Best book on the battles of the RCW?

[Red Dragon 44]

I am looking for a book on the battles of the Russian Civil War so I can turn the battles into scenarios for a set of rules on the RCW in the Dominion of the Spear series of rules. Ideally for each battle there would be a map or diagram showing the deployments, and indication of the troops on both sides, and a description of what happened in the battle. Does such a book exist in English? Hopefully extending into the Baltic States and Poland.

[Mark Plant]

No such book exists. Nothing even close.

The normal method of attack in the Russian Civil War was an outflanking move. I'm unconvinced a set of rules like Dominion of the Spear is suitable as a result. WWI trench warfare it was not.

[Inkpaduta]

Being a big fan of the RCW I can say that I have never found one. The best you can find are campaign level with
a lot of politics thrown in.

[Red Dragon 44]

Disappointing on the book front but not really unexpected. I would still like to have a stab at it with the Dominion of the Spear rules. I have managed to use the (modified) system for Ancients, Renaissance, Marlborough, French-Indian War, AWI, Frederick the Great, Napoleonics, and Otto von Bismarck, only I am struggling to use it for WW1 naval! A specific question though - 5th August 1918 when the Czech Legion soldiers advanced on Kazan, the Latvians came out to meet them accompanied by Serbians. I was surprised to read that when the Serbians opened fire they fired at the Latvians instead of at the Czechs. Now I get that many units in the RCW were pretty unreliable, but firing at your own side? Was this common in the RCW?

[armchairgeneral]

If there is a book, Cuprum will know. With his sources it would be great if he could write a wargamers guide to WW1 Eastern Front and RCW 

For WW1 Eastern Front I have found some very good narratives but nothing with much battle detail below divisional level.

[Mark Plant]

Cuprum knows more than anyone on the RCW, but I'm not sure that books in English is his sphere. 

Now I get that many units in the RCW were pretty unreliable, but firing at your own side? Was this common in the RCW?

Changing sides was fairly frequent, both at unit and personal levels. It was usually associated with shooting the officers or commissars whwn whole units went over.

The Samurskiy Regiment was entirely ex-Red Army, at least in the ranks.

Some changed sides multiple times (e.g. the Bashkirs).

[Dave Knight]

Following with Interest.  I have acquired 10mm armies for the Polish/Soviet war of much the same period.  Any sort of detail on the period as a whole would be much appreciated

[Mark Plant]

There's a lot more detail easily available on the Polish war battles, down to company level movements for some. It is all in Polish though.

I have translated some that have taken my fancy, especially around the Battle of Warsaw : www.pygmywars.com.

The issue with the Polish war is uniforms and flags for the Poles. That intimidates me, and I love researching this stuff.

In English there is only the Davies and Zamoyski books on the war as a whole. I don't recommend the translation of Pilsudski's "Year 1920" until you understand the period a bit more, but it does have nice maps if you get the right version.

[HerbertTarkel]

Canada sent a force to assist the Whites; this is the official DHH report:

https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/themes/defence/caf/militaryhistory/dhh/reports/ahq-reports/ahq082.pdf

[HerbertTarkel]

I studied RCW at university in Canada; I used to have a huge collection of English books but no longer do. Amazon has some possible hits, I see some that are memorable.

Most of what I studied was from the Mennonite Brethren Bible College translations, I focused on the formation of “selbstschutzen”; why would pacifist Mennonites after 400 years take up arms against the Reds in particular? My great-grandfather was one who did so. I have a photo of him in his WW1 medic uniform with buddies, but then I know he helped to defend his village against the Reds.

Part of a tradition of Ukrainians fighting against Russian invasion that continues to today …

[cuprum]

You can read about the participation of Russian Germans in the Civil War here:

https://geschichte-rusdeutsch-ru.translate.goog/18/59?_x_tr_sl=ru&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=ru&_x_tr_pto=wapp

I would say that the Mennonites have more serious traditions of fighting against the Ukrainian peasantry, united in the Ukrainian Insurgent Army of Makhno. It was simply a fierce mutual hatred 

[Red Dragon 44]

As I try writing up some battles for my new set of solo rules Dominion of the Red and White how do these army lists look for the Battle of C?sis June 1919?
German: 1x unreliable Cavalry (skirmishing), 2x elite Infantry (Freikorps Iron Division), 2x Infantry (Baltic Landeswehr), 1x unreliable Artillery
Estonian and Latvian: 1x elite Infantry (Kuperjanov Partisan Division), 1x fortified Infantry (Estonians in village), 2x unreliable Infantry (Latvians), 1x Armoured Train.
In Dominion all armies are built on 12 points with armies consisting of 3-6 “units”. A basic unit costs 2 points, unreliable -1 points, elite or fortified +1 points for each. Armoured Trains cost 4 points.
Are these army lists wildly inaccurate?

[Mark Plant]

The Baltic Landeswehr were better than the Iron Division. There is no reason to make the Iron Division elite. Not sure why their artillery is bad though.

If you mix Estonians and Latvians, then the Estonians are the dominant force. The Estonians were not the defenders, so why do they get a village?

[Red Dragon 44]

Thanks for replying, Mark, I really appreciate it. So, in the Dominion set of rules the ratings of elite, normal, and unreliable are all relative terms for the troops in that particular battle, and in no way an absolute rating. I quite accept that nearly all troops in these conflicts normally ranged from poor to the really really poor.

So, in the simplest terms, we have the Iron Division and the Baltic Landeswehr pushing back the Latvians and then the Estonians arrive to the rescue. Assuming the Latvians are the worst troops and are defending their villages etc. how about:

Estonian and Latvian: 1x elite Infantry (Kuperjanov Partisan Division), 2x unreliable fortified Infantry (Latvians defending villages), 1x unreliable Infantry (Latvians), 1x Armoured Train.

And, are the Baltic Landeswehr much better than the Iron Division or there is not much in it? It is a bit tricky with the constraint of 12 points (and maximum of 6 units) but how about:
German: 1x unreliable Cavalry (skirmishing), 3x Infantry (Freikorps Iron Division), 1x elite Infantry (Baltic Landeswehr), 1x Artillery.
Or
 German: 1x unreliable Cavalry (skirmishing), 2x Infantry (Freikorps Iron Division), 2x Infantry (Baltic Landeswehr), 1x Artillery but this still leaves 1 point to use.

Was their artillery notably effective against the Estonian armoured trains? I made the Artillery unreliable because, as I understand it, the Estonian troops and trains won which sort of implies that it wasn't.

[Mark Plant]

The Estonians won because they were much more committed.

The Latvians didn't really exist as an army at this point. There were two small groups, one formed around the Freikorps (which was deprived of any chance to recruit and equip properly) and an even smaller group under Estonian protection (who had to take whatever they could, given that the Estonians weren't exactly overflowing with equipment, but at least weren't actively hampered).

The Iron Division had lost heart that their enterprise had any chance of success. They had originally thought that they would defeat the Reds and take control of Latvia, never letting the Latvians have any chance to form their own state. They were flummoxed when the Estonians turned up to vehemently oppose them.

The Baltic Landeswehr were committed to Latvia long term, which is why they soon afterwards changed sides.

It's a while since I was last looking at this, but I don't remember the Estonian trains being particularly aggressive. The Freikorps was pretty well equipped and trained, so I would suspect their artillery was fine.