In the January 1972 issue of Jargamerts Newsletter I am referred to as a "chronic anglophila of the Victorian dinner tables ... trying to graft onto a set of rules the effect of Wellington's generalship on the British." These rather strong comments were a reaction against some conjecture of mine at the end of the August '71 What Makes a Wargamer Tick? ... namely, that British soldiers should not dice to stand a column charge. In this Mr. Clark sees an example of the 'perfidious albion' attempting "to make the British unbeatable". This is, I fear, an incorrect interpretation of my original idea i.e. i) The basis of Wellingtonian victory were the British line's firepower (which is documented as notably superior to that of other Napoleonic armies) and the reverse slope tactic, aided by the enveloping bayonet charge. ii) All the wargames rules which I have seen provide for the French-style column attack, but not for the three above British tactics. iii) If one is going to get any historical accuracy, the British Army should rely on the line and never (except in storming) the column. iv) Therefore, as it is not prepared for in most sets of Napoleonic rules, Wellingtonian victory - even given the reverse slope, etc., - is very difficult to achieve. For example, in the Battle of Waterloo we fought, the British army's position on the reverse slope did it no more good than if it had been positioned in a level field, as the rules did not provide for the advantages of the reverse slope position. My suggested rule was therefore intended to act as a stop-gap until someone brings out a set of rules which accurately reflects the different quality and tactics of different Napoleonic armies, instead of grouping altogether under the general heading "Napoleonic". something like The Wargames Research Group Ancient Rules, which accurately reflects these different qualities and tactics. Finally, for Mr. Clark's benefit, my calling of European soldiers "levies" and "common or garden" troops was not an intended slur on the fine armies of Prussia, Austria and Russia. The dictionary definition of a "levy", is "the enrolment of men for warlt - would Mr. Clark deny that this is why European armies were formed? Also, by "common or garden" I meant that most European armies were basically the same in quality and tactics - notable exceptions being (superior) the French and British and (inferior) the Spanish and Neapolitan armies i.e. I would place Napoleonic soldiers (vary broadly) in three qualitative categories - (1) British and French; (2) German States (including Prussia), Russia, Austria, Sweden, Italy, Netherlands (until Waterloo) etc., and (3) Spain, Naples (1815, Waterloo Dutch-Belgians). Back to Table of Contents -- Wargamer's Newsletter # 121 To Wargamer's Newsletter List of Issues To MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1972 by Donald Featherstone. 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