"WSS distance between lines" Topic

Does anyone have a rough guide for what would be a typical distance between the two lines that were typically deployed by armies of the period?

In theory the distance should be about 200 yards. This was to ensure that enemy musket overshoots would not hit the rear support line.

Ah, that makes sense.Thanks. I am just starting this period and using Twilight of the Sun King. I enjoy them, but they are quite… sparse. I'm having a tough time finding much tactical information about anything above the battalion level on other sources.

Broglie is right, but also, one of the jobs of the second line was to engage troops breaking through the first, as happened famously at Colloden. The second line volleyed the Scots who burst through so it was important not to be in range to hit the first line in the back!

You may find this useful.

link

You may also enjoy the early chapters of Anatomy of Victory.

link

Anatomy of Victory is excellent on this kind of tactical detail. highly recommended

Thanks for the links and responses everyone.
So is it correct to say that, in general, the brigades themselves deployed in a line and the second line was another separate brigade? i.e. a brigade itself did not typically deploy into 2 lines? Or would it depend on the circumstances? My initial thought was that it would be easier for a brigade commander to maintain control if his brigade deployed in two lines instead of one long one.
(Looks like I'm getting the Nosworthy book. I just finished Chandler's)

Chandlers 'Art of War in the Age of Marlborough' is the baby for this information.

I just read that and got very little information above the battalion level.

Each line would have had a Brigade commander, and they would have answered to what we would now call the Division Commander, but it was nothing so formal in this time. A Command (say Cutts) was made up of multiple Brigades (Churchills, Orkneys etc.) each normally formed into either a line or a column (regiments side by side, or one in front of the other, don't think Napoleonic era) and given there tasks from that point.

Mobile Infantry was a new thing in this era, with the two key changes, Flintlock muskets and socket bayonets giving them greater freedoms.

The British and Dutch forces for the whole WSS used the 1690 drill book (which did not include platoon fire) and the platoon fire system was added officially in 1711 when Orkneys rules for it from 1708 were made official. But they had been using them and training in them since 1701.

This of course is one of the dangers of just using drill manuals as source material without looking closer.

Another example of this is the French, they started the war using volley (rank by rank) firing, but by Ramilles a third of the regiments were using platoon fire and by the end of the war half of them were (but done under each regiments Colonels orders, nothing official). Indeed the Platoon Fire did not enter French Drill books until 1747 officially, despite it being used by them exclusively in the WAS.

Austrians are slightly confusing in this war as well, they used a 5 or 6 rank formation, but they appear to have picked up Platoon fire for the first three ranks as well. This seeming discrepancy is down to the fact they fought Eastern enemies (revolt in Hungary and Turkish forces in the Balkans) who used a much higher proportion of impact cavalry and three lines was not trusted to always hold.

The changeover dates of the Prussians, Hessians, Hanoverians, Danes etc. is also problematic as no fixed dates are given for the changes, and they still deployed in 4 or 5 deep formations.

As a general rule armies of this period were drawn up 'en muraille' that is a long unbroken front line, a second long unbroken line 200 yards behind and a smaller reserve behind that. Cavalry were deployed on the flanks and artillery was deployed out in front. If you look at some of the maps of the battles of the period you will see this.

The organisation of each line and the gaps between battalions changed as the century progressed so it would be best to consult the Anatomy of Victory for the precise period of interest.

As a rule, when part of a larger army a brigade, typically of 4 battalions, would deploy in a single line, being assigned to either the first or the second line ( or the reserve). Each battle line had a separate commander.

Of course, if a brigadier found himself detached on his own, he would reproduce this order of battle on a smaller scale, drawing up his brigade in two lines and possibly hiving off a few companies as a reserve.

- All of which is necessarily generalising, a lot would depend on terrain conditions an enemy dispositions.

Thanks a lot Musketier. That's the info I couldn't find. It's interesting and new for me. I like that Twilight of the Sun King rules gives morale benefits for units that have second lines of support. Since the units are Brigades though, I was trying to determine if the unit could "support itself" by being in two lines or if it had to be another brigade. Of course if the brigade is in two lines, then it has reduced firepower. I think I'm slowly figuring it. The rules are bare bones to say the least as far as details…which I kind of like because it gives me a chance to ask questions of the good people here and do alittle research

A member of our gaming group has a supplement/second edition of the Twilight of the Sun King rules on the way. It is considerably more detailed than the first edition with more specific rules for the wars of 1680-1720. There are more detailed rules for pikes for the early period, the Eastern wars, the Great Northern War and generally. Also some sample OOB's – 1 from the NYW, 1 from the GNW, 2 from the WSS and 1 from the Ottoman wars. I think they will be published within a few months.

On your rules question a unit can't support itself. Support has to come from another unit in an appropriate position. As others have said the idea is you have a long front line with support from another line or lines behind. But of course terrain, shortage of troops, etc, are likely to mess that up.

There is a yahoo group for these riles – link

Any idea how the new version might handle the slightly earlier Dutch Wars (1672-8)?

Cheers

Snowcat: I am afraid I don't know how it handle this war but I would guess it would be no problem. I don't know much about the 1672-78 war but I would assume that the troop types would be similar to those used in the NYW? Particularly as this is a big battle set and so a unit is a brigade.