The following post has been written by my friend Daniel Trilligan, who wrote and ran a Lasalle scenario of the battle of Maida for Harry and me in June 2026. The scenario is on the Scenarios for Lasalle page. I’m grateful to Dan for running the game and for writing it up. We had a very entertaining game of it.

It is a truth universally acknowledged that the Napoleonic Wars are not so much a ‘rabbit hole’ that wargamers fall into but rather an immense warren with air conditioning, a well-stocked bar and jacuzzi.
I count myself very lucky to have taken my first steps into Napoleonic wargaming under the kind tutelage of many generous friends (Tim chief among them) who have run entertaining games using a whole host of rulesets. Inspired by their example. I've long harboured dreams of running my own games so I can return the favour. The goal would be to run games not only for my existing wargaming buddies but also for other friends who might be interested in giving it a go. What follows is a description of the process that entailed and a brief report of the result.
The first task, picking a rule set, was easy enough. Of the half dozen or so rulesets I've played thus far, Lasalle by Sam Mustafa (specifically the second edition) is a personal favourite. The back-and-forth momentum system combined with the straightforward but satisfying ruleset is a winning combination. In the dozen or so times I've played it, it’s always been a fun game to play moment-to-moment, whilst also providing historically plausible results in a single evening. What more could you ask for?

The next question was ‘What battle to focus on?’. Whilst most of my experience with Lasalle has involved scenarios based on a flashpoint in a larger battle, I was keen to try and find a battle which could be entirely represented in a single scenario. Part of this was a matter of general preference, but it was largely because I wanted to have a manageable painting target. Being something of a hobby butterfly, I hoped that having a coherent number of soldiers to paint would motivate me to actually get them done – rather than being daunted by a seemingly never-shrinking ‘to-do’ pile.
After a little digging online, I stumbled onto the lesser-known Battle of Maida, fought between the British and the French in 1806. Compared to the great clashes of the period, it was barely more than a skirmish, with only about 5000 men per side. Or in Lasalle terms, somewhere in the region of 8-10 units each. Perfectly manageable as a scenario (particularly for a learning game) without being daunting as a painting project.
Having identified the goal, now came the fun part

Before we get into the nitty-gritty of the scenario - a brief summary. The Battle of Maida was fought on 04 July 1806 on the Calabrian coastline of Southern Italy. It saw an expeditionary British force under Major General John Stuart face down the French under General Reynier. The result ‘on-the day’ was what you might politely call ‘a thumping victory’ for the British. Indeed, the French defeat was so emphatic that their soldiers are reported to have referred to it as the ‘15-minute affair’ - not wanting to credit it with the formal title of battle. For the longest time, Maida was a by-word for the strength of the British line over the French column, until a later generation of historians pointed out that the French were probably also formed up in line too.
I started with sketching out the Orders of Battle for both sides. Maida was primarily an infantry affair, with the French only having some light cavalry and the British having no horsemen at all! When trying to build out the rosters from the internet, I quickly noticed that there were some inconsistencies, especially in terms of how much artillery both sides were reported to have and who was brigaded with who.
I therefore decided to dig deeper and picked up a copy of Richard Hopton’s history of the battle: Fifteen Minutes of Glory. This book was a very helpful guide not just to the battle, but also the wider context of the campaign, as well as specific information about the units involved. With its support, I finalised the OOBs, going so far as to adjust the points totals for units where needed to reflect units which were smaller (e.g. the Corsican Rangers) or just generally inferior (e.g. the 78th Highlanders) to the rest of the army.
The historical battlefield didn’t feature any built-up areas to contest or really any locations which could constitute an objective, so the goals for both sides would be simple: break the enemy before you yourself are broken. A little simplistic perhaps, but both in keeping with the history AND easy to explain for a pick-up game. Of course, with such small forces on either side, the break points were tiny, with both sides only able to lose 3 units each before hitting their ‘sudden death’ limit.
Given how potentially deadly combat (particularly melee) can be in Lasalle, I decided to add an optional amendment to the standard ‘sudden death’ rules. Rather than a player losing immediately when their third unit broke, they would instead grant their opponent a victory point, with play continuing until the end of the standard eight turns before ‘carnage’ would be calculated. Never mind that the real battle was short and emphatic, It didn’t seem right to run (and I doubted people would want to play) a scenario that took longer to set up / pack away than it did to complete!
I also decided to waive the requirements for both sides to have baggage markers on the table. Mostly, this was to streamline the battle and ensure that the focus was on the clash of armies, rather than trying to sneak around and capture the enemy's bits and bobs. In all my games of Lasalle I've only ever seen baggage captured once. That was achieved by some fast-moving light cavalry, which this scenario all but lacked, so I was confident it wouldn’t cheapen the game to just remove the markers. As both armies on the day had marched from very nearby camps, it seemed reasonable to just grant the standard baggage bonus to both sides without risk.
The final thing to determine was deployment and reinforcements. The armies at Maida were notable for the fact that they arrived at the battlefield in mirrored echelon, meaning that the British right flank made contact with the French left flank first, then the army centres and so on and so forth down the line. For the scenario, this meant progressively smaller deployment boxes for the various brigades as you went along.
I did (for the most part) elect to ignore the reinforcement rules for the last brigades to become engaged, given that it risked one side becoming severely outnumbered if they couldn’t manage to roll well. The only unit that was treated as reinforcements as per the rules was the 20th Foot for the British, who historically arrived at the battle after everyone else, and contributed to turning it from a disadvantageous situation for the French to an outright defeat.
So that’s how the scenario came to be, but would all the work actually result in something that was fun to play? The only way to find out was to give it all a go..

As my chief enablers in the wargaming hobby, it seemed appropriate that Harry and Tim should face off as the first testers of the scenario. Both are knowledgeable in Lasalle as a system and interested in the period more generally. So really there was no-one better to put the scenario through its paces. Tim even offered to host the game in the wargames shed itself!
All the models used were from my own fledgling collection of 6mm MDF figures from Commission Figurines. As a distinctly middling painter, I've certainly found my niche working in smaller scales. Massed ranks and bright colours can do an incredible amount of the heavy lifting in making a scenario seem like a full battle, rather than simply a dozen or so men taking a flag for a walk – as it can sometimes appear in the larger scales. And in a hobby dominated by ever rising costs, the tiny wooden men remain a much cheaper alternative to their plastic and metal counterparts.
On the day, Harry took the French and Tim the British. As both players were familiar with the rules, we agreed to use the advanced skirmishing rules, and gave the British the linear doctrine to really try and capture the fearsome reputation of ‘the thin red line’.
With the smaller scale of the models, there was enough space between the two opposing forces to have a couple of turns of manoeuvring before things heated up. Harry’s plan involved sending his foremost left-hand brigade forwards as quickly as possible to try and pressure the Brits and prevent them forming a full defensive line. Weathering sustained fire from the British infantry and artillery alike (including some particularly painful rifle-armed Corsican rangers), Harry had some fortunate rally rolls enabling him to keep his battalions in the fight just long enough for the next French brigade to have made up the distance, at which point he started pulling back his weakened units. Unfortunately for Harry, Tim was able to get his light battalion around the flank of the left-most French unit, which, when combined with the extra shooting enabled by the linear doctrine led to the poor Frenchmen being repeatedly raked with fire from two sides, and eventually breaking under the strain.
In the centre, the French stormed across the table in mass formation, opposed by the 78th Highlanders and the 81st “Loyal Lincoln Volunteers”. Interestingly, these central brigades were made up of the poorest quality troops for both sides, making the French easier to shake, and denying the Brits their rapid-fire and resilient traits. The lack of those extra shooting dice meant that the French atually made it into contact with the British. The Highlanders were routed in the resulting daring charge, but an ‘upset victory’ result meant that the lads from Lincoln saw off both units of the Polish-Italian Legion without injury and then proceeded to counter charge and rout one of their attackers in return.
The third and final brigades were moving into position as quickly as they could, but their actual contribution to the battle was relatively minimal. The French artillery battery was perhaps the one exception, with Harry rushing it into position to try and hold his centre against the British counterattack. Sadly, by the fifth round the British shooting advantage had really put the French on the back foot, and it was only a matter of time before the third and final French battalion broke. As it was getting late, we opted to simply finish the turn and see whether the French could break another unit before calling the first run to a close

Both players reported having an entertaining time playing the scenario, and I very much enjoyed watching it pan out in my capacity as umpire. All agreed that the fight is a challenge for the French player, but not an insurmountable one. Indeed, both sides had good and bad dice luck at various moments throughout the game, meaning that the result never felt pre-ordained.
I was particularly pleased that there were no immediately obvious issues with the scenario as written. The only thought I had was perhaps ruling that the Corsican Rangers for the British must be deployed as sharpshooters, rather than being on the tabletop itself. That would limit the volume of firepower (especially those dreaded rifles!) that the British could bring to bear, but I suspect it will be worth running the scenario at least once more before making such a change. For no other reason perhaps than because I’ve already spent the time painting their snazzy green outfits, so they deserve to be seen at least a few times before they’re relegated to only being tokens!
All in all, the whole process has been a great deal of fun. Whilst ‘fictional’ scenarios can be entertaining, ‘historical’ scenarios just feel undeniably ‘closer’ to the period. And off the battlefield, games such as these encourages painters to work on some specific units that might not otherwise have become part of a gaming collection. How many other wargamers have got ‘de Wattevile’s Swiss’ in their British armies I wonder?
Tim has very kindly offered to upload the Maida scenario on the blog on the Scenarios for Lasalle  page, in case anyone wants to give it a go themselves.
Since the battle, I've started reading John Gill’s history of the 1809 campaign, so who knows, maybe I'll have a go at some more scenarios – if I can stomach painting all that white for the Austrians.

There is an understandable wish at our club to cater for all tastes and offer a varied menu of gaming options. We therefore tend to flit between periods and rule sets. The drawback of this approach is that games can be slowed down mightily by unfamiliarity with the rules., so we do try to play one rules set several times in succession, to help bed them down. We find that when we do this, games really speed up as the focus shifts from checking the index to playing the period, as someone or other says. Paul has done this in the past with several great WW2 games using Battlegroup, while recently Alistair has been running a very successful linked AWI campaign using Sharp Practice. The result of sticking with the same rules for several sessions is certainly rewarding.

We don’t have a favourite Napoleonics set at the club. The contenders for games above skirmish level are Black Powder, Blucher, Soldiers of Napoleon, General d’Armée 2 and Lasalle. We have played them all in recent months, but rarely more than a couple of times apiece. Each has its fans. Blucher stands apart for Corps and Army level games, though there has been talk of trying Napoleon’s Battles again. My own top candidates for ‘divisional’ rules are Soldiers of Napoleon and Lasalle. So far, I have honestly been unable to choose between them, partly because we have not yet played enough games with the same rules to really get used to them. Until recently, that is.

Outside the club, we have a smaller gaming group that occasionally meets on a weekday evening. We tend to lean heavily on Napoleonics and for the past four meetings, we have played Lasalle. I am very glad we did as the ease of play has improved noticeably with each game.

Our first Lasalle game was at the club, where we played the combat at Markkleeberg (Leipzig, 16/10/1813), using 15mm figures and a Base Width of 40mm. This and the other scenarios described below are on the Scenarios for Lasalle page. The aim of the scenario for the Allies (Russians and Prussians) is to dislodge Poniatowski’s Poles from the village of Markkleeberg and so help their Austrian Allies to cross the river Pleisse into the French right rear. In this first game, the Allies assaulted the village several times without success, having elected not to soften it up first with musketry or artillery fire. We repeated the scenario a few days later but trying to apply the lessons of the first game. The result this time was much more satisfactory for the Allies, who pummelled the village with fire before taking it by assault. I am certain that the challenge in the first game was unfamiliarity with the interplay between firing, movement and close combat in the rules. Every rules system has its nuances that it is important to grasp if you are going to make the best of things.

The third game was Jakubowo, an action between Oudinot’s Corps and Wittgenstein on the northern flank of the invasion of Russia. For this one we used 6mm figures and a 30mm Base Width. Harry and my Russians emerged from the forest to find Dan and Ian’s French deployed around the settlement of Jakubowo. We tried and failed to dislodge the French in the 8 turns allowed in the scenario. I think on reflection the game should have been 12 turns to reflect the greater distances we had to cover on the table with our 30mm BW, but I think we would still have been bottled up by a very effective French defence. I do enjoy the mass visual effect of playing in 6mm and am so impressed by the MDF figures that now make up most of our 6mm armies. They are as cheap as chips and look stunning on the table. (If you are interested, look for Commission Figurines, who makes Napoleonic and ACW figures in 6mm as well as some lovely buildings and ruins in various scales). All players were comfortable with the rules by now and the game flowed well.

We played our fourth game on 18 June so thought it fitting to play something from the Waterloo campaign. I only have French and Prussians in 6mm and we have not long ago played the first Prussian assault at Plancenoit, so we jumped back two days to the battle of Ligny. I had written the scenario for both Soldiers of Napoleon and Lasalle and we had played the SoN version twice before, but this was the first time with Lasalle. Will led the Prussian counterattack against Dan’s 7th Division holding Saint Amand la Haye, while I champed at the bit in the wings, hoping to bring French reinforcements onto the table in time to make a difference.

This fourth game was the most tense and entertaining I can remember for a long time. Dan had an option to cover the whole front but chose to anchor his left in St Amand la Haye, more or less at the mid-point of his baseline, thereby leaving Will free to send 5th Brigade deep into the French left table half, for much of the way in march column. Dan therefore found himself with Prussians both in front of the village and on the high ground to its left flank. This was a bold and risky deployment by Dan and initially, he seemed at risk of being chewed up from front and flank as a lot of Prussian firepower converged on the northernmost sector of St Amand la Haye. Indeed, Will damaged and then evicted the garrison from this sector. Meanwhile, however, Dan’s right swept away the Fusilier battalions on Will’s left, and his compact division was then well placed to support the remaining two sectors of the village. Then Will inflicted an upset by capturing Dan’s baggage, - the first time this has happened in one of our games. The French camp was decidedly gloomy at this point but at the end of the turn, the French reinforcements finally arrived.

The French reinforcements appeared to the left of St Amand la Haye, to find Will’s flanking force on the high ground. Will turned his troops to face them and it looked as if they could contain the new arrivals, at least long enough for the village to fall. However, the French then had one of those turns when nothing can go wrong and the reinforcements charged and immediately broke two previously unscathed Prussian battalions and an artillery battery. Not only did this effectively snuff out the Prussian threat to Dan’s flank, but it brought the Prussians to within one unit of sudden death. The struggle continued to the final turn when Will’s Hussars, having survived all sorts of scrapes thus far, were finally destroyed by canister fire. And that was that.

I am really glad we have had a run of Lasalle games in a shortish space of time. There is nothing like being punished for your mistakes in one game to teach you to do differently next time around. The best example of this for me is Dan’s tactics for defending a village. In Markkleeberg, he had all battalions in garrison and no reserves close by. They held out well until they didn’t and at that point, there was no way to recapture the village. At St Amand la Haye, the two sectors nearest the enemy were garrisoned but the third had a battalion in mass formation, ready to counterattack if needed. He also had friends outside the village, near enough to support the garrison. The result was far better!

Gamers like variety, especially on club night, so I won’t push my luck with Lasalle. But we ought to play another game before long, so we keep on top of the rules. It would be a shame to have to go through the learning process all over again!

I recently finished reading the memoirs of Henryk Brandt of the Vistula Legion, which have a detailed account of his experiences during Napoleon’s invasion of Russia in 1812., I was interested by his account of the battle of Valutina Gora or Lubino. This was fought on 19 August 1812 between a Russian rearguard and a combined French and Württemberger force under marshals Ney and Murat. It was described as another wasted opportunity to destroy Barclay de Tolly’s Russian field army, which was strung out along the Moscow road after abandoning Smolensk. The battle was closely fought as the small Russian rearguard was constantly reinforced during the afternoon, just managing to keep the French from disrupting the retreat. It also had some interesting ‘what ifs’. For example, Junot’s corps was in a position to outflank the Russian position but despite Murat’s pleading, Junot refused point blank to bring up his troops. Also, Napoleon himself seemed not to realise the opportunity that Ney and Murat faced, so did not attend the scene himself or inject more urgency into their efforts.

The battle had two quotes attributed to it. When Tuchkov, the Rearguard commander, sought out Barclay de Tolly to demand reinforcements, the C in C allegedly said to him: “Return to your post and get yourself killed. If you come back again I will shoot you myself.” On the French side, when Napoleon realised he had missed an opportunity and was told of Junot’s inactivity in the face of the enemy, he declared that Junot would never receive his marshal’s baton.​

I found a scenario for Lubino on the excellent Free Napoleonic Scenarios website run by the Grognards group https://napoleonicscenarios.weebly.com/. There doesn’t seem to have been any action on the site since 2015 but it is a great resource and I hope the Grognards are still playing. The scenarios are written for Age of Eagles which I don’t know or play. They are however adaptable to Sam Mustafa’s Blücher, as both rules are at the same operational level. So thanks to the Grognards and with a bit of help from George Nafziger’s history of 1812, my scenario for Lubino is on the Scenarios for Blücher page. The map is closely based on the one in the Grognards scenario but the OOBs and special rules are mine.

Four of us played the scenario on 22 January. It was a tough game in which the initial Russian hilltop defence held up well against Ney’s corps, but was eventually overwhelmed. It had however bought enough time for Russian reinforcements to form a solid second line that the French could not break before nightfall. As happened on the day, Junot’s corps did not arrive on the field.

I adjusted the victory conditions after the first game. Originally they required the French to take the town of Lubino. The amended conditions allowed the French also to win by exiting at least two infantry units off the Russian table edge, thereby obliging the Russians to cover their whole front and not just cluster all their troops around the town.
I ran the game again with two other players on 30 January. Dan and I took the French side, while Harry led the Russian rearguard. This game ran differently from the first one: the hilltop was contested right until the end of the day, but the French and Württembergers went around the hill position and obliged Harry to extend his left. Also, in this game Junot’s Westphalian corps arrived,  on the high ground almost behind the Russian position. Things initially looked promising for the French and their allies as Junot had a clear run to the Russian base line. However, Harry threw his badly depleted cavalry in Junot’s path and scrabbled to shift more infantry to his left. The cavalry was destroyed but had done enough: night fell and the game ended with the Russian position crucially intact.
Both games were close fought with lots of memorable moments. Russians on the defensive are so hard to shift! I am happy with the scenario as it now stands. It is always a balancing act to allow for events that didn’t happen but could have done (in this case, Junot’s arrival).

I’ve read some interesting discussion on the Sam Mustafa forum recently about the merits of Blücher.  Some players miss the column/line/square options and tactical choices offered by Lasalle and similar rules. Now, I really enjoy Lasalle too, but I am perfectly happy with the operational scale that Blücher targets. While the players don’t make decisions about formations or other matters that would not trouble a commanding general, the rules  nevertheless present them with plenty of options and tricky decisions from turn to turn. So Blücher suits me very well for the bigger battles, though when the urge to go tactical strikes, my figures are based for Lasalle too. Why choose between rules when you don’t have to?

I am currently reading the memoirs of Henryk Brandt, who was an officer in the Vistula Legion during the Napoleonic Wars. It is full of anecdotes, some of them quite revealing of the tough culture in the French army serving in Spain. His account of the siege of Saragossa is particularly frank. I found the following passage interesting.

“Our brigade commander, Habert, enjoyed a good reputation with the troops. He was tall, energetic and serious, with the bearing of an athlete and a rough manner that was much appreciated by his soldiers.

I recall one incident involving him during the street fighting at Saragossa. We had taken a street that opened onto a square that was still occupied by our enemies and had barricaded the entrance to the square so we could pass without danger from one side of the street to the other. When passing behind the barricade we had to bend down to avoid the Spanish fire, and tall men like Habert had to crouch even lower. The general was crossing the street in this manner when a nearby soldier declared: “What? So generals are afraid as well?” Habert, enraged, spun around, grabbed the unfortunate soldier by the shoulder and dragged him into the centre of the street, holding both himself and the soldier to their full height. A shower of musket fire fell around them: the soldier was pierced by 5 or 6 musket balls and the general emerged unscathed except for a light wound on his arm. He then threw the bloodied corpse of the soldier on the ground, kicked it, uttered a filthy insult and walked away.

“He did the right thing” said the French. “It’s wicked to say something like that about a general like him”.

Translated from “Moja służba w Legii Nadwiślańskiej” by Henryk Brandt, Armagedon, Gdynia 2002.

General Pierre-Joseph Habert, 1773 - 1825

I’ve been down another rabbit hole recently, reading up about Poles in the Napoleonic era for a Sharp Practice game about the death of Poniatowski. There is an excellent facebook group called “Epoka Napoleońska”, which often posts albums of uniforms and battle scenes from the period. Recently this group posted a link to an article from the Polish magazine “Historia”, published on 27 February 2023, about the origins of the Polish national anthem. It was so interesting that I decided to summarise it here.

The story begins with the Third Partition in 1795, when the Polish State disappeared from the map, her territories shared out between Russia, Austria and Prussia. In 1797 the Polish Legions were raised in Italy under French sponsorship, attracting former soldiers and young patriots in exile. Their commander was General Jan Henryk Dąbrowski, an experienced officer who would serve the Polish cause throughout the Napoleonic wars.

Also in 1797, the Polish nobleman, politician and writer, Józef Wybicki, a friend of Dąbrowski who had joined him in Italy, wrote a poem that became known as “the Song of the Polish Legions in Italy”. The words were set to the music of a popular Mazurka and sung for the first time on 20 July 1797 in Reggio Emilia in Italy. The Dąbrowski’s Mazurka soon became the Legions’ marching song and its popularity spread. In 1806 it was first printed in the partitioned Polish territories, and from then on, it became an enduring symbol of the ambition to regain independence. Despite being banned by the partitioning powers, the song kept its popularity and eventually became the official national anthem of the restituted Poland in 1927.

The loyalty and courage of Polish troops in Napoleon’s service is legendary. The words of Dąbrowski’s Mazurka help demonstrate how tightly the dream of restored nationhood was bound to the person of the French Emperor. Small wonder they fought so hard for him, right up to the end.

The original song had six verses, though verses four and six have been dropped in modern times (you can guess why) . Some of the words have changed slightly since 1797 but the gist is exactly the same. My loose translation is below

Poland has not yet died
As long as we are alive
We shall take back by the sword
What foreign powers have stolen.
Refrain:
March, march, Dąbrowski
From Italian lands to Poland
Under your command
We shall unite with the nation.
We will cross the Vistula, cross the Warta
We will be Poles
Bonaparte has shown us by example
How we shall be victorious.
Refrain
Just as Czarniecki returned to Poznan
From across the sea
To save the fatherland
After the Swedish partition.
Refrain
Neither German nor Muscovite shall settle (our lands)
When, having drawn our sword,
Our watchword will be “Unity
And our Fatherland”.
Refrain
So the father says
To his weeping (daughter) Basia
“Hark! It seems our (lads)
Are beating the military drums”.
Refrain
At this we all say with one voice
“Enough of this captivity!
We have the scythes of Racławice
Kościuszko, if God wills it”.

And the Polish original text:

Jeszcze Polska nie umarła,
Kiedy my żyjemy.
Co nam obca moc wzięła,
Szablą odbierzemy.
Refrain:
Marsz, marsz, Dąbrowski
—Do Polski z ziemi włoski
—Za twoim przewodem
—Złączym się z narodem.
Przejdziem Wisłę, przejdziem Wartę
Będziem Polakami
Dał nam przykład Bonaparte
Jak zwyciężać mamy.
Refrain
Jak Czarniecki do Poznania
Wracał się przez morze
Dla ojczyzny ratowania
Po szwedzkim rozbiorze.
Refrain
Niemiec, Moskal nie osiędzie,
Gdy jąwszy pałasza,
Hasłem wszystkich zgoda będzie
I ojczyzna nasza.
Refrain
Już tam ojciec do swej Basi
Mówi zapłakany
Słuchaj jeno, pono nasi
Biją w tarabany.
Refrain
Na to wszystkich jedne głosy
Dosyć tej niewoli
Mamy racławickie kosy
Kościuszkę Bóg pozwoli.
Refrain

Last month, I hosted a game of Blücher in the shed for Nick, Harry, Dan, James and Jack. The scenario was Abensberg, 1809, on the Scenarios for Blücher page. We have played a few games based on the 1809 campaign using Blücher, Lasalle and Soldiers of Napoleon, but I haven’t tried to game Abensberg until now. The reason, I suppose, is that the day was more a series of separate actions than a set-piece battle. Formations appeared on the scene from different directions and it was hard to coordinate movements in the heavily wooded and hilly Bavarian landscape.

The game saw Jack and James’ Bavarians put early pressure on the Austrian right flank under Nick and centre under Dan. Nick and Dan had weak forces and several dummy unit cards, the threat of which slowed the Bavarians somewhat but of course were removed as soon as the enemy got within spotting distance. The French then appeared behind the Austrian right flank, though curiously, they advanced with some caution. Meanwhile Dan was shifting his Austrian forces from the centre to the right, as Harry’s reinforcements arrived on the left and he finally got moving. Poor Harry had spent much of the game watching Dan and Nick play, but he didn’t complain and declared himself happy to be moving his grenadiers and kürassiers.

Athough slow, the French advance threatened to encircle Nick’s remaining troops and he withdrew his paper-thin units towards Dan. As the Austrian right folded backwards, Harry on the left began to swing around the Bavarian right, and so the front rotated steadily clockwise. For a time, the Austrians looked as if they were going to lose too many units but Franco-Bavarian losses mounted too and as the gaming day drew to a close, it was clear that Austria had done enough to thwart Napoleon’s ambitions for the day. The two French objectives were still comfortably in Austrian control and more Austrian reinforcements had arrived on table. Victory, albeit marginal, went to the Kaiserlicks.

The game moved at a good pace and the players had no difficulties with the Blücher rules. One personal innovation I think worked well was to give each player two tokens at the start of the game that they could spend, either in combat or in rallying a damaged unit. We found when we played Waterloo last year that the ability to rally troops in the rules as written was too generous, meaning that a commander capable or rallying units dashed around restoring fighting power left right and centre: not realistic. On the other hand I like players to have choices they can exercise on how they influence the game. The two tokens meant intervention could be significant but did not dominate.

Overall, I think the battle went well and I enjoyed the company of the other players very much. I plan to host the same game with a different group of players next month.

Last Friday I ran a four-player game of Blucher at Staines Wargames Club. The scenario was Laichling 1809, on the scenarios page here. This was the fight between Davout and Rosenberg on 21 April, the day before the battle of Eggmühl. Ian and Harry led the French against Chris and Nick’s Austrians.

This scenario is unusual in having a lot of woodland, especially on the French side. In the real battle, Friant’s division moved northwards through the woods without much difficulty, before emerging to assault the village of Ober-Sanding. I found the Blucher rules as written too restrictive to permit the French to recreate this advance, since reserve movement is not permitted in woods and all movement in them is classed as ‘difficut’. I introduced a house rule for this game only, that infantry with the skirmish ability is able to make an easy move in woods. This covered all French infantry and the Austrian Grenzers, but Austrian Line did not benefit.

Chris as Rosenberg set up the on-table Austrians, with garrisons in the villages of Unter and Ober Laichling and his cavalry on his far left. Ian deployed the Bavarians on the French right and Friant in the Centre, and Harry took St Hilaire on the left. The game began with Ian/Friant assaulting Unter Laichling and Harry moving north through the woods towards the Sandings. Ian’s first two attacks on Unter Laichling were repulsed at some cost, but he was third time lucky. The rest of the game saw Austrians and French taking and retaking the village, with possession finally in French hands. The Bavarians also advanced on Friant’s right. The infantry held their own but their cavalry were given a bloody nose by the Stipcisz Hussars.

Meanwhile Nick’s first Austrian reinforcements arrived and moved to occupy Ober Sanding before Harry could get there. Harry was so fixed on reaching this village that he veered a bit too close to the Austrians around Ober Laichling and Chris charged two of Harry’s regiments in the flank. Harry got off very lightly in the ensuing combat but he was obliged to turn two regiments to face the Austrian centre, which reduced the French resources available to assault the Sandings.

Harry’s first assault on Ober Sanding was seen off in style, with Nick rolling either a 5 or 6 for every single combat die. Harry’s next attempt succeeded and his depleted regiment occupied the village. At this point, the French already held Unter Laichling and would win the game outright if they held both villages at the end of the next Austrian turn. Chris and Nick tried their damnedest to evict the French, with Nick sending in two units against Harry’s regiment in Ober Sanding. Despite having many more dice than the enemy, Nick’s rolling let him down for this combat and both Unter Laichling and Ober Sanding remained in French hands, bringing the game to an end.

This was a tense game, which almost went the full 26 turns. It rattled on at a good pace and the players seemed to enjoy themselves. I thought the scenario was well balanced and could genuinely have gone either way. Had the French sudden death conditions not been met, I reckon the Austrians may have inflicted enough damage to win the day. As it was, the honours went to Davout.

Thanks to all the players for getting stuck in. Commiserations to Chris and Nick and congratulations to Ian and Harry.

On 17 October, Dan, Harry, Will and I played a game of Lasalle. If I’d been thinking about the date I’d have run a Leipzig scenario but my brain was on go-slow and we played an 1809 game instead. The scenario was “Feeling for the enemy”, Friant’s attack towards Ober Sanding on 21 April 1809. It is downloadable here.

The scenario begins with Rosenberg’s Austrians deployed along the Regensburg-Eggmühl highway facing West and Friant’s French arriving in the south west corner of the table. The French aim is to take the village of Ober-Sanding on the Austrian right, which would cut the highway and hence the Austrians’ connection to Regensburg. The table is unusual in having a lot of woodland, especially on the French side of the valley. Dan took the Austrians and Will and Harry, the French.

The game began with the French 15th Light, the best French regiment, advancing eastwards through the woods in the centre. Dan had deployed two Grenzers battalions on the edge of the woods, ready to slow the French down, but the 15th despatched them almost immediately (to my embarrassment since I had encouraged Dan to place them there). Meanwhile the French left, comprising 6 battalions, moved northwards through the woods and came out opposite and slightly overlapping the village.

Up to this point, Dan had had atrocious luck with his dice rolls, his artillery barely troubling the French as they emerged from the woods. Also his reinforcements failed to show, which was less surprising since they needed two sixes to appear (each turn the players roll a number of dice equal to the turn number. Standard reinforcements arrive when one 6 is rolled; delayed reinforcements like Dan’s require two 6s). Fortunately for him, Dan began rolling better as the French attack on Ober Sanding started.

As Harry now had to leave, Will assumed full command of the French and began his attack on the village with three battalions in line and three in battalion mass to the rear. His firing reduced the garrison to rubble but Dan was able to race a reserve battalion into the village before the French could occupy it. This battalion was then assaulted by two French battalions who were repulsed in short order. Meanwhile Dan advanced his centre to support his village and, at just the right moment, his artillery and musketry so disrupted the 15th Light that it ceased to be a factor in the game.

The game ended with Will still outside the village but his reserves ready to mount another assault; the French centre incapable for now of forward movement; and the French right poised to put pressure on Dan’s outnumbered left. Dan’s centre was well-placed and holding their own and he still held the town on the right but he no longer had a reserve available should the garrison be bundled out by the French assault. Dan’s off-table reinforcements were still refusing to appear.

We agreed the game was a draw since it could still have gone either way. I’d give bragging rights to Dan however as I realised too late that the scenario heavily favoured the French, in two important respects. First, the French had such a big skirmish advantage that they went first every turn and had way more momentum than they needed. This negated any challenge arising from moving through the heavy woodland. Second, the French reinforcements only needed to roll one 6 to arrive, which happened quickly and gave them too much of a numerical advantage.

After the game I amended the scenario to reduce the French skirmish advantage (though they do still have one) and to require reinforcements on both sides to roll two 6s before they could appear. I hope this will make the Austrian task a little easier.

The scenario and orders of battle were taken from John H Gill’s Thunder on the Danube (volume 1). The Lasalle rules worked well and Will and Harry, both new to the rules, picked them up effortlessly. Next time, I’d like to try the same scenario using Soldiers of Napoleon to see how it compares. I was grateful to all players for the enthusiasm with which they assumed their Napoleonic roles!

I have been gathering ideas for a Sharp Practice scenario of the last moments of Prince Józef Poniatowski, Commander in Chief of the army of the Duchy of Warsaw, who died on the last day of the battle of Leipzig in October 1813. I found two accounts in Polish, one by Mariusz Lukasiewicz in his book “Armia Ksiecia Jozefa, 1813” and the other in “Lipsk”, by Jadwiga Nadzieja. Both accounts drew on eye witness reports and are almost identical. The following is a translation of the account in Lukasiewicz, with a small comment from Nadzieja’s book.

Introduction: On 19 October 1813, Napoleon’s army was retreating westwards from Leipzig, covered by a rearguard including Poniatowski’s Polish VIII Corps. The army had only one route out of the city and while the details are still disputed, the single bridge over which the troops were retreating was blown up prematurely, leaving several thousand troops of the rearguard on the far side, including the Poles. With the bridge gone, the only way the stranded troops could avoid death or capture was to cross two rivers, the Pleisse and then the Elster, either on makeshift bridges or by swimming. Meanwhile, Russian and Prussian skirmishers were racing to cut them off.

“Poniatowski retreated from the water fountain, together with his headquarters staff and remaining soldiers. They moved through the Reichel‘s garden and the Rudolf garden towards the river Pleisse under fire from approaching enemy skirmishers. The cuirassiers and some chasseurs were still fighting. General Bronikowski strongly urged the commander-in-chief to swim his horse across the Pleisse. Poniatowski was reluctant to withdraw, but eventually ordered his escort to gain time with one more charge and then jumped into the river. The Pleisse was deep and fast moving due to the autumn rains and Poniatowski’s horse couldn’t make it up the far bank. Seeing him in trouble Hypolite Blechamps, a young French captain on the Headquarters staff, ran to help. (Jadwiga Nadzieja says he was assisted by another aide, Ludwig Kicki, who was shot soon after dragging Poniatowski to the bank). He freed Poniatowski from his horse and pulled him onto the riverbank.

The prince now proceeded for a time on foot. As he retreated through the gardens he was wounded for a fourth time, this time by a musket ball in his side. The wound was serious and only quick attention stopped him from bleeding to death. Poniatowski fell unconscious into the arms of his escort but soon regained his senses. His staff begged him to hand over command to one of his generals and surrender to the Allies so his wounds could be properly treated. Now half-conscious, Poniatowski refused, saying that his honour and duty to his Fatherland would not permit him to do this. With the help of his adjutants, he mounted another horse and supported from both sides, rode along the River Elster towards a crossing place that had been indicated by an officer of engineers.

Allied troops had by now already reached the river and some had even crossed to the other side, shooting at the soldiers as they tried to swim to safety. Bleeding heavily and losing consciousness every few moments Poniatowski’s path was suddenly blocked by an enemy detachment and he turned his horse and jumped in the river. The horse managed with difficulty to reach the far bank, but as it scrambled to get out of the water, Poniatowski was hit again by a musket ball. He slid off the horse into the water and began to drown. Captain Blechamps again jumped in to help him, but soon they both disappeared in the current and neither was seen alive again.

Poniatowski’s corpse was recovered from the Elster by a local fisherman on 24 October and his identity confirmed by Polish prisoners.”