Actual armies in varying periods

Joined: 08 May 2006 Posts: 9

I would like to follow the 3 periods that have been posted on this forum, and would like to see what everyone thinks would be the 'major players' during the given eras.

I will start the ball rolling with my take Surprised

"Early War" 1798 - 1805

France, England, Spain, German Confederate, Austria-Hungary, Papal States, Russia, Turkey and ???

"Mid War" 1806 - 1811

???

"Late War" 1812 - 1815

???

Anyone else care to toss in their two pence?

Joined: 14 Mar 2006 Posts: 7

Looks good, thou I would move 1806 into early war as well as its part of the initial wars vs France during the imperial era.

cheers

Site Admin Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 174

I'm not sure about the different periods ... I've seen them divided in different ways and don't have the expertise to say it should be one way or the other.

I do, however, like the idea of sticking with the Flames of War troop ratings of Fearless, Confident, Reluctant & Veteran, Trained, Conscript. I think we can cover all the armies possible with those and stick close to the existing FoW model without complicating it too much.

Posted: Sat May 20, 2006 6:55 am

Ok, I try to list the nations :

"Early War" 1792 - 1804

France ( Revolutionnary, Emigrants, Chouans, Imperial ...) , England, Spain, German Confederate, Austria-Hungary, Papal States, Russia, Turkey-Ottomans, Prussia, Hollande, Hesse, Hanovre, Portugal, Saxe, Bavière, Piemont-Sardaigne, Egyptian ( Mamelouks ), Royaume of Naples, Saint-Domingue ( Toussaint Louverture Wink

) ...

"Mid War" 1805 - 1811
France, Austria, Russia, Bavaria, Prussia, Saxe, Royaume of Naples ( Bourbons and French Royaume), Holland, Great Britain, Danemark, Sweden, Spain (French Royaum and Spanish ),Portugal, Pologne, Wurtemberg, Royaum of Italy, Westphalia, Ottomans, ...

"Late War" 1812 - 1815
France ( many allied ), Italy, Pologne, Bavière, Saxons, Westphalie, Austria, Russia, Great Britain, Portugal, Prussia, Spain, Russia, Sweden, Danemark, Wurtemberg, Naples, Belgian, Hanovre...

Sorry forthe french names

Embarassed

Joined: 14 Mar 2006 Posts: 7

Im not so surte I agree Nicofig, as for example, Austria in 1805 is a far difeerent kettle of fish compared to Austria of 1809.

cheers

Posted: Tue May 23, 2006 7:35 am

Yes it's true. Confused

Joined: 14 Mar 2006 Posts: 7

What if you went this way instead....

upto 1805

1805/6 campaigns

1809/11 campaigns

1812/15 campaigns

and Spain (because the spanish campaign troop makeup is so different to campaigns in the rest of europe)

cheers

Site Admin Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 174

I have a thought and a question ...

I know we would all like to delve into the intricacies of each different army and time period (as always seems the habit of Napoleonic enthusiasts), however ...

Do we think there is wisdom in developing and testing a system which functions well with a generic human being armed with a musket, canon or sword of the period - and then continuing to develop the inclusion of national or period variables; rather than trying to develop the basic system at the same time as exploring those specific intricacies?

Joined: 25 May 2006 Posts: 17 Location: Oslo, Norway

Good idea. Let’s establish the stats for a normal stand of line infantry and take it from there!

J.

Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 34 Location: Sylvania, OHIO

Confident/Trained will represent a majority of the fighting troops (in my opinion)

The Napoleonic Soldier most likely will be a member of the regular army and has had basic training and experience in the unit and formation maneuvers that he will be ordered to follow. He has had experience in using his weapon and is familiar in its use. He knows the men in his section and is familiar with others in his company. This gives him a feeling of "comradship" which will help his morale.

This is the basic rating of the soldier of this time. National differences, specific units, specific training, and specific situations on how units performed can be factored in to give other ratings to reflect their ability and skills.

Steve

Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 34 Location: Sylvania, OHIO

Scruff wrote:

What if you went this way instead....

upto 1805

1805/6 campaigns

1809/11 campaigns

1812/15 campaigns

and Spain (because the spanish campaign troop makeup is so different to campaigns in the rest of europe)

cheers

1805/07 campaigns (this ends the pre-reforms forces of the Allies as they then decided to change many aspects of their armies also this is the end of the French well trained "Grand Armee".

1808/12 campaigns (This is what I believe is the true mid war period)

1813/14 campaigns (lots of conscripts flooded the armies)

1815 campaign (many veterans and trained troops avaliable)

Just my 2 centdimes worth

Joined: 25 May 2006 Posts: 17 Location: Oslo, Norway

I think it is a good idea to start some play testing with basic line infantry at this point, and Tadpoleon's ratings seem a good starting point to me.

Jonas

Joined: 03 Mar 2006 Posts: 34 Location: Sylvania, OHIO

Sample Unit Organization for French/Austrian 1809 Campaign

French Line Battalion

4 Fusilier Companies
Each company @ 2 bases
1 Grenadier Company @ 2 bases
1 Voltigeur Company @ 2 bases

All are medium bases*
Skirmish capable troops can break down into 4 small bases from each medium base

This gives 12 medium bases for the battalion.

Just my initial thoughts. Comments welcome.

Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 4:37 pm

12 stands a battalion is alot, but you got the companies correct,

I'm still yet to get around reading your rules yet but if Battalions=FoW Platoons 12 stands is a hell of a lot... then again I like the roster and 2 stands per company make sense...

Posted: Sat Oct 07, 2006 8:06 pm

Why don't we have four periods.

Early
Mid
Mid II (for lack of better name)
Late