ECW Wargames Rules - Updated

With sincere and copious thanks to The Jolly Broom Man, for his time and commendable patience in sanity checking, commenting and proof-reading, I am pleased to announce that I now have an updated version of the Rules Booklet, the QRS, the Command Cards and the "Chaunce" Cards for my Commands & Colors based ECW game, which is now up to CC_ECW Ver 2.69, and may be downloaded via the link in the top right hand corner of this screen.

The main changes concern a simplification of the system by which "Rash" units of horse may run out of control. There are some additional cards, so if you already use my cards you may wish to update both sets.

Any problems with the rules, or if you can't get the downloads to work, please let me know. If you do not care for my rules then bless you - thank you for your interest. 

Talavera - (0) - the field

Talavera on Saturday. I think, to be more precise, it is the second bit of Talavera, but since it is unlikely to follow the history too closely, it doesn't really matter.

All these photos are taken from the Allied side of the field. In the foreground is
part of the town of Talavera de la Reina. The French attack will come from the
right-hand edge of the table.

And here we are looking back from behind the Allied left flank.

This is based on the Commands & Colors user site EPIC scenario for the battle - I've shrunk it just a little to get it on my 17 hex x 9 hex table. Some soldiers will appear on this ground in a day or so (I don't want them collecting dust any longer than necessary, and have to keep the sunlight off the flags...) - there'll be another photo or two then, and I'll also include some QRS stuff and scenario information - we have a nifty little experimental rule to prevent Wellesley and Cuesta co-operating too well.

I fear that all my battlefields have a kind of generic look, but it's a flexible system. Here
we are looking down at the Allied right wing. The Portiña stream looks fairly substantial,
but in fact it's a watersplash - units have to pause when they step into it, but it has no
other effect, and all sorts of troops may ford it throughout it's length. There are some
bonus Victory Points available for the French if they can take any of Talavera itself (top
right corner). The things that look like gumshields are the earthworks of the Pajar
de Vergara redoubt - there'll be one Spanish and one British battery in there by Saturday.

Aerial view of the Allied left wing - the 10 hexes of the Cerro de Medellin, on this side
of the stream (complete with the omnipresent Wellington's Tree) are the British main
position, and possession of these hexes is another potential VP generator for the
French. The building on the left is the farm estate of Valdefuentes. 

On some future occasion, Talavera is one of the battles for which I really fancy doing a bigger version - this game on Saturday will be about half size - for numbers and ground scale - but with enough boards and a big enough hall (and some volunteer extra generals - please leave your name with the secretary) there's no reason why it couldn't be done in something closer to the Grand Manner (oops! - copyright wording...).

More soon.

Battle of Montgomery - rule tweaks

Because of the relatively small size of the forthcoming battle, I am intending to allow a little more tactical detail in the rules. The combat will remain pretty much straight Commands & Colors, but units will have a front, flanks and a rear, and will be able to do some (limited) changing of formation - thus the activation and movement rules will be different, and there will be a "reaction" test (based upon the quality of a unit) to allow emergency changes of front or configuration during the opponent's turn. [As ever, I hasten to add that this is not intended as an improved version of the published game - it is merely that C&C is rather a blunt instrument with which to fight a very small battle!]

This is all lifted straight from a rather long-winded (though much read) post I put up here about a year ago, Manoeuvring in Hexes; the only problem is that that note was about Napoleonic games, and extensions to Commands & Colors: Napoleonic - I've never actually written down how this translates to the ECW variant. I shall not attempt to batter through all the discussion in that post - please follow the link if you can be bothered, if not, just assume that I have thought about this before!

In the tactical extension to my ECW game, the recognised formations for Foot will be:

Column of March - essential if you wish to get anywhere in a hurry
(especially on roads - columns of march get a bonus hex of movement on a road)
but can't fight at all - not even a bit.

Formed Line of Battle (or battalia - choose your own jargon) - muskets on
the flanks, pikes correctly in the centre -  optimal fighting formation, but
moves slowly, cannot fire on the move.

This rather stylised arrangement of bases represents Stand of Pikes -
Renaissance equivalent of a Napoleonic square - this formation cannot
move, has no front, flanks or rear, has limited combat power but is good
defensively against Horse

Unformed - no formation, minimal combat ability - units which fail to
redeploy are in this form (with their original front), also units occupying
villages, woods or enclosures will normally be unformed, which is a useful
reminder that they must stop to reform as they emerge!

Units of Foot may be seen in this form, simply because their commander
has not got around to specifying what they are doing - this is just a
default "don't know" formation - to an extent, they are assumed to be getting
on with things, but must move at slowest rate, and if involved in combat
will be Unformed unless they shape up, or pass a reaction test

For Horse, things are less complicated:

This is a general purpose formation in which Horse can fight or move
- the front is defined, intuitively...

Column of March is almost a cosmetic device - it probably looks good to move
Horse around in this formation, and is essential if you wish to claim road bonus,
but remember they can't fight like this!

What else? Oh yes - for the purposes of the Reaction Test, the forces at Montgomery will all be Class 2, apart from the rather war-weary "Irish" Royalist foot units from the Shrewsbury garrison, and Tyldesley's two units of Royalist Horse, which will be Class 3 - which means that they are rather less likely to carry out emergency manoeuvres on the battlefield, and are subject to double retreats if things go badly.

The details about turning rates and all that are in the Napoleonic post from last year, if you have the stamina.

The units of Horse will all be of Trotter type, which means they have a standard move of 3, but advance to contact is limited to 2 (because of all the fiddling about with pistols).

The only other thing I can think of at present is that, since this particular game is to be played end-to-end of the table, temporary rules are needed to force units to face the flat side of a hex, rather than a vertex, which involves some intuitive, minor alterations to movement rules, firing arcs, definitions of flanks and permitted retreat directions. Easy peasy.

That's quite enough about that. Oh yes - artillery? There wasn't any. That was easiest of all.


*****Late Edit*****

Not so fast....

I received an email from Jack Mortimer, asking me if I would publish the full rules, or at least send him a copy by reply. The answer to both these questions is no, but I can set out a bit more of the detail.

Foot move 1 hex in line, 2 in column or unformed, + 1 hex bonus for a column of march which spends entire turn on a road. Cannot move and fire in same turn. Stand of Pikes cannot move. Terrain rules are pretty much as C&C. Units entering a new hex may turn 60 degrees without penalty; any larger turn, or any stationary turn (which includes a turn BEFORE moving) takes a full move. Any ordered change of formation takes a full move; any change of front or formation in reaction to opponent action is instantaneous, but requires the unit to pass a Reaction Test (q.v.).

Horse move 3 hexes, but only 2 if advancing to contact. Horse have negligible (i.e. no) range combat ability - pistol fire is abstracted into melee. Non-free turns and formation changes take 1 hex of movement (not a full move), otherwise movement rules as Foot. Charge to contact must be in a straight line - i.e. any necessary turns must be carried out (with necessary penalties) before final charge. Column of march gets 1 hex road bonus, as for Foot.

Units can only fire within defined frontal arc. Units attacked in flank/rear who fail reaction test and do not turn about do not get to battle back in melee, and opponents get an extra combat die. Horse in melee with Stand of Pikes roll just 1 die, the SoP itself also rolls just 1. Since a SoP cannot move, any retreat it suffers must be taken as casualties instead of movement.

Reaction Test - units are ranked Class 1 to Class 4 (elite to dross). When required, unit may take Test in reaction to enemy action; to pass, must roll 1D6 >= (Class + 1 for each loss counter - 1 if general attached); natural roll of 1 is always a failure, natural 6 always a pass.

Otherwise, the game is basically my CC_ECW variant!

Back to the River

I've now painted up my demo pieces for the rivers/waterways, and am rather pleased with the results.

I chose a compromise colour - as mentioned previously, I wish to use these hex tiles mostly as sensible, battlefield-type rivers, but deeper areas such as lakes and coastlines are also within scope. I experimented with various varnish finishes (another compromise - this time between perfection and my natural laziness). I decided that the water will mostly be visible in wiggly, 2-inch wide strips, and even a lake should not be like glass, so I opted for 2 thick coats of gloss varnish, I didn't rub down between coats, and the resulting brush-stroked, imperfect shine has a passable look of a current, or the wind, or something - anyway, it'll do!

I used clear gloss Ronseal varnish, because it is cheap and should be tough enough to avoid flaking. Though it is water-based, it is still fairly nasty sticky stuff when cleaning brushes, but it's readily available and goes on easily.

Even with just the three basic bank shapes I have available to date (there will be one or more junction pieces in due course, and maybe a couple of small islands), it is possible to play around and create a number of interesting shapes. I hope to get more river pieces to paint up in the next week or so. They store compactly and neatly, too, so I'm pleased. This could go viral - by next Christmas you could be the only kid in your gang that isn't playing at rivers

I still have to arrange for a couple of fords (just water tiles which show some colour variation, I think). And, of course, now I have established a system, I can give some thought to an alternative river colour for the other side of the water tiles...!


For no real reason, other than the fact that I like it, here's a loosely-linked music clip. I got a bit distracted, wondering whether David Byrne's suit would remain stationary if he spun round on the spot, but I guess not. It is nice for us Wallace and Gromit fans to see a pair of tribute Wrong Trousers, though, and any Al Green song is usually worth a listen.

The Hills Are Alive, and Hollow

During this next week or so I should receive some more of the new MDF pieces for my battlefields. I was about to use the word "scenery", but they are not very scenic - they are more game equipment. In the strange world of hexagonal geology, scenery is a contextual term.

You can never have enough hills. New hills almost ready - one of the old ones
nearest the camera

I made up the 10 new hills which Michael at Supreme Littleness has cut for me to date. These are 7-inch hexes, to match my existing stock, but laser cut from 6mm MDF in two parts per hill tile - to save weight (and in the hope that someone else might want 6-inch hexes in 6mm MDF?), the underhill (?) is a hexagonal doughnut, as you see.

Weight-saving hill, worm's-eye view

The tops and bottoms were glued together (very accurately - my tongue was probably sticking out) using "tacky" PVA glue, a very useful product which was new to me. Once dried, I painted them up with the house standard Crested Moss #2 baseboard colour. I also did some gentle dabbing on (spackling?) of a diluted darker green, to match my older hills and to make them more obviously different from the unspackled plain beneath. I was far too tentative with the spackling - it dried a lot paler than I expected, so I'll improve that when I paint up the next shipment of 10 hills.

Old hill on the right - yes, I know, I have to make a better fist of texturing
the new ones - I'll get to it. I'm very pleased with the match, and the old ones
are only very slightly thicker, which doesn't matter.

My original hills are ½-inch Insulation Board, cut by hand with a steel rule and a Stanley knife in 1974 or so - I couldn't do that now - I wouldn't even contemplate such a miserable job. How I still have all my fingers and thumbs is a mystery. No, lasers are the answer, my friends. Quantum science and those billions of dollars invested to develop the laser were all to avoid Old Foy risking his fingers with a craft knife. Obvious snag, of course, is that you can't laser-cut MDF thicker than 6mm - I think it just catches fire or something. So Michael has given me two-layer hills in 2 x 6mm, which is a close enough match for half an inch.

Very nice - only practical observations thus far are that the burned edges require 3 coats of the baseboard colour to hide the charcoal, and the MDF is a lot smoother than insulation board, so I need to be a bit more wholehearted with the spackling to give better texturing. It is, as ever, a learning process...

To achieve a more interesting effect with the dabbed texture colour, I invested in a natural sea sponge from Boots the Chemist. Ouch. Great idea, but of all the money I have ever wasted on my hobby, the price of this small sponge was the most eye-watering little surprise. These must be Fair Trade sponges - the guys who harvest them must have yachts at Monte Carlo.

Research on the colour of river water continues. I had a rough idea I might be looking for a colour called Teal, or similar, but it seems such a colour is not in vogue. I have a couple of candidate shades ticked on the extant Dulux sample cards - tricky business, this. For a start, my colour vision is not wonderfully accurate, and the shade cards are just bewildering - far too much information. If someone shows me 100 different varieties of greenish-blue then I can't cope - I am even distracted from what it was I was looking for in the first place. I found a wonderful colour yesterday, but it took about 15 seconds to realise that it might be suitable for the Caribbean in July, but not the Yorkshire Moors or Aberdeenshire in February. Anyway, I have a couple of promising candidates to ponder over. I hope I don't just buy something completely different in a moment of panic.

Cue the Spares Box, plus a World of MDF

All a matter of balance - and special equipment...

I have received the first prototype Thing (not sure what it is – a buttress, a pedestal, a support…?) to enable garrison units to stand on a walkway on the walls that is narrower than the subunit bases. My ECW Foote are on 60mm x 60mm squares, but the walkways are about 20mm wide – you can see the problem. The prototype seems to work OK – Michael has produced a build-it yourself kit in 2mm MDF which glues together to give a block 50mm wide, 48mm high and 23mm deep, and I attach a piece of steel paper to the top. Since my unit bases are all finished with magnetic compound, this should be a big help. I have glued-up and painted the prototype in a delicate stone shade, as you see, so that it blends in a bit (i.e. looks less stupid than you would expect). It should even be possible to mount artillery on the walls if I use the Things two-deep. Now I need a supply of about 20, plus I need a good name for a Thing.

The Thing

Troops on The Thing

Call out the trusty Spares Box. It also occurred to me that it would be useful to have some musketeers mounted in single rank, on half-depth bases, specially for siege and fortress work. It seems a bit of a grunt to paint some up just for this role (and I’d begrudge the use of figures which could be made up into proper battlefield units), but the Spares Box came into its own. A while ago I bought some old painted ECW figures from Harry Pearson, and some of them are from the very earliest “Subscription” series which Les Higgins made before his more famous centrifugally-cast 20mm range (of which I use a great many). The early figures are interesting because they are seldom seen, but for me they are a bit puny in stature to mix comfortably with the later ones. However, for isolated special-purpose siege stands they could be just the thing, so I did some (minimal) touching-up and revarnishing, and mounted them up on 30mm-deep stands. They could never be accused of possessing actual beauty, but I expect they will do as they are told. In any case, given their age and history, it would be sad for them to live in the Spares Box forever.

Surprised to find themselves on special duties - "Subscription" Les Higgins ECW

They can do it without The Thing

While I was looking in the Spares Box, I was also reminded that the ex-Harry figures also include some of the later Higginses which are in good nick and – with a few supplementary figures painted to match, should provide me with 3 new units of foote – there are some red-coated fellows who will give me a decent double-sized unit for Francis Gamul’s City of Chester regiment – there’s that siege theme again…

I also have prototypes for some of the new MDF structures which will form the basis of my trench sections, but more of that on another occasion. I also have some MDF pieces which will provide a pretty radical solution to the placement of rivers on my hex-grid table. I’ll get some painted up – this week, I hope – and there will be some pictures (unless they are terrible, in which case I shall just change the subject – good heavens, is that an elephant in the garden…?).

The river system is that I paint up some 2mm-thick hexes to be water – good gloss varnish finish and all that – I’m still pondering the best colour for water, by the way – I tend towards mud rather than sky-blue, but I am open to ideas. Then I have a series of bags of extra parts laser-cut from 2mm MDF, painted in baseboard green, which sit on top of the water hexes, and are painted on both sides to give maximum flexibility. The bags are labelled “cheeks – straight”, “cheeks – inners” and “cheeks – outers” and that sort of describes the system – there are two different profiles for a straight (a bit wiggly, these are not canals) and two profiles for a curve. Each river piece connects at the edge, with a 2-inch wide river in the middle of a (4-inch) hex edge. Using the cheek-pieces in different combinations, it is possible to produce a wide range of river shapes, and you can even make estuaries, lakes or a coastline. Until I get more to fiddle about with, I do not know the full extent of what is possible, but it seems very promising. When I have a decent number of pieces painted up, I’ll try to put together a post to demonstrate this.

Not painted yet, but this quick mock-up gives an idea of the scope, with a
very small number of alternative shapes - does anyone else remember
Slartibartfast? It may have occurred to you that the cut-out bits which are
missing from this picture are - well, roads! - aha....

I’ve had problems with rivers since I started wargaming, and hexes are just a specific variation on that theme. The new rivers, by the way, will not be the slightest bit dioramic – these are to be flat, tidy, obvious rivers that you can stand a unit or a bridge on without everything falling over. Like an oversized version of Commands & Colors terrain tiles, in fact.

Manoeuvring in Hexes

Tinkering-around time again. If hexes bring you out in a rash, I recommend you go and read something else!

As any regular readers will know, I mostly play Commands & Colors: Napoleonics these days, with miniatures, and am very happy with those rules, though I have to make the occasional adjustment to them to suit a particular game.

Principal areas where these adjustments are called upon are:

(1) I mostly play solo – standard game can be compromised by lack of surprises…

(2) The published scenarios give balanced games, with the armies set up all ready to start fighting; I very rarely use these scenarios, and a lot of my games – especially in campaigns – require the bringing up of reserves, sometimes off-table reserves, or rapid deployment of big groups; though there are a couple of the Command Cards which allow rapid movement of large formations, C&CN is not well suited to this kind of action without some special add-ons

(3) Any game which is not clearly across-the-table and divided sensibly into Left, Centre and Right doesn’t fit the Command Card system

(4) A couple of other things which I remember when I see them, but I can’t find all my notes as I sit here…

The whole philosophy of C&CN is that the game moves quickly – you can see the battle develop; the turns are short and very limited, but you get lots of them in quick succession – a battle on a standard-sized board/table (13 x 9 hexes) should last about 2 hours. To enable this, some very clever mechanisms are employed, and a degree of simplification which may be seen as a turn-off by unbelievers – the C-in-C does not concern himself with the exact formation of each unit, nor the placing of skirmishers – with a couple of exceptions (notably squares) this stuff is left to the regimental officers. In C&CN we do not form units into lines or columns, we do not even concern ourselves with which way a unit is facing – if they are still on the table, we assume they are getting on with doing what they are supposed to be doing, and if the combats go disastrously against us then maybe one of the contributory reasons was a lack of tactical skill at unit level – the C-in-C will never know, but it’s a handy excuse if needed…

That is all very fine, and I am very content with the approach, but I used to play an in-house (computer-managed) game called Elan, which also used hexes, and that allowed some tactical manoeuvring and suchlike; I would never suggest that Elan was even half as successful as C&CN as a game, but the tactical bit was rather fun, and it would be nice to do some of that again from time to time.

I have some other tweaks, some of which I have discussed here before, which involve alternative (dice based) activation systems instead of the Command Cards, with a rapid-movement option involving faster marching when distant from the enemy, and the ability to give orders to an entire brigade as a single entity, provided it has been kept together and in good order.

Recently I have been re-reading Neil Thomas’s Napoleonic rules (and especially some very fine work done by Jay “OldTrousers” and others on fitting Neil’s game onto a hex grid), the White Mountain Thirty Years War rules (which are a cousin of C&C Ancients), which allow for units to have a direction of facing, and my own Elan game (the movement aspects of which worked very comfortably for some 25 years before I ever heard of C&C, and which are logically very similar to what Jay set out on his blog).

Two further thoughts  - tickles at the back of my brain – to give the idea.

(1) Just looking at the four wooden blocks in a C&CN infantry regiment (or bases in the miniatures version), I have often often thought it would be possible to form them into a line or a column, though the blocks don’t make it clear which way the guys are facing, and the very idea is a heresy and would cause Richard Borg to shudder.

(2) I did consider just trying Jay’s hexified version of Neil Thomas’s game, as he has set it out. Two slight issues with that – the scale of the board and the size of the actions don’t really fit what I am likely to want to do. Also the C&CN combat dice, with (Hallelujah!) the built-in retreat system (which does away with the dreaded industry of morale testing) would be sadly missed.

Thus I have come around to my current plan, which is to have an alternative to pure C&CN available for games which could make use of it – this is not, repeat NOT, intended as an improvement on C&CN, nor as any kind of replacement. My present thinking is to use C&CN’s combat dice system, with as few alterations as possible, with a modified movement and manoeuvre system and with a dice-based activation system allowing brigade-sized groups to be activated. Yes, this does away with much of the beauty of C&CN, so I do not pretend this is a variant of C&CN – it is merely another game which uses a C&CN-style board and C&CN combat dice. I emphasise that the movement and frontage rules set out here are based on my old Elan game, and that it needs a fair amount of work (especially in the skirmishing department). Today I’m just intending to cover the formations-and-facing rules.

One preliminary note, and it may bring a few hoots from friends who know of my aversion to morale testing: formation changes and changes to front can be ordered, but they may also be attempted, out of turn, as a reaction to an enemy attack. It would be pointless to allow this to be successful on all occasions, and the reality would be that the better units would have a greater chance of success, so – yes, despite all my normal stance on this – these rules require a reaction test. I introduce this reluctantly, and I make a point of keeping it as bovinely simple as possible. When required to react to an attack, by changing formation or facing, a unit will have to score not less than a certain number on 1D6 – troops have 4 basic classes, thus:

1 – The Old Guard, certain very special elites

2 – Steady, reliable, trained troops

3 – Poorly trained, demotivated or raw troops

4 – Militia and levies, dross

"No, no - we are Class 2, and don't you forget it..."

The class of the unit will be improved (reduced) by 1 if a Leader is present, and worsened (increased) by 1 for each casualty counter. The test will be to equal or beat the altered Troop Class with 1D6. Thus, for example, Class 3 troops with a general need a 2 or better to allow them to react successfully; Class 1 troops with 2 casualty markers need a 3 or better. Simple as I could make it. One further detail I am thinking is to add a rule that a straight roll of 1 is always a failure, so the Guard may sometimes let you down, and a straight 6 is always a success, however desperate the situation.

With a nervous cough, I move on hastily.

Units must face a vertex (point) of a hex, as in C&CN. The two sides of the hex on either side of this vertex represent the unit’s front, and they may move, fire or melee only in that direction. They may, however, turn – according to the following, which I’ll come back to later.

(1) as it enters a new hex, a unit may turn by 60 degrees either way – i.e. to the next vertex – without penalty

(2) any bigger turn, or any stationary turn (i.e. turning on the spot before any movement) takes an amount of time equivalent to 1 hex of movement

Some additional points, before we get into the detail of movement allowances and so on:

(a) charges to combat must be straight ahead – there may be a preliminary turn if the movement allowance permits one, but a charge cannot wheel as it goes in

(b) this is similar to the normal Zone of Control idea familiar in boardgames – a unit entering a hex adjacent to an enemy must stop – they cannot slither around an enemy unit to reach a flank. Note that this does not apply for attacks on units in built up areas or woods, or squares, none of which have flanks or rear.

(c) units attacked in flank or rear who do not manage to react and turn are worse off in two ways – the enemy gets an extra die, and they themselves do not get to fight back – again, squares and units in towns and woods do not have flanks or rear.

(d) skirmishers don’t have a front either

Move Distances

Squares, unlimbered artillery                                                      zero (though may change formation)

Infantry in line                                                                            1 hex

Infantry in column, skirmishers, limbered foot artillery             2 hexes

Cavalry, generals, horse artillery                                                 3 hexes

Units in column of march may add 1 hex of movement if their entire turn of movement is on a road (otherwise terrain effects are pretty much as C&CN)

Change of formation, and any stationary turn, or turn greater than 60 degrees costs 1 hex of movement. Limbering and unlimbering is a change of formation.

Unit Types (note that scenario rules may limit this – e.g. some nations are not allowed to use column of attack)

Close-Order Infantry

Column of March - bases one behind the other - this formation gets a bonus on a road, and can march through a wood or town at normal speed, without stopping, but cannot fight or fight back unless the unit changes formation

Column of Attack - 2 bases wide - this formation can shoot only with the front row of bases, but may melee with 2 rows of bases. Note that, in all formations of all fighting units, the number of bases able to take part in a combat is limited to the original number less any casualty markers. The casualty markers are especially useful here, since keeping the bases on the table allows the formation to be indicated. A unit is removed, of course, when the number of casualty markers is equal to the number of bases (duh).

Line - single row of bases - all bases may shoot, but only bases engaged (i.e. same width as opponent) may melee

3-deep Line - I'm still considering this as an option - one-third of bases (to nearer whole number) are in a second row - front row of bases may fire, in melee formation fights with front row bases engaged (as Line above) plus 1 base

 Square - may not move - has no front - each base may shoot once per turn, through an adjacent face of the hex - melee rules are as near to C&CN as I can make them

Unformed - this is just a proposal at this stage - I am thinking that infantry in a town or a wood must be unformed (unless they are in Column of March, passing through) - up to one half the bases may fire through any one hex face per turn - each base may only fire once - melee? - not sure - I think all bases may fight in a town or wood, otherwise an unformed unit in the open fights with half bases. Still working on this...

Light Infantry

First off, let me say that French légère are just classified as line infantry in my games. Actual light infantry appear in two forms:

(1) units such as British or Spanish lights are capable of acting in close order or sending skirmishers out with supports

(2) units of converged voltigeurs or light companies are different - the only formations permitted for these are Column of March or Skirmish Order, in which latter they may be deployed with other, close-order units as a screen - I'm still working on skirmish rules, so this bit is a work in progress

Let's look at the dual-purpose light regiments first - in my organisation, these consist of two normal, line-infantry type, close-order bases, and two, half-strength, open order. Thus a battalion with a total strength of 3 bases may be deployed in the following ways:

With the open-order bases tucked away to the rear, here's a light unit in Column of March, mimicking their normal close-order brethren

They can also be a close-order unit in Column of Attack...

... or in Line (I haven't got a "3-deep" version of this)...

... or in Square.

Or they can do this special trick, which is deploying with skirmishers to the front, supports standing to the rear.

They can probably do Unformed as well, though I didn't bother with a picture.

Now consider the converged units of light companies - these only have two real formations...

...Column of March, if they wish to go along a road in a hurry...

... or in skirmish order, in which case they can be added as a screen to other units - the skirmish rules are still being worked on. Skirmishers caught in melee by close-order troops do not do well - they are just eliminated. Skirmishers, by the way, do not have a front - they can fire or move in any direction, and can hide behind friends if they need to.

Cavalry

Cavalry have only two formations...

... Column of March (can't fight in this formation)...

... or a formation which is Everything Else - it might be Line, or a series of Lines, or Waves or whatever you want - the whole regiment gets to fight in a melee.

Cavalry also move far enough to give a demonstration of how the turning rule works:

First of all, here's an infantry column demonstrating the move straight forward - the unit may follow either of the two red arrows, and move into either of two hexes, still facing in the same direction - having moved forward in this way, the unit may, if it wishes, turn up to 60 degrees in either direction at no extra penalty - they are regarded as having "wheeled" as they entered the hex.

Cavalry have a 3-hex move - here's an illustration of one of the many possible moves the rules would allow. The unit advances (red arrow) into the next hex, and gets a free wheel (of 60 degrees) to the right (the new facing is shown by the brown arrow), advances along the second red arrow, wheels again (second brown shows the new front), and does it yet again, finishing with a free wheel to face the final brown. So the unit may advance in a semi-circle, as an example - also note that such a move would not be permitted to be a charge to attack, which must be in a single direction after any initial turn.

Artillery

Unlimbered artillery only has one formation:

The front is shown by the brown arrow, and the permitted cone of fire is marked here. A stationary turn requires 1 hex of movement, and a battery which turns is thus regarded as having moved for the fire rules.

A single limber represents a complete battery on the move - a limber (like a general, and like skirmishers) has no front and may move or turn in any direction, without limitation - it may not fight, but it may get a Road Bonus if applicable, and may unlimber with the guns facing in any direction.

That is really all I wanted to write at the moment - I don't wish to get into detailed nitty-gritty of the rules (not least because much of it is not decided yet!), but thought that a discussion of how units may behave in a reasonably Old School manner in the world of hexes might be of interest.

I'll keep working on this, but I'd welcome any comments in the meantime. Bear in mind that this movement and manoeuvre system does work, and has done so for years with my old Elan rules - the new bit is attempting to graft it onto the C&CN combat system.

I'm sure that's quite enough for the moment.