The idea of using figures with Kriegsspiel rules has long had a fascination for me. Now that I've retired and we have moved to a property in the leafy countryside of middle England, the idea seemed to be ideal as a long term solo project for a `retired' war gamer with plenty of time on his hands, but not too much room.
Kriegsspiel
When one speaks of kriegsspiel, one name stands out in the UK. Bill Leeson has done much to publicise and popularise this version or style of war gaming. Since publishing a hard back English language edition of Kriegsspiel: Instructions for the Representation of Military Manoeuvres with the Kriegsspie/ Apparatus by Baron von Reisswitz, 1St Lieutenant of the Prussian Army 1824 in 1983, Bill has continued to write on the subject and in the past has produced a number of pamphlets, playing aids, maps and other material.
Some years ago now - probably in the early 1980s - I was fortunate enough to be invited by Bill to take part in a kriegsspie/at his home. I played the role of Oberst von Tschischwitz, Blue detachment commander, with orders to secure a bridgehead across a river in preparation for the supposed arrival of a pontoon train. As I recall, there were two players for the Red detachment, ordered to hinder Blue's plans and five or six umpires.
While I have kept all my paperwork from 'The Bridge Party'as the scenario was termed, after the passing of 20 years or so, my memory of some detailed aspects of the game is blurred. Kriegsspie/is umpire controlled and the action took place on maps with a scale of either 1:8,000 or 1:7,500. Only the all-seeing umpire had an overall map, Red and Blue commanders were supplied with maps that only showed what the 'real' troops on the ground would have been able to see.
The commanders had to send written orders to their men by 'courier' - hard working assistant umpires who trotted backwards and forwards from the umpire's table and they received reports by the same method. Thus it was never totally clear as precisely where one's own troops - represented by little metal blocks - were positioned, let alone those of the enemy.
Even after all this time, I recall that the game was good fun, demanded a high level of concentration and was very satisfying to play - and I was ridiculously pleased that I won!
Despite further invitations from Bill, this was destined to be the only kriegsspie/in which I took part, but the memory of the experience has stayed with me ever since.
Choice of Period
As far as I can see, kriegsspie/ is set in an unspecified period. From the one time I have played and from several readings of the book, it always 'feels' like the latter quarter of the 19th century to me, but as the rules were actually published in 1824, it must have been set in the Napoleonic Wars, or the period just after.
The scenarios are fictional with 'Red' and 'Blue' forces being the contenders. So why not follow this path and just build 'Red' and 'Blue' armies and use them to play the game - the period doesn't really matter.
For a long time this was the way I wanted to proceed. The advantages were that if a manufacturer didn't offer a complete range in a period, it didn't really matter when fighting a fictitious campaign. Equally, if a particular figure caught my eye, units could be created and used quite happily without either needing to have the correct percentage of that troop type, or having to create an army to justify their use. Such figures could also be used alongside other troop types that might not be strictly historically correct. This was a theme with which I was both familiar and comfortable, having in the past raised massive 30mm fictional 18th century armies based on the two classic war gaming books Charge! and The War Game, both of which I still feel should be obligatory reading for all war garners.
So an Emperor/Elector, Archduke/King, Republic/Empire type set-up had immense appeal, but I still felt that I needed a vaguely historical framework within which to work. Going back to the kriegsspiel book, I noted that variants of von Reisswitz's work were still very much in use up to 1870, so I had an overall period from say 1815, through 1824 (the book's date of publication) to 1870, so anything from the later Napoleonic Wars, through to the 1870 Franco-German War, seemed suitable.
From the title of this particular article, it is pretty obvious which period I eventually chose, but a brief look at the process involved at arriving at that decision might be of interest.
I'm a member of the Continental Wars Society and leafing through back issues of the Society's excellent newsletter The Foreign Correspondent was very helpful in providing information on many of these periods.
The selection of sub-periods turned up such interesting subjects as the Latin American Wars of Independence 1807-1825, the Belgian and Polish Uprisings 18301831, the Greek Civil War 1831-1832, the Spanish Carlist Uprising 1834-1839, various European Insurrections 1847-1850 and the Mexican Adventure 1864-1867, but somehow these didn't seem quite right for my perceived image of a kriegsspiel game.
I then considered the Leipzig Campaign 1813, the Crimean War 1854-1856, the Franco-Austrian War 1859, the Struggle for Italy's Unification 1860-1861, the American Civil War 1861-1865, the Second Schleswig War 1864, the Austro-Prussian War 1866 and the Franco-German War 1870-1871. Distinct possibilities here - all had good potential and most were periods about which I knew very little; there was much to consider.
Whilst browsing on the Internet, I discovered a fascinating website: www.nick-dorrell.co.uk/resources, which mainly covers the period 1854-1878. There were three main periods here that interested me; the Italian War 1859, the AustroPrussian or Seven Weeks War 1866 and the Russo-Turkish War 1877-1878. The site includes some rules - basically suggested amendments to Fire and Fury set - scenarios, orders of battle, historical notes etc. All three periods of the featured periods appealed, which did little to help my indecision.
Further inspection of this first class website revealed seven scenarios for the Austro-Prussian War 1866; Nachod, Langensalza, Trautenau, Skalitz, Soor/Burkersdorf, Gitschin and Kissingen. Each scenario has an introduction, orders of battle, notes on deployment and reinforcements, a map, comment on the terrain, victory conditions and a brief outline of the historical battle. I was hooked - decision made.
The Austro-Prussian War, 15th June to 23rd August 1866
A few remarks on the conflict would perhaps not be out of place at this point. The information has come from various sources, the Nick Dorrell website, the Continental Wars Society, plus books purchased from Ken Trotman Limited and Helion & Company, who have a most useful list of self published titles on late 19th century campaigns - particularly Notes on the Campaign Between Prussia and Austria in 1866 by T. Miller Maguire and Captain William V Herbert - a war garners' dream. My thanks must also go to Bob Walker of the Solo Wargamers Association for his help with Austrian uniforms and, subsequently, Austrian rocket guns.
The Austro-Prussian War, or The Seven Weeks War, was fought between Austria on one side, with Prussia and Austria's traditional enemy, Italy on the other, when the rivalry between Austria and Prussia concerning the supremacy in north Germany resulted in war. Austria won brilliant victories over Italy on land (Custoza) and sea (Lissa), but lost to Prussia in the main seat of the conflict, Bohemia and Moravia, notably at Koniggratz.
The Austrian Army of the North, operating against the Prussians, contained seven army corps and five cavalry divisions. Three more corps and an adhoccavalry brigade formed the Army of the South, which was employed against the Italians. The kingdoms of Bavaria, Saxony, Hanover and Wurttemberg, the grand duchies of Baden and Hesse-Darmstadt, the duchy of Nassau and the electorate of Hesse-Kassel declared in favour of Austria. The armed forces of all these southern German states composed the Austrian VII and VIII Corps. The Saxon army had always enjoyed a high reputation for efficiency and was intended to join the Austrian army in Bohemia; the army of Hanover also of good quality, endeavoured to join the southern forces and the contingent of Hesse-Kassel joined the composite VIII Corps.
The total strength of the armed forces provided by Austria's allies was 143,000, but the fighting value of the majority of these was not equal to their numerical strength.
In 1866 Prussia fielded four field armies to fight Austria and the German Confederation. Three of these - 1st Army, 2"d Army and the Army of the Elbe - fought against Austria and Saxony in Bohemia and Moravia and the fourth - the Army of the Maine - took the field against Hanover and Hesse-Kassel in June, before turning its attention to Bavaria and the South German States in July. The Duchy of Brunswick, the Grand Duchies of Mecklenberg-Schwerin, Mecklenberg-Strelitz and Oldenberg, the Principality of Lippe-Detmold and the Hanseatic towns of Hamburg, Bremen and Lubeck allied themselves to Prussia.
Tactics
Since the 1859 Italian campaign, when the French infantry had been most successful in their attacks with the bayonet, the Austrian infantry had been trained and taught to rely entirely on this style of fighting. For economy, the government had only made a yearly allowance of 20 rounds per man for musketry training, so the men could not shoot straight and the officers could not judge distances.
Thus, instead of taking advantage of the longer range of their rifle [900 paces to the Prussian 700], the Austrian command decided to use heavy battalion column bayonet attacks in the hope of closing with the enemy. These tactics only served to emphasis the tactical disadvantages of the Austrian weapon.
If this had not been the case, the natural tactics for the Austrians, with their greater range rifle and greater number of rifled artillery pieces, would have been to avoid close combat as much as possible, to engage the Prussian artillery at 2,000 paces, to make their infantry advance to about 600 paces from the enemy - outside their effective range of fire - to overwhelm them with a steady, well aimed fire from that distance and thus prepare the final attack.
Instead, the Austrian infantry almost invariably tried to attack without previous preparation of fire. Their generals may have been influenced by the opinion of one Colonel Schonfeld who had been military attache at Prussian HQ in the Danish war, and who had reported that a Prussian corps was such a rabble of reservists that they would not be able to resist the attack of an Austrian corps for 20 minutes.
The main power of decision in the infantry combat was, for the first time, shifted from the columns to the skirmishers' lines, thus marking a most important tactical progress. The new infantry fire by breach loaders demanded very quick deployment of columns into skirmishing lines, and as this movement took a long time with battalion columns, the employment of company columns now became a case of necessity and the company became the fighting unit.
The tactics of the Prussian infantry were based on the 1848 Drill Regulations in which great emphasis was placed on the battalion and the company. Whether the battalion was attacking or defending, one of the companies would act in a skirmishing role while the other three would form up either in a three deep line or a 10 deep column.
Blocks or Figures?
In his edition of von Reisswiz's book, Bill Leeson includes a useful section on the use of war game figures and suggests that many of the author's rules can be applied to them, although it may not be possible to consider hidden marches and positions, and to this extent an important element of von Reisswitz's idea is lost. As noted at the top of this article, this concept of using figures with kriegsspiel rules fascinated me.
In the true kriegsspie/little metal blocks of various sizes and shapes are used, suitably painted and marked with symbols showing the unit designation and type. These metal blocks are still available (unpainted) from Irregular Miniatures. I tried them, they are perfectly correct and ideal for their intended purpose, but for me they lack 'soul' and I really wanted to try using figures.
The first question to be addressed was what size figures to use. Whatever size I chose, I probably would not be able to match the unit frontages and depths provided by the metal blocks. The choice really came down to two sizes, 2mm and 6mm, as anything larger would be unworkable within the framework of the rules. After due consideration I opted for 6mm figures which, in my estimation, are small enough to use, but which have enough character to be genuine war game figures, as opposed to simply playing pieces.
The Figures
So, with the decisions now made on period - the Seven Weeks War of 1866 between Austria and Prussia, and figure size - 6mm, I felt that I was making some progress with the project.
To select suitable figures, I turned to the 6mm section of the Irregular Miniatures' catalogue. Let me at once declare that Irregular is my favourite 6mm manufacturer. This is purely a personal view based on years of dealing with the company. They are a friendly outfit with which to deal, their ranges from 2mm to 54mm are extensive, the figures are never out of stock and their mail order service is first class. Now, I'm sure that there are other perfectly efficient companies providing equally good figures and service, but I'm quite happy with Irregular Miniatures.
The company feature French, Prussian and Austrian forces for the mid to later 19th century period. The figures are sold in strips of six infantry or four cavalry in close (line troops) or open (light troops) order all moulded on a communal metal base, with artillery piece having its crew fixed to a base, a separate gun, and finally a four or six horse team with limber all on a long base. There are also 'divisional packs' available which offer good value for money. The purchase of some sample figure strips revealed that the French and Prussians are designed for the 1870 period, the Austrians for the 1859 period, ie they are depicted in tunics rather than greatcoats, this means that while the Prussians are correct, the Austrians are wrong for 1866. Also kriegsspie/can call for the use of skirmishers, outposts and patrols, and as the figures are provided in strips some might need cutting to reduce the size of a unit accordingly - all right with infantry, but virtually impossible with the cavalry. Using single figures from another manufacturer of 6mm figures might address this need, but I do like uniformity in my figures and prefer to use just the figures of one company.
After long reflection I decided that I could live with these points and sent off for a Prussian and an Austrian division
The Forces
In kriegsspiel, the infantry battalion has 900 men, but the basic infantry unit used for the game is the half-battalion of two companies of 225 men each. Each company has three platoons of 75 men each. Each half-battalion has two platoons that can be deployed as skirmishers, equalling 150 men.
This organisation caused me to have more reflection. I had intended that, in keeping with historical organisation, each of my infantry regiments would have three battalions, each battalion having two figure strips ie 12 figures. In order to operate in half battalions, my battalions would have to become half battalions and so I would need to double this figure, mainly for 'the look of the thing' and so use twice as many strips per regiment. As I had (inevitably) fairly grandiose plans for the 1866 set up, this represented quite a financial outlay. Eventually I decided to run with my two figure strips per battalion idea and see how I fared with using the infantry battalion - as opposed to the half battalion - as the basic infantry unit in my game.
There were still a couple of points on infantry. The kriegsspie/rules allow for the use of skirmishers and jagers. The third rank of each infantry company is used as a skirmisher platoon. A battalion (four companies) can employ up to four skirmisher platoons without altering its frontage. Skirmishers operate 100-300 paces in front of the main body. Given that the castings are supplied in strips, single figures are difficult, although as noted above, if required, a strip of six infantry in open order can easily be snipped in half to provide two smaller strips each of three figures, or even three pairs of figures. In keeping with the rules, these could be used as substitute figures when line infantry are deployed as skirmishers. Just how many I might need should become apparent in the light of a few games.
Jagers are infantrymen trained to act purely as skirmishers and again operate ahead of the main body of the infantry. Although the differences between skirmishers and jagers seem to be minimal, there is the odd occasion in the rules when jagers are specified. This was easier to tackle in that jager formations were rarely more than one battalion strong, so two strips of figures in open order each on its own base met. this requirement quite nicely.
The basic cavalry unit in kriegsspie/is the squadron of 150 men in three ranks, four squadrons make a regiment of 600. Each of my cavalry regiments has four strips (ie squadrons) of four figures. Referring back to the use of cavalry patrols and outposts, I decided that if I used a squadron - ie one strip of four figures - in this function, then there would be no problem. I based my cavalry as squadrons, rather than on a common regimental base, so this was quite feasible. The type of cavalry represented is clear from the figures and its interesting that in the Austrian army, cuirassiers were classed as heavy cavalry, with dragoons, uhians and hussars being the light cavalry, while the Prussians classed cuirassiers and uhlans as heavy cavalry, dragoons and hussars as light cavalry.
The basic artillery unit is the half-battery of four guns. There is a standard organisation in the rules, in which horse artillery batteries have six 61b guns and two 71b howitzers, light foot artillery batteries have six 61b guns and two 71b howitzers, heavy foot artillery batteries have six 121b guns and two 10Ib howitzers, howitzer batteries have eight 71b howitzers.
I use a gun and crew on one base, plus a limber and team on another base to represent a half battery. I have not as yet made any distinction between light and heavy, horse and foot. If playing some games demonstrates a need for this then I will do so, but it will only be in the form of some indication marked/written on the team and gun base, as there only is one artillery piece for each side in the Irregular Miniatures' range.
I'm not yet up to Koniggratz level, but I do have painted up eight regiments of infantry, a lager battalion, eight regiments of cavalry and eight guns for the Prussians, matched by 15 infantry regiments, five jager battalions, 10 cavalry regiments and 10 guns for the Austrians.
The numerical discrepancy in the Prussian and Austrian forces is as a result of my checking the maximum number of units that will be needed to refight the seven 1866 scenarios outlined in Nick Dorrell website.
Base Sizes
I have mentioned bases. I use art picture mounting card that is available in a number of colours including, usefully, Russian (or Imperial) green, ideal for instant use. I do not decorate or attempt to disguise the bases, as I need room on which to note the unit's designation.
The base sizes I have used are listed below. There is no real significance in these sizes, they are simply the smallest that can accommodate the figures and some unit notation.
| Troop Type | Frontage | Depth | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Infantry | 30mm | 30mm | A battalion, ie two strips of figures |
| Jagers | 40mm | 15mm | A battalion, one strip of figures |
| Cavalry | 20mm | 15mm | A squadron, one strip of figures |
| Artillery | 20mm | 25mm | A half battery, one gun, plus |
| Gun team | 20mm | 30mm | Horse team and limber |
Unit Designation
With regard to unit notation, I've simply designated the infantry regiments 'A'; 'B', 'C' etc. and the battalions within each regiment I, II, III. The cavalry are marked by type and allocated a number -'1C' for the first cuirassier regiment, '2U' for the second uhlan regiment etc, together with 1, 2, 3 or 4 for the squadrons of the regiment.
This rather soulless system is so that I can use the same units in different scenarios and note on an order sheet the actual units they represent.
While the infantry are usually in a fairly standard uniform, perhaps with the addition of regimental facings on the collar and/or cuffs that are not too obvious in 6mm, the cavalry - particularly the hussars - often have quite distinctive uniforms, even in 6mm. I have tried to copy this on my figures, thus my four units of Austrian hussars for example do wear the uniform of the Austrian 1't to 4th Hussar regiments of the period. Admittedly, this departs somewhat from my 'catch all' unit designation and means that the 1"t Hussars can and will often represent other hussar regiments, but I couldn't really see a way around this.
So, the preparations are all made. All that remains is to actually try out the kriegsspie/rules. I think it will be quite tricky to convert them from map orientated to tabletop, but I'm looking forward to the exercise.
Useful Addresses
Irregular Miniatures, 3 Apollo Street, Heslington Road, York YO10 5AP Tel: 01904 671101 (E-mail: email(a)irreqularmin.fsnet.co.uk) Website: www.irreqularminiatures.co.uk
The Continental Wars Society, 37 Yeading Avenue, Harrow, Middlesex HA2 9RL.
The Solo Wargamers' Association, 14 Gallows Hill, Ripon, North Yorkshire HG4 1RF E-mail: kennhart@btinternet.com
Helion & Company, 26, Willow Road, Solihull, West Midlands B91 1UE Tel: 0121-705 3393 (E mail: publishing@ helion.co.uk) Website: www.helion.co.uk
Back to MWAN # 124 Table of Contents
Back to MWAN List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Magazine List
© Copyright 2003 Hal Thinglum
This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com