To the Last Gaiter Button Bat Rep

[Fenton]

Would the same figures be useful for the Austro Prussian Wars as well?

[Leman]

The Austrians I'm doing are for 1866 (can also be used in 1864) i.e. they are in grey greatcoat. 1859 Austrians wore the white kittel jacket.

[Fenton]

thanks guys you have peaked my interest..Can you recommend a good book to begin with ...a Dummies guide so to speak?

[Leman]

There is so much more out there now than when I started doing FPW using 'They Died for Glory'. A real get you started primer is Bruce Weigle's 1870 rules, which summarise the war, its weapons and tactics, as well as providing most of the orders of battle and 14 very detailed scenarios. The unbeaten single volume history is Michael Howard's 'The Franco-Prussian War', but if you like your history detailed with lots of contemporary illustrations then try Quintin Barry's two volume history, 'The Franco Prussian War - The Campaign of Sedan' and 'The Franco-Prussian War - After Sedan'.

[Shedman]

And even though it is fiction Zola's Debacle is worth a read. He interviewed many FPW veterans.

[Hertsblue]

The Austrians I'm doing are for 1866 (can also be used in 1864) i.e. they are in grey greatcoat. 1859 Austrians wore the white kittel jacket.

So I thought too, but many of the illustrations show 1866 Austrian infantry in white and some eye-witness accounts speak of "white-clad masses".

[kustenjaeger]

Greetings

I'm still trying to work out how best to set up FPW in 10mm to both explore lower level tactics and larger forces.  I think I am going to go for a scheme that allows me to build, at lowest level, six bases per Prussian/German company (probably 4/base) so roughly 1:10 scale with command bases (so probably RF&F 1866 conversion scale), moving up to 1 base per company so roughly 1:60 with 48 bases per division.   Imperial French would be a bit trickier.

Regards

Edward

[mollinary]

So I thought too, but many of the illustrations show 1866 Austrian infantry in white and some eye-witness accounts speak of "white-clad masses".

This is a big problem for  a lot of periods before photographs, and many since.  Illustrators fall into many categories, and not all were present on campaign.  This leads to searching of archives for illustrations to base new material on, and where this fails, I suppose, guesswork.  In 1866 the Austrian army had been famous to the world as the "Whitecoats" for 150 years, and had fought as such in Italy in 1859.  Not surprising perhaps that these were the images that illustrators produced.  Remember a famous contemporary image (for a German postcard I think) of fighting on the Western Front (1914 I think) had red coated Bristish infantry in Bearskins resisting German cavalry!   The eye witness accounts are more difficult to square.  Those that are done for newpapers might well fall into the 'artistic licence' category, giving people images they will recognise easily, and that allow the two sides to be differentiated. There are also other aspects of uniform which might have given the impression of white masses (The Austrian Heavy cavalry wore huge white greatcoat/mantles during the campaign). Individual accounts, eg in letters home, must be given more credence, but still probably need a closer look, rather than simply saying, "I saw white figures which identified them as Austrian" and not looking for other possible explanations". In more informal settings, in camp or bivouac, I am sure most soldiers were in shirts rather than their greatcoats, for example. Finally, as a thought, I seem to recall from somewhere that the Austrians were instructed not to take the white kittel with them on campaign. What is not clear to me is whether it is possible that some of those troops actually permanently based in Bohemia might have worn them.  Still, mostly speculation, interested if anyone has anything firmer to go on.

Mollinary

[mollinary]

Edward,

Sounds very much where I am going on this.  I have the Prussians and the Austrian Army of the North at the 1:60 scale, suitable for Trapped Like a Fox or TTLGB.  From them I can (and have) built up Corps for the early actions of 1866 using an interim scale of 1:20 so three bases to a Prussian company.  I am also planning on going to the full RFF scale of 1:10 to do more or less brigade/division level scenarios for refighting parts of Koniggratz, like the Swiepwald or Problus.  As you say, the French are trickier to track down.  I have most of the army in 1:60 scale, three bases to a battalion.  At 1:10 that would be about 18 bases, which might work.  My middle scale, with nine bases, might be a bit trickier.  I need to get some playtesting in!    I also have, but so far have never used, about 100+ skirmish bases, each with two figures instead of four, for each of the armies.  These might allow for a more accurate representation of the firing line. Anyway, I am looking forward to experimenting.

Andrew

[kustenjaeger]

Greetings

I spent some time reading accounts and the French need to be able to deploy by half battalion (example at Gravelotte pushed out to skirmish - can't recall the regiment off hand) so I think there need to be an even number of stands if you aim to break down the battalion on the table.  The rapid fluctuation of French numbers doesn't help.

Have you read Petain's On Infantry article from 1911 where he compares French and Prussian regulations and uses parts of Mars le Tour as an example?

Regards

Edward

[mollinary]

Hi Edward,

Yes I have, my French is just about up to it.   A very interesting read.  Agree your point about even numbers per battalion, for exactly that reason, so I'd probably go for 8 or 10 depending on rounding actual strengths (where available). There are a couple of excellent French pamphlets in a series called something like "Les Batteilles Oublies" on Wissembourg and Spicheren which have very good OOB information.   I had some interesting preliminary discussion with Richard Clark on this FPW sublect about 2 years ago, but various things got in the way of taking it forward.  It is on my to-do list!


Andrew

[kustenjaeger]

Hi Edward,

Yes I have, my French is just about up to it.   A very interesting read.  Agree your point about even numbers per battalion, for exactly that reason, so I'd probably go for 8 or 10 depending on rounding actual strengths (where available). There are a couple of excellent French pamphlets in a series called something like "Les Batteilles Oublies" on Wissembourg and Spicheren which have very good OOB information.   I had some interesting preliminary discussion with Richard Clark on this FPW sublect about 2 years ago, but various things got in the way of taking it forward.  It is on my to-do list!


Andrew

Rich and I talk about it from time to time as well :-)

Interesting about the pamphlets.

Regards

Edward

[mollinary]

The two pamphlets (about Osprey sort of size) are by Ronald Zins, in the series quoted.  Spicheren is No4, published in 2001, and Wissembourg is No14 published in 2010.  They are relatively easy to get here in Belgium, at 15-20 Euros each.   Helion stocks the Wissembourg one, but at 35 pounds! I could probably get copies for you if you are interested and post them on, if you pm me with an address.  Otherwise, I am sure some French site will let you buy cheap via paypal.

Cheers,

Andrew

[Leman]

This leads to searching of archives for illustrations to base new material on, and where this fails, I suppose, guesswork.  In 1866 the Austrian army had been famous to the world as the "Whitecoats" for 150 years, and had fought as such in Italy in 1859.  Not surprising perhaps that these were the images that illustrators produced....... Still, mostly speculation, interested if anyone has anything firmer to go on.

Mollinary

To add my three ha'pence worth, even in the greatcoat the Austrians wore very prominent white crossbelts with a white pouch in the middle of them. From a distance this would lighten the appearance of the Austrians en masse quite a bit I should think.

[dedonta]

Marcus, thanks for the explanation, I  thought the bases must represent more than a battalion (the basic unit in the TTLGB rules).  So so you give the regiment bases 1 point per 250men, to replicate the rule strengths?   I assume the cavalry are one base per regiment as well, and the guns one per battery?    I was wondering how you keep the damage inflicted by various forms of combat all in synch!      on organisation was that basic divisional organisation was the same on both sides, each division containing two brigades, each of which contained two regiments of three battalions. The diffference was:
i) in the light troops (Chasseurs/Jagers) where the French had one battalion per division and the Prussians one per corps,;
ii) in the artillery where the Prussians had 2 heavy and 2 light batteries per division, plus a corps reserve of c6 more batteries, usually 2 heavy, 2 light and 2 Horse batteries. The French had 2 4pdr batteries and Mitrailleuse battery per division, and a corps reserve of about the Prussian size;
iii) in battalion size the Prussian being close to 1,000 strong, the French very variable between 600-800;
iv) The number of divisions in a corps. The Prussians standardising on 2, the French having from 2-4, with Marshal' corps having four.
Regards,

Mollinary

Molinary,
Yep...you are correct sir...1 point per 250 men.  We just mark the casualties with tokens/dice.  We do the same procedure for cav and artillery as well.  As for the organizations...the resource I used to do my OOB's was a ruleset by Bruce Weigle-1870 Grand Tactical Rules.  My reserach showed the following...which pretty much matches what you said.  I used McMahon's Army of Alsace from August 1st 1870 and it contained Three corps, 1 corp with 4 divisions of infantry ranging from 4-5 regiments, a cav division, and corps artillery.  The other two corps had 3 infantry divisions with the same number of regiments each, a cav division and corps artillery.  Whereas I used the Prussian Second Army of Pz Friedric Carl also from August 1st 1870.  This army had four corps, each with only 2 infantry, corps artillery, and one had a cavalry division.  Thier infantry divisions had 6 infantry and 1 cavalry regiment each, and 6 batteries of varing sized Krups.  From everything I've read, this fits quite well with the Prussian model of mobility and flexibility.  The French play very much like they should...sluggish and unwieldly compared to their Prussian counterparts. 
i.  i'm seeing a regiment of jaeger per corp, and chausers a pied 1 per division
ii. artillery you have dead on
iii.  yep...those numbers match all the sources i have as well...average sizes of 1000 vs 750
iv.  again...dead on.

[mollinary]

Thanks for that! So, to sum up, your infantry bases represent a regiment of three battalions, with from 15(Prussian) to 12(French) strength points.  How do you then manage the fire and hitting mechanism which is based on a battalion rolling below its strength in bases?  For a full strength Prussian battalion in the basic rules, they have four bases and an officer figure for a strength of 5.  They have to roll 5 or less on a six sided dice to score a hit. Do you roll three dice for a regiment, and divide the remaining strength points between them?   Are your artillery bases single batteries with one dice each, or multiples, and how do you carry out the process?   It is a fascinating modification, however you do it.

On OOBs,  a Prussian corps has, on average 25 battalions. These consist of 8 (so a division has 4, not 6) three battalion regiments and one Jaeger Battalion.  There are no mullti battalion jager regiments in the Prussian army, although the Saxons have a three battalion Schutzen regiment in XII RS Corps. The French Chasseurs a Pied are also single battalions, not regiments, and are one per division.  What it boils down to was the standard struture for both sides, occasionally modified by circumstances, was a division of 12 line battalions, in two brigades, each containing two regiments of three battalions.  The rest were then stuck onto this skeleton.

Regards,

Mollinary

[dedonta]

Thanks for that! So, to sum up, your infantry bases represent a regiment of three battalions, with from 15(Prussian) to 12(French) strength points.  How do you then manage the fire and hitting mechanism which is based on a battalion rolling below its strength in bases?  For a full strength Prussian battalion in the basic rules, they have four bases and an officer figure for a strength of 5.  They have to roll 5 or less on a six sided dice to score a hit. Do you roll three dice for a regiment, and divide the remaining strength points between them?   Are your artillery bases single batteries with one dice each, or multiples, and how do you carry out the process?   It is a fascinating modification, however you do it.

On OOBs,  a Prussian corps has, on average 25 battalions. These consist of 8 (so a division has 4, not 6) three battalion regiments and one Jaeger Battalion.  There are no mullti battalion jager regiments in the Prussian army, although the Saxons have a three battalion Schutzen regiment in XII RS Corps. The French Chasseurs a Pied are also single battalions, not regiments, and are one per division.  What it boils down to was the standard struture for both sides, occasionally modified by circumstances, was a division of 12 line battalions, in two brigades, each containing two regiments of three battalions.  The rest were then stuck onto this skeleton.
Regards,
Mollinary

We have simplified it a bit...one dice roll per regiment or battery.  We play it straight up with the regiments...no extrapolations needed...that one regiment operates as a single entity.  I guess we could really bloody it up by giving them equal dice to their number of hits left (battalions in essence).  It seems bloody as is though...regiments disappear pretty quick once they get into the fight.  May give that some thought though...everyone likes more fire power lol.  The only problem is that with our simplified version, a single regiment has between 3-6 hits...in a single turn, a regiment would be wiped out if they received any kind of combined fire.  Think we are probably better off sticking to a single die per regiment or base of artillery.  What do you think?  Our overall goal was to really put us in charge of the corps without the worries of what the regimental officers were doing with batallions/formations etc...

For OOB's we have to adjust a little to get the flavor of organizations...we don't have batallions.  again...we are trying to keep the players operating at a higher level of command...not worrying about what the batallions are necessarily doing...only what their division is doing...regiments are in essence a pawn in their master plan.

Marcus

[mollinary]

I think you are certainly trying to stay true to the spirit of the rules, and by the sound of it succeeding!  I was interested to find out how your changes affected the balance of the game. Another factor which might modify things is what I call the "stacking limit" for 10" squares. This is eight units, with batteries counting as a half. How do you do it?  If you still have eight units (ie regiments) allowed in a square, it would explain why it is so bloody, as that would give three times the troop density intended!   I am still not sure what your gun models represent. Do they represent single batteries, or pairs, or groups of four?   The answer would heavily affect the overall balance between infantry and artillery.  It would be interesting to get Bernie's views on all this, he wrote the original rules after all.   The bottom line is, however, they seem to work for you, they look good, and your group is enjoying them.  Not a bad combination. 

Mollinary

[dedonta]

I think you are certainly trying to stay true to the spirit of the rules, and by the sound of it succeeding!  I was interested to find out how your changes affected the balance of the game. Another factor which might modify things is what I call the "stacking limit" for 10" squares. This is eight units, with batteries counting as a half. How do you do it?  If you still have eight units (ie regiments) allowed in a square, it would explain why it is so bloody, as that would give three times the troop density intended!   I am still not sure what your gun models represent. Do they represent single batteries, or pairs, or groups of four?   The answer would heavily affect the overall balance between infantry and artillery.  It would be interesting to get Bernie's views on all this, he wrote the original rules after all.   The bottom line is, however, they seem to work for you, they look good, and your group is enjoying them.  Not a bad combination. 

Mollinary

Wow...i really never thought about the stacking rule and how it would be different for regiments.  I honestly read the directions as full regiments...so even more batallions per square than I guess he intended if its supposed to be a cap of 8 batallions per square.  Should the squares be limited to how many hit points can be in there then?  As each hit is roughly a batallion...so that would in effect be around 3 regiments.  As for artillery...not sure how many guns they actually would represent.  When looking at the divisional composition in my resource book it shows a french division as having 2 4lb and 1 Mit...I read that as 2 batteries of 4lbers and 1 battery of Mitrailleu.  So we are using 1 stand per battery.  Its keeping things balanced for the organization we are using, but may not be balanced for the scale intended by TTLGB.  Now I'm growing concerned that we are allowing too much fire power in a square.  A square is roughly 1km x 1km...and we are placing a cap of around 8,000 men in there.  I imagine that isn't too crowded over square kilometer.  Are you saying the Bernie intended it to be only around 8 x 250 men...rougly 2500 men?  Its good to have you as a sounding board to bounce all this off of.  We really do like the results we are getting.  Prussians have a decided advantage due to the artillery and manueverability of their divisions, but the French hit hard in defensive positions.  So its playing prety accurately to everything I have read about the war.

[mollinary]

The intent is eight units, ie battalions, not eight bases. So that means up to about 8,000 men in a kilometre square. If you are only allowing three of your regiments per 10"square you are staying true to the ratio, if you are allowing eight regiments in a10" square you are cramming 24,000 men in the same space! In the base rules each hit is not a battalion, it is a base, or one strength point, if you like.  A battalion can have  up to six strength points in the normal game ( a Prussian Guard battalion with four bases and two officer figures), but most Prussians have five, and French four. In the base game one gun model represents a battery, so if this is the same in your game, are you understating the effect of infantry fire if you only role one die per regiment as opposed to the one die per battalion intended.  Ultimately the key question is not are you playing the rules as intended, but are they delivering what you want, in a way which seems realistic to you.  I love their simplicity, and the way they make you concentrate on big decisions.  The most important decision in our games is when you move from a manoeuvre formation (March column) to a fighting formation (line) as your manoeuvrability is then extremely limited for the rest of the game. Keeping reserves in March column is absolutely vital to being able to exploit a breakthrough.  I assume you use markers to indicate this part of the rules as well?

Mollinary