map edge in the afternoon of the first day of battle, closely followed by the pursuing French IV Corps (27,000) which arrives a few hours later "marching to the sound of cannons." These dispositions are close to historical positions and force strengths. These account for no earlier battles to weaken the Austrians and additional attrition (5%) on Kutozov's force due to the increased marching pace.

The reader can acquire a better 'feel' of this battle by watching a 2D map (overhead view) movie of an actual game (click on Figure 2).

[gif animated movie in progress ... to be added later]

Figure 2. Ulm Campaign Battle Animation

.

Objective Hexes, Scenario Duration, and Victory Conditions
There is a split in opinion among gamers as to the appropriateness of objective hexes possessing victory points. The argument goes something like, "The value of a hex is the value the player places on it in its relative importance to the outcome of the battle; battle victory should be awarded to destruction of units only." To honor this opinion, this scenario is offered in two versions: (i) with objective hexes, and (ii) without objective hexes. There is merit in either opinion. However, the value of a hex sometimes has greater significance than just its battlefield worth: for example the national pride of losing one's capital is an obvious example.

As another example, in this Ulm Campaign the value of Ulm is more than just its battlefield worth because FML Mack had bragged to his military peers that the defense of southern Austria hinged on the defense of this city. Further he stated that Ulm had always been successfully defended in prior eras and was an easy place to defend. (This was actually demonstrated just a few years before in the year 1800.) Therefore, Ulm must be given significance beyond its battlefield worth, which is the four objective hexes within its walls collectively worth 1000 VP. Moreover, the concept of 'lines of communication' in this period of battle was strongly held by all commanders, including Napoleon. Because of this the three western map edge objective hexes are collectively given a worth to the Austrians of 1000 VPs, and the two eastern map edge objective hexes a worth to the French of 1000 VPs. The fortification and eastern village hexes total another 1000 and 500 VPs, respectively, to the Austrian player. By gaining all the objective hexes to the south of the Danube and outside the Ulm city walls, the French player acquires sufficient points for a draw result. To win, the French player will need a net total of 3000 VPs, which requires him to get north of the Danube in force, and ideally before the Russians arrive. This produces a more aggressive style in the French player, which better reflects historical accuracy.

The scenario duration is set at 98 game turns. Why this number? Given the time of day and night in this scenario, a complete 24 hour cycle is 66 turns. This can be deduced as follows. Dawn is at 5:00 AM and dusk is at 5:00 PM. Night turns are 1 hour in length while day turns are 15 minutes in length. Dawn and dusk last 2 hours and similar to day turns have 15 minute durations. Thus there are 14 hours of 15 minute game turns (14 x 4 = 56) and 10 hours of night turns lasting 1 hour each (10 x 1 = 10) for a total of 66 turns per day. Since the scenario begins on the first day at 10:00 AM, the second day of battle at 10:00 AM is the 67th turn, leaving 32 additional turns after completion of the first day or 8 more hours of combat, which ends the game at 6:00 PM, which is well into dusk. While plenty, 98 turns is not overly intimidating as say for example a multi-day battle lasting 200 or more. This game length gives plenty of time for both sides to determine the outcome and still allow ample time for the land bridge representing the eastern bridges to be used by the French player if he choses.

River Defense

Blowing Bridges
This scenario is designed for the Austrian to blow the two eastern map bridges if so desired. This simulates the probability that the Austrians, having been better led, would prepare these bridges for destruction should the need arise. The caveat here is that it takes a bit of time to prepare to either burn or blow up a bridge. This is an uncertain duration, which is simulated in the scenario by having the bridge detonator appear on the board on an adjacent hex to the bridge with a 16% probability starting with the 10:30 AM turn. This means the Austrian will have to defend the bridge area -- and most likely the southern side of the bridge too -- until the detonator arrives otherwise the French will destroy it in their defensive fire phase once the bridge detonator arrives during the movement phase of the Austrian. The detonator is only 1 SP but has sufficient firepower in one shot to destroy the bridge. This delay before arrival represents the time it takes the engineers to either rig the bridge for destruction or to tear up planks or whatever to make the bridge impassable in game terms and duration (roughtly 1 1/2 days). This also requires that the bridge be defended for some period unless the French can destroy the detonator unit and thus any chance for the Austrian to easily destroy the bridge. The probability of a detonator arriving by a given turn is shown in Figure 3, showing that it should arrive 40% of the time by 11:00 AM, 70% of the time by Noon, and 85% of the time by 1:00 PM (i.e., 3 hours after game start).

Figure 3. Probability detonator arrives by indicated time

How to blow the bridges? Use the fixed Austrian 'detonator' situated adjacent to each bridge (in the river hex) with sufficient firepower to blow the bridge in one shot. In game mechanics, just highlight the unit and aim it at the bridge (left mouse click). The hit will be sufficient to destroy the bridge.

Once the detonator arrives on the mapboard, be careful of waiting too long before blowing a bridge: (i) there is a 1 in 12 chance for a 'misfire' which means the bridge will not blow on the phase in which it is fired, and (ii) the unit strength of the detenator is 1 SP and therefore if it takes a casualty from French fire (or Austrian for that matter), it is gone for the duration of the game. This latter occurence represents the French defusing the demolition charges rigged to the bridge or putting out any fire. Therefore the Austrian should not wait too long to blow the bridge if he has chosen to do this. NOTE: if French fire at the Austrian detonator unit misses -- releasing the fixed unit, the Austrian should nevertheless NOT move the unit, which would give him the equivalent of a mobile nuclear device with range one hex! This special unit is to be used only for blowing the bridge ONCE and then should be ignored. (Ideally the Austrian would destroy it after detonation by firing his own unit into it.)

Whether the Austrian should or should not blow a bridge is a game tactical question and one which completely changes the nature of the battle. It is not a simple decision because blowing the bridges effectively isolates the Russian reinforcements which arrive on the southeastern mapboard edge later the first day of the battle. The loss of the bridges further reduces the Austrian player game tactical mobility later in the battle since the French can bottle them up in Ulm and keep them away from the land bridge. Further, the hex grain construction and wooded river-line of the two 'blow-able' bridges allow them to be quite effectively defended by a vigorous Austrian player. Finally, the two bridges in Ulm with strength 999 can not be easily destroyed during the game, and therefore always exist, prompting additional reflection on the worth of the other two bridges -- to wit, if the French successfully force Ulm's eastern city walls, the bridges in Ulm are more easily assaulted given their placement in the hex grain of the map.

If the Austrian wishes to blow the bridge, he will have to defend the southern bank of the Danube for at least a few hours, which should make for some interesting simulation. In addition, the threat of arrival of Dupont's 1st Dv on the north side gives some threat in their rear, which is quite different from the typical bridge defense where once on 'your' side, a player feels safe placing artillery and defense anywhere to defend the bridge.

Eastern Off-board Bridges
There were several other bridges to the east of those depicted on the map which are represented in this scenario by a land-bridge 100 hexes long. A typical infantry unit can traverse this at 5 hexes per turn, which means the round trip from southern opening to northern is about 4 hours (i.e., 2 hours to the off-board bridge and another 2 hours on the return trip). This land bridge to the east is controlled by the French player and makes the bridges on-board less valuable in game terms, particularly because the scenario is a two day affair allowing sufficient time to shuffle French forces from south of Danube to the north if faced with blown bridges or stiff bridge defense. This increases historical accuracy and reduces the long-term effectiveness of a stiff bridge defense.

Land Bridge -- Compromised River Defense
Ney's isolated deployment of Dupont's 1st Dv north of the Danube has been questioned by historians. However this is a great example of benefit-risk analysis: the benefit of this division north of the Danube is that it greatly complicates the Austrian defense of the bridges across the Danube, while the risk is that the isolated division could be out-numbered and destroyed. (Historically, the Austrians did try this at Haslach-Jungingen, albeit with a miserable battle plan, and were defeated by this elite French division.) This feature also complicates the French position as it needs to keep control of the mouths of this land bridge. This represents the line of communication between forces north and south of the Danube.

Artillery Classification, Range, and Ammunition Values
The original Battleground design used four classifications of artillery A, B, C, and D, which are described in Table 1.

Table 1. Battleground Expansion Artillery Classifications

Classification Letter	Typical Artillery Caliber	Range
A	12 pdrs	11
B	6 & 8 pdrs	10
C	3 & 4 pdrs	9
D	Howitzers	9
X	Bridge Demolition	1

The Battleground Expansion philosophy is that these classifications are better than the myriad of types adopted by the Napoleon in Russia Project. One primary reason is that rarely were batteries cleanly composed of only one type of gun caliber, so representation of a 6 or 8 gun battery is something of an average. Further, the ranges of the artillery are restricted to effective range rather than maximum range. This produces more realistic firing patterns by the player since historically artillery officers usually would NEVER fire at targets beyond effective range even when instructed to do so by higher ranking infantry officers. Most gamers when presented with a long-range target and plentiful ammunition fire at targets near a mile away! That didn't happen too frequently so the ranges are adjusted accordingly. Because of the effective range restriction and similarity of national weapon effectiveness of the era, the worth in game terms of finely resolving artillery classifications by exact gun caliber and nationality as done in NiRP modules has questionable value.

This brings up another topic: ammunition values for a battle. It has generally been agreed by veteran BG gamers that the ammo values in most BG (and HPS for that matter) scenarios are way too high. The amount of battlefield casualties by artillery is over-represented when large ammo values are used. Therefore the number of artillery shots is restricted to a smaller value than many other scenarios a gamer may be used to playing. This makes tactical movement as important as fire results which gives a more historical and interesting gaming experience.

It should also be noted that the original BG fire table is used but with slightly reduced effectiveness. This reflects veteran gamers experience that the casualty rates are usually a little too high in the battles. What occurs in games due to these changes is that small firepower shots are less effective -- reducing the effect of skirmish companies -- and more fatigue results are applied rather than strength point reductions. This reflects the historical outcome of units that usually routed away from fire long before taking large numbers of casualties. (This is also another reason why unit quality levels are kept lower than those found in equivalent NiRP modules. A unit with quality 7 or 8 will stand in withering fire, which is completely ridiculous! Even the top units like the French Guard withdrew at Waterloo when faced with murderous fire. A top quality unit should be considered a quality 6 and higher values should be reserved for rare instances. All these adjustments tend to make units fatigue and rout faster than being destroyed by fire or melee.)

Reinforcements & Safe Boundary
Early Russian reinforcement groups have a 40% chance of arriving beginning at 2:00 PM the first day. Table 2 shows the probability at each successive turn of arrival. Russian units that slated for arrival after 2:00 PM have successively higher probabilities to reduce the chance of creating small detachments from the main body late in the afternoon.

Table 2. Early Russian Group Arrival Probabilities

Turn	Time	Chance Arrival By This Turn, %
17	2:00 PM	40
21	3:00 PM	87
25	4:00 PM	98
29	5:00 PM	99.8

Note that the early Russians arriving on the southeastern map edge have a safety boundary of 15 hexes around them. This is to prevent 'dirty pool' by the French player setting up close ambushes in the lightly forested area. Remember that any enemy unit found within this safety region automatically becomes routed the moment the Russian units arrive on the mapboard edge. Russian units arriving later use the standard 5 hex boundary.

Also note that Dupont's 1st Dv arrives on the northeast mapboard edge staggered out over a 3 hour period every 15 minutes beginning at 10:00 AM. All these units have a safety margin of 15 hexes, so this protects the French land bridge for the first three hours from a Austrian attack. (Recall that any enemy unit in a safety zone automatically immediately routs when the replacement unit arrives.) By 1:00 PM it assumed the French will have properly defended this area if they desire to keep it under French control. After this the Austrian can safely move east to assault the 1st Dv if it so desires.

II. AUSTRO-RUSSIAN BATTLE GUIDELINES

Basically it probably is in the best interest of the Austrian player to blow the Thalfingen bridge. The bridge over Elchingen is more difficult, but once Dupont's Dv arrives, the Austrian should probably blow that if he is under pressure from both the east and south of the Danube. However, blowing these bridges allows the French to bottle you into Ulm and isolated the Russians scheduled to arrive later that afternoon. Therefore the Austrian player must think long and hard about whether to blow all the bridges and how hard of a fight he should put up to defend them.

III. FRENCH PLAYER BATTLE GUIDELINES

You as French should aggressively move toward the bridges at Elchingen and Thalfingen. These control your later options of attack. If these are blown or you can not force passage, you will have two options: (i) use the slower land bridge to the east, or (ii) attack the fortified area of Ulm.