"Franco-Prussian games." Topic

Why is it that the Franco Prussian war is always gamed at corps or multi divisional level? Not many people want to game the whole battle of Waterloo or Borodino. I have been pondering this questioin for a while now and I am just about to get rid of my 28mm Prussians so I can buy lots more 10mm Prussians, have I been brain washed into thinking my games must be corps level? Or is it possible to game this period in 28mm on a 4x6 table? Does anyone do that?

Hi, I believe several of your assumptions are incorrect. Lots of folks like playing Waterloo or other large battles. Rules like VnB, Grand Armee and DBN allow you to do it. There are also several sets of rules which allow you to fight lower level actions in the FPW. They Died for Glory, Field of Battle and Chassepot and Needlegun are all set at a lower level.

I think the reason that the FPW draws interest in Corps or larger actions is due to the fact that that's where the real differences in the two armies become crystal clear. All that Prussian Corps artillery starts to show up. I'm sure others will chime in.

Thanks,

John

Because smaller actions do not show up in the English-language history books.

I agree! WHY must i game corps or Army level games in the FPW,when i can do regimental,and lower actions for say, ACW, or even Napoleonics??
I like They Died for Glory,but even then,you need a minimum of a couple hundred figures for the smallest scenario!

Bob

D. All of the above. I play the larger battles just because I enjoy that type of game more. I have also played smaller "scenario" type games at game cons. They were fun too. I think that it is your personal choice. Playing smaller games with 28mm figures can be as entertaining as massive corps sized battles. I remember a scenario a few years back where a French division was assigned the defense of a border town against a large Prussian forse. It sounded like an exciting game. Bottom line, do what you enjoy. It's your hobby!

As stated, its really up to you. I don't do larger historical refights (purely my choice), BUT they are a good source of ideas for my own games as they give actual ratios/troop types/weapons used etc,. and scenrios within a large scenario.
If you want to do 28mm small battles, then do exactly that old chap. Even multi corps/multi divisional battles comprised smaller scale engagements at tactical level, just use them, e.g. the one cited above, or a cavalry recon in force against a screening infantry brigade, or a regiment holding a crossroads being attacked by a division and reinforcements come along. The choice is endless…

Large battles don't means lots of figures either, just use element based rules and use six figure regiments or something (which is what I do).

Personally I prefer big battles because they are the defining feature of the war, the trick is fitting them into a manageable playing area and playing time.

There were lots and lots of small actions in the FPW – for example, scouting before the big battles and skirmishes with the franc-tireurs and Republican forces in the later part of the war

There were lots and lots of small actions in the FPW,

If you have the details, I would be a customer for the scenario book.

Agree with Lentulus that it's hard to find accounts of small actions in English. 28mm FPW would be more tempting if that wasn't the case.

I think the FPW just lends itself nicely to larger scales as well as smaller. I'm a new devotee to the 1870 rules with 10mm figures and it gives the sense of epic battles with massive forces without getting too bogged down.

I have more or less decided to use the 1870 rules they look like a good game. I was thinking of using my 28mms but im sure it woul look right.

Battlefield sectors, anyone? Advanced guard or rear guard clashes?
A lot of rules today use 4 bases. Some add additional bases.
In 28mm 4 bases make a nice regt or brigade if you up it a level. Many old rules sets before Empire and Stars and Bars were "divisional battles in nature." The emphasis in 28 has always been a couple of divisions or a small corps versus the equivalent. What's wrong with that? Even with V and B there's a lot of figures called for. Play what you would enjoy playing. You can do Gettysburg and Waterloo with bathtubbing if you want. It's up to you. It's supposed to be fun.

Our club has been using Regimental Fire & Fury successfully with ACW for some time, and is now exploring using these same (regimental/battalion-level) rules for Franco-Prussian war scenarios. We plan to do small-scale actions with a few brigades on each side.

I would also be interested in Regimental Franco Prussian rules, and I agree with the original point. Wargames magazine articals always deal with the Corps level games. What about the brigade holding the village type scenarios?

We have been using TDFG for some time and have done all the big scenarios in the rules book. But there is very little information about smaller battles with just two or three brigades per side.

What we are experimenting with is adapting scenarios form Johnny Reb and RF&F for TDFG. We are just substituting the Union and Confederates with the French and Germans. Exchange the ACW buildings for Northern European buildings. Then write a plausible historic premise to your hypothetical FPW battle.

This month we are going to adapt The Farmville Road, Virginia scenario form the JR "To the Sounds of the Guns" Scenario book. The Rebels have to keep Farmeville Road open for Longstreet to get his baggage train down the road during the retreat from Antietam.

Instead we are going to call it the "Road to Metz" and have Two French Infantry brigades and two small cavalry brigades hold open the road so the rest of the army can retreat to Metz. Three German infantry and one cavalry brigade will try to rout the French and block the road.

I had to scan the map and do some photo shopping to better adapt to the rules. But essentially the same battle but in 1870 France.