I'm getting close to being able to play my 2mm Crimean War battle of the Alma game, just some terrain to finish making. While there are a few directions I can go with that particular project I suspect I'll be putting it on the back burner once it's in a playable state and maybe just adding a few units here and there to expand into other battles in the Crimea.
In the meantime that leaves a bit of a gap in my ongoing projects that I'd like to start researching and planning to fill. I like to have ongoing projects in a number of different eras at once and while I have a fair few ongoing in the ancient, medieval and early modern world, the musket and rifle era is a little sparse.
So I'm putting it out to the forum, what are some fun and interesting conflicts to get into in the period? Preferably something I can do with Pendraken ranges but open to other things too.
A couple of caveats. GNW and LoA are very tempting but I feel are a little close to my ECW project, so I'm resisting them as motivation to get my ECW stuff done so one of them can take that "slot". AWI I've already skirmish project in. 20th century is a no go too, as while I have a few temptations there (RJW, WW2 Pacific, Korean War...) I don't want to distract from my Great War project.
My usual approach is to pick a particular battle that interests me and start building towards that, usually planning small and medium armies along the way to get playing then expand from there. I am also open to skirmish level projects if anyone has inspiration there.
Therefore, I'd appreciate any suggestions for what conflicts, campaigns or battles people find particularly fun and engaging for 18th/19th century warfare?
Why do you find it fun? How is it to research? How does it play on the table? How do the armies and figures paint up?
I have or know of a few rules for the period so fairly flexible on that front. I've also a decent overview knowledge of the period so this is more where I should deep dive.
Also don't feel limited to European conflicts, as I've interests in ones on multiple continents, and I'm not beyond picking up something more obscure amongst all the headliners in the period.
"Now for something completely different"
I'd suggest the Senguko Jidai in Japan but it is well outside your 18th/ 19th Century time frame.
The technologies and weapons are not so different from the ECW but the society, styles of fighting and look of the armies are vastly different.
Pendraken have a nice new range of figures and buildings too.
Worth a thought?
Of course, Sengoku armies are great fun. If you're serious about going a bit more modern, however, the range of SYW stuff is comprehensive and attractive, while the battles are extremely different from ECW.
Ooh! The obvious ones are those wars that shaped Europe in the C19: Schleswig, Italian Unifications, Austro-Prussian and Franco-Prussian.
I'd also look at the Russo-Turkish war of 1877 and (I think I heard Leon talk about) the Russo-Japanese war of 1904 though that may be a bit close to WWI - though I would argue that WWI 1914 and WWI 1916 and WWI 1918 are pretty different conflicts.
ACW has to be a runner. Easy paint jobs and plenty of source materials. I like it 'cos it can be pretty simple. Just 3 arms to think about, no worrying about the difference between light and line; heavy and hussar. You can then add a bit of complexity with Napoleons and Gatlings, smooth bore and rifled, Zouave and Sharpshooter. Great for first timers.
C18. Nah. I got nothing. Basically a bit boring between Malplaquet and Marengo. :P
Quote from: mmcv on 27 July 2022, 09:08:45 PMTherefore, I'd appreciate any suggestions for what conflicts, campaigns or battles people find particularly fun and engaging for 18th/19th century warfare?
You could do a lot worse than consider the early Peninsular War with Pendraken's new range. I've gone for Talavera because in addition to the British you have the Spanish with a host of light/regular/militia units, and with the French there is the German division comprising Baden, Hesse Darmstadt, Nassau and Frankfurt troops, plus some Poles. Alternatively, if you want something a bit smaller in scope, the same range lends itself to Maida. The British include some interesting Corsican and Sicilian troops, the French have Swiss and Poles. Not much cavalry though, just a couple of squadrons.
QuoteYou could do a lot worse than consider the early Peninsular War with Pendraken's new range. I've gone for Talavera because in addition to the British you have the Spanish with a host of light/regular/militia units, and with the French there is the German division comprising Baden, Hesse Darmstadt, Nassau and Frankfurt troops, plus some Poles. Alternatively, if you want something a bit smaller in scope, the same range lends itself to Maida. The British include some interesting Corsican and Sicilian troops, the French have Swiss and Poles. Not much cavalry though, just a couple of squadrons.
Good idea.
Eastern Spain during the Peninsula is also an interesting area. A secondary theatre but includes the Spanish, Sicilians, British and a host of guest appearances.
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51eJunK4nJL.jpg)
Quote"Now for something completely different"
I'd suggest the Senguko Jidai in Japan but it is well outside your 18th/ 19th Century time frame.
The technologies and weapons are not so different from the ECW but the society, styles of fighting and look of the armies are vastly different.
Pendraken have a nice new range of figures and buildings too.
Worth a thought?
I agree that Sengoku is a fascinating period, which is why I already have a project well underway on that one :D
QuoteOf course, Sengoku armies are great fun. If you're serious about going a bit more modern, however, the range of SYW stuff is comprehensive and attractive, while the battles are extremely different from ECW.
SYW is definitely a strong contender. It's one of those I know a bit about broadly, but it's such a complex web of different things going on at the time that it's hard to get to grips with from casual reading. Any suggestions for a particularly interesting battle as a good starting point? I'd probably be tempted by something with Freddy and the Prussians.
QuoteOoh! The obvious ones are those wars that shaped Europe in the C19: Schleswig, Italian Unifications, Austro-Prussian and Franco-Prussian.
I'd also look at the Russo-Turkish war of 1877 and (I think I heard Leon talk about) the Russo-Japanese war of 1904 though that may be a bit close to WWI - though I would argue that WWI 1914 and WWI 1916 and WWI 1918 are pretty different conflicts.
ACW has to be a runner. Easy paint jobs and plenty of source materials. I like it 'cos it can be pretty simple. Just 3 arms to think about, no worrying about the difference between light and line; heavy and hussar. You can then add a bit of complexity with Napoleons and Gatlings, smooth bore and rifled, Zouave and Sharpshooter. Great for first timers.
C18. Nah. I got nothing. Basically a bit boring between Malplaquet and Marengo. :P
Italian Unifications, Austro-Prussian and Franco-Prussian are all tempting, though given the size and scale of them I'm wondering if I stick to 2mm for them, as my Crimean French could easily be repurposed as a starting point and the forces needed are generally huge. I have had some interest in Italy lately it's ripe for smaller battles and skirmishes, particularly with Garibaldi. I'm not sure if it would sustain my interest enough for a huge battle but could have some fun at smaller levels.
Russo-Japanese War is definitely interesting, but it's very close to WW1 in terms of how it was fought and I think might be too much of a distraction. I'll likely do it at some point and even have a few rough outlines of how it would look, but I want to get further on my WW1 stuff first. I agree there are very different wars to be had in the Great War. I'm doing big battle early war and skirmish level mid-late war, both Western Front, but will likely get into the other fronts at some point in the future. X_X
Russo-Turkish war is an interesting proposal, one I don't know much about and a little different. Will do some reading. :-\
ACW is definitely another contender. My dad has always been interested in it and has a stack of books on the topic and I've enjoyed learning bits about it too. It is a fascinating conflict and an interesting bridge on the industrialisation of warfare between Crimea and WW1. There's also plenty of battles and campaigns to choose from. Any recommendations for a particularly interesting one to get into? I've played a test game of Gettysburg which is the "obvious" choice but there are so many to choose from.
QuoteYou could do a lot worse than consider the early Peninsular War with Pendraken's new range. I've gone for Talavera because in addition to the British you have the Spanish with a host of light/regular/militia units, and with the French there is the German division comprising Baden, Hesse Darmstadt, Nassau and Frankfurt troops, plus some Poles. Alternatively, if you want something a bit smaller in scope, the same range lends itself to Maida. The British include some interesting Corsican and Sicilian troops, the French have Swiss and Poles. Not much cavalry though, just a couple of squadrons.
Thanks for this, Napoleonics have always been a bit daunting to me as they can be quite overwhelming, but the Penisular seems like a good place to get started. Maida might be a nice place to start then build up to Talavera, etc, from there. Lack of cavalry doesn't bother me too much as I'm not the biggest fan of painting horses, though that may give me less of a feel for the essence of Napoleonic warfare. Will read up on it a bit more and see.
Thanks all for the suggestions so far, keep them coming :)
As a variation of the Austrian-Prussian you could look at that part of the war against the Bavarian and Federal armies. There is information available on the campaign, army organisation and uniforms. The Bavarians are in Pendraken range and with those and the Saxon figures you can easily create the Hesse-Darmstadt and Wurttemburg forces. There is a small brigade of Austrians involved. There also sufficient figures in parts of other ranges to use as proxies for some of the smaller Federal contingents. The actions are relatively smaller than in the main theatre of the war as well.
QuoteAs a variation of the Austrian-Prussian you could look at that part of the war against the Bavarian and Federal armies. There is information available on the campaign, army organisation and uniforms. The Bavarians are in Pendraken range and with those and the Saxon figures you can easily create the Hesse-Darmstadt and Wurttemburg forces. There is a small brigade of Austrians involved. There also sufficient figures in parts of other ranges to use as proxies for some of the smaller Federal contingents. The actions are relatively smaller than in the main theatre of the war as well.
Interesting, I'll have a look into this.
Leuthen is always popular, and shows Fred at his best. Torgau, Kunersdorf?
QuoteLeuthen is always popular, and shows Fred at his best. Torgau, Kunersdorf?
Thanks, gives me some to investigate.
You could do a French Napolionic Corp with no Frenchmen in it, alsorts of German states Italians etal
Seconded (or is it thirded) for the Peninsular to take advantage of the new and existing ranges. If you are happy to bend history just a little you can have French in an array of uniforms and headgear, Spanish in all sorts of pretty colours and a few guerillas loitering around the table edges. Lots of tactical challenges
If I were to offer just one dimension to help you choose, it would be asymmetry: how different are the opposing armies' weapons and doctrine? As a general rule, asymmetric opponents make for more interesting tactical tabletop challenges. Eg: Franco-Prussian (Krupp and needlegun vs Lahitte and Chassepot); Austro-Prussian (Lorenz vs needlegun). And once you get into those 'hyphenated wars', if you're not too fussy about headgear or greatcoats etc you can reuse the armies against different opponents (Crimean Russians vs Hungarians; Austrians vs Hungarians, French, Prussians, Danes, Italians; Prussians vs Austrians, French, Danes; and so on).
ACW loses out a bit on the weapons & tactics asymmetry dimension (though the armies still differ in other ways). But, since you asked for nominations, a couple of my favourite ACW battles that have produced great games are Chickamauga and The Wilderness. Paradoxically, the notoriously dense wooded terrain generates games that are all about maneuver - it limits the effectiveness of artillery which can otherwise pin everyone down in protracted firefights.
Good luck in finding new projects that suit your tastes!
With Pendraken's excellent range, multiplicity of nations, interesting battles and Kronoskaf's superb website to draw information on uniforms, flags, equipment, organisation, battles and personalties, the Seven Years War has to be a favourite contender - and that is just the European theatre.
QuoteIf I were to offer just one dimension to help you choose, it would be asymmetry: how different are the opposing armies' weapons and doctrine? As a general rule, asymmetric opponents make for more interesting tactical tabletop challenges. Eg: Franco-Prussian (Krupp and needlegun vs Lahitte and Chassepot); Austro-Prussian (Lorenz vs needlegun). And once you get into those 'hyphenated wars', if you're not too fussy about headgear or greatcoats etc you can reuse the armies against different opponents (Crimean Russians vs Hungarians; Austrians vs Hungarians, French, Prussians, Danes, Italians; Prussians vs Austrians, French, Danes; and so on).
ACW loses out a bit on the weapons & tactics asymmetry dimension (though the armies still differ in other ways). But, since you asked for nominations, a couple of my favourite ACW battles that have produced great games are Chickamauga and The Wilderness. Paradoxically, the notoriously dense wooded terrain generates games that are all about maneuver - it limits the effectiveness of artillery which can otherwise pin everyone down in protracted firefights.
Good luck in finding new projects that suit your tastes!
Thanks, I agree on the "hyphinated wars" but part of me is thinking I'm maybe best just staying in 2mm for those given the large scale of the maps and terrain needed and the grand manoeuvres involved. I already have a core of the British, French and Russians from my Crimean and if I end up doing the rest of the Crimea battles that'll give me plenty more Turks and Sardinians too, which gives me some interesting options and jump of points for some of those other conflicts, including Russo Turkish. Plus headgear and coats aren't so much a concern at that scale. I probably just need an army in dark blue and in white and that should cover most of the main players?
I think you hit the nail on the head on the ACW though and why I maybe have some subconscious reticence towards it. While the history, characters and campaigns are interesting, many of the battles give the impression of being slogging matches and whoever can "get there firstest with the mostest" as the well-spoken General Forrest never actually put it. It's maybe the symmetry of forces that lend to that impression, though I imagine there are still a lot of interesting battles to be had with the right scenario.
QuoteWith Pendraken's excellent range, multiplicity of nations, interesting battles and Kronoskaf's superb website to draw information on uniforms, flags, equipment, organisation, battles and personalties, the Seven Years War has to be a favourite contender - and that is just the European theatre.
QuoteSeconded (or is it thirded) for the Peninsular to take advantage of the new and existing ranges. If you are happy to bend history just a little you can have French in an array of uniforms and headgear, Spanish in all sorts of pretty colours and a few guerillas loitering around the table edges. Lots of tactical challenges
Okay, so Seven Years War and the Peninsular seem to be the frontrunners here. I think I had been originally gravitating towards SYW, but I could be swayed towards the Penisular.
Any love for India? Asia? Africa? South America?
China is probably difficult until the fabled Boxer Rebellion range is done to give enough proxies for the various conflicts, but there are a few potentials in India and South America for some interesting conflicts... :-\
Well there are a wide range of wars in India: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Anglo-Indian_Wars
These should give some asymmetric conflicts that might use Crimean British; the Sikh wars are interesting as their armies are, perhaps, closest to European style.
QuoteWell there are a wide range of wars in India: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Anglo-Indian_Wars
These should give some asymmetric conflicts that might use Crimean British; the Sikh wars are interesting as their armies are, perhaps, closest to European style.
Yeah, I suppose what I'm asking here is what people's experience of them are to play are to help narrow down a list of potentials. I know there's the recent Mutiny range and there's Anglo Afghan ranges (presumably could proxy Sikh from amongst them?). But then as you say that could easily be an extension of my 2mm stuff using the British rather than going 10mm, though by that point were the Britsh in khaki and/or pith helmets rather than red and black? I am more than a little tempted by some of the subcontinent stuff BUT I'm planning on doing the Indian Army for my Great War project, which might leave me a little tired of turbans if I'm doing 19th Century India too. @-)
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51qHJ49N2rL.jpg)
This is the kind of thing that gets me started.
Quote from: hammurabi70 on 28 July 2022, 01:56:16 PMWell there are a wide range of wars in India: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Anglo-Indian_Wars
These should give some asymmetric conflicts that might use Crimean British; the Sikh wars are interesting as their armies are, perhaps, closest to European style.
Oh yeah, India gives you asymmetry in spades. I've played quite a few of Mark Smith's scenarios, they're great fun and provide a very distinctive flavour.
https://bloodybigbattles.blogspot.com/2022/07/newly-published-bloody-big-battles-in.html
A reminder that SYW includes world-shaping battles in India too.
As a source of inspirations or not, my current 19th century projects are:
28mm Ethiopians, which can be used from Napoleonics to the end of the century, and a good opponent for everyone's colonial era Egyptians, Brits, Italians, Turks, Mahdists before you get into ahistorical adventures.
28mm Afghans 1st Afghan war, a bit on hold as there are no suitable regular cavalry available in plastic, and no Sepoys to fight them with.
28mm Turks 1877, an army I've actually completed, shock horror. Unless anyone makes lancers in fezs, I won't be adding to these. Currently fight them against friends Brits, Russians, and even 1878 Afghans.
I won't be doing any more 28mm armies after these, as we've found the figures are too big for the ground scale we use, even though we have the frontage about right, which limits manouevre on the table too much, even on a 10 x5' table.
10mm 1812 Austrian Expeditionary Corps, French 5th Corps, Russians to be decided, Brits/Portuguese/Spanish for Salamanca. To add War of 1812 when Pendraken bring out that range.
10mm 1790s Revolutionary Wars in Italy would be one I'd consider, there are a good selection of 1790s Italian state armies, as well as the Swiss to pick from.
10mm Wars in India would be my other pick if the figures were available. Marathas, Ghurkas, Sikhs, Mysore, Baluchis, an eclectic mix of regulars and rabble {that's probably a good name for a set of wargames rules} to fight Afghans or EIC or more likely each other.
I still have 15mm Persian and Ottoman Turkish Napoleonics which are again an interesting mix of regulars and irregulars, with lots of troop varieties.
One of my colleagues has a massive 15mm Carlist Wars range, which is a good stand alone project, with assorted foreign legions involved. Not sure if it's doable in 10mm though.
If it is asymmetric you want, how about the Jacobite 1745 Rising. I did it a few year ago. You have all the Hannoverian types in the SYW range, plus there are the French Royal Ecossois and the Irish Piquets to add a bit of variety to the Jacobite army. Not much cavalry though but enough to make it interesting. Loads of different clan flags. The armies are manageable and the period lends itself to a campaign. The Jacobites can win but it is difficult even if you don't factor in the incompetence of their leaders. Give the Jacobites plenty of muskets – there were ten recovered at Culloden for every claymore sword and the Jacobite army wasn't the amorphous mob it is often depicted as.
Have you thought about some early stuff like the Dark Ages. The Norman Conquest is asymmetric enough. Two quite different armies and Hastings, like Culloden, is a small battle with manageable armies. The Normans should have it far from all their own way and it also lends itself to a campaign. I haven't done it myself but there is also Stamford Bridge and the Norwegian aspect to the period too.
The early ACW can also be quite interesting asymmetrically speaking with units armed with a variety of weapons from flintlock smoothbores, percussion smoothbores, through the variety of different rifle-muskets to state of the art Enfields and Springfields. Shiloh was my first 10mm project years ago, mainly because everybody else was into Gettysburg which I find about as uninteresting as Waterloo as battles go. If you want a smaller army there is Bull Run and the uniforms are not entirely blue and grey.
I don't want to overcomplicate this, but the Wars of the Austrian Succession in the 1740s offer some interesting battles. On the whole they are smaller than their SYW equivalents, but still hardly skirmishes! It gives a good go to the Saxons, an attractive army, while having loads for the Austrians and Prussians. Mollwitz is a great sized battle to start with, reasonably balanced and not too big. I have played Chotusitz, Kesselsdorf and Hohenfriedberg over the years, and all gave great games. Uniforms are broadly similar, as are flags, and your opponents are likely to be less familiar with the actions. In September I will be going on a battlefield tour which will include Mollwitz and Hohenfriedberg, along with a shedload of SYW stuff. My enjoyment of this hobby is based on the combination of history, battlefield walking, figure painting and wargaming.
Thanks sultanbev some interesting ideas there.
Quote10mm 1790s Revolutionary Wars in Italy would be one I'd consider, there are a good selection of 1790s Italian state armies, as well as the Swiss to pick from.
That's one I hadn't considered or know much about so some investigation to do there for me.
QuoteIf it is asymmetric you want, how about the Jacobite 1745 Rising. I did it a few year ago. You have all the Hannoverian types in the SYW range, plus there are the French Royal Ecossois and the Irish Piquets to add a bit of variety to the Jacobite army. Not much cavalry though but enough to make it interesting. Loads of different clan flags. The armies are manageable and the period lends itself to a campaign. The Jacobites can win but it is difficult even if you don't factor in the incompetence of their leaders. Give the Jacobites plenty of muskets – there were ten recovered at Culloden for every claymore sword and the Jacobite army wasn't the amorphous mob it is often depicted as.
Have you thought about some early stuff like the Dark Ages. The Norman Conquest is asymmetric enough. Two quite different armies and Hastings, like Culloden, is a small battle with manageable armies. The Normans should have it far from all their own way and it also lends itself to a campaign. I haven't done it myself but there is also Stamford Bridge and the Norwegian aspect to the period too.
The early ACW can also be quite interesting asymmetrically speaking with units armed with a variety of weapons from flintlock smoothbores, percussion smoothbores, through the variety of different rifle-muskets to state of the art Enfields and Springfields. Shiloh was my first 10mm project years ago, mainly because everybody else was into Gettysburg which I find about as uninteresting as Waterloo as battles go. If you want a smaller army there is Bull Run and the uniforms are not entirely blue and grey.
Jacobite is an interesting idea. I did design a Culloden scenario a few years back but never played it out, may have to fish out the game pieces I made (was just 2d) and see if it inspires.
My aim here is more for a fire and manoeuvre project. I already have a fairly decent Medieval collection which scratches that itch at the moment nicely.
Bull Run might be an interesting on to dip my toes into the conflict and see if my reticence is justified. :-\
So many interesting options to choose from! ~X(
QuoteI don't want to overcomplicate this, but the Wars of the Austrian Succession in the 1740s offer some interesting battles. On the whole they are smaller than their SYW equivalents, but still hardly skirmishes! It gives a good go to the Saxons, an attractive army, while having loads for the Austrians and Prussians. Mollwitz is a great sized battle to start with, reasonably balanced and not too big. I have played Chotusitz, Kesselsdorf and Hohenfriedberg over the years, and all gave great games. Uniforms are broadly similar, as are flags, and your opponents are likely to be less familiar with the actions. In September I will be going on a battlefield tour which will include Mollwitz and Hohenfriedberg, along with a shedload of SYW stuff. My enjoyment of this hobby is based on the combination of history, battlefield walking, figure painting and wargaming.
Interesting... Very interesting...that could be a nice starting point into the period. Presumably those armies could then go on to fight in the SYW? I'm not fussy about minor uniform changes if that's a factor.
QuoteInteresting... Very interesting...that could be a nice starting point into the period. Presumably those armies could then go on to fight in the SYW? I'm not fussy about minor uniform changes if that's a factor.
Certainly, the uniform changes in Prussian and Austrian armies are few (Prussian dragoons go from white to light blue coats, although for some regiments this happened during the war in 1745). I use the same troops for both periods. The Saxons have already transitioned from red to white uniforms before the WAS and continue to wear this in the SYW. Go for it!
Listen up. And doing the WAS means you could also consider The War of Jenkins' Ear between Britain and Spain.
I said ... Jenkins' Ear! ... The War of Jenkins' Ear!
.... oh! I give up ... =)
;)
QuoteListen up. And doing the WAS means you could also consider The War of Jenkins' Ear between Britain and Spain.
I said ... Jenkins' Ear! ... The War of Jenkins' Ear!
.... oh! I give up ... =)
;)
Indeed! You make a strong argument with many valid points.
Was doing a little research into WAS and it's definitely a contender. Start with Prussians and Austrians then expand from there through WAS and SYW. Once the British get involved then that's Jenkins's Ear and the Jacobites in the mix. I even have rules with Mollwitz as a sample scenario.
Bit of a tangent but I have also been interested for a while in some of the South American conflicts, the War of the Pacific range is quite nice.
I think I'll probably pass on the 19th C hyphenated wars (loving that shorthand term) and keep them 2mm for now. India as well I'll leave for future consideration.
Right now my main contenders are getting into the soldier kings era, possibly with Mollwitz, getting into Napoleonics with the Peninsular, maybe starting with Maida, or starting in the ACW with a small Bull Run project or the like.
Or stuff it all and start painting some Bolivians.
:-/
Okay so I think I've ruled out ACW for the moment, it'll have it's day another time.
Still wavering over South America.
I've picked up a biography of Fredrick the Great and a few overviews of the WAS and browsing through the many available on the Peninsular.
Anyone any good recommendations for resources for WAS/SYW and the Peninsular? Websites, books, podcasts, videos etc?
Every Lace Wars fan swears by Duffy's books, esp. The Military Experience in the Age of Reason, which is super-readable.
The Wars of Frederick the Great by the late lamented Dennis E Showalter. Available in paperback, a brilliant overview. All of Duffy's books.
QuoteEvery Lace Wars fan swears by Duffy's books, esp. The Military Experience in the Age of Reason, which is super-readable.
Thanks I'll take a look. Edit: had a look, it appears to be very expensive!
QuoteThe Wars of Frederick the Great by the late lamented Dennis E Showalter. Available in paperback, a brilliant overview. All of Duffy's books.
Was Showalter's Fredrick the Great A Military History I got, can't tell if that's just a reprinting of the wars of or not. Got it on audiobook for some painting listening. Will check out the others.
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51Ma4Hkh4BL._SX336_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
Not a fan of the 7YW, but this is a useful book for uniforms and organisation of 17 nations, as well as some OOBs. Got to love a book with OOBs.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Armies-Seven-Years-War-Commanders/dp/0752459236/ref=sr_1_2?crid=7LGLDM1GA339&keywords=armies+of+the+seven+years+war&qid=1659197115&sprefix=armies+of+the+seven+years+war%2Caps%2C97&sr=8-2 (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Armies-Seven-Years-War-Commanders/dp/0752459236/ref=sr_1_2?crid=7LGLDM1GA339&keywords=armies+of+the+seven+years+war&qid=1659197115&sprefix=armies+of+the+seven+years+war%2Caps%2C97&sr=8-2)
Quote(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51Ma4Hkh4BL._SX336_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
Not a fan of the 7YW, but this is a useful book.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Armies-Seven-Years-War-Commanders/dp/0752459236/ref=sr_1_2?crid=7LGLDM1GA339&keywords=armies+of+the+seven+years+war&qid=1659197115&sprefix=armies+of+the+seven+years+war%2Caps%2C97&sr=8-2 (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Armies-Seven-Years-War-Commanders/dp/0752459236/ref=sr_1_2?crid=7LGLDM1GA339&keywords=armies+of+the+seven+years+war&qid=1659197115&sprefix=armies+of+the+seven+years+war%2Caps%2C97&sr=8-2)
Thanks, also surprisingly pricy. Maybe Lace Wars are a rich man's game?
It's available in paperback.
QuoteIt's available in paperback.
Even the paperback and Kindle edition are around forty quid! There's some second hand ones for much less that I'll maybe pick up bit it's a pain about the Kindle edition as that's what I mostly read on.
... and, unless you wish to voluntary contribute an amount you feel is warranted, Kronoskaf is free. :)
http://www.kronoskaf.com/syw/index.php?title=Main_Page
Quote... and, unless you wish to voluntary contribute an amount you feel is warranted, Kronoskaf is free. :)
http://www.kronoskaf.com/syw/index.php?title=Main_Page
Thank you, added to my research bookmarks.
Found a cheaper ebook version of military experience and a second hand copy of seven years... Though neither exactly cheap either!
Sometimes you have to pay for quality! :P
Why do I have a £40 book about a period I have no interest in? No idea.
Maybe one day, when I have completed projects for all the really interesting periods, I will take Digby Smith off the shelf and ponder the army of Lippe-Detmold.
I'd still go for ACW.
QuoteThank you, added to my research bookmarks.
Yes, Kronoskaf is quite simply, magnificent. For SYW uniforms, OOBs and battle maps you need nothing more.
Quoteabout a period I have no interest in? No idea.
I'm not sure I understand this concept? I was unaware that was an option! A period you have no interest in. What a strange notion!
Okay so that's a couple of bits on SYW sorted.
Anything WAS specific I should consider? Have a couple of overview books which might be enough. Doesn't seem to be a period with too much written on it.
Also any Peninsular must haves from the oodles written on it?
The classics for the Peninsula War are the Charles Oman series A History of the Peninsula War, I managed to pick up the first 4 volumes for £24 at Barter Books in Alnwick a couple of week ago, so you might be lucky and find 2nd hand ones for those kind of prices. Lots of OOB, casualty reports, etc in the appendices.
The campaign is too big to be covered well in one volume, and most sources are Anglo-centric, so it's specialist volumes on individual battles and forces. Be prepared to be overwhelmed!
Check out Helion & Company and Ken Trotman for individual works of quality;
there are several Osprey Campaigns on Peninsula battles. The individual MAA books are sort of okay.
Peruse this website, which for example shows individual British unit strengths at different dates
https://www.napoleon-series.org/military-information/organization-strategy-tactics/
QuoteThe classics for the Peninsula War are the Charles Oman series A History of the Peninsula War . . .
Available electronically (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/39035)
QuoteThe classics for the Peninsula War are the Charles Oman series A History of the Peninsula War, I managed to pick up the first 4 volumes for £24 at Barter Books in Alnwick a couple of week ago, so you might be lucky and find 2nd hand ones for those kind of prices. Lots of OOB, casualty reports, etc in the appendices.
The campaign is too big to be covered well in one volume, and most sources are Anglo-centric, so it's specialist volumes on individual battles and forces. Be prepared to be overwhelmed!
Check out Helion & Company and Ken Trotman for individual works of quality;
there are several Osprey Campaigns on Peninsula battles. The individual MAA books are sort of okay.
Peruse this website, which for example shows individual British unit strengths at different dates
https://www.napoleon-series.org/military-information/organization-strategy-tactics/
Thank you for all this, will prove very useful.
QuoteBe prepared to be overwhelmed!
This has been my main reluctance to get into Napoleonics, there's just so much... #:-S
QuoteAvailable electronically (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/author/39035)
Thank you kindly.
QuoteAlso any Peninsular must haves from the oodles written on it?
I'd pick my period first. The forces (particularly the allied forces) of 1808 were very different to the forces of 1814, in looks, numbers and composition.
Oman is very detailed. Wouldn't be my first choice for a first read. There are more modern, readable and shorter treatises to get an overview. Peter Snow's "To War With Wellington" is very approachable.
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51JMwaQOfYL._SY346_.jpg)
QuoteI'm not sure I understand this concept? I was unaware that was an option! A period you have no interest in. What a strange notion!
Yes. Surely everyone has periods they're not interested in ... until they get interested in them?
QuoteI'd pick my period first. The forces (particularly the allied forces) of 1808 were very different to the forces of 1814, in looks, numbers and composition.
Oman is very detailed. Wouldn't be my first choice for a first read. There are more modern, readable and shorter treatises to get an overview. Peter Snow's "To War With Wellington" is very approachable.
(https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51JMwaQOfYL._SY346_.jpg)
Yes. Surely everyone has periods they're not interested in ... until they get interested in them?
Thanks I'll take a look. I suppose at this point overview is what I'm looking to decide which period or battle I want to drill into. Maida looks like an interesting starting point but I do have a bit of a soft spot for the Portuguese for some reason so might find something else of interest.
Ah okay so you just mean a period you're not interested in
that much yet? Gotcha ;)
Four quid on Kindle, yes please and thank you very much
My approach has been to pick a British/Allied force. In my case this has been Hill's command in Estramadura in late 1811-early 1812 taking the action of Arroyomolinos as the centrepiece. I'm still collecting the figures prior to painting.
This allows the use of 2nd Division of three British brigades (not all present) plus Ashworth's Portuguese brigade plus Long's light cavalry brigade and - in Hill's command area but not present at Arroyomolinos, more Portuguese (infantry and cavalry) and a heavy cavalry brigade. In addition Spanish infantry and cavalry were also present and engaged.
The British allow Highlanders (92nd Foot), Light infantry (71st Foot), rifles (5/60th as part of skirmish screen), Light dragoons (9th, 13th), KGL Hussars, 9pdr RA and 6pdr RHA.
If you are interested there is a reasonably new Helion book called 'At the point of the bayonet' by Robert Griffith which covers Arroyomolinos and the bridge at Almaraz.
My French opposition is taken from Drouet's command in Estramadura and includes line and Leger infantry plus Chasseurs a Cheval, Hussars and Dragoons as well as mixed batteries of 4/8pdr guns and howitzers.
Edward
QuoteMy approach has been to pick a British/Allied force. In my case this has been Hill's command in Estramadura in late 1811-early 1812 taking the action of Arroyomolinos as the centrepiece. I'm still collecting the figures prior to painting.
This allows the use of 2nd Division of three British brigades (not all present) plus Ashworth's Portuguese brigade plus Long's light cavalry brigade and - in Hill's command area but not present at Arroyomolinos, more Portuguese (infantry and cavalry) and a heavy cavalry brigade. In addition Spanish infantry and cavalry were also present and engaged.
The British allow Highlanders (92nd Foot), Light infantry (71st Foot), rifles (5/60th as part of skirmish screen), Light dragoons (9th, 13th), KGL Hussars, 9pdr RA and 6pdr RHA.
If you are interested there is a reasonably new Helion book called 'At the point of the bayonet' by Robert Griffith which covers Arroyomolinos and the bridge at Almaraz.
My French opposition is taken from Drouet's command in Estramadura and includes line and Leger infantry plus Chasseurs a Cheval, Hussars and Dragoons as well as mixed batteries of 4/8pdr guns and howitzers.
Edward
Thanks for sharing, thats an action I wasn't previously aware of. Certainly appears to give an interesting mix of units. I was also reading a bit about a few other actions that might be interesting, there's so many battles and actions to choose from. I need to work through a bit of a survey of them until one jumps out at me and grabs my interest.
I've been working through this series, which includes a few peninsular videos: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLaBYW76inbX41sSPLjvUyYfRY0B4ihYBN (https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLaBYW76inbX41sSPLjvUyYfRY0B4ihYBN)
And for the Prussians in the WAS and SYW this one has been interesting so far: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLazn7eofVtjIhqfq0vv7BudQvdy5A0Mgp (https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLazn7eofVtjIhqfq0vv7BudQvdy5A0Mgp)
And started on the Fredrick the Great biography.
Was also flipping through a few rule books for inspiration, including the War of the Pacific ones that I still haven't ruled out as a wildcard entry.
Though I think the Prussians and Austrians are currently just edging into the lead.
Once I get a chance to I may do some test games with a few rulesets and proxies to see if one grabs me more than the other. Not sure when that will be, hobby time has been mostly limited to this sort of research stuff lately and very little painting or gaming.
Building a nice little collection up of research material though as I will more than likely do all the projects mentioned at some point or the other, the decision is just which comes first!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47cf07l1N9g
Napoleon never wrote music for his troops. :)
Quotehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47cf07l1N9g
Napoleon never wrote music for his troops. :)
Probably for the best, apparently Napoleon couldn't hold a tune. Plus the French already had the Marseille which is one of the world's catchiest anthems.
Quote from: mmcv on 31 July 2022, 08:43:20 AMProbably for the best, apparently Napoleon couldn't hold a tune. Plus the French already had the Marseille which is one of the world's catchiest anthems.
It is indeed, though it helps if you don't know what the words are saying (even some French politicians have suggested watering their fields with the impure blood of the enemy could benefit from a rewrite).
QuoteIt is indeed, though it helps if you don't know what the words are saying (even some French politicians have suggested watering their fields with the impure blood of the enemy could benefit from a rewrite).
Not the only national anthem with a few problematic sentiments to be sure, still a damn good tune.
Late entry into the field - how about the Texas revolution?
The Mexican army would certainly be easy to proxy
(https://i.pinimg.com/550x/7c/0b/21/7c0b218f04806cdc6b9c5d7f721e9c2d.jpg)
Texians maybe a little more difficult
(https://64.media.tumblr.com/94fecf8deb1b2e96edd8299e1d7efffa/tumblr_mnx4g94tCR1rcoy9ro1_500.jpg) Napoleonic Hanoverians in cap?
Quote from: FierceKitty on 31 July 2022, 08:58:07 AMIt is indeed, though it helps if you don't know what the words are saying (even some French politicians have suggested watering their fields with the impure blood of the enemy could benefit from a rewrite).
What kind of country would have a cock as its emblem? ;D
Quote from: John Cook on 31 July 2022, 09:21:44 AMWhat kind of country would have a cock as its emblem? ;D
Any dicktatorship. (to excusing please my Inglish spellinks)
QuoteWhat kind of country would have a cock as its emblem? ;D
One who enjoys a good Latin pun.
QuoteLate entry into the field - how about the Texas revolution?
The Mexican army would certainly be easy to proxy
(https://i.pinimg.com/550x/7c/0b/21/7c0b218f04806cdc6b9c5d7f721e9c2d.jpg)
Texians maybe a little more difficult
(https://64.media.tumblr.com/94fecf8deb1b2e96edd8299e1d7efffa/tumblr_mnx4g94tCR1rcoy9ro1_500.jpg) Napoleonic Hanoverians in cap?
Interesting idea. Though if doing that it'll inevitably gravitate toward the Alamo which feels more like a showpiece project whereas at this point I'm probably more inclined towards something with big field battles. Though that does also throw up the idea Mexican war of independence (and indeed all the Latin American independence wars) though as you say would need some heavy proxy use I suspect. Still, interesting as something a little more "obscure" which can always be attractive.
Quote from: FierceKitty on 31 July 2022, 09:40:23 AMAny dicktatorship. (to excusing please my Inglish spellinks)
Alexander youse inglish is normal perfek
QuoteNot the only national anthem with a few problematic sentiments to be sure, still a damn good tune.
Just noticed they're playing "Jerusalem" when England win gold at the Commonwealth Games.
Have I missed something?
QuoteJust noticed they're playing "Jerusalem" when England win gold at the Commonwealth Games.
Have I missed something?
We get Londonderry Air (the tune Danny Boy is sung to).
Guessing because God Save the Queen is a bit redundant for the Commonwealth, so regional tunes and anthems are preferred so it's not just the same anthem over and over? Particularly as it's a somewhat dreary anthem. Jerusalem is a bit more uplifting I suppose.
QuoteParticularly as it's a somewhat dreary anthem.
Aye, you're not wrong there. Should have changed to the Archer's theme (© Billy Connelly) though . . . ;)
Quote from: mmcv on 04 August 2022, 05:59:56 PMGuessing because God Save the Queen is a bit redundant for the Commonwealth, so regional tunes and anthems are preferred so it's not just the same anthem over and over? Particularly as it's a somewhat dreary anthem. Jerusalem is a bit more uplifting I suppose.
Other Commonwealth Countries have their own national anthems but this is not the first Commonwealth Games where Jerusalem has been used when England wins gold. It was used at the 2014 and 2018 Commonwealth Games to my certain knowledge.
The argument is that God Save the Queen is the national anthem of the entire United Kingdom and because the countries of the UK compete independently, God Save the Queen is not the appropriate anthem for England.
So in order to appease the PC loonies, who would probably like to see a republic anyway, they play Jerusalem for England, for Scotland it's Flower of Scotland, for Wales it's Land of My Fathers, and for Northern Ireland the Londonderry Air.
Looked it up and a lot of commonwealth countries have it as a "royal" anthem. UK and NZ and a few territories have it as their "national" anthem. Maybe it was just so the English wouldn't feel left out not having their own tune? Maybe Jerusalem will become the national anthem of the Republic of England in the future? :d
Personally I always thought Rule Britannia either be a better choice as national anthem, much more rousing, if a tad aggressive.
QuoteLooked it up and a lot of commonwealth countries have it as a "royal" anthem. UK and NZ and a few territories have it as their "national" anthem. Maybe it was just so the English wouldn't feel left out not having their own tune? Maybe Jerusalem will become the national anthem of the Republic of England in the future? :d
Personally I always thought Rule Britannia either be a better choice as national anthem, much more rousing, if a tad aggressive.
But Rule Britannia, like God save the Queen, isn't specifically English.
Quote from: steve_holmes_11 on 05 August 2022, 08:33:26 AMBut Rule Britannia, like God save the Queen, isn't specifically English.
The tune to God Save the King pre-dates the Act of Union but its modern rendition dates from the 1745 Jacobite Rising and was performed in London. It is, very much, I would say, English in origin. Furthermore, when England becomes independent, when we have got rid of the unruly Scots once and for all, Northern Ireland has been left to its own devices (it is more trouble than it is worth anyway) and Wales has become Western England, Her Majesty (her heirs and successors), will still reign over us. God Save the Queen (or King as appropriate) will still be the national anthem of proud Englishmen (and women). Now, you will have to excuse me as I seem to have something stuck in my cheek.
QuoteBut Rule Britannia, like God save the Queen, isn't specifically English.
Aye, I meant more as the British anthem, while God Save the Queen would still be the royal anthem, then each of the constituent countries have their own national anthems. Then you've a bit of choice as to what you use. Then again, may all be a moot point in a few decades if any of those institutions will even exist in a currently recognisable form. Or indeed any form of civilisation depending how pessimistic you are.
QuoteThe tune to God Save the King pre-dates the Act of Union but its modern rendition dates from the 1745 Jacobite Rising and was performed in London. It is, very much, I would say, English in origin. Furthermore, when England becomes independent, when we have got rid of the unruly Scots once and for all, Northern Ireland has been left to its own devices (it is more trouble than it is worth anyway) and Wales has become Western England, Her Majesty (her heirs and successors), will still reign over us. God Save the Queen (or King as appropriate) will still be the national anthem of proud Englishmen (and women). Now, you will have to excuse me as I seem to have something stuck in my cheek.
;D Sounds about right. Though the Welsh are of course invited to join Ireland and Scotland in the new Union if they want to be free of the English yoke. The Republic of London can do what it wants though. ;)
But anyway, back to the topic at hand.
Still waiting on a few "dead tree" books to come through but been bouncing between the Fredrick the Great and Wellington books digitally and enjoying both. I think for the Peninsular I'd maybe just want to start at the beginning of the British intervention with Roliça and Vimeiro, which could be quite interesting with the right scenario setup. Haven't quite worked out what I want to do with WAS/SYW.
I have settled on doing something musket based for next project though, so definitely something in the mid 18th - mid 19th, and likely one or both of the above. To be honest, I'm tempted to just order a pack of Peninsular infantry and a pack of SYW infantry and just see which I prefer painting up as realistically I'll be doing both at some point in time. Though at this point it's been near a month since I last had a chance to paint a model so can take my time researching and deciding still!
Quote from: mmcv on 05 August 2022, 09:19:16 AMBut anyway, back to the topic at hand.
Though at this point it's been near a month since I last had a chance to paint a model so can take my time researching and deciding still!
Good idea!
Sensible approach, a bit like eating an elephant - one mouthful at a time. On books, Jac Weller's Wellington in the Peninsula 1808-1814 isn't a bad primer and an easy read.
QuoteGood idea!
Sensible approach, a bit like eating an elephant - one mouthful at a time. On books, Jac Weller's Wellington in the Peninsula 1808-1814 isn't a bad primer and an easy read.
Thanks, I've put in an order for that as well, looks like it'll go into good detail of the battles.
MMCV, I have just spoken to your wife. She has decided on your next project. Its the Bathroom, followed by the Hall, Stairs, and Landing.
We will welcome you back to the forum in a couple of Months :D :D
..then she'll get you doing the kitchen and the rest of the house.... then get you to sell it because she wants to move somewhere else..
(or is this just my experience... :-\ )
Quote from: Matt J on 05 August 2022, 03:25:33 PM..then she'll get you doing the kitchen and the rest of the house.... then get you to sell it because she wants to move somewhere else..
(or is this just my experience... :-\ )
No, but be careful sometimes its time to change both the house and the Husband :D :D
Quote..then she'll get you doing the kitchen and the rest of the house.... then get you to sell it because she wants to move somewhere else..
(or is this just my experience... :-\ )
Thankfully we just moved in last year, and neither of us have any desire to move again anytime soon. The next project I believe is the en suite, which (like more than a few on this forum) is a 70s throwback, complete with mustard suite, brown carpet and horrendous patterned tiles. We've already converted the 80s bedroom into a nursery, including stripping the granny patterned wallpaper, and had some of the polystyrene ceiling plastered over though still 4 rooms to do. And replaced the leaky shower and fixed the hole in the kitchen ceiling from said leak. Latest projects were a new curtain rail and skylight blind in the master bedroom as well as fitted wardrobes. The 90s bedroom remains hobby/junk room but I've been able to clear it enough to put up a full size gaming table. Thankfully the baby has distracted from any major renovations for the time being, though has also distracted from any hobby time aswell. I have in the past 3 months painted a handful of 2mm bases and made a few hills, mostly in 10 minute bursts of free time. Plenty of time to read/listen/watch while nursing the wee man to sleep though. When he sleeps. If he sleeps. (He's actually been okay this week).
I think I'm settling into the idea of WAS/SYW. It's been interesting reading about it and some of the parallels with the First World War. I'm still waiting on a few books to arrive (hopefully they arrive this week as I'm off for a long weekend and would be some excellent reading material). I am enjoying reading about the Peninsular as well, but have found myself more drawn to the earlier period for the moment. I will no doubt visit the Peninsular in due course, but for now I think some Prussians and Austrians are on the agenda. Maybe some French. And Russians. And Saxons. But that's getting ahead of myself!
I still haven't settled on the battle I want to work towards, but can start planning some core forces. In general, I like to base things on as few bases as possible. For the Long 19th Century different formations and manoeuvres are quite important so I'm generally planning on those being multiple 25mm bases to allow that to be shown. For 17th Century and before forces are in lines most of the time so single bases are generally okay with a marker on the odd occasion when in something different.
18th Century though provides a bit of a transition between the two. As far as I can tell forces are typically either in some form of column or line. Square formations exist in drill manuals, but don't seem to have been used much beyond last stands. I could go with the single base approach and just have a small base of marching troops to indicate when in column, or go with the 19th Century approach of multiple small bases, though I'm leaning towards maybe having a 2 base unit. Exact sizing to be determined, probably 50 of 60mm frontage per base, representing each as an individual unit with it's own flag and command. Then they can be used as individual bases with markers as I build the forces or for bigger games, then as combined units as I get more done. This would allow me to show line, march and square fairly simply. I'll need to get some figures and start sticking to bases to fully decide though. I do like the look of a single-based diorama style unit, but I might be able to get that on the smaller bases. I suspect I'll need to custom order some extra commands when the time comes though unless I'm feeling particularly masochistic and decide to do 30-man bases.
How are others basing their forces for the period? Have I missed anything obvious I might need to consider?
Rule wise I'm looking at Twilight of the Soldier Kings and Honors of War/Post of Honour.
I put almost everything in units of four bases, with 7 line foot, four HC, or 3 LC on a similar frontage. The columns are a bit broad, but nobody stays in column for long, since the enemy are usually professional enough to hurt you badly if you aren't properly deployed.
My 10mm SYW infantry and cavalry units are 4 bases strong on 1 inch square bases - I cram 8 Line infantry onto a base, 4 or 5 light infantry and 3 cavalry per base. This enables me to arrange these in Line, Field Column, March column and Square. These were originally based with Field of Battle 1st Ed. and Maurice rules in mind.
But for a long time now, my favourite rules have been and still are Honours of War. It's a slick set of rules and 15mm or smaller scale games can be easily fought on a 3 foot deep or less table. With these rules, you have the choice of using different ground scales; all you have to do is match the width of your standard tabletop infantry or cavalry unit with the Close Order Infantry in Line movement rate in one of the many different scale Quick Reference Sheets provided and Bob Fred's your uncle.
Using this facility, I'm now able to fight battles where the standard unit width is 4 bases wide OR, if I need to fight a bigger battle requiring more units (or play on a smaller playing area) fight battles where my standard unit width is only 3 bases (this also has the advantages of having your colour party in the middle of the unit and to paint less figures per unit)(some spare command bases are also helpful to have for building 2nd battalions from the 'spare' 4th bases).
I've also found with Honours of War that I don't really need to represent a 'Field Column' or Square for infantry so, if I was starting again, I would probably build my infantry units using 3 bases only. For cavalry in HoW, there is the option of using the 'Field Column' formation (called Double Line in HoW) so a 3 base unit would probably have to be 2 bases in front with one behind (or just don't have Double Line which, frankly, I wouldn't miss because there are no movement or direct combat advantages - indeed, it's a disadvantage when fired on by artillery).
If I had done this, I might have been able to start armies for those other nations I had planned to paint when I first started my SYW project(!). How also allows you to field "Large' and "Small" size units in addition to the "Standard" unit size giving you 3 choices of unit size within the same game.
The HoW forum has a number of WSS battle reports.
"Standard" units of 2 bases can also be accommodated with HoW (remember, it's all about matching your preferred unit width to the appropriate QRS) meaning that you could consider representing "Large" units with 3 bases and "Small" units with only 1 base. Incidentally, the standard unit size in Might & Reason is 2 stands strong and, indeed, the author of Field of Battle (now in its 3rd edition) has since re-based from 4 to 2 stands per unit, saying although it's more figures per stand, it's less figures per unit to paint plus his games move faster because there are fewer stands to move.
QuoteBut for a long time now, my favourite rules have been and still are Honours of War. It's a slick set of rules and 15mm or smaller scale games can be easily fought on a 3 foot deep or less table. With these rules, you have the choice of using different ground scales; all you have to do is match the width of your standard tabletop infantry or cavalry unit with the Close Order Infantry in Line movement rate in one of the many different scale Quick Reference Sheets provided and Bob Fred's your uncle.
Yeah I've heard a lot of good things about HoW. I've read over PoH and done a little playtesting with Shadow of the Eagles which I know are both by Keith as well, though I understand HoW is slightly different and includes an alternating activation (which I tend to enjoy in a game). I have ordered a copy of the rules but it's one of the books I'm still awaiting arrival of.
I signed up to the forum recently and have been reading through and enjoying some of the scenarios and battle reports, including some of your own, looks like a great resource.
QuoteUsing this facility, I'm now able to fight battles where the standard unit width is 4 bases wide OR, if I need to fight a bigger battle requiring more units (or play on a smaller playing area) fight battles where my standard unit width is only 3 bases (this also has the advantages of having your colour party in the middle of the unit and to paint less figures per unit)(some spare command bases are also helpful to have for building 2nd battalions from the 'spare' 4th bases).
Being able to have a colour party in the middle and paint less figures is no small thing. I do enjoy a bit of symmetry in a unit where appropriate and with liking to have many projects on the go and not a whole lot of painting time that's always a win.
That actually raises a question, where in the line of battle would the flags and commander stand? As far as I've been able to find out so far it looks like the battlefield positioning (as opposed to the parade ground) would be the commanders out front and the colours and musicians behind or within the line? Or would they have stood at one flank or the rear to avoid blocking line of sight of their men? Part of me suspects the commanders outfront is more artistic convention than reality. The NCOs (always more sensible than officer types) certainly seem to be behind the men to dress the ranks and keep them moving in the right direction and it would seem more sensible for the officers to be similarly positioned to give orders more easily.
QuoteI put almost everything in units of four bases, with 7 line foot, four HC, or 3 LC on a similar frontage. The columns are a bit broad, but nobody stays in column for long, since the enemy are usually professional enough to hurt you badly if you aren't properly deployed.
Your games do certainly always look impressive in scale, though is there any advantage to having 4 rather than 2 bases with perhaps the foot in 2 rows rather than 1 on each base?
Part of me is tempted to try and do the 3 rank Prussians and 4 rank everyone else. That might lead to some degree of madness, though I do want to experiment a bit with speed painting dense infantry like that, e.g. only painting the front of the front rank and the back of the back rank in detail and have the rest in just dark block colours with maybe heads and shoulders and guns painted. That might make it easier to field large numbers of units quickly and hopefully doesn't look too naff.
Well, I differentiate a bit in allowing a small melee bonus for a double deep line, but an increased vulnerability to artillery. That aside, there's an automatic break and run if a unit loses 2 elements more than it inflicts during the artillery shooting phase, the smallarms shooting phase, and the melee phase. Any unit losing three elements is out of it too. So the system suits my rules, and in addition does allow one to form square, though this very seldom happens.
QuoteWell, I differentiate a bit in allowing a small melee bonus for a double deep line, but an increased vulnerability to artillery. That aside, there's an automatic break and run if a unit loses 2 elements more than it inflicts during the artillery shooting phase, the smallarms shooting phase, and the melee phase. Any unit losing three elements is out of it too. So the system suits my rules, and in addition does allow one to form square, though this very seldom happens.
Ah certainly if base removal is a factor then it makes sense. Though that can usually be fudged with markers if needed. Interesting on the double deep line factors. Is that for a standard line or a type of "attack column"?
QuoteThe HoW forum has a number of WSS battle reports.
Meant to say "WAS" not "WSS." :-[
QuoteThat actually raises a question, where in the line of battle would the flags and commander stand?
I couldn't definitively say but as an example of early 19th century practice, in Adkins's Waterloo Companion, there is a diagram of a British battalion in line which depicts the Colour Party right at the centre and within the body of the line (which makes sense considering that the colours are intended to be a rallying point). The officers and NCOs are distributed along the line and also behind the line in their respective companies.
I use 'Twilight of the Soldier Kings'.
Each base is 60x20, although I use deeper bases for artillery. Two bases for infantry and cavalry represent a Brigade.
For infantry each base has 12 figures two deep and represents a regiment. The command group of 4 figures sits in the centre of the base and consists of an Officer and Drummer in the front with 2 standard in the rear. The 2 standards have flags for the 1st and 2nd battalions.
For cavalry I use 5 figures per base with 4 troopers set towards the back of the base and an Officer in the centre set towards the front.
Not entirely sure about the 18th Century but I can tell you what Napoleonic regulations say, and most of them originated in the 18th Century. The Austrian Generals-Reglement 1769, for example, was in use until 1807.
Colours were in the centre of the line, between the two central companies of the line. Drummers were at the rear. The supernumerary 'fourth rank' was formed by NCOs whose job was, amongst other things, to stop soldiers falling out of the ranks, keeping dressing, that sort of thing. Officers led from the front when the unit was advancing, they moved to the rear if it was defending. All regulations are pretty much the same. Here is a rather good Knotel painting. Its been a long time since I posted an image so I hope it works :)
(https://i.imgur.com/J8IFqbq.jpg)
QuoteI use 'Twilight of the Soldier Kings'.
Each base is 60x20, although I use deeper bases for artillery. Two bases for infantry and cavalry represent a Brigade.
For infantry each base has 12 figures two deep and represents a regiment. The command group of 4 figures sits in the centre of the base and consists of an Officer and Drummer in the front with 2 standard in the rear. The 2 standards have flags for the 1st and 2nd battalions.
For cavalry I use 5 figures per base with 4 troopers set towards the back of the base and an Officer in the centre set towards the front.
That's quite a neat setup, similar to what I was thinking, though was thinking of maybe having the officer out front on a slightly deeper base, maybe 30 or 40. Undecided at his point.
QuoteI couldn't definitively say but as an example of early 19th century practice, in Adkins's Waterloo Companion, there is a diagram of a British battalion in line which depicts the Colour Party right at the centre and within the body of the line (which makes sense considering that the colours are intended to be a rallying point). The officers and NCOs are distributed along the line and also behind the line in their respective companies
QuoteNot entirely sure about the 18th Century but I can tell you what Napoleonic regulations say, and most of them originated in the 18th Century. The Austrian Generals-Reglement 1769, for example, was in use until 1807.
Colours were in the centre of the line, between the two central companies of the line. Drummers were at the rear. The supernumerary 'fourth rank' was formed by NCOs whose job was, amongst other things, to stop soldiers falling out of the ranks, keeping dressing, that sort of thing. Officers led from the front when the unit was advancing, they moved to the rear if it was defending. All regulations are pretty much the same. Here is a rather good Knotel painting. Its been a long time since I posted an image so I hope it works :)
The differences in position on defence and attack make sense and could be why I've sometimes seen conflicting information. So any troops that were in march attack/advancing/etc would have the officer out front while any of those in a firing position likely have the officer behind. That sounds like a reasonably sensible system then. I could represent a regiment with the colour or colours in the ranks, the officers out front and the drummers behind. I'll play with layouts once I get some figures, likely buy an army pack to give me a good mix. Will probably want most/all troops in the march attack pose and use some of the other poses as markers as required.
That picture has come up a few times, I wasn't entirely sure though if it was taking a bit of artistic license, but seemingly not!
Quote from: mmcv on 10 August 2022, 10:25:11 AMThat sounds like a reasonably sensible system then.
That picture has come up a few times, I wasn't entirely sure though if it was taking a bit of artistic license, but seemingly not!
It was a very sensible solution! When I say officers moved to the rear, they moved to positions in the line, rather than in front of it. Where exactly depended on their appointment, but that sort of granularity is not really relevant in a wargames context. Similarly they took up different positions when a battalion was going through the various evolutions, depending on which evolution it was. Herbert Knotel is a pretty reliable artist, he produced a lot of paintings between the wars mainly, as I understand. it for German army officers' messes.
QuoteIt was a very sensible solution! When I say officers moved to the rear, they moved to positions in the line, rather than in front of it. Where exactly depended on their appointment, but that sort of granularity is not really relevant in a wargames context. Similarly they took up different positions when a battalion
QuoteIt was a very sensible solution! When I say officers moved to the rear, they moved to positions in the line, rather than in front of it. Where exactly depended on their appointment, but that sort of granularity is not really relevant in a wargames context. Similarly they took up different positions when a battalion was going through the various evolutions, depending on which evolution it was. Herbert Knotel is a pretty reliable artist, he produced a lot of paintings between the wars mainly, as I understand. it for German army officers' messes.
QuoteIt was a very sensible solution! When I say officers moved to the rear, they moved to positions in the line, rather than in front of it. Where exactly depended on their appointment, but that sort of granularity is not really relevant in a wargames context. Similarly they took up different positions when a battalion was going through the various evolutions, depending on which evolution it was. Herbert Knotel is a pretty reliable artist, he produced a lot of paintings between the wars mainly, as I understand. it for German army officers' messes.
QuoteIt was a very sensible solution! When I say officers moved to the rear, they moved to positions in the line, rather than in front of it. Where exactly depended on their appointment, but that sort of granularity is not really relevant in a wargames context. Similarly they took up different positions when a battalion was going through the various evolutions, depending on which evolution it was. Herbert Knotel is a pretty reliable artist, he produced a lot of paintings between the wars mainly, as I understand. it for German army officers' messes.
was going through the various evolutions, depending on which evolution it was. Herbert Knotel is a pretty reliable artist, he produced a lot of paintings between the wars mainly, as I understand. it for German army officers' messes.
The Picture is actually by Carl Rochling, who died in 1920. Herbert Knotel, son of the famous military artist Richard Knotel, also did a lot of military painting, and research into the history of military uniforms. He served in World War One, and I think finally died in the 1960s. .
So it is. Carl Rochling is also a pretty reliable artist. Yes, I got my Knötels mixed up. Teach me to rely on memory in future. Richard best known, amongst other things, for the 18 volume Uniformenkunde series of plates, his son Herbert, a lesser artist, in my view, who produced material based mainly on secondary material, who is best known for Handbuch der Uniformkunde and the illustrations used in Elting's Napoleonic Uniforms.
Armies of the Seven Years War arrived today, it's a good size book with what looks like lots of information. Also got the HoW rules book so that give me some weekend reading.
Quote(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51Ma4Hkh4BL._SX336_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg)
Not a fan of the 7YW, but this is a useful book for uniforms and organisation of 17 nations, as well as some OOBs. Got to love a book with OOBs.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Armies-Seven-Years-War-Commanders/dp/0752459236/ref=sr_1_2?crid=7LGLDM1GA339&keywords=armies+of+the+seven+years+war&qid=1659197115&sprefix=armies+of+the+seven+years+war%2Caps%2C97&sr=8-2 (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Armies-Seven-Years-War-Commanders/dp/0752459236/ref=sr_1_2?crid=7LGLDM1GA339&keywords=armies+of+the+seven+years+war&qid=1659197115&sprefix=armies+of+the+seven+years+war%2Caps%2C97&sr=8-2)
This was a great recommendation, thanks, really good collection of information so far. Pulls a lot of disparate information into one place for easy consumption. If anyone else is interested it's much cheaper here https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/313743356093 and they have a lot of other good books for historical wargamers.
You are more than welcome.