WW1 Western Front Tactics Prior to Commencement of Trench Warfare

[monk2002uk]

If I may, once the move to contact was established was there much evidence of urban fighting? Or did units retreat?

Thank you for your kind comments. There was very little evidence of urban fighting in large built-up areas. Cities like Lille, Reims, Soissons, etc were abandoned without any attempts to defend them. I do have the descriptions, both French and German, of the battle for the town of Longlier. I will post these as soon as I get a chance. Basically, all sides held the notion that small villages and towns should be defended from the edge closest to the enemy. Loopholing of buildings and barricades in the streets were the preferred methods of defense. I think there was a strong concern about being enveloped, given the relatively poor communications systems in the heat of battle.

Robert

[armchairgeneral]

I notice both British and German forces had a lot of field artillery as part of their divisional organisations to the extent of a battery for every battalion. I appreciate some of this would be deployed at a distance from the front line to give "off table" fire support but I was wondering to what extent this artillery would be deployed in a front line direct fire support role?

I have read accounts at First Ypres of gun sections of two being deployed up at the front but less so entire batteries. I suppose what I am getting to is if one were to deploy a brigade of say 6 German battalions on the wargame table, it seems a bit ludicrous to also have 6 batteries going in with them as well. So how many batteries would be realistic?

[monk2002uk]

In the last example when the charge is attempted, the enemy are able to be very effective in their shooting as they are shooting at targets in the clear, and are not under suppressing fire.

I'm not sure I've really seen a rule set factor in fire and movement that well...

FWIIW, 'charge' might not be quite the right description. More like a rapid advance across several hundred metres to contact. The French forces were at least 700 metres from the Germans, probably more. This distance would be too far for what was normally referred to as a charge.

With fire and movement, my personal view is that it should not be modelled specifically but should flow from the basic mechanics of the game.

Robert

[monk2002uk]

...descriptions, both French and German, of the battle for the town of Longlier.

Here is the German description from the 88th Infantry Regiment's history:

"The attack by 5th and 8th Companies developed as if on the parade ground. Their advance was then partially held up by wire fences around the paddocks. The obstacles were overcome with a variety of implements, including wire cutters, spades, bayonets, and pickaxes. The leading riflemen could hear the incessant soft chirping sound of enemy bullets but they couldn't see their opponents. Captain Zickendraht, the commander of 8th Company / 88th IR, was seriously wounded by small arms fire. His company pushed ahead undeterred, with the 5th Company / 88th IR continuing to be further forward. Suddenly the air was filled with a shrill then eerily hollow whistling noise followed by a loud, metallic cracking sound. The battalion was under hostile artillery fire but this only accelerated the attack. When Major Schmidt detected an enemy position south of Longlier, he pushed the 6th Company to the left of the 8th.

Near the entrance to Longlier, a German cavalry patrol consisting of Jager zu Pferde and hussars was rescued. They had been bravely defending a farmstead against an enemy cyclist detachment after their horses had been shot down. German artillery had set Longlier on fire. The right flank platoon of 5th Company / 88th IR pushed forward as ordered to a wood that was lying half-right on a hill. There it made contact with the (left flank) Company von Hirschfeld (6th Company) from the Brigade Regiment (87th IR, the other regiment in the 41st Brigade of 21st Infantry Division). This meant that 5th Company was able to move left again, taking the two men wounded by artillery fire, and head towards Longlier to join in the battle. The enemy appeared to have machine guns because the automatic rapid rate of fire, which the German machine guns could not achieve, was clearly heard from certain directions above the din of the battle.

Having deployed, the companies now commenced the firefight. The air was rent with the loud German musketry. As the enemy's fire diminished, Oberleutnant Eger strained to get his 6th Company's skirmish line forward. The men at the front refused to get up. The "Fix bayonets!" signal rang out. Then the village was stormed! The leutnants rushed ahead of their platoons with swords drawn. The assault parties cheered as they entered the village. Savage house-to-house fighting broke out wherever the enemy resisted stubbornly. Individual fanatical civilians joined in, to whom no quarter was given. The cyclist battalion, which had defended Longlier, fell back. They pressed between the burning buildings in Longlier, rushing through our men. Enfilade fire then struck our left flank."

Robert

[monk2002uk]

And here is information from the French perspective. It comes from the war diary of the cyclist company attached to 9th Cavalry Division:

"The Advance Guard of the 9th Cavalry Division moved towards Neufchâteau via Straimont. A troop from 3rd Dragoons formed the point. At Straimont, the Captain learned that a squadron from the 2nd Hussars (4th Cavalry Division) had been engaged [earlier] in the morning in Neufchâteau against German cavalry, to the disadvantage of the latter. Once the northern exit of Neufchâteau was made secure, the company advanced towards Longlier. The company reached the town, following behind Squadrons Bossut  and Pastourel that had been sent on ahead to reconnoitre with two cyclist sections under the commands of l’adjutant Vadel and l’adjutant en chef Leprince respectively.

On exiting Longlier, the men were stopped by fire from dismounted [German] uhlans; Squadron Bossut dismounted with Cyclist Section Sontay to the north of the road, facing the woods 1,500 m northwest of Longlier. The woods had been organised for defence by the enemy [which may be a reference to the triangular wood that was mentioned in the account of the German 87th Infantry Regiment]. Section Fertaud (2nd Platoon) prolonged the line to left with Lieutenant Filippi; 1st Platoon deployed to the right of 2nd Platoon south of the road, with part of a section on the road towards the bridge. The machine gun section from 1st Dragons came into the line north of the road with 2nd Platoon.

At 1230 hours the Officer Commanding (OC) cyclist group realised that he is was being strongly engaged and had some concerns about his left flank. Also the ... of the enemy infantry was progressing from Lahérie towards Hamipré [threatening to outflank Longlier to the south). An order was given to Brigade Séréville to push to the left of the cyclist group and the battalion of the 89th [Infantry Regiment] to filter along the railway line to counter-attack the enemy in his flank while he is trying to outflank Longlier by the south. A[n infantry] company was held back at Offaing. The 3rd Battery moved into position north of Hamipré, near Hamipré - Longlier road.

The unit continued to resist for some time but [it became impossible to hold on], 2 sections had run out of ammunition, and the group fell back towards the north exit out of Neufchâteau onto a hill overlooking the [Longlier] station. The Cyclist Engineers section created a barricade at the top of the road with an embankment of wood and earth. Only 3 sections were deployed on this narrow terrain feature; the other sections were positioned off to the side, ready to counter-attack."

The cyclists suffered minimal casualties. Their withdrawal from Longlier after a prolonged firefight was facilitated by the support from the 25th Dragoons Regiment:

At that moment, the Brigade was ordered to go back through Neufchâteau, then along the road to Semel and take up positions on the left flank of the chasseur cyclists, who had been overwhelmed [clearly not the case] trying to defend Longlier and were having great difficulty in falling back. The Brigade traversed Neufchâteau at the trot, with 24th Dragoons at the head, took the road to Semel and stopped at the turn in the road, near the cemetery.

2nd Squadron (Bellegarde)... dismounted behind hedges and advanced towards Longlier over the slope, which was exposed to the northwest, to get closer to the cyclists left flank. The squadron ended up about 5-600 meters from the horses. Having seen that there was a very large gap separating [2nd Squadron from] the neighbouring squadron, the General moved a squadron from the 25th (Poucher) in between; the horses were left with those of Squadron Bellegarde and [the men] advanced over the same slope, except that the troop on the left was at the bottom of the opposite slope. Once the line was established, the General reconnoitred the road in the direction of Recogne and found a troop from 4th Cavalry Division that was returning to the division. He ordered [the troop commander] to apprise GOC 4th Cavalry Division of the situation and to provide whatever help [4th Cavalry Division] could give to [16th Dragoon Brigade] left flank. The troop went off down the main road. Having seen that the troop got away without incident, the General concluded that it was possible to extend the left. The two sections behind our squadrons on the right and one to the east of the town were firing continuously. The cycling group, supported by our action, had managed to fall back from Longlier to the north side of Neufchâteau."

It goes to show how important it is to triangulate as many sources as possible with respect to any action.

Robert

[monk2002uk]

I have read accounts at First Ypres of gun sections of two being deployed up at the front but less so entire batteries. I suppose what I am getting to is if one were to deploy a brigade of say 6 German battalions on the wargame table, it seems a bit ludicrous to also have 6 batteries going in with them as well. So how many batteries would be realistic?

The answer depends on the type of battle being fought. Meeting engagements were relatively common in the lead up to First Ypres. Very often there would have been an all-arms advance guard, which would have included a battery of field guns. Once forces were engaged then as much artillery would be brought to bear as possible. In the lead up to Mons, for example, the two German divisions advancing on Nimy and Obourg discovered the BEF defenders. The artillery was ushered forward and set up on the higher ground north of these two towns. This included the heavy howitzers as well as the field artillery batteries.

By First Ypres, neither side was keen to push batteries forward. It did happen but mostly guns were kept in defilade cover. FOOs could not be far from their respective batteries. Hence when the Germans broke through at Nonne Bosschen then the 60 pounders previously in defilade were brought into action in direct fire mode.

Robert

[SaltBrushBill]

I think Stephen has been reading too may accounts of the quality of the Australians written by Australians!

The old regular army of 1914, who learned to shoot to get their beer money, was nothing like any other army or the post- 1914 British Army: the long and slowly gained skills disappeared in the opening battles.   I find WW1 gaming, certainly for the Western Front, pretty well impossible except at skirmish level - trench raiding and such like - and nothing captured the feel of what was needed by individual men.   I can only regret that I did not talk more to the elderly gentlemen I knew as a boy - not, I suspect that they would have talked to me or anyone else about what they had seen and experienced.   My wife's grandfather was an Old Contemptible, Grenadier Guards, tall and very upright and able to sink a pint with the best till he died.

[monk2002uk]

Here is a battle map showing the advance of the German infantry divisions on Nimy and Obourg. It is taken from the German official history of the Battle of Mons. This is the relevant text from the official history, which Holger and I translated then published as 'The Battle of Mons: The Official German Account'. I have highlighted the key sentence for this post:

"Shortly after 0900 hours IX Corps approached the Canal du Centre northeast of Mons in four parallel march columns. The right column of 18th Division, which comprised the reinforced 35th Brigade, had reached the Champ des Manoeuvres southwest of Casteau at that time. The reinforced 36th Brigade formed the left column, which had reached St. Denis. The 17th Division’s reinforced 33th Brigade marched to Ville sur Haine and the reinforced 34th Brigade headed towards Thieu.

Dragoon Regiment 16, which was 17th Division’s cavalry, reconnoitred ahead and found the canal crossings defended by weak enemy forces. The information was sent back to the division. The artillery was immediately given preference over the infantry march columns and was brought forward into position. The enemy forces, British cavalry, withdrew from the area after a few shots. The dragoons advanced aggressively, easily capturing the intact bridges.

Around 1000 hours, General von Quast (commanding IX Corps) ordered both divisions to advance to the canal crossings. 18th Division’s objectives were the bridges between the Obourg-Mons road. 17th Division was directed to the crossings from La Bruyere up to Bracqeugnies. The divisions were instructed not to go beyond the line Nimy - southwest corner of the woods west of the Obourg-Mons road - the southern edge of the Bois d'Havre - Bois du Rapois in the first instance.

The brigades from 17th Division completed the crossing without incident and reached the objective line under the protection of batteries deployed in an overwatch position. 18th Division, however, struck fierce enemy resistance.

Generalleutnant von Kluge directed the right column towards the crossings northwest and northeast of Nimy, while the left column was ordered towards the bridges south of Obourg. All of the artillery was available to support the infantry advance. It was positioned along the high ground around Maisieres and southwest of St. Denis.

Opposite 36th Brigade it was discovered that the British were defending the Obourg railway building located south of the canal and had occupied the edge of the forest running west from there. Further west again, the enemy had expertly entrenched themselves in a position that was difficult to spot. Located about 500 meters northwest of St. Denis, two batteries of II Abteilung Field Artillery Regiment 45 opened fire on the bridge area and on the defenses that had been detected. Under this covering fire, infantry from Infantry Regiment 85 approached Obourg. Third Battalion came under heavy rifle fire from the occupied railway buildings opposite, which prevented any further advance towards the bridge. The batteries were too far back to destroy the obstacles blocking the infantry’s advance. The divisional commander ordered an artillery section forward. Despite the intense enemy fire, Leutnant Petersen and two men succeeded in bringing a field gun into position. Unfortunately a house still blocked the field of fire to the British outpost. With a few shots this obstacle was cleared. Several shells were then fired at the other railway building, which soon collapsed in on itself like a house of cards."

Robert

[huevans]

I would love to use Paul Hicks' Mutton Chop 28mm figures to fight 1914, but the game seems almost unplayable. Huge ranges. Straight-on tactics. And a slow long-range contest for fire superiority. This has neither the appeal of Napoleonic / ACW close-range mass maneuver, nor WW2 / Modern close range small unit high firepower.

Can anyone suggest how to make 1914 interesting to game?

As it is, it seems I need a table 40' long and 2' wide and 100 turns of just pushing the offensive side forward against a static, entrenched defence and hoping that off table artillery rolls will kill enough defenders to allow the attackers to close and charge.

[Shawnt63]

huevans, I can tell you, from my perspective, that Great War Spearhead gives a great game. It is both playable and enjoyable, but it is designed around Division/Corps level. It is not beer and pretzels gaming, you need to take a few moments to figure out what you are trying to do and how you are going to do it. (I am the author by the way and Robert and I have also produced 4 scenario books to support the period).  Most of our tables are 4 x 6, but that is using 6 to 20mm figures. I would suggest that at 28mm you would want to increase the distance by a third for all measurement so you would likely want an 6 x 8 table. You can play a divisional sized game in 2 to 3 hours once you are read up on the rules.

The game works very well in both open warfare and trench warfare. There are a lot of added rules specifically for trench warfare but again I will say up front that they give a superb feel of the period and reflect well on the historical use of tactics. In other words if you plan well, and then execute the plan you have a good chance of victory on the table - just like in real life.

From where I sit I feel that most skirmish rules, miss completely the nuance that WWI has, and through my own tooling about, reading, discussing and playing, I find that the scale of GWSHII lends itself perfectly to the period - not that the rules are perfect, everyone has their own slant, but if you play them as written, I believe you will get a great feel of the period.

But I can only speak of my own perspective, I am sure others would gain say me on some points above, but I will again say it is my perspective/opinion not right or wrong, just mine.
Shawn

[monk2002uk]

I would love to use Paul Hicks' Mutton Chop 28mm figures to fight 1914, but the game seems almost unplayable.

heuvans, you have provided a very accurate summary of WW1 small unit actions. Most rules that are available for skirmish style actions get around this in various ways. You can tell, however, that the mechanics are not quite right when two equal size forces can go head-to-head on table and the attacker can win. It makes for fun games, which is absolutely fine.

When you examine the Battle of Mons, for example, then it is possible to zoom in on some of the small unit firefights. Nimy is a classic for wargaming. The canal is represented on table, with the Germans attacking frontally towards the railway and the road bridge (if the latter is included). In reality, the Nimy defensive position was unlocked by a combination of frontal pinning and an outflanking manoeuvre. German units quickly realised that the BEF position would require a difficult, costly, and lengthy frontal assault. A German pioneer found an alternative route across the canal between Nimy and Obourg. German infantry began filtering across unopposed. Facing the threat of being outflanked, the Nimy defenders fell back.

The canal crossing succeeded, in part, because the Middlesex Regiment was defending around Obourg. They couldn't react because their positions were under heavy threat, including another outflanking manoeuvre further east again. These two examples illustrate how the ultimate success of the German attack was dictated by the higher level tactical advantages. This is characteristic of many WW1 battles in 1914, with success being achieved by outmanoeuvring rather than outshooting the enemy. This is why I like the higher level of Great War Spearhead. You will see the prolonged firefights breaking out in some areas of the battlefield. It is easy to get drawn into these engagements, reinforcing 'failure'. The challenge is to identify and then exploit where the terrain and enemy dispositions give you the best advantage. Get this right and you will more quickly whittle away and then overwhelm an exposed flank or equivalent. Only to find that your reserves won't get moving to exploit the opportunity... 

Robert

[huevans]

Thanks, gents! Looks like Great War Spearhead is the game of choice. But those pretty MC 28's are probably going to have to be supplanted by a scale that looks better for a division level game!

[armchairgeneral]

Thanks, gents! Looks like Great War Spearhead is the game of choice. But those pretty MC 28's are probably going to have to be supplanted by a scale that looks better for a division level game!

I reckon it is do-able using 28s. Just scale it down a bit to say 12 - 16 figures to represent a battalion. I was thinking of using Black Powder with a few minor adaptations. Inspired by this:-

http://talesfromghq.blogspot.co.uk/2016/12/it-will-be-over-by-christmas.html

http://talesfromghq.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/oh-oh-oh-what-lovely-war.html

[MartinR]

You don't need that many, my GWSH battalions only have eight figures (four stands of two each), which looks fine.

There isn't much point having huge battalions as the stands come flying off the table once the shooting starts...

I would humbly submit that 1914 is best gamed at Corps level as you've actually got a chance for some manouvre. Works for me anyway.

[janner]

I reckon it is do-able using 28s. Just scale it down a bit to say 12 - 16 figures to represent a battalion. I was thinking of using Black Powder with a few minor adaptations. Inspired by this:-

Yes, I've gone down this route, but my battalions are 19 figures strong (4 stands of 4 figures and a command stand of 3 figures). The sources do naturally draw one to company level actions, but you do need to play at formation level to get the feel of 1914 manoeuvre, I think.