"Quality of Bavarian Infantry" Topic

Hi ya'll,
I'm a first time poster here, and new to Napoleonics as well (well, as a player, not as an enthusiast). My gaming club has decided to devote a lot of time to the era and with such an incentive, I'm considering collecting a Bavarian division, modeled on GM Wrede's from the 1809 campaign. We play Empire 5th Edition.

I only have gaming source material printed for Empire 3rd Edition and scenarios for Grande Armee, which rate Bavarian infantry rather differently in terms of quality. Can anyone give me an idea of how they compare to that of the major powers?

As an aside, I'm saving up to buy Gill's "With Eagles to Glory" and the Osprey "Napoleon's German Allies: Bavaria", but I'm concerned these may not have the information I need to accurately assign quality ratings in our wargames. I have bought books about the Napoleonic Wars in the past that failed to address this topic.

I admit my biggest fear is to find out that these guys with really neat helmets are actually a rabble in arms, but either way I want to get my facts straight.

Thanks!

They are pretty much about average, nothing special about them at all. However, they are the largest of the German states.

In Russia they had about the worst attrition rate of all the nations that went in. That German sausage and good life made them a little soft for arduous long campaigning ;-p

In all honesty, go with Empire III ratings. They were mediocre in the field. They weren't anywhere near the quality of the French (except maybe in 1813).

Steve
the-d-d.net

PS I don't think that you will find the Osprey book all that informative for what you want. I wish I could refer you to something that would give you that information. Maybe we can both learn where you could get that from.

I've been reading the Gill series of books on the 1809 campaign and the Bavarians seem to perform fairly well, or at least better than the Austrians whom they are fighting. So I would rate them better than mediocre, perhaps on par with some of the French line infantry, but certainly a notch or two below the more veteran French line regiments such as the units in Davout's corps.

You might take a look at the Osprey Campaign Series book on Eggmuhl for information about the Bavarians in that campaign.

Don't worry about quality. Just paint and collect them. The Bavarians are a great army to own – you can fight almost anybody. Sometime, if you're allied to the French player, just switch sides with only a turn's warning. He'll love that.

Great uniforms, lots of battle history (you can fight Tyrolean rebels, even), and you'll have the challenge of commanding an army that is the equal (or slight inferior) of its opponents.

I had a small Neapolitan/Italian army years ago in 15mm, and have always regretted selling it off. It was a lot of fun to push around the table.

Quality : As all regular Infantry, it would depend on the leader to get the best out of them.

Avoid the super light blue – for the coast, in reality they were much darker, for painting a lot of questions will be served looking at Cantler which is on line at

link

I found the Osprey of hardly any use at all.

In 1809 they were better than mediocre – keep saving for Jack Gill's "With Eagles to Glory", its the book you need.

The Gill book you are considering will provide most of the information you need. In addition I would highly recommend the other Gill series on the 1809 campaign. There are a couple of battles in the beginning of the 1809 campaign where the Bavarian commanders far out preformed the Austrians and allowed the Bavarian infantry and cavalry to function very well in a combined arms scenario.

We've recently fought most of the early 1809 Austrian vs Bavarian battles using a variation of CLS (very tactical) rules where the Bavarians were able to outfight the Austrians on every field under a competent commander.

Some members of this forum will deride both nationalities but the Bavarians of the time had a distinct command advantage under the French Corps system. CLS rules (units are purchased using a point system) give a player who understands the tactical advantages and disadvantages of either nation an equal chance to be victorious without the artificial ratings many rules sets impose. The smaller Bavarian battalions are more flexible than Austria's larger battalions and when combined with the Bavarian's internal grenadier company and the organization of Bavarian Brigades (which included a battalion of lights) at the time gives them a fair advantage within the CLS system that favors combined arms. …Just my opinion mind you. Will

"…the soldiers of King Max served their French Emperor well. If perhaps not as vigourous and durable as the Württembergers or as impetuous as the French themselves, they proved solid, courageous, reliable soldiers. And they were well led Deroy was a competent veteran, and Wrede, for all his ambition and obstreperous independence, was a valuable leader on the battlefield. Even the difficult Crown Prince, guided by the able Raglovich performed satisfactorily. The cavalry brigadiers are also worthy of note; all three, particularly von Seydewitz and von Preysing, demonstrated a keen eye for the tactical situation and a sure ability to motivate their troopers. The infantry was steady, the cavalry determined in the attack (if not always wise on the defence) and the artillery both brave and capable. Moreover, all three arms displayed an excellent grasp of flexible tactical manoeuvre. Their weaknesses included outpost duty, marching (with serveral notable exceptions, they never matched the feats of the French and the Württembergers), commanders´initative (such as on 19 Aril) and command and control (Wrede on 0 April for example); they also acquired an unpleasant reputation for being hard on the local populations wherever they were quartered. Many of these 'weaknesses' however, can be laid at the doors of the French superiors (e.g., Lefebvre and even Napoleon) and should not blind us to the value of the Bavarians as soldiers. Indeed, inspired by leaders such as Wrede at his best, the Bavarians performed marvellously under trying circumstances (e.g., his attack on Pfeffenhausen on 20/21 April or his pursuit of Jellacic) Napoleon and the French owed no little debt to the fidelity an valour of the Bavarian soldiers in 1809"

The Bavarians summed up by Gill in "With Eagles to Glory", doesn't read like a description of "mediocre" troops to me.

An excellent choice of army I think, though the difficulties in getting good info on them is understandably offputting to most.

You get to play the only '2 rank' army outside the peninsula. Part of the Wrede & Deroy updates of 1804, they definitely had their own characteristics which seems largely overlooked in most Napoleonics.

link has some info around page 210 for organisation that doesnt need to know more than a couple of military words in german to decipher.

In English there is just about only Gill, priceless though he is.

Hi
I would rate the Bavarians as average, but capable of "going the extra yard". A good solid wargaming army certainly,..
I wouldn't call them "mediocre".
You can see my Bavarians here:
link
Cheers

Aye, average and solid but nothing to write home about. They were capable and able to fight well but no better or worse than most other average troops.

but then you could say that about most troops of the period typical of standard line regiments.

If you want to build a large army that is still within the budget the Bavarians are the way to go. Having a standing army of 60,000 men in 1809-1812 is an awesome number of soldiers to build a fantastic looking army for.

p.s. their uniforms and colouring make them very attractive on the field also. Love those checkered flags also.

Shane

IIRC, Bruce Quarrie in his book "Napoleon's Campaigns in Miniature" rated the Bavarians as impetuous, rather like Highlanders (dear old Bruce – he did love his national characteristics, and it was the 1970s…..). He did not quote any source, or examples, and I have always wondered where he got that from, as it doesn't gel with anything written or quoted in the posts on this thread, or what I've read in Gill (WETG).

The early part of the 1809 campaign has them operating in small groups of cavalry squadrons and the schutzen detachments of line infantry battalions. To get the best out of the Bavarians, IMO you need a ruleset below the grand tactical level – something like "General de Brigade" where the different regimental/battalion organisation can be observed (and the two-rank line). Be aware that they did not adopt the six-company French battalion organisation until 1811.

trailape,

Been looking at your site. What line is your Bavarians? I'm not seem much out there in 15mm.

…never mind. Haven't had my coffee this morning. Helps if I read! AB.

Reviewing the Empire rules I do detect a fair degree of biase in the troop classifications; the rules do seem to be the product of a francophile.

As someone who is working on the same project I would suggest that the Bavarians should be treated as solid trained troops. Drop out one horse battery and you've pretty much got a Bavarians Division for 1812, before General di Buonaparte started stripping away the cavalry to other non-Bavarian formations.

Gill's "WIth Eagles to Glory" is first class. You will also need to save for his 3 volume (2 currently published) "1809" series. If you want something a little cheaper but only covering the campaign in Bavaria in April try James Arnold's "Crisi on the Danube" This is the same period as vol 1 of Gill. Bowden's book on the Armies of 1809 is worth adding to you collection at some time too. See I can praise Bowden where appropriate :)

Reviewing the Empire rules I do detect a fair degree of biase in the troop classifications; the rules do seem to be the product of a francophile.

Yup. My experience with "Empire" was the French are always great and everyone else except the British are rubbish. The author is a HUGE Francophile.

I'm also building Wrede Division at the moment. (well, a friend of mine does the painting)

Maybe I can sway you with pretty pictures

Superb force (and great flags), and can be used for or against Napoleon, a wise choice to collect imho.

link

link

Before I say this I cannot believe I am actually defending Empire but here goes…

Yes the system is weighted towards the French especially Grand-Tactically but for good reason. The French under their system of warfare did pretty good against the Allies up until 1809 especially under the watchful eye of Napoleon if on the field.

However, if you look closely at the "tactical" level of the rules and compare unit stats the Allies do pretty well also, I have been on the receiving end of some of those stats which I thought were actually rated higher than I expected them to be.

Now, when you start playing battle post 1809 you see significant differences in the older allied armies compared to late war. Their ability to fight the French on an even keel is much closer (as it should).

I actually praise Scott Bowden for this system because he (and his group) understood why the French won and incorporated mechanics to suit those winning tactics and grand tactics into a system that had everything.

I commend him for designing a system that was and still is controversial. He took what Quarrie and his ilk had started and built on it in a better way encompassing a great deal more of the period to boot.

Although I do not play Empire anymore, I walked away very much liking many of his mechanics and the style of play. I did not always agree with his spin on things but his ideas gave a great deal of food for thought for others in the 25-30 years since they first came out.

But still, I cringe at the concept that Grand tactically the French can get 3 impulses of Bombardment much of the time while the allies are lucky to get two and most of the time in early battles only got one impulse. Couple this with the extreme fire discipline rating differences between Allied and French artillery and you find the French get a double dip into advantages over the allies…now THAT I did hate about the system.

Incidentally, a group of friends that I do not play with down here have made great changes to that system (Empire) that have improved the system markedly. I have to boast here because many of these changes came about from this group playing my system and liking it so much they modified Empire to match.

The most dramatic change they made was to make every hour broken up into 4 equal Impulses for both sides and also now allow units with BAD morale a chance to rally on board and keep fighting after reforming etc.

This group is the same group that Dave at the War depot writes up his campaign for:
link

Regards,
Shane

How to rate Bavarians partly depends how much granularity your rating system has. If it is elite, average, raw, then most Bavarians are solidly going to be 'average', apart from raw units…

aye, I agree,

Also, if you have a system (like mine) where you have revolving experience grades then a unit that starts a campaign RAW can end up Veteran then Elite after a period of time exposed in action.

This often happens in our games, a Bavarian line btln can climb up the experience ladder just as any other unit nationality. The advantage of this is that even if you have crap troops you can expect them to advance in our campaigns.

I faced veteran Landwehr several times and they were tough as nails when they became experienced.

Shane

Well, let me say your replies certainly encourage me to follow through on collecting Bavarians. In fact, I'm glad to hear that combined arms tactics were a strength of their army, because I partly chose them because I could get all three arms (even horse artillery) at the division level (I'm not ready to even think about commanding a corp).

Also I'll be sure to forget the Osprey book and focus on Gill's book.

So far I really like the Empire ruleset, but my introduction is an ongoing engagement between 1812 Russians and the Saxon corp of Napoleon's Grande Armee, so I can't speak of the French advantages from personal experience.

For comparison, Bavarian infantry in Empire III is better than Swiss and Italian infantry, worse than all the major powers, Wurttemburg, Polish, and Hessian infantry, and on par with the remaining Germain states. Does that sound about right? I too read something about them trouncing the Austrian early in 1809, maybe I can extrapolate something from that.

I had a Bavarian army and was pleasantly surprised when researching it. They were average to 1810, average to veteran into 1812, then average to poor thereafter (reflecting the fact that effectively the entire Bavarian army perished in Russia, and that disillusionment with Napoleon had really set in). Interesting army to recreate. It's quite possible to do the entire army if you really want to. They even took part in the 1815 campaign.

@ thegeneral

Yes, I read that only 68 men returned from Russia *chills*

Could you recommend any particular sources for research? I usually try to spend at least 3 months reading about a new army before I collect any figures, cost of books is the only inhibition.

I would rate the Bavarians, Poles, Württemberg, Italians, Hessians all the same, regular Infantry.

Ajbartman

"…never mind. Haven't had my coffee this morning. Helps if I read! AB".

And some Fantassin Miniatures, (from Spain).
Cheers

@Boomstick86.

With Eagles to Glory: Napoleon and his German Allies in the 1809 Campaign. Gill, John. (Section on Bavaria and generally interesting).

A Soldier for Napoleon: The Campaigns of Lt Franz Hausmann, 7th Bavarian Infantry. Trans Hausmann, Cynthia; Ed Gill, John. (All campaigns. Highly recommended. Written from a Bavarian point of view and quite candid. Very interesting also in that he reveals that the Grande Armee was starting to starve and fall apart even before the campaign actually started).

Napoleon's German Allies (4) Bavaria. Pivka, Otto von. (uniforms and general information)

The Bavarian Army 1805-14. Rawkins, WJ. (Uniforms, history and organisation).

The Armies of the Kingdom of Bavaria and the Grand Duchy of Wurzburg 1792-1815. Nafziger, GF. (History, some uniforms, organisation).

Sundry websites. Try Napoleon-online.de to see the Cantler illustrations.

@Boomstick86.

Also look at the General de Brigade (a set of rules) forum. There are a number of threads dealing with Bavaria there.

The best forum of all is the Napoleon series. There are a large number of extremely knowledgable posters there, including quite a few professional historians and other authors.

Shane

I would like to ask you a question about your improvement system. Did work just in one direction? Or is it possible that a unit would suffer lower ratings for its morale/quality due to battlefield attrition/performance?

(I am trying to figure it out some mechanism for campaigns that would reflect this particular issue; though I won't use it for Napoleonics, but for wars of Independence of South America. Therefore I would appreciate it if you would provide me with hindsights about how your group has managed the effects of a campaing in the morale/perfomance of the troops)

Thanks in advance.
Antonio

G'day mate.

Sure, happy to explain our system.

Basically I have the following Experience/Class ratings for troops:

A Class – Best of the Guard units
B/Elite – Other guards and best of the line units
B Class – Veterans units, experienced
C Class – Trained regular units
D Class – Raw, Conscripts or poor units
E Class – Militia and extremely poor units

Basically most troops of the line no matter which nation (even British) start as C Class trained. Some nations especially those who rush training or give their troops little training in certain periods start as D Class, examples are French Conscripts and Prussian Landwehr and so on.

Now, if for example you start out with a C Class trained unit at the beginning of a campaign they will be at FULL strength (paper strength). As they fight and die (campaign attrition from all causes) the lose men but gain experience. The generic and simple way we show this is by a cut off of losses of 20%. So when say a btln of men (C Class) numbering 800 men drop by 20% to 640 men they automatically become B Class Veterans.

Now, this new B Class Veteran unit of 640 men (16 figs in our rules) is considered to have a base strength of 640 men now, not 800. This means that in order to progress to B/Elite Crack status they have to drop another 20% but this time it is only 20% of 640 men or 128 men. Thus to reach B/Elite they must drop to 512 men (13 figs).

Or if you look at it from a 1:40 fug ratio it would be a simple formula as follows:

C Class – 20figs
B Class – 16figs
B/Elite – 13figs

Also, we never allow a line unit to advance more than 2 steps up the ladder, so a C Class unit can never get to A Class/ Elite guards.

But for example, a Prussian Landwehr unit which may start with 800 men at D Class can become b Class (Veterans) but they will be no stronger than 13 figs.

Now, for dillution back the other way it is the EXACT same formula as new recruits are aded back into that unit. If you have a B/Elite unit of 13 figs or less and you add 3new figs back into the ranks you will dillute that unit back down to B Class veterans and so on…this is very easy to understand and follow.

Another point also is how can you say for example get an 800 man C Class unit to stay at 800 men and get a status of B E/Elite?

Well, glad you asked, this is easy.

All of the above is based on a single btln unit. However, if that unit is part of a Regiment (only) and if the btlns of that regiment all climb up the ladder the same then you can disband say the last btln, add those men into the other btln and together, providing they are currently the same Morale status and their combined strength does not exceed that of the paper strength they can add up to become Veteran or even B/Elite at 800 men (20figs) strength. This sounds a little complicated and hard to explain but in practice it is really easy to follow and do.

This is how we get Crack, tough regiments like you read about in the history books, units that are regarded as a cut above the rest.

Shane

From a performance point of view we do this seperately, any unit that suffers a Rout during a battle will continue the rest of the battle on a -10% morale rating. This is only temporary for the duraction of that battle.

Also, a unit that defeats an enemy in melee breaking them etc gains a +10% morale bonus for the next turn only etc…

Broomstick, i have a large chunk of Bavarians, and have actualy fielded them much more than my French. One of the things I always like ablout them is that there is no doubt who they are when they are on the field. And they have alwauys been fun to play.

In fact, thank you for this thread, as all of mine are 1/72, and I am just starting to switch to 25mm for Sharp Practice and General de Brigade. Now I need to go see if Old Glory has them before my Army disvcount runs out.

ALl right just what I needed another new Army or at least in a new scale to collect! The joys of wargameing never stop do they?

Hello Boomstick86!

I've painted the entire Bavarian army in 6mm. Very impressive looking force. Gill is the man for 1809. Keep in mind that during this campaign they were fighting the Austrians who were invading their homeland. Pretty strong incentive to fight.

After 1812 the new army is pretty green, but then so is just about everybody else. So I would never rate Bavarians any lower then average.

Best regards,

Glenn

sometimes the 2 rank system of the bavarian is mentioned; I thought is wasn't used anymore in the 1809 campaign. Tought I read that in Gill. Someone correct me?

@ Badger22,

I'm glad to hear you use them so much; my biggest concern is that they are too specialized to be worth the investment, but I agree: the uniforms are great!

@ Glenn Pearce,
That's really impressive. Since I'm playing 15mm that may be prohibitive, but I'm really looking forward to fighting my division "in battle". Right now I'm learning with my Russians, and I certainly look forward to more colorful uniforms! In what rules do you field an entire corp strength army like that? Sounds fun.

Hello boomstick86

Although you can fit some big battles on most tables in a number of scales I think 6mm really lets you get into those big Napoleonic battles in a great way. We use Polemos Napoleonics from Baccus6mm. Visit their site and see just how great 6mm figures can look.

I presently have over 25,000 6mm Napoleonic figures that I have been collecting for at least 25 years. The Bavarian army is over 1,000 figures. I can field just about every battalion for a lot of the big battles.

It's better then fun. My group can't wait to play the next game. In the big games players will control a corps. Although at times there can be a lot of units on the table flanks are still very important. 6mm just allows you to put that extra depth in your games which translates to an extremely exciting game.

Should you ever want to know more just contact me at glennrpearce@hotmail.com

Best regards,

Glenn

The Bavrian army doesn't have too much in the way of published official or general staff history that addresses their organisation and tactics. So it is a little misty.

My main source about 2 ranks has been -:
"Geschichte des Bayerischen Heeres volume 6 part 1. Bayerischen Kriegsarchiv.
Geschichte des Königlich Bayerischen Heeres 1804 bis 1825
Dr Oskar Bezzel, München 1933"

In 1804
p197 Reglementskommision im noch Wrede, 20th April 1804 wie die Kompagnien exerzieren follen – Zum Exerzieren ruckte sie in 80 zweigliedrigen Rotten aus….

Thus in 1805 two ranks.
& the Schutzen stand separate to the rear of the company and seem to be expected to operate detached combined with others Schutzen.

Then in March 1809 we get -:
Nach diesen bestand der 5 Theil einer Kompagnie aus Schützen, von denen höchtens ein Fünftel mit Stitzen bewassnet wurde. Die keit 1801 aufgegebene Aufstellung der kompagnie in drei gliedern wurde erneut eingeführt. Das dritte Glied bestand nur aus Schützen und aus zum Tirailleuren besonders geeigneten Leuten, sog. Plänklern, die jedoch keine Abzeichen trugen…….

The Schutzen are back in greater number, along with the 'flankers' and are to be the third rank for massed fire combat; when they are not off being light infantry.

So unless someone has dug up something more concrete the answer for 2/3 ranks in 1809 seems to be 'kind of'.

:<

Thanks for this information about the 2/3rd rank

Has anyone painted any of the Landwehr for the post 1812 period? According to Osprey they wore shakos and single breasted jackets. I`ve never seen any figures representing them but would love to get some.

not to sure if they ever fought? if not I don't think many figure manufacturers will sculpt them.

I think Front Rank does some Austrian Landwehr and even Foundry does some as well I believe and you could do some head swaps and put shakos on them.

Shane- they appear to have been integrated with the regulars at the brigade level after the last change-of-sides. Hence, the difficulty- without them a late Bavarian orbat can`t really be reproduced.

Actually the impression of the Bavarians I got is mediocre unless led by Wrede, then excellent.

Oh! Old Guard at the very least. Er, maybe I am a bit biased. Lol! All said and done in 1812 they had their best year, despite being given poor tasks, like the Wurttemburgers and also told to bivouac around the marshes. Yes why force French to take the worst spots when you have allies. Lol! That is the greatest reason for their attrition.

On the battlefield in 1812 they performed very well and were as good as any French or Russian line battalions.

Thety are no 57th French Line but are as good as any other regular line battalions. They were notb always led by the bet or most suitable generals which at times was a pity during the Napoleonic Wars…

I would expect the Bavarians, like any minor power, do best in their own country. That may be why they did well in 1809 – the Austrians had invaded BAVARIA, without a declaration of war. Those Bavarian troops were fighting to defend the farms and towns of their own relatives and friends. They knew what enemy occupation meant.

Just my opinion, but I would rate all the minor powers pretty much the same, but add value if on home turf, and deduct value when away – with additional deduction for being FAR away – from home.

As for the Empire system, my recollection might be faulty. But as I recall, the differences in ratings were additive, not geometric. In other words, a rating difference of five points works out to a mere 5% difference on the average dice. When all other factors are worked into the formula, there is not that much difference between Old Guard and Landwehr! That was only one of my complaints . . .

After reading Nafziger's "Napoleon's Invasion of Russia" I certainly wouldn't rate them as anything less than average for 1812. They seemed to be on par with the French especially when you consider they seemed to get the garbage/hard duties. They seem to have been able to take tremendous punishment and kept fighting.

We rate them almost the same as an average French ligne btln. (as we do with most units of the same training and experience. There are only subtle differences we add on. For example we rate their order activation as less than the French (on average) but this depends on the actual general also. Wrede for example is very good so Bavarian Directly under him are well commanded and controlled.

What we do drop them for is their seemingly lack of ability to hold their units together in 1812. This I think is due to their lack of motivation (as will many German troops for that campaign) and that they did not seem to cope with the privations of campaigning due to a lack of forage skills. If they had fought in Spain like most of other German contingents they would have learnt this skill very well. This in our system causes their attrition rate to sore above a similar French unit.

So their ability to sustain themselves and stay together as a unit is less than that of a French unit unless well provided for. This in turn lowers their morale and motivation thus dropping their ability to fight or their will to fight at least. This becomes noticeable when on the field in a battle.

Shane