1805 Campaign: Act IV - The Armies Scatter (1 - 23 November 1805)

The Austrians

Following the catastrophe of Babensham-Jettenbach, the Austrian army retreated down both banks of the Inn to the next line of defence on the Salzach.   Contact was successfully broken off with the French, the bridges burned at Marktl (across the Inn) and Burghausen (on the Salzach).  Werneck ensconced his corps in the fortress of Brauau, while the forces of Klenau and Riesch pushed on further toward the Bavarian fortress of Passau.  It had not been garrisoned, and Hessen-Homburg secured its commander's surrender on the 12th, entering the city without opposition.

A week later a small mishap occured as Klenau's corps evacuated the city in accordance with orders to form up ready to march to the west.  A road and gate was left unguarded, and a patrol of French hussars slipped unchallenged into the city (one hussar uniform looks much like another, after all), and only when they were ordering drinks in the Marktplatz did it dawn on them that they were in an enemy-held city.  About then they also become aware of a column of Austrian cavalry, led by Freiherr von Mesko, entering the city by the south gate, across the Salzach, and made themselves scarce via the northern gate across the Danube.  Now entirely cut off from their fellows by the great river, they explored up its bank to find out what the Austrians were up to, in hopes of having something to report when they finally found their way back.

Monkey Trap - Campaign Battle of Abbach

 The Situation

With Strik's column, after many days behind enemy lines, almost in sight of the safety of Regensburg, the French swooped in and cut the road ahead of them.  General Buxhöwden, aware of their plight, agonised over the safety of the city, but concluded that it could be held against stray French probes by a rearguard while he led the bulk of the army out to Strik's rescue.  Grand Duke Constantine led the column, clearing the road as far as the town of Abbach of what turned out to be no more than French scouts.  Having been swept away the scouts did not, therefore, see that Constantine was followed by a much stronger column led by Buxhöwden himself and von Anrep.  Having ensured that the road was free the rescue column counter-marched, on the morning of November 20 heading over the hills back to Regensburg, again with the Guard leading.

Suchet's division, south of Regensburg, had been given an imperial mission - to complete the destruction of Strik's column by cutting it off, along with the Imperial Guard who had come to its rescue, and pinning it against the Danube until the full weight of the French army could be brought to bear to crush it.  To that end, his division had cut the riverside road between Regensburg and the isolated Russians on the evening of the 19th, and the following morning were marching south along the road toward Abbach. 

The Bear in his Lair - Campaign Battle of Ingolstadt

The Situation

For a week the 1st West Army fell back after Ottenhoven, fending off the French nipping at their heels and, without supply, trudging doggdly on to Ingolstadt where they hoped to find at least temporary shelter.  Their lead elements reached the city on the evening of the 10th, and immediately started scouring it for supplies, establishing warehouses, hospitals and supply dumps for the succour of their soon-to-be-arriving comrades.

As the army trickled in, outposts were left on the various roads to provide a "crumple zone", slowing down the French advance to allow the recovery of broken units and the preparation of a defence.  This worked to a degree, but by the morning of the 13th the perimeter was not much more than a mile from the city walls.  Elements of II, V and VII Corps attacked at midday on that day with reinforcements to follow through the afternoon, including the infantry and artillery of the Imperial Guard, accompanied by the emperor himself.

Loaded for Bear - Campaign Battle of Attenkirchen

The Situation

Having been frustrated in their advance toward Munich (see here), Kutuzov became aware, at the start of November, of the previously-unsuspected threat to his rear.  He fell back hastily on Freising, first to determine the size of the threat and then to eliminate it, if he could.  His intention was to secure Ingolstadt, on the Danube, and to build a base of operations there with his flanks covered by the river.  His path was blocked, though, as he marched north from Freising on the Isar.  No sooner had he left the city, on 4 November, than the French marched into it from the south - quite possibly the Imperial Guard, who had chased his Cosscks from Munich.  To the north, scouts identified multiple French divisions marching to intercept him, and a cavalry probe in strength confirmed that II Corps, at the least, was present.  Bagration, as vanguard, was ordered to clear the road to the north, so that the divisions of Strik, Skepelov, Essen and the Reserve Cavalry could follow up and establish a perimeter in preparation for a breakthrough.  Miladoravich and Dokhturov were ordered to mask Freising, securing the safety of the column's rear.  At dawn on the 5th the designated divisions formed up to smash their way clear to the north.

The Battle

The map, as shown in the briefng documents

Playing Russians in Throne & Altar

I wrote some time earlier about the challenges of playing Austrians in 1805 under Throne & Altar rules.  The experience is clearly different from that of playing Russians, and it is fair to say, I think, that man for man the Austrians are more difficult to use well.  At the same time John has expressed some views on the utility of Russians based on his experience in the campaign.  Some of these I think are insightful and some perhaps less so.  Let me offer my view from above...

Like the Austrians, the Russians do not play the same way as the French.  What is it that makes the Russians distinctive, and what is the way to take advantage of those special characteristics?  I suggest that there are four things that set the Russians apart.  Two of these are a matter of a special rule that apply specifically to Russians (a bit like the no-support rule for the Austrians, although that is not unique to them).  Another is a matter of historical orders of battle, and the third (closely related) is a matter of command structure.  The right question is: Does the game reflect the historical reality appropriately?

The War Spreads, and so do the rules challenges

 When I first wrote these rules I envisioned the operational level being intermittent and quite short-term - corps would meet on the strategic map, drop to the operational map of seven hexes, or maybe ten if they had friends nearby, manoeuvre for a week or so, and maybe have a battle.  After that they would separate, go back to the strategic map, and continue there until another meeting occurred.  There might perhaps be two operational theatres, or even more, going on in parallel, and then all returning to the strategic level.

That is not how it has turned out at all.  It is how it started - a tight little map stretching from Munich to a few miles east of the Inn, perhaps sixty miles by fifty, extended from the northern flank of the Alps.  At that point we had about 80,000 Frenchmen trying to force a crossing of the Inn against a rather smaller number of Austrians.  The Bavarians were there in the background, and the Imperial Guard and Grand Park were just coming on-stage - not really near the enemy, but approaching the base of operations at Munich, so they went into the mix also.  

That was on October 17, game time.  Now, as I write, we are in the third week of November, and there has been no possibility of going back to strategic-level manoeuvering.  More corps have poured in from all sides, and the map has expanded to accommodate them.  There must be over 300,000 troops in-theatre - French, Bavarian, Austrian and Russian.  They are manoevering over an area bounded approximately by the cities of Innsbruck, Nuremberg, Taus in Bohemia, Passau and Salzburg - perhaps 200 miles by 150.  The main French supply route stretches over 70 miles from the great logistics base in Munich almost to the Austrian fortress of Braunau (which I think the Emperor has his eye on already as the next base for the push east).

I have had to revise my assumptions and my rules as I went along, and mostly this has been achieved fairly smoothly.  New logistics rules have been retro-fitted without doing anybody any terrible injustices, and the players have come to grips with how supply works pretty well.  I still have some further simplifications in mind, but the bulk of the work has been done, now.  The rest can wait for the next campaign, I think, although no doubt there will be some ad-hoc insertions as we go. 

I have given some information above that is not public knowledge, but nothing that will come as a surprise to anybody, I trust, or affect strategy at this stage - the Coalition must have spies and correspondents in Munich to tell them of the great warehouses and wagon depots there.  Further remarks I was going to make here would give away secrets that are rather fresher, so I shall keep them for later.  It will perhaps be of interest to show what the operational map now looks like:

1805 Campaign: Act III - The Armies Converge (25 - 31 October 1805)

The Russian victory at Ottenhoven left the security of the whole French advance into Austria in question.  Marshal Soult retreated to the south-east, linking up with Bernadotte's army group on the Inn but leaving the way to Munich open to the Russians.  The (now Royal) Army of Bavaria was too far away to guard its own capital, having been sent to the right flank of the advance to act in concert with Marshal Ney in seizing the Inn crossing city of Rosenheim.

Saving General Roussel - Campaign Battle of Jettenbach

In the confusion of the retreat from Babensham the Austrian army became strung out along the south bank of the Inn.  The French hastened to pursue, attempting in particular to cut off the tail of the column and destroy it.  Drouet, leading the pursuit, managed to catch FML Auffenberg a little upstream of Mühldorf, where the small stream of the Wanklbach flows into the Inn at Kraiburg.  Auffenberg might have fought a skirmishing retreat to the east but for his knowledge that if he did so he would be leaving General Roussel d'Hurbal, with almost 9,000 men, cut off to the west, trapped against the bank of the Inn.  Roussel would surely be forced to surrender, so Auffenberg sent an appeal to the Emperor, committing the army to a reversal of direction to rescue the isolated column.

The map, looking from the south, and the actual table seen from the east.

1805 Danube Campaign: Act II - Going Operational (15 - 23 October 1805)

By October 13 French armies had entered Bavaria along multiple axes of advance and several corps were closing in on Munich, where the Elector was still keeping his options open.  A final diplomatic "letter of offer" from the Emperor of the French read, to me, like an ultimatum, and evidently Maximilian Josef read it the same way, or perhaps his francophile inclinations just got the better of him.  At any rate, an alliance was concluded on mutually acceptable terms on the 14th, and the now-Royal Army of Bavaria joined its new French comrades in marching shoulder-to-shoulder to the Inn, where the main Austrian army was presumed (quite rightly) to be awaiting their coming.

The situation on October 13 - all armies visible.

Coming Soon to this Blog...

 It was some time ago that I posted the acount of Babensham.  The followup battle of Jettensbach was fought at the club meeting on 14 February, now six weeks ago, so it is high time I gave an account of it. Briefly, the Austrian rearguard of the retreat from Babensham was caught by the French late the following morning, and felt constrained to give battle.    The map is below, with the Austrians retreating eastward along the south bank of the Inn and the pursuing French coming from the south and west.

1805 Danube Campaign: Act I - Opening Moves (10 September - 15 October 1805)

The time has come that I can begin to tell the story of the campaign without giving away crucial military secrets.  At the time of writing we are still mid-campaign, so I will be rationing what I say and when.  Once it is all over I may go back and update posts giving more detail.  Or not.  In the meantime the account will trickle out in several parts.

Introduction (from the campaign handbook)

The War of the Third Coalition began with an Austrian assault in September 1805.  The Austrian plan was to attack the French possessions in northern Italy with the main army under Archduke Charles, while a secondary force under his nephew, Archduke Ferdinand (nominally, but really managed by the Chief of Staff, Karl Mack von Lieberich), was to cross Bavaria to invade France.  Its real purpose was to distract Napoleon from reinforcing Italy, not to prosecute the main war.  The main French force was far away, preparing at Boulogne for an invasion of England. 

Napoleon responded with shocking speed and force.  He ignored Italy, where in any case Charles had as yet made no move (having grave reservations about the safety of the army north of the Alps) and launched a counter-invasion of Germany.  The Bavarians, meanwhile, revealed a secret alliance with the French - not formally concluded, in fact, until some weeks after the Austrians crossed their borders - leaving Mack’s army in an embarrassingly exposed position.

Campaign Battle of Babensham

The Situation

Four days after the Russian victory at Ottenhoven, the Grande Armée is finally getting to grips with the army of Austria.  A strong push by Bernadotte, backed by Davout, has expanded to the East the Wasserburg bridgehead across the Inn, only to discover a solid line of Austrians stretching for miles to the South-East in the direction of the Chiemsee.  It has been raining for days, and will be an uphill fight.  The French have fought with mud on their boots before, though, and if the Austrians are willing to accept battle the French are more than willing to give it to them...

We played the battle in the extremely congenial location of Bundanoon, in the Southern Highlands of NSW, where the Bundanoon Hotel were kind enough to allow us the use of their private dining room.  Thanks, Gavin!  We hope that this will be only the first of many such meetings.  Robert led the Austrians, assisted by the (nominally Russian, in the campaign) John and Colin, while David and Michael handled the French.

Playing Austrians in 1805 - Some Notes

Toward the end of the Battle of Babensham, Robert as the Austrian commander was heard to exclaim "How can you win with this army?  How can you attack?".  Later, when the post-battle dispositions had been completed at operational level, he was dismayed again.  The French, having the initiative, moved first in the following pulse, and piled straight into his rearguard.  Feeling obliged, for reasons I will not go into here, to accept battle, the pulse ended immediately.  Despite knowing that that would be the consequence of the decision to fight, he nevertheless opined that "this sucks", for it meant that his forces elsewhere would not get to move, nor the Inn valley force even to re-construct brigades broken in the previous day's fighting.  The same could be said, mind you, for all of the other French and Bavarian forces - they did not get to continue their advance, either.

Naturally I do not like my players to be unhappy, but this is after all a simulation of war, and in war a good deal of excrement occurs.  Some of the Austrians' current predicament is simply down to that, but some of it is a reflection of the fact that the Austrian army in 1805 was pushing 'it uphill in facing Napoleon at the height of his powers, leading arguably the best French army that ever existed.  That is, this is not a balanced tournament scenario, but a simulation of an historical situation that was deliberately set up, historically, to be unfair.  In that context the French were certainly more successful than the Austrians, but it was not a foregone conclusion, I think, and it is still not one in the campaign.

While trying, as usual, not to give any intelligence away that is not already public knowledge, I want to offer a few notes on the situation at Babensham in the campaign, and also (of more general interest) on the Austrian Imperial army at this date and how this is reflected in the rules.

Campaign Battle of Ottenhoven

 This battle was played on 19 December, with Michael kindly offering to host it at his office at Marrickville.  The Russians were led by John as Kutusov, faced by Dave and Michael as Napoleon and Soult respectively (the presence of Napoleon on the field giving John some qualms about the imminent arrival of the Guard).

The Situation (spoiler and intelligence-free, I trust).

The Grande Armée crossed the Rhine in late September, advancing inexorably to the east with no enemy contact.  This changed as they approached the eastern frontier of Bavaria - Austrian scouts, then major formations, were met along the valley of the river Inn.  Even as the lead elements of the army, under the immediate direction of Marshal Bernadotte, started to probe across the Inn, new intelligence was received from the Bavarians, with whom an alliance was concluded on the 1th of October.

They had been aware, through their local agents, of Kutusov's 1st West Army since it had crossed their frontier some days earlier.  On concluding the alliance they advised the French of the Russian presence, now well south of the Danube and apparently heading for Munich.  Marshal Soult was ordered to take his IV corps off to intercept them.  Soult's scouts located a strong column of Russians marching south from the Iser river crossing at Freising via Erding and Markt Schwaben.  Without waiting for reinforcements from other corps, Soult made haste to surround the head of the column.  It had reached the village of Ottenhoven, a couple of miles north of Markt Schwaben, and Soult launched his assault just after 10:00am on the 23rd.

Progress and Digressions

This post was written a year ago, but never published...

It is high time to do that now, in anticipation of more good stuff to come, I trust.

I see it has been quite a while since I put anything up.  In January I looked forward to playing Aspern-Essling by May (everything was ready, including printing of the army counters), but for one reason and another we have not had a public battle at the club since then.  The delay has dragged on so long, in fact, that I decided in the end to take a step that I always meant to take eventually.  I have ordered troops from Baccus, initially enough for Aspern-Essling, then in following orders for a replay of Friedland and, with the addition of Bavarians, for 1805 and Austerlitz.  That will keep us for a while, and then a small number of Prussians will enable us to do 1807, and a large number to do 1806.

Nevertheless, things have not been entirely static.  Mini-playtests have allowed the Throne & Altar rules to be refined further and they are now close, I think, to a final form.  Meantime, in anticipation of the promised 1805 campaign next year I have been at work on three parallel projects.

Friedland AAR - January 2019

This month we finally played the long-planned Friedland game, using the latest version of the T&A rules.  I received Greg Wagman's kind permission to distribute complete rules to the players beforehand, and I know that at least some generals read them in the day or two available, but only two of the players had actually played them before.  More on that below under "Game Notes".  My thanks to the many people who signed up for the game - on the Russian side John, Angus and Geoff, and on the French Robert, Dennis, Steve, Anthony and Gordon.  Special thanks to Steve and Gordon, who remained good-humoured and engaged, even though their troops never actually made it onto the table!  Special mention also of Angus and Anthony, both playing their first Napoleonic battles (at least in this form), who handled their respective commands with skill and aplomb despite their inexperience.

With that said, what happened?

Troop Quality

The third axis of troop characteristics is quality - this is a combination of moral confidence, unit cohesion, including esprit de corps, and level of training.  All (or almost all, anyway) wargaming rules reflect this in some way, often by sorting different units into categories such as "raw", "trained", "veteran" etc.  Throne and Altar does it with a numeric rating, which unlike Altar of Freedom varies between units.

I mentioned in an earlier article that AoF represents degradation of unit effectiveness, including casualties, by means of "fatigue" points.  In AoF, if a brigade accumulates more than four such points it breaks.  Once enough brigades have broken, the entire army breaks and the battle is lost.  This number (the army break point) is known in advance, and is calculated based on the scenario designer's judgement of the general state of enthusiasm of the army

National Characteristics

The first axis of troop differences I identified as having to be addressed in a Napoleonic rule set was the tactical roles filled by various troop types.  This has been dealt with already.

The second was tactical doctrine, by which I mean the differences in behaviour for ostensibly identical troop types across different armies, and even the same army at different time periods.  It includes also the effects of differing cultures and social relations between members of different armies.  The relations between officers and men were quite different, for example, in the British army as compared with the French, for the societies they came from were founded on different principles.  Likewise for Austria, Russia and so on.  The differences discussed below are all expressed on the battlefield as simple bonuses and deficits applied to certain troop types.

Troop Types

To alter a set of rules written for the American Civil War to be suitable for Napoleonics, a number of changes need to be made.  The first and most obvious is the range of troop types available.  All of what follows (in terms of actual modifiers, move distances etc.) can be found on the Quick Reference Card.  This post sets out the thinking behind the rules - the justification and reasoning, to give y'all something to take issue with.

Foundations

I wrote a few weeks ago that I would expand, in due course, on the Throne & Altar rules, and I want to do that in a couple of steps.  I have already said that the rules are based on Greg Wagman's Altar of Freedom.  First, I want to give an overview of those rules, and then I will go on to set out what changes I have made to make them suit Napoleonics rather than ACW.