The seven days of Leipzig, Oct 13-19, 1813

[kzucker]

Proposal From Franck Cartel:
3 maps : A 3 map version*gives a good*cover of the historical theater of operations; but a quarter map is needed to cover the Zwickau area (you can add that mini map or cut it from the Southeast map : see the picture) Scenarii: - Opening moves (late sept. or early oct. start : Wartenburg crossing) - Napoleon strikes back (counteroffensive at Düben) - Road to Leipzig * You will have noticed these maps link with those of your 1806 game : an expansion (counters and scenario) using all 5 maps then allow to play the Lützen Campaign * As both 1806 and Leipzig campaigns occured during the oct. month, you*obviously may*use the same graphics for the new maps *
2 maps : if you want to cover the same battle area (from Zerbst in the N
to Zwickau in the S, from W bank of Saale River to E of Torgau), then you
need a map at 1,3 miles per hex, or 1,25miles per hex (15,5mm large); you can start playing as soon as the end of sept with battle at Altenberg and Bl¸cher's moves to the N! But it's no more a "Days" game and the subject
is better suited for a Napoleon at Bay treatment on my mind. 1 map (see attachment) : 1 mile per 15,5 mm hex offers a playing area from Bitterfeld to Gera and Halle to Grimma; the game begins with Napoleon's order to concentrate on Leipzig for a decisive fight... and lasts with the French running out of ammo on the morning of the 19th: Napoleon's gamble
is then to get a swift victory over the Allies, or to retreat in good order before being cut from his lines of communication to Erfurt! More to come, FC

[Nico[PL]]

Kevin,
As far as I remeber You have already made "Napoleon at Leipzig" :-)?

I`d say game in DAYS system with one of these battles:
- Eylau 1807
- Lutzen 1813
- Bautzen 1813
- Albuera 1811
- Fuentes de Oñoro 1811
- Vittoria 1813
- Orthez 1813
- Touluse 1814

Spain would be interesting, with no Napoleon with his "3" command points, no guard in such number...only Soult or Massena..and Wellington with his all-out defensive tactic

Of course "sing all 5 maps then allow to play" would be very nice - but how many players have room to place all TETE 3 maps + organization display :) ?

[kzucker]

Nico,

You have some good ideas there. Which ones would be two maps?

Regarding the Leipzig campaign it has never been done at 1 mile hexes!

[Nico[PL]]

I have only tactical maps from Spanish battles and little or none maps with operations, but I think Fuentes de Oñoro 1811 would be 2 maps game, they were manevuring again and again....maybe Salamanca with Marmont? And Eylau would 2 maps games...
or make 2nd part of Six Days of Glory ;) ? Arcis sur Aube or Craonne..

[Lance Cresswell]

Kevin,

When you discuss multiple maps for games based on the "Days" system do you intend that both (or all) maps would be needed for most, if not all, scenarios? I prefer, and limit myself to, games that require a single map. I realize not everyone is so limited and this is merely my two cents. Thanks.

LC

[kzucker]

Hi Lance,

This one would require two maps to start with (the two to the north). That would carry the game through the 8th of October. Then an expansion would add the southern map. Using the 1806 maps, there would be a 5-map playing area to do the Leipzig campaign from October 1st.

[kzucker]

Franck Cartel writes:

>The one map project depicts the Leipzig mousetrap during the week preceding
>the French retreat; the delimited area is sufficient if you want to simulate
>this critical period only.
>As I implyed last time, the 3 maps - 3 weeks version might be unplayable in
>a "Days" format: you have to include attrition rules as well as
>Schwarzenberg's and Bernadotte's passiveness and cautiousness.... the whole
>Leipzig campaign is then better suited to a new "Napoleon at Bay" opus on
>my mind.

Well, you have to limit the duration of an operation to about 12 days. Then you can normally just ignore march attrition. Towards the end of 12-14 days (rather less in 1813), an Army would start to unwind. You could liken an army in 1813 to a wind-up clock. It runs fine at first, then starts to run slower, and then it must stop. If you try to force the hands of the clock the springs will start to break, men will scatter to the winds.

The overall cause of Napoleon's failure in the Autumn of 1813 was entirely due to an administrative breakdown, just like in 1812.

However, we can ignore that view and propose, what if Napoleon had succeeded in the Wittenberg operation?

Here, we can start with two maps, and then publish the third as an expansion. The two maps would be the top two maps of the 3-map arrangement, which retains the ability to mate with the 1806 maps.

That then would not include the Leipzig phase. There has to be a halt in operations around the 8th, so the troops can be fed and re-supplied.

With the third map you could have a second Leipzig scenario, and a mini-campaign with a necessity to go into semi-active status for each army at some point around the 8th, but if they do not stop and resupply they start flipping over units (to reduced strength).

>What about a what if ? "Days" during april 1814 when Napoleon would have
>marched to deliver Paris, had his Marshalls not betrayed him ?

The Start date of this 1814 scenario would be March 30th? Let's set-up "Napoleon at Bay" for that date and take a look. Assume that Marmont withdraws south of Paris (to spare the city) and the French LOC becomes based upon Orleans (S/S #2 near Nemours).

What's Napoleon going to do now? He is outnumbered, probably four to one. Maybe he heads for the hills, becomes a guerrilla leader in the mountains...

[MHaggett]

What's Napoleon going to do now? He is outnumbered, probably four to one. Maybe he heads for the hills, becomes a guerrilla leader in the mountains...

Kind of a 1814 "War for the Loire" :p

[MHaggett]

Another interesting area might be Napoleon's defense of the Quadrilateral, perhaps the Rivoli campaign. (Covered in Bonaparte in Italy but would be a more focussed look)

The Fuentes d'Onoro and Salamanca could be interesting if the timescale for maneuver around those battles fits in the Days system; to me, the operational situation has to be interesting enough to warrant the treatment.

Kevin/Nico: How do you think this system would work for maybe something in the Revolutionary period, prior to Napoleon? Something like the 1794 campaigns in Germany?

[kzucker]

I know that those campaigns were still under the older paradigm of the "war of Maneuver," where battles were not always sought out. So for months the two armies would just move around a lot without much combat.

Unfortunately I don't know a lot about those campaigns. Maybe you can say more about that?

[MHaggett]

I'll have to find some reading material. There were a number of pitched battles once the armies finally did start to move, but I am unsure how 'interesting' the maneuver leading up to them was.

[kzucker]

Those revolutionary campaigns haven't been discovered by Military Historians ... you could probably find a topic for it on www.Consimworld.com

[Nico[PL]]

Today I have finished reading book about battle of Talavera de la Reyna (27-28 VII 1809). In my opinion this is a very good topic for game. Two French columns (Soult with three corps (Soult, Ney and Mortier) and Jospeh with two corps and reserves (Victor, Sebastian)) vs Wellington & Cuesta. Altough French were superior in numbers they lost battle. [but won campaign -they have saved Madrid and forced Wellington to retreat]

The problem with French Army was that there were no united command and Soult would not listen to Joseph (and Jourdan), Ney would not listen to Soult, Victor was hot-tempered and Napoleon was at Vienna at that time..and opportunities were missed....(destroying whole British Army).

On the other hand Wellington had same problem with Cuesta and with Venegas who could turn campaign in favour of Spain-Britian, but was disliking Cuesta...

[kzucker]

What would the map look like? WOuld it fit on one map. How many days of campaigning?

[Nico[PL]]

The map I think should be from Toledo to Plasencia.

http://www.diablos.nastawnia.com/map.jpg

Time from 22 VII (on 23 Wellington missed a great moment to destroy Victor`s 1st Corps) until 5 VIII (that day Wellington started to cross Tag river and escaped from Soult pursuit).

The forces were small. About 40,000 main forces of each side (plus 40-50 thousand of Soult troops).

The Ally player should immediatly destroy/rout Victor`s Corps, then destroy Sebastian`s Corps with King Joseph reserves and capture Madrid (the peace treaty was negotiated in Austria at this time and this could have some serious impact) then retreat before Soult comes.

The French player should fastly retreat Victor, combine 1st and 4th Corps with Jospeh reserves and try to hold Wellington until Soult arrives.

Some rules should says something about Venegas, who has forced Joseph to retreat from Talavera after battle, afraid of his LOC.
Wellington havent captured Madrid cause Soult was already appearing..

[cdt luppo]

what about toulouse, april 10 1814...!!!

kevin,

what do you think of a game between vitoria and toulouse...

a campaign in the sector i mean...

[kzucker]

That will work for the Campaigns of Napoleon system.

There are several people on this discussion board who know more about this campaign than I do. Maybe they would like to post a comment?

This campaign you mention is ultra-obscure. There are no books that focus on it that I know of.. In 1814, the British had broken through against Soult, when news came of the fall of Paris...

[cdt luppo]

hello kevin,

well, i speak about this campaign because...i live there !!! : in Toulouse...

there are 2 or 3 books on the subject : in french, by local historians.

[kzucker]

Are there lots of nice maps and Orders of Battle in these books?

[nftaylor]

I'd love to see a 'Days' game on one of the Peninsular campaigns but most would need several maps. Of those which are manageable, the Salamanca campaign seems most interesting to me and would fit on two maps - from Marmont's initial positions north of the Douro to south of Alba de Tormes and east-west from Zamora to Medina del Campo. Oman is still the best source on the campaign in English but his maps are not sufficiently detailed. Fortescue may have a decent campaign map but I don't have the volume handy to check. I don't have Sarramon's book so I don't know if it covers the campaign. Of course there may also be other books in Spanish or French which would help.

I think the Talavera campaign would be better as a Campaigns style game as the area covered is large.

Would Toulouse make a good game? I'm not sure if an assault on a fortified camp is all that enticing.

Of course, the biggest problem in all these potential games would be the absence of Napoleon. Many gamers seem to consider a game on this era without him as not worth playing!

Niall

[kzucker]

Niall,

You are right about that last point. It's not ONLY that, but also these battles are less well covered by historians for the same reason, so there is a snowball effect.

Having said that, there is something we can do about that, and that is to share information about these battles so that more people know about them, what makes them interesting. Napoleon is only one man after all, and lots of able men participated in these struggles.

History has a tendency toward myth-making, and attributing accomplishments and skills to those towering individuals which belong to others.

[nftaylor]

I wonder if there's a US vs UK thing going on here too. Most US military historians (Elting, Bowden for example) seem to have a far more favourable view of Napoleon than do their UK equivalents (say Paddy Griffith or even Oman). Chandler would be the exception, of course. The Peninsular campaigns have been studied in great detail by British historians but the absence of Napoleon seems to deter their US equivalents. Jac Weller is the only exception I can think of offhand.

Niall

[kzucker]

Niall,

British historians (and publishers) have a love-hate relationship with Napoleon. They think they hate him, but in some dimly-lit area of the British soul they admire him.

The Americans have no particular animus toward Napoleon but tend toward hero worship and often have to look to other lands for heros since, traditionally, Americans resisted mythologising as anti-democratic. Of course that is less true in these dark days of primitivism.

[nftaylor]

It would certainly be interesting to trace the views of British military historians on Napoleon since 1815. Much in the way Peter Geyl did for French historians in "Napoleon For and Against" - a book which I'd recommend to anyone.

I find hero worship disturbing in any form - we Scots are traditionally averse to it. One more reason why I'd like to see games on campaigns of the era which didn't include Napoleon. The Peninsular is one possibility - another might be an expansion to The Emperor Returns covering the Revolutionary Campaigns in the same area. George Nafziger has Chuquets volumes on the campaigns in translation......

Niall

[kzucker]

The Revolutionary Campaigns are quite interesting as they can be treated at the same scale as the Campaigns of Napoleon, though certain elements such as the Corps system of operations haven't been fully worked out yet.

[daniel]

The game made in 1992 about Valmy campaign for french chanpionship was interesting. Main revolutionary campaigns were fought in Belgium and Germany. Maps can be used for some games.
daniel

[kzucker]

Was that the game called "La Patrie en Dangeur" and published in Casus Belli? I think Marc Brandsma designed it. I used to have a copy.

And, just to avoid any possible confusion with our next game, I have changed the name of this thread (remember I "stole" the title from this "Days" Series proposal for our Campaigns "2X" design).

A very good title at that, given to us by M. Cartel.

[larrydunn]

Just wanted to see if there was any progress on the Leipzig idea for DAYS. NLB and NAL are my alltime favorite boardgames. I hate what Clash of Empires did to NAL, and would love to see that battle available updated to the DAYS system.

One thing I would love to see would be a return to the simplicity of the counters in NAL and even NLB -- I bought FLB lately and, like Clash of Arms' NAL, I find it very difficult to tell friend from foe! I wrote to CoA about that with their redo of NAL and they told me that it had happened on real battlefields, so why not in the game? I took this to mean that I could move and fight with my opponent's units in their version of the game ....

[kzucker]

I find it very difficult to tell friend from foe!

Which counters in particular did you have trouble with?

[Barrie Pollock]

Sorry, but just have to express a contrary opinion in regard to the colours being used on the counters in OSG games. I love the different colours by the subordinate nationalities and really like how they carry over from one game to another. The player can know at a glance that the unit coming down the road is Wurtemburgers for example and I think it enhances the gaming experience.

I do agree with the writer that Clash of Arms goes too far with this concept and that their counters can be confusing, however, I don't think OSG should be tarred with the same brush.

[larrydunn]

The player can know at a glance that the unit coming down the road is Wurtemburgers for example and I think it enhances the gaming experience.

At a glance? Not sure I agree with that. How is that possible? If there is some way to do it, let me know. Other than committing all the colors to memory, that is.

Looking at the counter sheet, the variety of colors on the units appears very confusing to me. There are white Austrian units, and white Italian units. There are greyish German units, and greyish Prussian units.

Of course, units like French and Russian are easy to distinguish, as nothing is remotely simlar to dark brown or dark blue. What I'd really like to see is some sort of unifying color code on the units to clearly show that they are Allies or French (and allies).

I play Napoleonic miniatures, and know full well that one of the glories of wargaming the period is the variety and pinache of uniforms. But in miniature games you have flags and different uniform cuts to look at, different headwear, and often gamers will place small variations on the miniature bases on an army level. When I play a boardgame, I don't want to have to be constantly looking at the now-empty counter sprue to see what units are mine. I considered this to make CoA's Leipzig game unplayable, and I'm not sure how FLB is going to play out, although as you say it's not nearly as bad as CoA's NAL.

[kzucker]

"What I'd really like to see is some sort of unifying color code on the units to clearly show that they are Allies or French (and allies)."

Flip them over.

[guardafeu]

Suggestions for NLB-Four Last Battles games: Eylau and Lutzen. But defintely not at 480 meters/hex.

An older issue of S&T (S&T 138) published Eylau at 175 yards per hex. This worked well, got the entire battle on one map, no stacking at this scale. That game is a bit outdated though. Perhaps a NLB 2.0 series for smaller one day battles like Eylau and Lutzen, 175-200 meters per hex.

[kzucker]

But 175 meters per hex would be quite a different game. Could be a regiment level game.

We are more interested in a series of interrelated battles and maneuver, not so much about a set-piece battle.

[guardafeu]

Eylau S&T 138 was brigade level and essentially used NLB rules. Worked fairly well but outdated compared to Four Lost Battles.

[guardafeu]

"We" are interested in a variety of things. I probably should have started a new thread for future NLB series games.