Slitherine

With the release of the next army book on the horizon... 22nd is sooooooooooooooo far away

French army around 1796-1798.... Any hints on the general stats?

Superior/consripts unreformed infantry sound about right for the french line units?

Haven't seen the lists, but I would be surprised if the French infantry was unreformed.

Maybe an arguement for poor trained/veteran in Bonaparte's infantry at the start of 1796, with elan grade increasing as the successes pile up over the course of the campaign?

Not sure about Moreau and Jourdan's armies.

I'm really looking forward to seeing the lists for the revolutionary wars as well.

Scored a sneak peak at the list your looking at avg/superior drilled and reformed if I remember right but changes with which army you want as thierry a couple to Choies from.

Hope this helps

By the mid 1790s we rate all the French as reformed, but for the period up to 1795 we have modelled two blends or amalgams, of armies one based on the levee en masse with loads of conscripts some poor (but many superior) which we have labelled the "Armee du Nord" and is reformed and another the "Armies of the Centre and the Moselle which still contains some old regular line units (unreformed) and newer demi brigades (reformed). There is a suggestion that the army of the Moselle continued to use the old regulations for a time. Each list can import a division from the other.

French Cavalry are not very good at all until much later in the 90's - no large units nothing better than drilled and some poor. We have some special rules for this initial period up to '95 for the French- there have to be at least 4 infantry units in a French infantry or mixed division , at least one of the Armee du Nord conscript line infantry must be deployed in skirmish order - they move as light infantry but fire as line - and up to half may be. Field artilery must pass a CMT to limber ( civilian drivers until the Consulate - and ditto for Spain in this era.) In this earlier period there is a French siege of Toulon army list one for the Pyrenees to face the Spanish - plus the later directory and consulate armies.


Our reasoning is explained pretty fully with a slightly longer preamble arrative than is usual for FOG as it will be fairly unfamiliar to many folk. ( It was to me before I began to read!)

By the mid 1790''s the French army is reformed and the demi brigades are standard. Their enemies are universally unreformed. Austrian fans may find the quality of their armies quite good by comparison with the later period.

Hope that gives you sufficient clues to whet the appetite.

Thanks mike. Looking forward to do doing the list.....

MikeHorah wrote:By the mid 1790s we rate all the French as reformed, but for the period up to 1795 we have modelled two blends or amalgams, of armies one based on the levee en masse with loads of conscripts some poor (but many superior) which we have labelled the "Armee du Nord" and is reformed and another the "Armies of the Centre and the Moselle which still contains some old regular line units (unreformed) and newer demi brigades (reformed). There is a suggestion that the army of the Moselle continued to use the old regulations for a time. Each list can import a division from the other.

I look forward to seeing that argument. Everything I've read - Noseworthy et al - has held that the French reforms were introduced before the Revolution and the Regulars would be better at carrying them out than the national guards. I await with impatience.

Sarmaticus wrote:

MikeHorah wrote:By the mid 1790s we rate all the French as reformed, but for the period up to 1795 we have modelled two blends or amalgams, of armies one based on the levee en masse with loads of conscripts some poor (but many superior) which we have labelled the "Armee du Nord" and is reformed and another the "Armies of the Centre and the Moselle which still contains some old regular line units (unreformed) and newer demi brigades (reformed). There is a suggestion that the army of the Moselle continued to use the old regulations for a time. Each list can import a division from the other.

I look forward to seeing that argument. Everything I've read - Noseworthy et al - has held that the French reforms were introduced before the Revolution and the Regulars would be better at carrying them out than the national guards. I await with impatience.

Nafziger's Imperial Bayonets ( which does cover the earlier period) and Lynn's seminal "The bayonets of the Republic" have been my favourite texts. My main argument is that reform proceeded at an uneven pace and not uniformly and that the 1791 reglements had not been sucessful and the levee en masse forced the pace of change albeit unevenly.

MikeHorah wrote: Nafziger's Imperial Bayonets ( which does cover the earlier period) and Lynn's seminal "The bayonets of the Republic" have been my favourite texts. My main argument is that reform proceeded at an uneven pace and not uniformly and that the 1791 reglements had not been sucessful and the levee en masse forced the pace of change albeit unevenly.

Thanks. I can see that I've, sub-consciously, been carrying over the Massed and Impulse categories from Volley & Bayonet and Age of Eagles, respectively : In those rules they signify a tactical flexibility that depends in part on the use of columns but it isn't primarily a matter of a preference for attack column over line. I think the lists' classification of the later Austrians on the basis of their "sluggishness", when they favoured the column, led me astray. That's not necessarilly a criticism - consistency isn't as importance as pragmatism in a game; though I have to admit, it irks my tidy mind.

Sarmaticus wrote:

MikeHorah wrote: Nafziger's Imperial Bayonets ( which does cover the earlier period) and Lynn's seminal "The bayonets of the Republic" have been my favourite texts. My main argument is that reform proceeded at an uneven pace and not uniformly and that the 1791 reglements had not been sucessful and the levee en masse forced the pace of change albeit unevenly.

Thanks. I can see that I've, sub-consciously, been carrying over the Massed and Impulse categories from Volley & Bayonet and Age of Eagles, respectively : In those rules they signify a tactical flexibility that depends in part on the use of columns but it isn't primarily a matter of a preference for attack column over line. I think the lists' classification of the later Austrians on the basis of their "sluggishness", when they favoured the column, led me astray. That's not necessarilly a criticism - consistency isn't as importance as pragmatism in a game; though I have to admit, it irks my tidy mind.

1792-95 was a challenge to model as it is for France a period of transition. The debates over closed columns and open columns and line versus column did pre date the revolution but my reading is that the massive social change to the compostion of the French army and levee en masse forced the pace organically in that maintaining the cohesion of the lne in the advance proved too difficut for the mass of volunteers and so the open column ( column of divisions) became the preferred method of advance almost by default. Then there is the " clouds of skirmishers " issue alongside that. And there was much more to reforms for the French amy than just the tactical formations .

But our refomed/unreformed distinction is a practical and pragmatic game design mechanism not so much a distinction historians have drawn looking across all the armies of the time as "reform" meant different things for different armies at different times. (We use it quite specifically rather like our use of " conscript" meaning training no better than a conscript - however recruited. ) I am not sure whether we would have felt the need to create it had we not been working from the beginning to the full 1792-1815 period rather than just 1805-1815. It might not have flagged up the issue so clearly . But wargames rules generally create definitions and distinctions that historians generally would not see any need to do!

Oh... Nice email from amazon.... Delivery due tomorrow i think a nice quiet evening reading is on the cards

E&E has arrived.... Turkish types or early french..... Choices choices.... Massed cheap art could be fun

Just off to work with my new book

I'm still waiting for mine...

I order the book on Wednesday. Thursday email said "shipped" and arriving in 4-7 days. Book was waiting here in the mail when I got home Friday!

Mine arrived today, much list building will ensue!

Prussians look like they might be actually good but i dont see a auto lose rule for the 1806 list

Prussians look like they might be actually good but i dont see a auto lose rule for the 1806 list

You have my permission to perform (as a commander) as badly as they did historically.

After britcon that will be easy ill see if mr will. Has any notes for me