A French Revolutionary Wars project in 15mm

[OB]

I got a copy of Phillip Balls Neither Up Nor Down.  It proved to be the tipping point for a new French Revolutionary Wars project.

The bulk of the infantry figures are coming from Lancashire Games archived Revolutionary Wars range.  A very cost effective choice.
I’m aiming to have Coalition, French and Vendee forces on the table top.

If it’s of interest you can see my progress here.

https://youdonotknowthenorth.blogspot.com

[Chad]

Good to see increasing interest in this neglected period. I have 15mm forces for French, Austrian, Prussian, British and Hanoverian. The major issue is a good set of rules that give more than lip service to the period.

[OB]

Thanks Chad.  I'm looking at how to represent the subsidy troops and the Dutch. 

I agree about the flavour of the period there were a lot of interesting things happening on the battle field.

[duc de limbourg]

As already mentioned, it is always good to see figures and games for this great period, so thanks for showing

[ChrisBBB]

Looking good! I particularly like those grenadiers.

In an act of shameless self-promotion, let me mention my own French Revolutionary endeavours. First, my translations (with Professor Nicholas Murray) of Clausewitz's histories of the 1796 and 1799 campaigns:
https://kansaspress.ku.edu/978-0-7006-2676-2.html
https://kansaspress.ku.edu/978-0-7006-3025-7.html
https://kansaspress.ku.edu/978-0-7006-3034-9.html

Next, the "Bloody Big BATTLES!" rules, originally written to fight Franco-Prussian War and other later C19 battles, but which have proven to work just fine for the 1790s and Napoleonics as well. Witness our game of Marengo earlier this year:
https://colinthewargamer.blogspot.com/2021/08/wargaming-in-real-world-again-bbb-1300.html
I also wrote a set of operational-level scenarios for the 1796 campaign which produced some interesting games. See the most recent one here (with links to the earlier ones):
http://bloodybigbattles.blogspot.com/2019/09/clausewitz-at-arcole.html

Chris

[Chad]

Chris

I have found that the general approach to gaming the period is that the period 1792-95 is not worth considering, probably because Bonaparte is not present. I have looked at several sets of well known rules advertised as 1792-1815 and found them nearly all lacking in any obvious understanding of the early period.

[ChrisBBB]

The 1790s generally seem strangely overlooked, don't they? It can't solely be the Bonaparte factor - the Peninsular War gets done to death without him. And it can't just be "no Brits involved" either: maybe "no victorious Brits"?

What do you regard as the distinctive features of the period that need to be reflected in the rules you use but are lacking in those you've looked at?

Chris

[Chad]

Chris

I think the following are important features:

1) Growth of the quality of the French army from 1791 to 1794. This to
    include the ex-Royal units as well as the Volunteers.
2) An understanding of the difference between the demi-brigade as a
    tactical formation and the Demi-brigade as a homogeneous 3 battalion
    unit, the forerunner of the Regiment,
3) The difficulty in establishing a reasonable level of competence in
     Commanders at Brigade level to Army..
4) Should Representatives on Mission be incorporated and how?
5) An understanding that the 1792 Regulations encompassed both Line
     and Column formations and training incorporated both.
6) Recognising that individual units could and did panic at the drop of a hat.
7) Representation of tirailleur en debande.

All these I am trying to bring in to my own rules.

Chad

[Chad]

Chris

The view of “non-victorious British” being a possible cause of lack of interest
is probably true. However the background to and detail of the British involvement needs  to be understood before anyone should form that view. There are several new books devoted to that campaign which provide a number of insights in to the apparent failure.

Chad

[OB]

As already mentioned, it is always good to see figures and games for this great period, so thanks for showing

Thanks Duc.  Some French next.

[OB]

Chris

I think the following are important features:

1) Growth of the quality of the French army from 1791 to 1794. This to
    include the ex-Royal units as well as the Volunteers.
2) An understanding of the difference between the demi-brigade as a
    tactical formation and the Demi-brigade as a homogeneous 3 battalion
    unit, the forerunner of the Regiment,
3) The difficulty in establishing a reasonable level of competence in
     Commanders at Brigade level to Army..
4) Should Representatives on Mission be incorporated and how?
5) An understanding that the 1792 Regulations encompassed both Line
     and Column formations and training incorporated both.
6) Recognising that individual units could and did panic at the drop of a hat.
7) Representation of tirailleur en debande.

All these I am trying to bring in to my own rules.

Chad

That's pretty much the list I'm working to as well Chad.  On point 4, I'd say it's a key point to be included.

I'd noticed your translations before Chris and hope to add them to my library.

[Chad]

My intended game scale is too small for the Representatives with Division being the highest command. At the moment my version 7A of my rules are going well under test, although the game mechanics are too slow. Version 8 will test some new mechanics to hopefully speed them up without losing anything.

[SJWi]

Chad, fascinated with the comment about “non victorious British”. As I understand things the British involvement in the War of the 1st Coalition was pretty limited, albeit some fighting in the West Indies. Later in the decade we see the Egyptian campaign which is quite well covered as a wargames period. I will admit that the 1799 invasion of the Batavian Republic was a shambles!

[Chad]

There are engagements of varying sizes and results involving the British between 1793-95. There were several factors involved that had a significant impact on performance over and above the Duke of York’s ability as a field
Commander. The following are examples:

1) the quality of the British army had deteriorated since the end of the AWI.
    Sir John Fortescue is scathing in his consideration of how the government
     Caused this.
2) The initial forces were 3 service battalion from the 1st, 2nd and 3rd
     guards. Their operational orders were severely restricted by the
     Government who were only interested in protecting their trading
     Situation.
3). The greater involvement of the British was at the request of the Austrian
     High command and the Duke had to obtain permission from the
     Government before he could confirm involvement
4) The Austrian s retained had full operational control odder the Duke’s
     actions and ultimately left him stranded when they decided to withdraw
     From Flanders.

The mentioned the West Indies involvement. At one point a number of battalions were sent to Flanders as reinforcements but no sooner had they landed they were removed from Flanders and shipped to the West Indies.

[NickNascati]

OB,
       I’m focusing on the revolts in the Vendee and Brittany, also in 15mm, using Old Glory miniatures.  Sticking with smaller scale skirmish level games, maybe even some Scarlet Pimpernel style role playing.  The characters alone make it an interesting period.