"Branching out from ACW to mid-19th Century European Wars?" Topic

Our club has played American Civil War for a long time. About 3 years ago, we decided to branch out into the Franco-Prussian War (1870-71) and more recently, the Franco-Austrian War (1859) using the same set of ACW rules and basing of figures (w/modifications). These wars took place in roughly the same time period with the same level of technology and linear tactics. I was wondering if any of the rest of you ACW gamers have tried the same thing, and what results you might have had?

The main issue of doing this is not undervaluing cavalry in the European theatre.

I am a 19th century guy branching out to the US civil war. I actually think the best branching is between the later 19th century and the US civil war. In all the later wars of the 19th century in Europe (Russo-Turkish 1877, Greco-Ottoman 1897, Serbo-Bulgarian 1885, and imho the Franco-Prussian war 1870-1871) good cavalry use was ACW style cavalry use. The infantry and artillery dominated battles. Indeed both the Ottomans and Russians in 1877 prohibited their cavalry to make charges against formed infantry.

Other wars that were infantry wars was the 1864 Second Sleshwig Holstein War, and the War of the Pacific.

I think ACW is significantly different from other late C19 wars in being so symmetrical. The US and Confederate armies were very similar. In other late C19 conflicts you see much bigger differences in weaponry and tactics, which for me at least makes for more interesting tabletop games.

Chris

Bloody Big BATTLES!
link

The Franco Prussian War was significantly different than the ACW. Both sides had good breech-loading rifles and the high firepower that produced was the death-knell of close-order infantry attacks and battlefield cavalry charges. Most infantry in the FPW were forced to fight as skirmishers.

Well, its a bit of a stretch to consider the needle gun a good breech loading rifle. short range, the firing needle broke if you looked at it hard and the breech didn't seal properly after sustained use causing many soldiers to shoot it from the hip to avoid getting a face-full of unpleasantness.

There are enough differences to warrant a specific set of rules or heavily modified ACW rules. DWilliams you say you want to "branch out" but using the same set of rules is not exactly branching out. All your changing are the figures.

Actually in the Imperial phase of the war most infantry did NOT fight as skirmishers. The high casualty rates of the early battles, like Wissemburg, Spicheren, Froeschwiller, Mars la Tour, and Gravelotte-St. Privat, saw most infantry fighting as they had in earlier wars. The only major tactical difference was that the French now preferred to use bayonet attacks as a counter-punch to Prussian assaults after subjecting them to chassepot fire first. The Prussian Guard Corps lost 10,000 casualties in about ten minutes attacking St. Privat. Not exactly skirmishing…

The Germans did the same thing in 1914. Just march in in line or their version of an attack column and got mowed down by rapid rifle fire and a few machine guns at the time.

I thought the Prussians shot from the hip as they marched towards the enemy as a matter of doctrine or is that just a myth.

The tactics of the post FPW period is one I've researched extensively during my doctoral studies. The lessons of that war kept the tactical experts and theorists busy for the next forty years trying to figure out how to best deal with realities of breech-loading rifles. Everyone, German, French, Russian, British, US, all agreed that close-order combat was not possible anymore. The challenge was to come up with a workable system that allowed the men to spread out, but still maintained adequate control over the troops. By the time WWI rolled around, they THOUGHT they had it figured out. Sadly, they didn't.

To reinforce what ChrisBBB said, both sides of the ACW were trained to fight in the same manner--they even knew each other personally--and were armed in the same manner. That makes the rules relatively simple. In Europe, you saw a clash of doctrines AND weapons. The Austrians fought 1866 very differently from 1859. Same with the French in 1870 vs. 1859. Each conflict has its own internal dynamic which tend to make the rules very period-specific. And, in my opinion, more fun. Have at it!

We have been doing the Paraguayan War (War of the Triple Alliance) for some time. I have developed some scenarios for Garibaldi's campaigns that we will try out in the coming year.