A 10mm Franco-Prussian Black Powder battle over at the Aylesbury club a couple of weeks back vs Andy and David. French II Corps faces off against Prussian X corps.
https://madlemmey.blogspot.com/2023/10/10mm-franco-prussian-war-french-2nd.html
Excellent game there Will and your figures really do look great 8) !
Nice one! Do you use BP rules as written, or with some kind of opportunity fire tweak?
Good looking figures Will. And good to hear you were getting interest in the smaller scale figures.
Perhaps you will need to take a few buildings along next time to supplement the club terrain?
Quote from: Chris Pringle on 25 October 2023, 05:14:19 AMNice one! Do you use BP rules as written, or with some kind of opportunity fire tweak?
As written, with defensive fire.
French get sharpshooter (reroll one die if shooting) to represent weight of fire
A very nice looking game!
Great stuff, Will. :)
I'm interested to understand how BP handles the 'challenge' around rifled muskets in the period it is covering.
As I plough my way through my next set of rules (watch this space folks) and the associated historical reading that goes with it, I have come to the conclusion that pre c.1864, and the change of infantry tactics by the Prussians (associated with the introduction of the Dreyes needle gun), that Line Infantry tactics in Western Europe were still primarily influenced by Napoleonic doctrine.
This doctrine, which was that of (broadly) 'advance to close range, fire a volley and then charge with the bayonet' took no regard for the advancement of firearm technology. Officers were trained in staff college that it was this tactic that beat Napoleon and as such it was the standard tactic of the day, up until the 1860-70s.
So that despite the introduction of rifled-muskets to the Line Infantry and their greater effective range, in the Crimea (for example) British and French infantry were delivering their volleys at the same range as their Russian opponents who were still using smoothbore flintlock muskets. The exceptions to this appear to be when a unit is in defensive positions, and then the rifle range is used to its full potential, but also by Line infantry against charging cavalry. The introduction of the rifled-musket appears to allow infantry to drop forming into square against cavalry and to form in line, shooting the cavalry with successive volleys, starting at a much longer range, and successfully defeating the charges. We see that demonstrated by the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders 'Thin Red Line' at Balaclava and also by the Danes defeating Austrian cavalry, whilst in line, in the 2nd Schleswig Holstein War (just 2 examples). In fact the use of the infantry square, with the exception of 'colonial' conflicts, appears to all but disappear from use post the Napoleonic Wars (post Crimea).
It therefore appears to be that despite the advances in rifling technology, it was tactical doctrine that dictated the use of the rifled-musket, not its range. Against enemy infantry anyway. And not until the Prussians adopt a more open formation and the use of prone fire (easier with a breech-loader) that we start to see more 'modern' infantry tactics occurring. The rifled-musket was more accurate than flintlock-musket, so casualties would have been higher (to some degree) from rifled fire, but this might explain why we don't see rifle armed Line infantry units using their increased range to their advantage, even in the American Civil War.
Does Black Power allow for this or are rifled-musket armed line infantry given the option to use their extra range?
Thanks
Mark
In my modifications,
Prussians - 12cm range due to the nasty habit of the Dreyes backflashing, ruining the rubber washer and then losing all range (we use cm range). French 36cm, with a reroll.
French default to line, Prussians default to assult columns in my system (they can form line, if ordered).
Link to mods here BI
https://madlemmey.blogspot.com/2019/07/black-powder-1870-stats-and.html
My tattered synapses are still hanging on :D and I remembered reading this in Wargames Illustrated some decades ago, also delighted to find it online:
Firepower in the FPW Peter Dennis (https://www.flamesofwar.com/Portals/0/all_images/WargamesIllustrated/ArticlePics/WI313/archive%20articles/Firepower%20in%20the%20FPW.pdf)
Still worth a read for thought provoking insight into the FPW
Quote from: Gwydion on 26 October 2023, 11:43:22 AMMy tattered synapses are still hanging on :D and I remembered reading this in Wargames Illustrated some decades ago, also delighted to find it online:
Firepower in the FPW Peter Dennis (https://www.flamesofwar.com/Portals/0/all_images/WargamesIllustrated/ArticlePics/WI313/archive%20articles/Firepower%20in%20the%20FPW.pdf)
Still worth a read for thought provoking insight into the FPW
Thank you for this. Some interesting thoughts on the post 1860 nature of infantry combat.
Insightful
Cheers
Mark
Really like the look of the armies, but surprised you use BP rules, which were very dismissive of gaming in later C19th Europe. I dismissed them as a set not designed to deal with rapidly changing weapons and tactics once muzzle loading muskets ceased to be used by both sides in a conflict. Mind you, they did push the "incredibly popular" Carlist Wars.
I used BP as it was what was popular with my club at the time
2bd edition is more forgiving.