Battle of the Nile (Battle of Aboukir Bay), 1-3 August, 1798 Scenario

[Nightmoss]

Yes, one of the players suggested we replay it the next week with all the French free to maneuver at will from the beginning.

As a practical matter, the reason I would hesitate to go that far (and this is a bit of a gut check for someone wanting to replay battles like the Glorious First or Trafalgar) is that the complexity would go way way up. You'd need a full roster of French players for one thing. Playing the turns would be a lot slower, with the much higher probability of frequent collisions, etc. Also you'd have more time eaten up in planning/signalling/conferring, since the situation would be more fluid. Not that it couldn't be done, but it would be a radically different game with tougher challenges. Even the "Villeneuve option" of allowing only a few French ships to move (and later in the battle) might be too much to bite off, but at least it would be far more manageable.

Another justification for limiting the French mobility is to reduce the scope of the hypotheticals involved. As far as I know, the question of, roughly, "did Villeneuve screw up, and if so what would have happened if he had acted more boldly?" has been a rich subject of historical debate and second guessing. Therefore it seems a promising topic to explore.

The broader "what if" of what might have happened if Brueys had been prepared for Nelson and engaged in a mobile action (in deep water?) is of course interesting too, but sufficiently open ended and hypothetical that I've actually not seen it raised as often in my limited reading...

Haven't I read somewhere that if the French had anchored correctly the British would not have been able to play it out as they did? I really can't recall the source or whether anchoring closer to land would have made any difference or not?

[Walram]

Haven't I read somewhere that if the French had anchored correctly the British would not have been able to play it out as they did? I really can't recall the source or whether anchoring closer to land would have made any difference or not?

That is what I found. The Fleet commander's orders were to set spring anchors as well as run cables between ships to preclude the British from going between the ships. Neither was done. One of the other things I ran across was that the lead British ship had recently captured French charts of Aboukir Bay. However, there was no excuse for the French to not have had their frigates out to provide early warning of the British arrival.

Another problem for the French fleet was that when Napoleon went ashore, he took all the provisions, including that meant for the crew. The French had crew ashore getting food and water.

[Nightmoss]

That is what I found. The Fleet commander's orders were to set spring anchors as well as run cables between ships to preclude the British from going between the ships. Neither was done. One of the other things I ran across was that the lead British ship had recently captured French charts of Aboukir Bay. However, there was no excuse for the French to not have had their frigates out to provide early warning of the British arrival.

Another problem for the French fleet was that when Napoleon went ashore, he took all the provisions, including that meant for the crew. The French had crew ashore getting food and water.

Thanks for confirming what I'd thought I'd read. Having crew ashore certainly wouldn't have helped either.

[Walram]

Thanks for confirming what I'd thought I'd read. Having crew ashore certainly wouldn't have helped either.

if I remember correctly, they had as much as 1/3 of each ships crew ashore at any one time. The shore parties required a large contingent of escorts for protection.