On the day after Christmas, we had nine players available for our horse-and-musket game, so a large game was required. We created a scenario for the Battle of Hohenlinden, which fit the bill just right.
The Battle of Hohenlinden was fought in Bavaria on 3 December 1800. Most of the action took place in a large forest, during a heavy snowstorm. In the historical battle, the French forces under General Moreau soundly defeated the Austrian army led by Erzherzog Johann.
Our sources for the scenario were James Arnold’s excellent book, “Marengo and Hohenlinden” and this article on Hohenlinden found on the Obscure Battles blog:
Using the orders of battle of both sources, we organized our figures so that a base of infantry represented about 500 men, a base of cavalry about 300 men, and an artillery base 12-14 guns. Thus our units represented infantry regiments/brigades, cavalry brigades, and two batteries of artillery. The infantry and cavalry units of 2-7 bases worked perfectly for the rules that we used, Bloody Big Battles.
To make Bloody Big Battles (BBB) work for this period, we give all infantry units the “Tactically Inept” rating when fired upon. BBB was originally written for battles in the later 19th Century, when infantry generally fought in more open order. BBB rates infantry that used close order in that period as tactically inept to reflect their greater vulnerability to enemy fire. Since all large infantry formations in the Napoleonic period generally fought in close order, we believe that giving them this rating is historically accurate, and it also gives the poorer musketry and artillery of this period a more relevant effect in the game.
For this scenario, we also rated all cavalry as “Fragile” in the forest. Being fragile would penalize cavalry units in close combat, and would also make it harder for them to recover from disruption, which we felt was a good representation of the difficulties that cavalry would face in a forest — we may use this again in future games.
Although the snowstorm had a major effect on movement and visibility, we did not reduce the rates of movement or the effect of shooting. We find that doing this just bogs down the game. Instead, we simply extended the time that each turn represented. In our game, each turn represented about an hour, giving us a ten turn game that would cover the time from sunrise to sunset.
At Hohenlinden, French leadership, morale, and tactical doctrine were all superior to the Austrians. To reflect this, all French corps and divisional generals were represented with a command stand on the table. All French infantry units were rated as Veteran and given the Skirmisher attribute. The French cavalry at this time was only average, and thus was rated as Regular, with no special bonuses for heavy cavalry. The only Aggressive units in the French order of battle were the small unit of converged grenadiers, the Polish Legion infantry and the Polish Uhlans.
The Austrian army at Hohenlinden was poorly led (with a few exceptions) and their otherwise well trained infantry were not well suited to fighting in a forest in bad weather. Thus only the four Austrian column commanders were represented on the table, along with Frenel, who led the advanced guard, divisional general Schwartzenberg, and the experienced Bavarian general Zweibrucken. Field Marshals Baillet de Latour and Riesch were particularly dilatory, and the units in their columns were rated as “Passive” to reflect this. All of the Austrian units were rated as Regular with no special attributes (including their grenadiers and cuirassiers). The Bavarians in this battle were averse to taking losses, and were rated as Raw to reflect this. Only the two small Austrian grenzer units, and the two Bavarian brigades (which had light infantry battalions) were given the Skirmisher attribute.
Our 12 X 5 foot table was set with the long axis running roughly north-south. The western and eastern edges of the table served as the baselines for the French and Austrians, respectively. A huge forest ran down the center of the table along the long axis, until it reached a mostly open, undulating plain on the southern end. This forest was traversed by a few east-west roads and tracks, which served as the axes of advance for three of the Austrian columns; the fourth column would advance along the southern plain. Most of the western side of the table was an open plain, with the town of Hohenlinden located near the southern end of this plain. The eastern side of the table was also mostly open, with two streams and some small woods. A few other towns and several villages were on the table, mostly on the western plain and near the streams in the east. Because our miniatures were not mounted on snow bases, we opted for a non-snowy, bleak landscape, with leafless trees and evergreens (which we could have used a lot more of!). See the map in Obscure Battles for the details.
The final task in organizing the game was to set the objectives. Historically, the Austrians were attempting to brush aside what they thought was weak French resistance and open the road to Munich. The French were trying to draw in the Austrians, then hit them with a devastating counterattack, led by a flanking attack around the Austrian left. Converting these historical objectives to BBB was a bit tricky, as BBB uses geographic objectives in its scenarios (which work very well at producing good games). Thus, to reflect the Austrian objective of attacking the French, we placed two objectives on the French side of the table — the town of Hohenlinden on the southern end of the plain, and the village of Harthofen on the northern end of the plain. To reflect the defensive-mindedness of the Austrian column commanders, and to give the French some offensive objectives, we placed four objectives on the Austrian side of the table — the town of Isen in the north, the villages of Giglberg and Maitenbeth in the north-center and south-center, and the town of Albaching in the south. These four objectives corresponded to the axes of advance of the four Austrian columns. To win, a side had to hold a majority of the six objectives at the end of the game. Any other result would be a draw.
With the scenario organized and the players assembled, the two sides set about deploying their forces and making their opening moves.
The French were deployed historically, with the three divisions of Grenier’s corps (Legrand, Bastoul, and Ney) on the western plain between Harthofen and Hohenlinden. These three divisions would step forward and take up positions inside the edge of the forest. Grouchy’s division of Moreau’s corps was south of Hohenlinden, with its front regiment inside the forest. Hautpol’s reserve cavalry division was in the rear near Hohenlinden. South of the forest, the light cavalry of Richepanse’s division was screening the movement of his column of infantry through the village of St. Christophe, heading toward Maitenbeth and Abaching. Two hours later, Decaen’s division would follow Richepanse’s division along the same route, entering the table from the SW.
The Austrians were also deployed historically. In the north, Kienmayer’s column entered the table at Isen. Kienmayer personally led Erz. Ferdinand’s mixed division of cavalry and infantry to the west along the road to Harthofen, while Frenel’s and Schwartzenberg’s portion of Kienmayer’s column moved to the southwest, angling toward the center of the French position. In the south-center, Kollowrat’s very long column of Austrians and Bavarians lined the main road toward Hohenlinden, with his advanced elements already deployed to face the forward elements of Grouchy’s and Richepanse’s divisions. In the center, Latour’s column began to enter the table, heading west toward Giglberg. In the far south, Riesch halted for an hour in order to deploy his units, then headed for Abaching.
Kollowrat’s column was the first to make contact with the French, and a firefight ensued. Grouchy steadily built up his front line strength against the leading Austrian infantry regiments to his front, while Richepanse did the same against the two Austrian grenadier brigades facing his division. The Austrians responded by pulling slightly back, deeper into the forest, and unlimbered their artillery to face Grouchy.
A portion of Richepanse’s division raced toward Abaching, and one of his cavalry brigades beat the slow-moving Austrians of Riesch’s column to the town. This delayed the Austrians just long enough for a French infantry regiment to reach the town and occupy it. This single regiment would then see off a succession of attempted Austrian assaults. Although he had a greatly superior force, Riesch was unable to effectively bring it to bear — nevertheless, the contest for the town was a near-run thing. Late in the game, the French defenders were reinforced by elements of Decaen’s division, after which there was no chance of the Austrians taking the objective at Abaching.
In the far north, Kienmayer’s single division made contact with the bulk of Lagrand’s division, and the Austrians did well to fight this superior force to a draw, although the Austrians could not break through to seize the objective at Harthofen. Neither could the French break through to threaten the objective at Isen.
Between Kollowrat’s and Kienmayer’s columns was a large expanse of empty forest, and Bastoul’s and Ney’s divisions moved into this gap, advancing toward the central objective at Giglberg. Bastoul detached part of his division to face Frenel’s and Schwartzenberg’s advancing column, and Ney detached some of his units to assist Grouchy, but the better parts of both French divisions were able to pass completely through the forest before deploying to face Latour’s slowly advancing column. Hautpol’s cavalry division followed them through the forest and soon joined them on the other side.
Under converging pressure from Ney, Grouchy, and Richepanse, Kollowrat’s isolated column began to break apart. The two Bavarian infantry brigades at the rear of the column were sent north and south of the road to try to protect both flanks, while the Bavarian artillery moved away to reinforce Latour. Eventually, the Austrian regiments at the front of the column were spent. Unable to stand up to the subsequent French assaults, the Austrians were hounded through the forest by the victorious French, their artillery was captured, and the Bavarians were swept up in the rout. By the end of the game, except for the Bavarian artillery, which was elsewhere, Kollowrat’s column had been virtually annihilated, and the objective at Maitenbeth was firmly in French hands.
However, in the center, the French were not having everything their way. Supported by the Bavarian artillery, along with Frenel’s advanced guard and Schwarzenberg’s artillery, Latour was able to form a solid defense to hold the objective at Giglberg. Every attempted French attack was repulsed with losses, and the Austrians were able to mount some successful counterattacks. By the end of the game, the Austrians had gained the upper hand in this sector.
The final act involved the advance of Schwartzenberg’s infantry opposed by one solitary French infantry regiment. The leading Austrian regiments assaulted again and again, each time inflicting a minor defeat on the French regiment and forcing it back. If the Austrians could break through the forest and reach the open plain on the French side of the table, there was a slight chance that they could reach Harthofen and/or Hohenlinden. With the entire French army committed to the attack, neither of these objectives were occupied. If the Austrians could have slipped through and taken both, or just one, of these objectives, they would have snatched victory (or at least a draw) from the jaws of defeat. Alas, after eight exciting turns, we ran out of time, and we had to adjudicate that the odds of Schwartzenberg pulling this off in the two remaining turns were just a bit too long. Thus we ruled the game as a French victory!
Everyone agreed that this was one of the best Napoleonic games we had ever played (and we have played a lot!). All of the players were familiar with the BBB rules, which are well-designed for big games with a large group of players, so we could just focus on the playing. The scenario worked very well, with continuous action across the entire table. Both sides had to move and attack to achieve their objectives. Fighting in the forest forced players to think ahead, because once units were sent into the woods, they were difficult to reposition. This created sectors of the table where one side or the other had the advantage, which produced a nice bit of tension and uncertainty. The final result was due to the overall performance of the team, along with a little bit of luck at the right time — just as a good game ought to be!
- TJ
That looks and sounds splendid! Thanks for posting!