"Wesencraft Corps Level Game" Topic

At Pascal's request—"Will you people PLEASE stop interrupting my DBN/HFG discussion?"—I'd like to put in a word for Charlie Wesencraft's "Corps Level Game" as another approach to fighting decent-size Napoleonic battles on small tables. You'll find them starting on page 181 of the "History of Wargaming" edition of his Practical Wargaming. At 12"=1 mile, many corps-size Peninsular actions may be fought out on a card table in an afternoon, and the rules haven't the somewhat stylized form of DBN nor all the extraneous (for the Napoleonics player) material of Horse Foot and Guns. That said, you're going to have to type your own copy, and it won't be the same as mine. Here's why.

1.Organization. Wesencraft included everything in the book, but not in the "Corps Level Game" chapter. Units will halt, Fall Back, Run and Disintegrate, but none of those terms are explained in there. They're described earlier in the book in the "Ancients" section, and good luck finding them there. You can fit everything on both sides of a sheet of paper, but you have to find everything first.

2. Basing. The presumed basing is taken from his 1:40 game with (probably) 1/72 or 15mm figures—three British infantry on a 1.5" x .5" base, for instance, and four French on a 1"x1" base. I long ago decided that it was more fun to modify rules than to rebase castings. The game plays fine with my 24 6mm infantry on a 2"x1" base with 1" square squares, but there was a certain amount of filing to fit. You'll probably need to do a bit yourself.

3. History, and our understanding of it. All historical miniatures games not needing to be standardized for tournament play reflect the wargamer's notion of period warfare, which tends not to exactly conform to anyone else's. I permitted attempts to form hasty squares and cavalry countercharges, somewhat reduced cavalry movement and made pure cavalry melees dual attacks. Your list will be different.

Given those relatively minor modifications, my regular opponent and I fought out Medellin, Medina de Rio Seco, Castalla, Bailen, Vimiero, Talavera (at half scale) and three hypotheticals based on Grant scenarios, all on a card table, each taking no more than an afternoon, all units represented and no strikingly unhistorical features. Give it a try some time.

Wesencrafts book on pike and shot is still the gold standard for the period. Just modify to fit the rules you use.

Thank you Robert. I have a copy of Practical Wargaming – have had it for years, but am now reading it carefully (as warned by you) with interest. I can just about remember reading him on one-base battalions maybe about 50 years ago; I think that lodged in my brain and subconsciously inclined me towards corps-style games as an ideal ever since. The text doesn't look instantly familiar, but I am putting that down to bad memory rather than the hypothesis of a whole nother book.

I've also got a magazine with an article by him on basing units in this style for a Borodino refight which I think he did for David Chandler. These might have been 15mm by that time.

That is very impressive, one element battalions are a very modern idea in the figure gaming world, but mentioning this 50 year in the past for figure gaming is eye opening. I must admit napoleon's Battle back in 1989 uses 480 men elements, so that is rather close to battalion sized elements. Shako uses 500 men elements in 1995. Snappy nappy 1st edition uses 2000-3000 men elements in 1994, but 50 years ago is the early 1970's.

That "modern" idea dates back to at least 1962, pfmodel. Joseph Morschauser's "How to Play Wargames in Miniature" has a photo of a "Shock Period" army consisting of 12 stands, each with the same frontage. Twenty-six years later, that would be highly original and innovative.

Fewer original ideas after the first generation of historical miniatures players than most of us think. Plenty of ignored or forgotten ideas, though.

This 1974 book passed me by at the time. By this date wargame clubs were fairly well established and there was the UK National Wargames convention using rules produced by the larger clubs. And of course there was WRG. Re-reading this book it does make you think we are constantly trying to make a better mouse trap. I agree about all the original ideas were out there with the early generation of wargame authors. His order control system is similar to the maneuver table used by the ACW Fire and Fury rules, I like it when he writes about speeding up the game by reducing the time spent rolling saving throws and avoiding disagreements.

Anyhow the Napoleonic corps rules look very good. However it will take some effort to persuade my mates down the club to try them. I don't think my club has ever adopted a ‘toolbox' approach of of adapting and using ideas from other sources then  published rules.

Robert,

Thanks for bringing this to our attention. I remember seeing this book many years ago, but was on to other rules and never got it.

I just purchased a copy and will give it a good look. ESR might be the current rules set to be in the ball park of these rules, but perhaps old school ideas will work just as well at no where near the modern investment.

The parade of never ending new Napoleonic rules stems from the search for the "Holy Grail" for players when maybe the Grail has always been there!

Kim