Neerwinden in 1793 was a classic encounter battle between the Austrians under Coburg and the French under Dumouriez. The French outnumber the Austrians by about 44,500 to 41,400 (so not much in it). The Austrians have twice the number of cavalrymen (9800 to 4500) but don't seem to have used them for scouting. The French move first and subsequent Austrian plans are based on teh belief that the main French strength is attacking their right... but they don't know...
And this happens a lot - at Jena Napoleon thought he was facing the whole Prussian army - he wasn't.
At Austerlitz the allies thought that Napoleon's right was wide open but that gap was waiting to be plugged by Davout (who only just made it by some serious forced marching).
Maps were wrong. Columns were sent down unsuitable roads, roads that didn't exist, roads that were already occupied by other columns.
A walk in teh countryside will show you that even with a good map (and GPS) it is easy to get lost in unfamiliar country and the extent to which even barely noticeable folds in teh ground can conceal landmarks (and groups of your mates lying in wait).
How often is any of this seen on the wargames table?
I am going to give this some thought and one day will report back on a suitably random game- though there is a limit- you do have to feel like you can direct events to a degree or there's no point playing!?
Thoughtful piece as ever Phil. Campaigns always seem to be the best format to bring in such fog of war, don't you reckon?
ReplyDeleteYou are good, if y9u can remember what the other side is doing/where they are when playing solo!!
Yes - I have never really done campaigns. I have an ambition to do a large campaign based on 1814 with numerous generals with unreliable maps writing orders in different rooms of a large house but maybe that would work better as a PBM. I do think that we (as gamers) have too much control over units in large battles too though but where do you draw the line?
ReplyDelete