Wally Williams

Dear Sir

Would you be interested in an article on Prussian uniforms and equipment of 18666 to supplement Pat McDermett's article in Volume I Number 2?

On the subject of Napoleonic wargames, Pfc Frank Hall USMG (British) and I (French, Piles, Swiss) had at it from 3 p.m. to midnight yesterday. We each crushed the other's flank and ended the game in a draw, after all units except the guards had either been routed, retreated, withdrawn, or been annihilated. All heavy cavalry and all but six (French) light cavalry were destroyed.

An interesting side note on the game occurred when about at 7:00 I related a story of Bob Black's about you. He tells me that in a particular game a Guard or Elite unit performed miserably that you picked up these troops and uttering a foul oath smashed them into the wall. We all thought it was funny until about 10:30 when 16 (all) light cavalry took on 16 French hussars. The French lost 10 and the allies all 16. Frank than preceded to hurl them one at a time with a foul name against my concrete wall.

C'est la guerre!

Ed. Yes indeed, and also rather costly as I can testify as a long standing practitioner. We are looking forward to your article on the 1806 Prussians.

Bud Branson

General? I enjoy your magazine very much and except for the sometimes disorganized format, think you are doing a great job!

My wargame armies consist of Scruby Napoloonies, Airfix Civil War, Romans and Gauls, Cavalry and Indiana, Afrika Kerps, and U.S. Marinas and Japanese. So you can see I'm interested in almost eveything you publish.

What's wrong with the South Pacific during World War II? I can't recall seeing in any war game publication any articles dealing in this period.

Ed. Your kind remarks are appreciated, though I do not personally recall ever having an organized format. Miniature Warfare once did a very interesting spread on Japanese infantry, cavalry, armored, and higher level organizations. It was the author's contention that the Japanese campaigns, chiefly on the Asian mainland, could offer a modern wargame with less heavy equipment and a more workable pace for the table top. From some of my own reading I knew that the pro-war Russo-Japanese encounters--the greater of which started with the rout of Russian-Mongol cavalry by Japanese-Manchurian horse with tactical air support had a good deal to work with. Our elusive former ad manager does have a very thorough file on the Imperial Japanese Army. On the other hand, tanks, armor, and other heavy equipment are the handiest end perhaps most colorful of table top decorations, and preferred by most players. A Pacific Theater campaign calls for a combination of rather dramatic Naval and Air action combined with the most difficult and confusing of ground combat. Do you combine all arms in the game? Or do you presume that your American and Japanese ground troops were both marooned on the sea tropic isle?

Ken Bunier

Dear Sir

I received your letter last month in reply to my letter of last Spring. I appreciate your info on my rather crude figures. They were, by no means, my best or favorite conversions, converting figures being one of the most enjoyable features of the hobby.

As for my complaints about the lack of 20mm Seven Year's War figures; I wrote my letter about two weeks before I received literature about the now Scruby and Miniature Figurines assortments in this period and scale. These figures are really great and compliment rather than duplicate each other. A friend, Bill Protz, and I have begun building up a substantial force of about 420 figures so far.

I have really quite a bit of uniform documentation but there's certainly a lack of availability of info as compared to other periods. I hope, when I say this receive the same deluge of information as occurred following my previous statement on figures.

Between graduation this January and Law School next September I'll have a lot of time an my hands. I hope to submit to TAG a couple of articles on games of the Civil War or Seven Years War. I enjoy TAG and am in favor of any wargame, reports as they always contain some useful ideas. Also I'd like to see some more figure reviews. Good luck for the future.

Ed. Ken was referring to some conversions of Airfix figures which he had evidently recast in metal. That's what he said they were, anyway--they were quite well done and scarcely resembled the original Japanese and Confederate Infantry. The Mid-18th Century offers wide possibilites for the collectors of both round and flat figures many of the more popular scales, and we are eager to handle articles on the period. I may, from information garnered either by accident or to paint my rather widely spread French 18th Century troops, attempt an article an that army, part of which (those serving in Canada) was covered by Aram Bakshian back in Volume I Number 3. Trouble is, there was so much variety among regiments that you practically need a special met of instructions for each. I don't care much for tri-corne, but the uniforms, while challenging to paint, really decorate the game board.

Daniel W. Groves

I read with interest your article in the latest Wargamer's Newsletter on the Mexican War. Ever sines, I bought Hefter's book on the Mexican Forces 1837-1847 1 have had a deep ever growing interest in building an army for both sides. I have developed rules for the period, organized opposing forces, and ordered figures from Jack Scruby a little before Christmas. I had been working on an article to send to Don Featherstone, however, you beat me to it--oh well, the only reason I wanted to see enough printed is because I quite agree with you that it is quite interesting. I even sold part of my 30mm figures because I wanted to concentrate on this period.

I am using a ration of about 1 figure equals 15 men actual, and 1 gun equals 2 real pieces. Organization will be with stands rather than individual figures, and rules quite realistic a la Vietmeyer. I was wondering if you know any sources of information an the San Patricio Battalion. I know there has been in article in The Military Historian and Collector, but I do not know which one. Also, are there any others really interested in this war, with whom I could correspond?

If you have not had an opportunity to read Justin H. Smith's two volume book "The War With Mexico" I highly recommend it to you. Of the two volumess, about haflf are footnotes..lots of data of interest to wargamers. Some quotas are:

"The Mexicans stood artillery and infantry fire fully as well as our own troops,"

"All admit that the Mexicans handle guns in battery as well as we could."

"The Americans really won mostly with the bayonet. The Mexicans lacked the discipline and the confidence in themselves one another, and their officers which were necessary to sustain them against a charge."

Referring to Mexicans the following quotes are good;

"Firing free from the hip to avoid the recoil marred their aim"...."Grapeshot was poorly made and its range was considerably reduced."

"Owing to the smallness of their heroes the cavalry had not much shock value."

There are comments on the Americans as well which amply justify the cost to the wargamer.

I just realized that I forget to mention that I wrote Hefter in Mexico and learned that the Mexican wagons, and gun carriages, were not painted, but tarnished so the grain showed through, and the metal parts were painted a grey with green mixed in so a grey-green color was obtained.

Ed: Our "staff member" currently working on the Mexican War period is James R. Hinds. He is personally skeptical of any historians reference to "firing from the hip" when diagnosing the cause of poor marksmanship in any musket period army. The same goes, to some extent, for "smallness of heroes" as a reason for low shock value. Small horse able to carry a man armed with a lance at a gallop should be presumed to offer shock value--they may have frightened people leas than big heroes would have, and most cavalry does not close unless the enemy shows signs of wavering. I suspect that greater confidence in their own marksmanship, coupled with better marksmanship, gave U.S. regular and volunteer infantry a considerable edge. The marksmanship itself was often leas than spectacular. Too many scholars who talk about "shooting from the hip" fail to take into account the phenomenally low accuracy usually achieved by man holding their muskets against their shoulders.

A poor grade of cannister, coupled with clumsier field pieces may have gone a long way to render the well handled Mexican inefficient in the field--a great deal of the U.S. artillery success at Buena Vista and other battles can probably be attributed to the work of the elite "flying artillery" units with 6pdrs. of a now single trail pattern, which usually appeared close to the front and usually fired cannister.

Also, the Mexican infantry, whose poor marksmanship is cited by many historians, was poorly suited to use skirmisher fire as an anti-dote to advanced batteries. All Napoleonic armies did their beat to engage exposed batteries with light infantry in skirmish order. At Waterloo Wellington's greatest danger came when French voltigeurs occupied a sandy depression and picked off the gunners of the batteries supporting the squares near La Haye Sainte.