1866 Hanoverians

[cameronian]

I would echo Dour Puritan's advice "Get yourself a copy of the booklet, Langensalza 1866, by John Pocock. Obtainable from The Continental Wars Society (Ralph Weaver), 37 Yeading Avenue, Rayners Lane, Harrow, Middlesex HA2 9RL". Austria, Hesse and Wurtemburg were the only allied states to formally espouse stosstactik. Their casualties were proportionately huge particularly the Wurtemburgers (Weigle 1866).

[KTravlos]

But Cameronian, permit me to be a bit foolish, but can you be 100% sure that differences in casualties represent differences in tactics, rather than differences in how those tactics were put in practice and by who?

To the orginal poster. Play them as you wish. There seems to be serious disagreement on the matter. I wish I could help but beyond the Quinting Barry claim that they followed the Austrian doctrine, I have nothing else to give.

Why not do both? play some battles using one doctrine and play the same using the other, see which results are closer to history?

And my rule is if the person I am playing with starts giving me grief over uniforms, models, tactics, and this or that, I stop playing. When I play I play to have fun. I have nothing against those who worry about these things more than getting the toys moving. I just will not play with them. I have stopped games in the first turn because the other person behaved in a manner that made it impossible for us to both have fun.

[Leman]

Here's another spanner in the works. I've just read the Bloody Big European Battles' Koniggratz scenario. The stosstaktik is listed as tactically inept. The Austrian army list then states that all Austrian infantry units are tactically inept EXCEPT the Saxons. Make of that what you will.

[sdennan]

I have a copy of th ebooklet.

If it has anything on tactics then I am missing it.

I will take the advice and play them as I see fit to figure it out.

Cheers

[Leman]

Tactics used are discussed in the grey sidebars next to each scenario army list.

[sdennan]

Then I have a different book

There are no scenarios in the continental wars society battle booklet no 1 Langensalza 1866 by John Pocock

[Leman]

Sorry, we're at cross purposes. I was talking about the Bloody Big Battles European scenario book that accompanies the rules of the same name. Unfortunately Langensalza didn't make it into the book as Chris Pringle considers it too small for the scale he uses. However it does feature in Bruce Weigle's 1866 rulebook with an excellent map and OOBs. I will be using these to design a scenario to fit Neil Thomas' C19th European rules.

[sdennan]

Just reading that and he has Hanoverians operating in line while Federal armies are in column only.

[Chad]

I am disappointed that two respected members of this forum should feel it necessary to adopt a tone in their exchanges that is sadly reminiscent of 'discussion' on TMP. Particularly as it moved off the subject. 😢

Chad

[mollinary]

I am disappointed that two respected members of this forum should feel it necessary to adopt a tone in their exchanges that is sadly reminiscent of 'discussion' on TMP. Particularly as it moved off the subject. 😢

Chad

Chad, you are quite correct. i apologise unreservedly  to all, including Cam, for allowing the tone of my posts to become too combative. 

Coming back to the point, I think you are probably entriely safe in allowing Hanoverians (or Saxons for that matter) to enagge in fire fights in line.  If attempting to close assault, my impression is that most armies would form column. The big distinguishing mark between those who followed Austrian practice and those who did not appears to be that the Austrians would seek to close assault at practically every opportunity, often with totally inadequate preparation.  The others would be much more careful about decidng when to attack in column. Saxon practice seems to be that assaults are in company, not battalion columns.  I have a couple of books in German about Langensalza, and will try and find if there is anything definitive regarding tactics, but my recollection is that regrettably they do not contain such detail.

Mollinary

Mollinary

[Duke Speedy of Leighton]

Thank you, I was worried this here row would spiral out of control.

[cameronian]

Grumble, grump ... ok, sorry, busy week, big inspection, difficult surgical caseload, felt a bit put out, mumble .... 

[cameronian]

Bennighof for what he's worth ... yes I know, I know.

Saxon soldiers carried the same Lorenz muzzle-loading rifles as their Austrian allies, but Saxon doctrine called for "outmoded" tactics compared to the Austrian army's brutal stosstaktik. Austrian units formed massive assault columns, 60 men wide and 12 deep, and suffered terribly from Prussian rifle fire. The Saxons used the linear tactics of the late Napoleonic period, with much better effect. The Saxon corps saw as much action at Königgrätz as most of the Austrian corps, but suffered fewer losses than any equivalent Austrian formation. The wrecked Austrian IV Corps lost roughly seven times as many men as the Saxons.

[KTravlos]

I see. Thank you

[cameronian]

I've been taken to the cleaners by Bennighof before so caution is advised.