Two Mill Comments and News....

Dear Dave,

I enjoyed your article on 2mm scale gaming, it included some valid points which I will take note of, although I still think that advertising 2min blocks as companies or battalions shows the customer that they can be used in a variety of ways, after all its not for the manufacturer to dictate figure scales and curb wargamers initiative.

I'm currently working on some much needed additions to the 2min Terrain and I'll send some sample for review when ready.

I've some feed back for you regarding First Empire. Napoleonic Wargamers love it! they are not at all put off by the lack of colour pictures, as long as they have a magazine devoted to their period, with good maps and O.B.'s they are happy. Of course pictures may help to broaden the appeal of the magazine and therefore sell you more, but the 'Napoleonics' seem happy with it as it is.

Keep up the good work.

Tim Reader. Conflict Miniatures.

Congratulations..again!

Dear Sir,

After reading the second issue of First Empire may I congratulate you on your publication.

For me the format is just right. Plenty of articles (all Napoleonic), maps, just enough advertising and a readers letters page. Some letters which I disagree with, but every body has their own opinion.

May I make one small suggestion if you have a spare page. Would it not be possible to have a page of articles for sale or articles that readers are interested in acquiring. I am sure that many of your readers would be interested in Napoleonic Material for sale.

May I also mention your brilliant idea for a Worldwide Napoleonic club. A wargaming club or association of this sort has been needed for many years. I would join tomorrow if possible. Not everyone has the opportunity to correspond with other enthusiasts.

I hope your publication lasts many years longer than the original First Empire. With Partizan Press's excellent Napoleonic Notes and Queries yours is the only other magazine in the country dealing solely with Napoleonics.

Tony Broughton. Manchester.

Reviews and Albuera...

Dear Dave,

It's good to see FIRST EMPIRE readers writing in to the editor and some of the points raised in DISPATCHES were interesting and deserve further discussion.

I'm puzzled about "tough" reviews. Certainly anything that isn't good or up to standard should be knocked but it all depends on the criterion for "good". As an example I am reviewing a book by an Australian soldier of his experiences in W.W.I.

The experiences are interesting and deserve sharing with a wider public. But I found the actual style of the writing strange. The syntax and construction were not what I was used to and I found reading the book very difficult. Under normal circumstances I wouldn't continue to make the effort to read it. But perhaps to a different reviewer the grammar would be a minor or even non existent inconvenience and the book could receive rave reviews on the basis of its content.

I can't comment on "Napoleon's Grand Amee 1813" as I haven't read it. But I did read the introduction to "EMPIRE" wargame rules (3rd Edition) which I believe is either by the same author or from the same publishing stable. It's been such a long time since I read anything so patronisingly condescending that when I finally stopped laughing I decided I would never look at anything that had any vague connection with "EMPIRE". As to over pricing, again I couldn't comment except to say that for about a fiver more a friend got a book-search company to come up with 2 bound volumes of "A History of the Wars" (Napoleonic of course) published in 1816. As they say in the Classics, you pays your money and you takes your choice.

As to Bibliographies, again I'm skeptical. If I told you that some of the information on Cossacks used in " Refighting the Retreat of 1812" in issue 2 came from Friedrich Weber's "THE PRESENT STATE OF RUSSIA" (translated from High Dutch and printed in Patemoster-Row in 1723) you'd just think I was being pretentious. It wouldn't make any difference to the article or your further reading. If I said I used a 1989 MEN AT ARMS you'd wonder why I was wasting your time when you can get that and others from either the library or any wargames supplier. More use perhaps is specific sources for specific quotes, figures or details. But what do other readers think.

I enjoyed the Battle of Albuhera, although I never seen the name written without that way . Certainly the "Albuhera Badge" and the battle honour are spelt with the "h". On my last visit to the regimental museum of what was the 57th Regiment I meet a serving sergeant in the modem- day regiment. The Curator of the museum had just died and the sergeant had been detailed to keep the museum open until another curator could be appointed.

When we spoke about Albuhera there was no talk of "The Regiment" or "The 57di" or even "The Die Hards". He talked about "we" - "we were at Albuhera" as if it were yesterday and as if those men were his platoon mates. His knowledge of historical events was not as accurate as an academic curator's or historian's would have been, but for him it was living history, a history of his regiment and his comrades. He also told me the story of the 57th's part in the Paoli massacre. He told this story with such relish to some American visitors that I can only say I'm surprised he's still standing and able to walk home.

Finally a quick query on the Battle of Gorodetschna. I could be wrong but I assume that "Gorodetschna" is an Anglicized form of the Russian name, designed to give English readers an indication of how to pronounce an unfamiliar word. Its a convention I follow myself but I wouldn't mind knowing how its actually written.

I hope that the letters section of FIRST EMPIRE will develop into a forum for wargamers. But I can't hang arourid to fmd out. I've got to smash a French Corps in the wastes of Russia.

Bob Black, London

Editor: Yes I thought Albuhera was spelled Albuhera, but I bowed to the contributor's knowledge. Probably can be spelt both ways, anyway, got the old maps out and couldn't locate Gorodetchma, much less find the Russian spelling. Any one out there keep Bob happy with thecorrect spelling?

Confederation Uniforms...

Dear Sir,

In my previous letter I referred to the potential for lots of information on uniforms and units being printed in the pages of the magazine. then in issue 2 1 saw a direct request for information on the letters page. So perhaps if I do the same. There are a couple of units that I have been struggling with since Men at arms No43 was re-released and they first came to my attention. Would you please give me any details that you have on dress and organisation of the 4th (Saxon Duchies), 5th (Anhalt Lippe) and 6th (Schwarzburg, Reus and Waldeck) Rheinbund Regiments? It would be a great help if you could.

Peter Kessler, Whitstable

Editor. If this keeps up have to start a 'Uniforminfo' section. So once more into the garage your brave editor goes to rifle through the piles of unsorted research notes, to emerge triumphant with the followmg which appertains to the the 1812 Campaign, when incidentally they all were brigaded together, namely Anting's brigade, 34th Division (Loison), XI Corps (Amgerau).

4th Rheinbund Regiment (Saxon Duchies). In 1812 consisted of three bttns for a total of 2800 men. The regiment was comprised of the following: Uniforms and equipment after the French pattern.

Saxe Weimar and Saxe Hildeburghausen. Green jacket with yellow collar white (summer) grey winter trouser. White Shako cords black leather equipment Cockade green and white

Saxe Coburg. Green jacket with yellow collar and cuffs, red turnbacks, three while lace loops on green cuff flaps. Light blue Hungarian style breeches with yellow braiding, short black gaiters. White Shako cords. Cockade green and while.

Saxe Gotha and Saxe Meiningen Dark blue jacket faced red. White Shako cords and trouser. Cockade green and white.

5th Rheinbund Regiment (Anhalt Lippe). In 1812, the regt fielded two battalions as follows.

1st Battalion. (Anhalt) 6 companies from the Anhalt princepalities of Dessau, Bernberg, and Kothen for an establishment total of c 810. Green sing1e breasted jacket faced and piped rose pink, white buttons grey gatters. Black leather equipment green cockade. White shako cords for centre companies. Grenadiers and Voltigeurs epaulets shako cords and pompoms red adn green respectively.

2nd Battalion (Lippe) 5 Companies from Lippe Detmold total 500 men and one company from Schaumburg Lippe, total 150 men. White jacket, breeches, shako cords and equipment. Collar, cuffs and pompoms green, Cockade red and yellow for Schaumburg and red and white for Detmold

6th Rheinbund Regiment (Schwarzburg Reus Waldeck)

1st Bttn: 2 companies of 350 men each(!) Dark green jacket, red collars and cuffs, turnbacks, and piping. Grey breeches and plume, black leather equipment. Cockade white and blue.

2nd Bttn: (Reus Waldeck) 3 companies from Waldeck total 400 men. White jacket and blue collar cuffs and lapels, yellow buttons, grey breeches white equipment, yellow shako cords and double pompom.

9 companies from Reus total 450 men . White Austrian style jacket light blue collar cuffs and breeches with yellow stripe and thigh knot yellow shako cords red plume and white equipment. Cockade black and red.

As far as I can ascertain, elite companies only existed where I have indicated. If anyone knows differant, write and share it with us.

More Please.

Dear Sir,

You requested comments on what people would like to see in the magazine. More of the same! There are already established magazines which deal with the hobby generally so I would suggest that you stick to the targeted market. The articles in your first publication were well presented and an interesting read, I look forward to other contributions of a similar quality. Good luck with your new venture.

Gregor Fotheringham, Staines

Albuera Alternatives (or Albuhcra Alternatives)...

Dear Sir,

I was quite interested to see the Napoleon's Battles scenario 'The Battle of Albuera' in your latest number (2), as this has always been one of my favourite Peninsula Battles (an opinion that many others seem to share). Having read it thoroughly, I feel the urge to comment upon the way that it was presented here. Looking at the map, it is quite hard to relate the features with the historical reality. The map that I use for my own purposes is that presented in Sir John Fortescue's History of the British army, which shows more faithfully the locations of the Olive groves, and also of the woods on the battlefield, which cover much more of the map than the one presented in your magazine would have us believe. (Ed. Not my fault this time!) Indeed on the west bank of the Albuera, the woods are usually no more than a mile away, and in parts less than half that. This fact had significant effects upon the actions of both Soult and Beresford on the day.

My other concern is the orders of battle. I don't really have many complaints about the French Army, but the Allies are a different matter. I offer an alternative below:

(2) ANGLO-PORTUGUESE CORPS:

Beresford 9" E(7)+1 (6F/7M)

(1) 2nd Cavalry Division: Lumley 3" G(7) +1
1B/2C: 16 BrHC (5D)
2B/2C: 12 Ptl-C (7D)
2C: 6pdr RHA

(1) 2nd Division: Stewart 3" A(4)+O
1B/2D: 16 BrLN (6D)
2B/2D: 16 BrLN (6D)
3B/2D: 16 BrLN (6D)

(1) 4th Division: Cole 4" 0(8)+1
1 B/4D: 16 BrLN (6D)
2B/4D: 20 PtLN (10D)
4D: 6pdr RHA

(1) Portuguese Division: Hamilton 3" A(6)+0
1B/P: 20 PtLN (10D)
2B/P: 20 PtLN (10D)

(1) Von Alien's Brigade 4" G(8)+1: 16 KGLLT (6D)
(1) Collin's Brigade 3" A(6)+0: 16 PtLN (8D)
(1) Espana's Brigade 3" A(4)+0: 16 SpLN (11D)
(1) Penne Villemur's Brigade 3" A(6)+O: 12 SpLC (7D)

(2) ARMY OF ESTREMADURA: Blake 7" G(6)+1D (3F/4M)

(1) Loy's Brigade 3" G(5)+1: 16 SpHC (10D)
(1) Vanguard: Lardizabel 4" G(6) +1 IV: 20 SpLN (14D)

(1) 3rd Division: Ballasteros 3" P(4)+0
1B/3D: 16 SpLT (11D)
2B/3D: 16 SpLN (11D)

(1) 4th Division: Zayas 4" G(7)+1
1B/4D: 16 SpGD (8D)
1B/4D: 20 SpLN (14D)

This revised order of battle does a number of things. It restores Espana's and Villemur's Spanish to Beresford's Corps, where they belong. These units were actually detached from Castanos' army and were not part of Blake's army. Considerable numbers of the Spanish infantry present were light regiments and so I have given Ballasteros a brigade of light infantry, purely on the grounds that he had the largest contingent of light troops. Similarly, I have added together the two K.G.L. light battalions, the companies of the 5/60th and the light companies of the 3/27th, 1/40th and 97th Foot (whose parent battalions were not present) and so gathered enough light troops together to justify von Alien's brigade. I didn't feel that I could justify doing something similar with the Portuguese, so there are no Cacadores.

I have also reconstituted the 2nd cavalry Division under Lumley, though I can see a case for splitting it into constituent brigades. I have removed the Spanish artillery as it was neither heavy enough or mobile enough to merit listing for Napoleon's battles. I do agree with Mr. Finkel that the Spanish can do without any units bearing the militia rating, but I feel that I must point out that the inclusion of that category in the game at all betrayed a serious lack of knowledge about the nature of the Spanish army during the War for National Independence. (Ed. Ouch!).

I have one minor quibble as well, Mr Finkel gives all the credit for the destruction of Colbourne's Brigade to the Vistula Lancers, but in fact they were joined in their charge by the 2nd Hussars, who nearly always get forgotten, presumably because they're not as romantic as the Poles. On the whole though I liked the Napoleon's battles scenario, though I suppose that if you don't know Napoleon's Battles its utility drops rather.

Moving on though, I think I agree with those people who want colour pictures in the magazine. I don't necessarily want a magazine full of pictures of miniatures, however. Colour has been under exploited in the traditional magazines and possibilities abound. On the other. hand, the quality of the black and while illustrations in the first two issues has not been good, and unless you can improve this, there's not much point in going for colour just now.

Unlike those others though, I don't want to see extensive coverage of other periods (once you start where do you stop?), though that isn't a cast iron requirement. I'd rather see a good article about the Seven Years War Russians than a bad one about the Ottoman Turks of the Napoleonic Wars (say..).

Anyway thanks for the first couple of issues and keep up the good work (as all these correspondents of your seem to say).

P.S. How can anybody find Napoleon's Grande Armee of 1813 boring? They'll be complaining about the Q.E.D.'s lack of plot next.

P.P.S. No., I didn't like the article about the Turks.

Alexei McDonald, Edinburgh

Editor This is the stuff chaps! An informed exchange of ideas in practice as well as constructive criticism. Love it! More of the same please.

A new subscriber writes..

Dear Mr. Watkins,

Having visited 'Colours 91' I noticed your magazine on a number of trade stands and eventually purchased issue 1 & 2. It is not often that I read a magazine from cover to cover, (and I regularly do by Miniature Wargames and Wargames Illustrated). Having allowed my subscriptions to lapse I am delighted to part with my £ 10.95 for a subscription starting with issue 3.

As a dedicated Napoleonic Wargamer I seek a magazine exactly like the first issues you provided. As an occasional board gamer I willingly read your Advanced Squad Leader article and would welcome further similar articles on Napoleonic board-games. I also liked your article on the Milan City Guard and would welcome features on such uniform painting guides, (to encourage me to buy more figures?)

Kind regards,

Andy Pain, Kingsteignton.

P.S. Don't worry about the glossy pictures, I can get these with my sheep farming magazine!

Editor G1ad to see that we are providing, the service that you and many others want Hopefully, the wargames trade might take this on board , and get behind us a bit more!

An old subscriber writes....

Dear Editor,

Once again a very enjoyable magazine with issue 2. You raised a few points in your editorial, so I thought I would write.

Before tackling that, however, I would like to say how much I enjoyed your article on 2mm gaming. I found your comments very intriguing, and may well delve into that area of gaming at a later date. It reminded me of an article by Roy Beers in an early edition of "Miniature Wargames", when he wrote about 6mm gaming.

It took a while, but I eventually "succumbed" to the temptation and invested in some 6mm, figures. Needless to say, I haven't looked back and am now an avid 6mm gamer.

I may well try out 2mm figures after reading your article, but I do feel that here was an opportunity to put in a few photographs for those of us who need that extra little push. I know your ideas about photos in the magazine, and I think by and large we agree with you, but I feel that the article justified putting some in, since they would be relevant. Of course, if not in the magazine, what about on the front cover - an ideal place to show us the benefits of 2mm gaming. Perhaps we shall see your figures on the front of a future issue? (Ed. That's the plan!). I certainly hope so, and feel that you would do 2mm gaming a great service.

Now to the editorial. The super idea of a list of gainers and areas is something that has been needed for some time. I actually mentioned this to one manufacturer some time ago but lack of computerisation at that time seemed to be a problem. However, he was able to put me in touch with a customer of his in my area, and we have been happily gaming now for a few years. I look forward to you realising this ambition of a Napoleonic gainers list and wish you luck with it, as I'm sure the rest of First Empire readers will.

I also liked you leaving open the option of touching on an odd period outside the Napoleonic era, and look forward to your reviewing different sets of rules so that we gainers don't have to waste time and money ( as I have for one in die past) buying rules that have proved to be very poor. I think the review will fit in very well with your ideas on "helping" the wargaming fraternity.

Also your request for outlines of games using various sets of rules is an excellent one.

In fact ever since your editorial in Issue 1. I have looked at other wargames magazines more closely, and have observed this putting in unrelated pictures to fill in space and articles that have only limited appeal. It is nice to know that most if not all of the information and articles will be of interest and use. I look forward to Issue 3.

Yours faithfully,

Dave Lycett, Newcastle, Staffs.

Editor : Good to see the 2mm article was well received. As for the gamers / c1ub list, I will still work on this to try and secure some real benefits for would be members hopefully plans will finanalize at New year and be announced in Issue 4. As for the photos, point taken as the time of going to press with #2, none were available. As First Empire continues to grow, I will introduce Relevant photos.