"Approaching Napoleonics" Topic

Right now I am gaming the WAS/SYW period with the BAR rules (Batailles de līAncien Regime). What changes do I have to make in order to switch from tricorne to bicorne and shako (and chapka, this new perry polish infantry got me hooked)?
So far I plan to
-get rid of battalion guns (I want to game pre 1809)
-increase the mobility of medium artillery (the drivers are full time military personal), get horse artillery for all nations
-increase the number of light infantry by giving each battalion skirmishers (and form separate btls with them)and introduce high quality light infantry units that will not be disbanded as soon as possible
- allow assault columns to attack units, not only field works, and give those assault columns the ability to form squares quickly
-increase the speed of infantry (to more than 76 steps per minute)
As I wont field more than a division, there will be no grand batteries.

Anything else?

Early battles still used battalion assigned guns. Depending on the size of battles, the role of artillery will change.
Certain countries the tactics remained the same especially in the pre-1806 eras. The Ottomans never changed.
So you need to do some ToE and OB research.
Military drivers were not in every country. USA they were civilians. In the Peninsula both sides used Spanish civilians as wagoners.
Speed of March prior to 1808 is often assigned by nationality, some slower and the French faster.
I have always debated about the speed of March on the battlefield. The rates in manuals are for flat, level parade grounds. The actual ground in an war is a field full of dips and rises.

Are you saying that you want to use BAR for Napoleonics?

@79thPA:
ja
What I really love about BAR is that those rules remind me of the Kriegsspiel Rules from 1824

My quibbles pretty much match TimePortal's. You'll have to watch details country by country--when drill manuals are revised, when the drivers are militarized and such. Many changes were at higher levels and won't show up in games with only 10-12 battalions on a side.

Good luck, and let us know how it works out.

If you want to use the Perry Polish in czapkas then you can't do pre-1809 as the Duchy of Warsaw was only created in 1807 post Tilsit and 1809 was the first time it's army was employed.
But if you just extend to 1809 you have a wonderful small contest between the Poles and Austrians, both fielding about corps-sized forces. The best account of that campaign that I know of is in vol.3 of Thunder on the Danube:
link

Upps I thought I would let them fight as part of the polish legion in Italy, but I am not overly concerned about uniform details anyways. I will game tactical problems rather than historical battles, as I will use 28mm miniatures. And I am mostly interested in learning why different tactical doctrins were developed.
John H. Gill is a fine author, I love his "With Eagles to Glory". Which exactly deals with the changes in the different french-allied armies.

@ dogtail
Assault columns don't form square quickly, they are already in a solid square. This makes them able to manoeuvre relatively easily even if enemy cavalry are in sight; but in 1809 the Saxon drill book still said form line at 1000 yards from the enemy so you need to know your specific army.

@Mark J Wilson:
Are you talking about a column of 8-10 companies with no distance? Or column of division? Would a column of division form a rectangular or a square if they close the distance between them?

my problem with those damned assault column is that I donīt know if you mean a colonne serre or a colonne a demi distance or a prussian Angriffskolonne with Zuege formiert nach der Mitte. And then I donīt know how a solid square is supposed to deal with a attack from the flank if it can only bring a handfull of musket to shot at attackers. I know that in a 1813 prussian brigade it was the job of the cavalry to fend of the (non-existant) french cavalry. But is a french bataillon in 1805 not supposed to form hollow squares like they did at Auerstaedt?

run the other way:)

@mildbill :) that is exactly why I chose to play kind of WAS/SYW, cause it is just: lines :)
And while you COULD represent divisions in a Batallion in 28mm there is no way to represent the depth of a prussian brigade from 1813 cause my oppents arm reach is just to small to make my gaming table deep enough.
I am glad my 6mm work much better for that. :)

@ Dogtail
I'm taking about a column in close order between the company or divisional units; which as far as I'm concerned was the routine manoeuvre formation for the Napoleonic Wars.

How it deals with an attack by cavalry from the flank is the same as an attack from the front, stand still present bayonets and wait until the cavalry go away. There is no need to fire, horses won't impale themselves on sharp spikey things and if the horse won't the rider doesn't get any say in the matter. in practice you do fire and as the cavalry ride past the block the front and rear rear fire at the passing targets.

I agree that horses won't impale themselves, but reading account the cavalry did not approach closer than 50 paces because most likely at this distance not the horse but the horseman was afraid to be shot out of the saddle in case he would come closer, premature fire, lack of firing discipline could be a catastrophe for a square a closed column could fire easily as well.

Interesting, must have been a claustrophobic experience. I always thought that the loud cracking of the musket shots was the main defence versus horses.
Actually not that big a difference from the macedonian phalanx and the tercio. I thought that the colonne a demi-distance was the routine manoeuvre formation. How the hell is a colonne serre forming into line? With the colonne a demi distance you could keep a forward movement for most of the btl when deploying after the head of the column was stopped.

Close column forms line, and line forms close column; by each peloton turning to right and left and filing 3 wide sideways in relation to the front; exactly as described in the diagrams. This is why in a correctly deployed French column the elite companies are at the back.

It is also in my opinion, why the 'fire 1 volley and charge' technique works, because the rear companies are facing the wrong way and are probably unwilling to 'come out of hiding'.

I always assumed filing to the side needs a bigger distance between soldiers, would be possible for a phalanx or a matchlock unit, but almost impossible for a unit where the elbows of soldiers are touching.

Why, the key thing is to march in step and I've done that at very very close order, i.e. all packed into a re-enactment pike 'scrum'

According to what you say a line could move sideways rather easily. I rather thought that this is only a wargamer thingy. I expect a platoon to "swing" to make a 90 degree turn.
I am that far off?

I always laugh myself silly when rules let units incline, to me that is the ultimate 'wargamers only' move. I've read the drill book about how to perform this dance manoeuvre and at 22" per man and close ranks it's a recipe for everyone tripping over each other. Far easier to file to one side and then face front and advance and real soldiers on campaign do what is easy because that minimises the likelihood of mistakes. The clever stuff gets left to officers at home writing drill books and chocolate box soldiers prancing around on drill squares. It still applied in WW2, I have had first person testimony that home training was not what was done in the field.