An Opportune `Cutting-Out Action'.......

Dear Editor,

I would be most grateful if you could include the following comment in the Letters Column of FIRST EMPIRE.

Many of your readers will, by now, be aware of the many `difficulties' associated with the 15mm manufacturer BATTLE HONOURS and its proprietor Mr. Richard `Danny' Boreham. As the sole owner/operator of NETHER HALL, SHOTLEY, NEAR IPSWICH, SUFFOLK, I wish it to be known that, as of the beginning of 1992, Mr. Boreham is no longer associated in any way with the NETHER HALL WARGAMES CENTRE (as advertised throughout 1991 in the wargames press) due to the alleged breach of contractual obligations on his part.

After a relatively successful first year, however, the WARGAMES CENTRE may continue in the future ( with a greatly enhanced format and figure range) with the total exclusion of the above mentioned Mr. Boreham and all BATTLE HONOURS' products.

Having been a `small' businessman for almost ten years, I have encountered and crossed swords with a veritable heap of colourful scoundrels and Arfur Daley-types. These characters are to be found in virtually every sphere of our `professional' lives, and one deals with them in a professional manner; I am greatly saddened that the hobby of wargaming (that I took to my heart some twenty five years ago with the guiding hands of the wargames `greats': H.G. Wells, Charles Grant, Brigadier Peter Young, Colonel Lawford and Donald Featherstone, one of the first visitors to NETHER HALL) should be blighted by these disreputable individuals that we all come across during our `day' jobs.

As a relatively recent wargames `professional', I have been able to assess my peers with a fair degree of accuracy: the industry as a whole is a veritable hotchpotch of essentially `cottage' industrialists with a healthy dose of good old fashioned acumen who strive daily to improve production and service for you the customer.

Contrary to some areas of belief from the great wargaming public, there are no wargames - related millionaires (although there are more than a few millionaires who happen to play wargames!) nor are there many individuals who have achieved great wealth through their involvement in the wargames industry.

The wargames `professionals' are, to a man, service driven; you the customer dictate their every move and innovation, but you will not find a more hard working, well meaning, cheerful bunch of eccentrics in any walk of life. Many will tell you to your face that the ``the industry is a hiding for nothing'' and ``if it wasn't for the wargaming we wouldn't bother''. Never a truer word spoken in jest.

This hobby is ``an ennobling and enlightening way to have a FUN time'' (in the words of the late Brigadier Peter Young). There is no room for the totally unscrupulous, `get rich quick', self penned entrepreneurs. Regardless of your political convictions, the dreaded phrase `economic sanctions' will prove deadly for these rogues.

Let us make a concerted effort to eradicate the few `undesirables' that will always do their best to mar our genuine pursuit of pleasure.

Believe me, life is simply to short to ignore them...

(Many congratulations on a splendid magazine, David.)

Peter R. Lawson.
Nether Hall, Shotley, Surrey.

Editor. I, as I have indicated in the past, have strong views in support of Mr. Lawson. I draw readers attention to the News Report section and editorial of this issue, for further comment.

Gross Beeren error...

Dear Sir,

I expect you have already had several letters pointing this out, but it appears that the order of battle in the article on the Battle of Gross Beeren was incomplete. Lecoq's division of Reynier's VII Corps, repeatedly mentioned in the narative, does not appear in the OB. Could a correction be published in issue No.5?

Otherwise keep up the excellent work!

Editor. Indeed it can and here it is:

24th Division. General de Division Le Coq

1st Brigade: Colonel de Brause

Saxon Guard Battalion 723
1/1st Saxon Light Infantry Regiment 663
2/1st Saxon Light Infantry Regiment 616
1/Maximilien Regiment 579
2/de Rechten Regiment 609
1 Coy Saxon Chasseurs 136

2nd Brigade: General de Brigade de Mellentin

1/Saxon Combined Grenadiers 668
1/de Frederic Regiment 378
2/de Frederic Regiment 473
1/de Steindel Regiment 591
2/de Steindel Regiment 563

24th Division Artillery Reserve: Colonel Verpeau

1st Coy Saxon Foot Artillery 6 guns
2nd Coy Saxon Foot Artillery 6 guns
Each of the above batteries comprised 4 x 6pdr, 2 x 5.5" howitzers.

The usual apologies to all concerned, the complete OB was forwarded to the printers, the disappearance of 24th Div. is another great unexplained mystery!

Willing to Pay More...(!)

Dear Sir,

I would like to say how much I like your magazine, First Empire, I am already a subscriber. One idea about giving uniform details and information is to do the article on the back page so that a coloured plate may accompany the text, or to do a centre page with colour and the uniform details on the reverse. Colour plates of uniforms are more easily understood than interpretation of the text. I would be willing to pay more for the magazine if it included a coloured uniform guide on a regular basis.

Editor. I would be interested in some `interactive market research' on this point. Are the readers prepared to pay more, and if so what do you want to see? I won't be publishing your replies but if you can let me know your views, I will try to respond positively.

Early Russians, help needed...

Dear Sir,

I thoroughly enjoyed the first two issues. One of those rare occasions where one literally reads a magazine from cover to cover. I also found the mix of articles nicely balanced - great stuff.

I wonder whether any of your readers could help me with a couple of queries I have regarding the Russian Army of the period

1. During the period 1805/7 I am a little confused regarding infantry organisation. I have studied the readily available books - Osprey, Rafm etc and on the one hand organisation is described as regiments of 3 battalions; 1 grenadier and 2 `ordinary' (fusilier or musketeer). Personnel breakdowns of regiments confirm this 2:1 proportion. On the other hand battalions are described as 4 companies; 1 grenadier and 3 musketeer/fusilier coys. There appears to be a contradiction here.

2. Did fusiliers of grenadier regiments sport the large black plume of the grenadiers as they did at a later period?

3. Did Guard Jagers wear a shako or the brimmed hat as did the line jagers?

4. Did the Guard Infantry at Austerlitz wear shako or mitre? I have come across one reference suggesting the latter

5. Is there any information on which regiments at Austerlitz were still wearing bicorne/mitre?

6. Minifigs produce (in 15mm) an 1802 `Guard light Infantry' figure in `brimmed hat'. Is this figure accurate? I was under the impression they wore the bicorne.

I do hope someone can help me with some of these points. I am at present raising a Russian Army 1805-7 and would hate to buy the wrong figures!

Information on the Continental armies (especially Russia) at this time is not as widely available as it is for later periods. The same can be said as regards figure ranges. I find this surprising as the period sees the French Army at it's height.

Perhaps some articles on the Russian Army of 1805, and for that matter in the Revolutionary period which is even less well documented, would make interesting reading in your magazine. It might also lead to an expansion of the figure ranges available.

Raab 1809, Help needed....

Dear Sir,

I am looking for a detailed description of the Battle of Raab (1809). Initial dispositions, progress, detailed maps etc. My sources are rather contradictory on the most basic points, can you or any reader possibly help?

Editor. Over to the readers again. Anybody got the definative Raab? We must assume that Grant has access to the more readily available sources, Armies on the Danube, Bowden, and The Great Battles of History - Raab 1809 from Anschluss.

Happy New Year and defence of Empire...

Dear Sir,

Happy New Year! I've just received issue No4, and I'm thoroughly enjoying it. 1992 is looking good for First Empire. Keep it up!

I'd just like to make a few comments.

Firstly the magazine itself. There has been a crying need for an exclusively Napoleonic Magazine for years. Forgive me for being selfish, but let the competition worry about wargaming the revolt of the Persian Basket Weavers and Robocop versus Godzilla. Let us get on with the wargaming hobby's most popular period - EXCLUSIVELY. Every non - Napoleonic article means a Napoleonic article doesn't get published and doesn't get read! It's got to be Napoleonic or nothing.

Secondly, I'd like to stick up for the `Empire' rules system. Sure the authors are American and they write differently but we British are not the be all and end all in wargaming, Mr Black. The guys who wrote the rules were making a good point - that almost every other rule set is pretty staid. National characteristics only ever seem to feature as an afterthought in most sets of rules. Even more so the problems of Command and Control which were not inconsiderable, hardly ever appear. Different gamers take different views of their tabletop encounters, from a kind of friendly `bash' to a full scale simulation. Well if you lean to the latter I think Empire have got something and you can either steal from them or adapt them quite easily, even for just national characteristics in the `bash' type games.

My last comment is finally a constructive one. Somebody, I remember, wrote about the time consumed moving figures around the table. I have started to use movement trays in my games after a suggestion from a friend of mine. They save a lot of time and hassle and are easily made. Measure up the area of your battalion, regiment or whatever, formed in column or whatever formation that you move them in, cut out some sturdy card to that area plus 3 - 4mm all around, stick a couple of match sticks on the edges, flock it and hey presto the answer to all your problems! They really don't look very obvious and are also extremely handy when it comes to getting your figures out or putting them away.

Before I go, don't forget to rush copy No5 to me!

Editor. Just a few words there from our Far Eastern Corespondant. I'm still amazed that the Post Office can deliver to Japan on time, but can't get a magazine to Yorkshire in less than 10 days!

On the first point, I think that Napoleonics are the order of the day, but we should try to avoid being so tunnel visioned that we ignore the periods that had a direct bearing on the era. In issue 4 I published an article on Hadik's Raid, a Seven Years War piece. This gave an insight into what a `light strike force' was capable of doing in any `Horse & Musket' period, and I have no doubt helped to generate some scenarios for the weekly wargame.

On the second point. I'm sitting on the fence!

On the third point. It's been done before but as with all good ideas it can stand being repeated for those not in the know. For those with cash to spare, Irregular Miniatures actually manufacture metal movement trays for their 6mm ranges.

The Blunt Edge of Technology...

There's a lot of comment/queries and interest amongst FIRST EMPIRE readers about computer moderated wargaming. Not surprising since the editor/publisher is also the author of FOLLOW THE EAGLE a superb computer based set of Napoleonic rules.

But for those who are tempted by comments and adverts to consider using a computer in their wargames a prime consideration will be cost. Now any computer magazine will tell you that an "entry level" machine (i.e. what they consider the absolute minimum) will cost you between £ 800 and £ 1,500. If you take a mid point of say £ 1,200 you could get a 386 machine with SVGA monitor, dual floppies, a 40mb hard drive and a couple of megabytes of on-board ram. Or in layman's language - a super machine capable of doing just about everything at incredible speed.

But £ 1,200 is a lot for a machine to enhance you wargames. (yes, I know it can be used for other things, but how many computer owners do you know who actually use a Spreadsheet, a Data Base or an accounts package at home; or produce a newsletter using a Desk Top Publisher. Apart from games most owners might just use their computer as a word processor, but if you only write the odd letter now and again a professional DTP package on such a machine can be overkill.)

Those who want to get into computer moderated wargaming might feel it difficult to justify such an outlay. So what's the answer.

It might be found at the opposite end of the spectrum. Instead of looking for the "cutting edge" of technology with it's high specification and equally high cost look for "old" technology.

Computer technology moves so fast that it isn't long before the most up-to-date machine becomes "old". There's an advert currently being shown on national TV where the big selling feature is space left for the machine to be upgraded. Consequently there are "oldies" available which should do all that the average wargamer wants for a fraction of the cost. Your "entry level" machine down at the "blunt edge" is much more affordable.

For example one company is advertising the now obsolete (but still functional) AMSTRAD 1512 for £ 200. These are new machine complete with guarantee, monitor, 512K ram and twin disc drives.

Now, it can't run as fast as the £ 1200 machine but speed is relative. At the "cutting edge" the machine will process information in nanoseconds - the older machines, like the AMSTRAD will take seconds. But it is still infinitely faster than calculating by hand. And although it might take seconds it will still handle all the firing, melees, ammunition expended, movement and formations for 500 units a side - as well as the command, the weather, terrain protection flank marches and other variables.

And its affordable. For the cost of two painted 15mm armies you have a machine that will not only run FOLLOW THE EAGLE and all its associated programs. But also W/P and other commercial programs if you need them.

Of course these obsolete machines have their limitations, but if your prime interest is wargaming these limitations may not be a hindrance. For example the 1512 can be upgraded to 640K (at home, by any wargamer) for about £ 30. Computer pundits will tell you that a machine without a hard drive is a waste of time - this is nonsense. But a hard drive is useful, and can added at anytime, with prices starting at about £ 130 for a new 32MB card.

These price examples quoted are for new items. Take a look through the second hand columns - who knows what bargains are waiting to be picked up.

I don't sell computers and have no association with AMSTRAD or any other computer manufacturer/distributor. The above is written in good faith to give an idea of what can be bought on a limited budget.

I use FOLLOW THE EAGLE to run my ECW games, as well as Marlborough. Mid 18th century including Clive in India and the French and Indian Wars, AWI, Napoleonics of course, including India, Turks and America/Canada, the Crimean War and early ACW - all without any problems or anomalies on the wargames table.

The reason I stopped at early ACW is that EAGLE SOFTWARE produce a set of 19th century rules, and I now use these for ACW, Colonial, Balkan Wars and WW1 games.

Have a look at what's available and don't let the price of new machines put you off. Come and join us using computer-moderated rules and see just how much it adds to your gaming.