A tiny test of Twilight: Fraustadt 1706

The ’Twilight of the Sun King’ rules were first brought to my attention by a review on the marvellous 'Un Marius Sinon Rien' blog. Reading a further review on wargamer.com website convinced me to purchase them. They arrived in April and I was immediately keen to give them a go. I threw some Great Northern War Saxons into the ever-expanding group of figures that I am painting. Having brought these, a few Russians and some additional Swedes to the stage of ‘good enough’ (base-coat completed, awaiting black-wash, addition of basing mix and then final highlights/details), my impatience could wait no longer; it was time for a test game.

Set-up for this first test game, the Battle of Fraustadt 1706 at brigade scale (a scenario provided in the rules). This also gave me a chance to have a go with my new latex rivers and roads. The scale meant that 15 mm and N-gauge railway buildings were most appropriate.

Twilight of the Sun King, revised edition 2019

The Rules

The authors of Twilight of the Sun King are members of the Pike and Shot Society, so it is little wonder that the rules have a strong historical focus. That said, they are not complex; I consider them to be the definition of elegant simplicity. The rule book is 22 pages long, with a further three devoted to the introductory scenario and a one-page 'advert.' for the Pike and Shot Society. The rules could easily have been written on around four pages, I'd estimate. The longer presentation is due to them having been printed in a large font, with clear, large diagrams and the odd reproduction of a painting from the period—all most pleasing aspects. The booklet is a simple, A4 production printed in black and white (apart from the cover) and is not especially cheap (£12 plus postage). It does not, though, suffer from the problem of gloss over substance that besets so many of those expensive, hard cover sets of rules that seem to be churned out all to regularly.

I was drawn to purchase the rules because they featured a truly novel system which sounded like it could work well (and was certainly worth a go to find out). They take the familiar 'I go you go' approach, but the similarity with other set of rules stops there. The turn sequence for each side comprises but three phases: opponent's bombardment, test morale of own troops (for effects of bombardment, firing, mêlée), move own troops. In each turn the attacker moves first followed by the defender.

All movement and ranges are calculated in base widths, so the rules are completely scalable. Units can always move straight ahead, so there is none of this business of troops sitting around waiting for someone to tell them how to march. More 'elaborate' manoeuvres (including charging, formation changes, crossing terrain, entering difficult going, undertaking more than one move) require a successful 'action test'. This is simply a roll of a D6 with anything but a 1 or 2 being a success. There is a negative one modifier to the die roll for the action test if the unit failed a morale test in the current turn (and/or is charging a platoon firing unit—for the Great Northern War this is limited to "probably Russians from 1710").

There is no firing. WHAT?!!! If you have read reviews of the rules you'll already know this 'shocking fact'. Actually, it is not really correct. There is plenty of firing (as you'll see in the photos below), but it is not conducted in the familiar manner where a roll is made against factors and ranges to determine the casualties on the enemy unit(s) (or other mechanic being used). Rather, in Twilight of the Sun King being fired upon, involved in mêlée or infantry with cavalry in close proximity (1/2 base width) are causes to test morale and any artillery fire, small arms fire, mêlée, terrain/defences, supports/flanking (as appropriate) are modifiers to the test.

Failing a morale test (modified score of two average dice below eight) results in a morale failure (four or below is a rout). Generally infantry will break on their third failed test, cavalry and artillery on their second. A unit classified as 'large' and/or 'determined' gets an extra morale failure before breaking, while one classed as 'wavering' gets one fewer (units classed as 'small' and those classed as 'raw' receive a negative one modifier in the test). There is no way to 'rally' troops or otherwise recover morale, but a commander may have an impact.

The presence and proximity of commanders is important in Twilight of the Sun King to bolster morale (i.e. re-take a morale test if 'attached' to the unit—within a base width) and to encourage the troops to undertake some of those more elaborate manoeuvres mentioned above (i.e. re-roll an action test). In the former case a commander is a commander (provided that he may command the unit, is close enough and is not 'attached' elsewhere), while his quality is important for the latter (and for a brigade or army test if required).


I was pleased that the introductory scenario provided in the rules is for the Battle of Fraustadt, 2nd February 1706 (by the Julian calendar—one day later by the Swedish calendar of the time and eleven days later by the modern Gregorian calendar) as the Great Northern War is one of the two conflicts in the eighteenth century that interest me greatly—along with the French and Indian War, not being particularly 'fussed' with the rest (apologies to the devotees out there). The scenario in the rules allows for the game to be played at either the brigade or regimental scale. I decided to test the rules initially at the brigade scale, moving to a larger game if I liked them sufficiently. I used the scenario largely as provided, but adjusted the order of battle, chiefly using the Great Northern War Compendium, to one that I considered more historically accurate.

Volume one of the Great Northern War Compendium includes a chapter by Oskar Sjöstrom and Stephen Kling about the Battle of Fraustadt. I used this source, principally, to adjust the order of battle for the game.

Playing the game solo meant that I carried out turns as and when it suited, playing two turns over two nights last week and then finishing the game on the Friday. This was really helpful as it allowed me to proceed slowly and to double-check the rules between mini-sessions. 

The Game
 
This has been a wordy post so far, by my standards, so let's proceed to the pictorial description of the game.
 

Table set-up, showing the map from the rules. The area is tiny, being 10 base widths x 15 base widths or 500 mm x 750 mm for my figures.

The Russo-Saxon army had been lured by Rehnkshold from its strong defensive position on the heights near Schlawa when the latter had moved his Swedish army away from their positions in a seeming headlong retreat. Schulenburg, commanding the Russo-Saxons, advanced, then hastily formed a new, improvised and 'messed-up' defensive position north-east of Fraustadt when Rehnkshold turned to give battle.

View from the Saxon side of the table. Note the far inferior Swedish force, odds roughly 2:1 in the Saxon favour.

A map from Sjöstrom and Kling's chapter in the Great Northern War Compendium. I began the game by copying these moves (as far as possible, allowing for the scale).

As per history, the Saxon guns opened fire on the advancing Swedes (bombardment range in the rules).

"From right to left, one cannon after another spewed its deadly content onto the field... however, aside from the battery at the right end of the line that managed to slow down a couple of Swedish battalions, the salvoes had had more or less no effect at all" (Sjöstrom and Kling 2016). We were going fairly well to script, the Södermanlands regiment at the right of the line failing the morale test (indicated by the black piece of straw).

Rehnkshold encouraged his centre forward towards the Saxon positon (successful action test for a second move).

The Saxon cannons fired "... a third at short range and canister" (Sjöstrom and Kling 2016).
Another morale failure for the Södermanlands.

GåPå! The Swedish infantry charged the fortifications.

On the Swedish left, the Livdragonregementet moved to confront the Saxon cavalry.

 

On the Swedish left, in a break from history, the Saxon garde du corps and Goltz Dragoon Regiment attempted to advance through the marsh, only making it half-way (failed action test to exit). At this point, I realised that I had mucked up my left and right and so put two Saxon cavalry units on their right, instead of three, the reverse on their left. Ah well, that's what test games are for!

The Saxon infantry opened fire on the attacking Swedes. (Note dear reader, that is more of that firing that does not exist in the rules!).

This time the Västmanland regemente (Södermanlands in support) failed a morale test (above), but the Närke-Värmlands regemente, an élite unit with the Pommerska dragoons in support, passed (below).

 

Breaking with history, the Saxon infantry behind the chevaux de frise, represented by the zig-zag fences here, continued to hold. The foot guards (right of photo) passed their morale test, forcing the Västmanland regemente to withdraw 1/4 base-width. The Drost regiment failed a morale, but were still able to hold on and continue the mêlée with the Närke-Värmlands.

Cavalry mêlées on the Swedish right (above) and left (below) flanks.

Having pushed the Västmanland regemente back, the Saxons fired off another round of volley and artillery (intense enough to make the camera shake).

On the Swedish right, the élite Livdragonregementet had beaten back the Beust cuirassiers, who retreated behind their supports (Dünewald dragoon regiment) who then charged the Swedes.

Not so good on the Swedish left, the Skanska Standsdragon regemente losing the mêlée (failed morale test) and, having no supports, retreated their full measure, caring not about the marsh. Keeping up the pressure, the Goltz dragoon regiment followed-up (below).

In the centre the Swedish infantry tried again and were blunted once more.

 

More Saxon fire, a second morale loss for the Västmanland regemente (below).

Hope again for the elusive breakthrough, as the Närke-Värmlands continue in mêlée.

It was not Hummerhjelm's day. Two failed action tests made the Skanska Standsdragon the Skanska stranded-dragoon.

Not missing the opportunity of a charge in the rear, the Goltz dragoon regiment finished them off.

As with the historical action, the von Krassow's brigade (represented here by the
Livdragonregementet) were getting the better of their more numerous Saxon opponents, aided by the fact that the Saxon's poor deployment had them attacking piece-meal.

Having forced the Närke-Värmlands regemente back, Schulenburg ordered an exchange of the lines, replacing the Drost regiment with the Koningin. I really enjoyed mixing up the paint to make those Isabella facings and base colour for the flag of the Koningin.

For the Queen! The Koningin immediately out-did their line comrades, Närke-Värmlands failing a morale test (now represented by the little red 'pimple—utilising some silly little plastic covers from some pens that I bought, making more attractive markers).

Having 'sat on his bum' for eight turns, and with the Västmanland broken, Rehnskold was finally spurred into action, sending cavalry left and right. Too little too late?

Perhaps not, von Krassow's Livdragonregementet broke the Beust cuirassiers (above), von Dunewald sending in the Wrangel dragoons supported by his own unit (below).

Now getting desperate and unlikely for the Swedes in the centre: a volley against the
Närke-Värmlands and artillery fire on the Södermanlands (which did not agree with them, as you'll see later).

The Pommerska charged the exposed left of the Russian line,...

... breaking the raw unit, while the Livdragonregementet continued on their winning way.

That flank looks attractive!

Left exposed by the breaking of the Södermanlands, Schulenburg liked the look of the Närke-Värmlands' flank, sending out the Saxon foot guard.

The Wrangel dragoon having retreated from the mêlée, von Dünewald's dragoons again charged the Livdragonregemente.

Flank fire on the Pommerska and a loss of morale.

A second morale loss to the Närke-Värmlands, now unsupported.

In charged the Pommerska...

 

... a morale loss to the Patkul Infantry Regiment, but they held.

 

von Dünewald's boys fought bravely, but incurred a morale loss.

The Norra Skanska tried a desperate, headlong charge against the Saxon guard, with predictable results, the Pommerska dragoons were broken by the Patkul Infantry Regiment and even the Närke-Värmlands had given up the fight.

This forced an army morale test, which Rehnskold easily passed!

von Dünewald's boys had fought bravely, but finally broke. I just realised that I forgot to do the brigade morale test, but it was of no consequence as, with only two cavalry regiments left, it was all over for the Swedes!

 
So, after nine turns I lost. As a fairly unimaginative Rehnskold I had failed to replicate the  dramatic Swedish victory that was his finest hour. Alternatively, as a more aggressive Schulenburg I achieved a better outcome. Still, since I lean strongly towards the Swedes, I have to say that I beat myself.

The result was not really the point of this though, for it was about the rules and they came out of this game with a win. On reading, I thought that I’d like them. I was not sure after the early turns. I re-read key sections, found things that I had not done quite correctly and, as I began to get the mechanics clear in my head and perform the tests correctly, I found myself liking them more and more. The rules are straightforward, as I said in my description above, but the completely novel approach meant that they took a bit of getting one’s head around.

As the 'mist' cleared I could consider the rules' mechanics. There are several aspects that I like, firing is central, units can always move, but it takes more to perform more 'elaborate' movement, supports, protected flanks and generally good positioning of your forces are paramount. Troop quality has an effect, but not an extreme one (either positively or negatively). Similarly, commanders are well represented in the rules, but not out of proportion.

Having enjoyed this playtest of Twilight of the Sun King, I'm keen to complete the additional troops necessary to play the game at regimental scale. I’ll then compare the rules with GåPå (that I have tried once and liked) and also the Polemos Great Northern War rules (by Nick Dorrell one of the authors of Twilight of the Sun King—one can see that he has included a lot of ideas from them into Twilight of the Sun King). I often find 'sticking points' with rules the more that I use them. Time will tell whether this is the case with Twilight of the Sun King. They passed their first test with a credit and I'll see how they go with further testing.

One of my long-term aims is to paint sufficient figures for the Great Northern so as to field Swedish, Saxon, Polish-Lithuanian, early Russian and Ottoman armies (these latter will also be fit for Napoleonics), as well as some later Russian and Danish troops. The eventual 'grand plan' is to work through the battles of the Great Northern War from go to whoa. This playtest has added fuel to that fire.



Rules

Twilight of the Sun King by Steven Thomas, Andrew Coleby and Nicholas Dorrell, revised edition 2019 (https://www.wfgamers.org.uk/resources/C18/Twilight/ToSK).

Scales: 1:200–300 for brigade-scale games, 1:100–150 for regimental-scale games. Units of two bases each (one for artillery). All movement and ranges calculated in base widths. Ground scale 1:5 000 for brigade-scale and 1:2 500 for regimental scale at recommended base width. I used 1:6 000 for my game (base width 50 mm).


Figures

All figures in the game were 1/72 scale.

Swedish
Infantry: Mars 'Swedish Infantry'
Cavalry: Zvezda 'Swedish Dragoons of Charles XII' and Strelets 'Reitars of Charles XII'

Saxon
Infantry: Mars 'Saxon Infantry'
Cavalry: Strelets 'Russian Dragoons of Peter I' Artillery: Zvezda 'Swedish Artillery of Charles XII'

Russian
Infantry: Strelets 'Russian Dragoons of Peter I' and 'Swedish Infantry of Charles XII', Zvezda 'Russian Strelets Infantry' and Strelets various bonus Streletsi figures.
Some of these Russians were part of a huge haul from John of the Wargame Hermit blog that I got back in June 2018 (thanks John, if you are reading). I'm adding further streletsi as early Russians (for Narva, River Düna).


References

Sjöstrom O (2008) Fraustadt 1706 - Ett fält färgat rött. Map of the battle (sourced from https://www.tacitus.nu/gnw/battles/Fraustadt/)

Sjöstrom O and Kling SL (2016) Warsaw, Fraustadt and the Grand Plan to Crush Charles XII. In Kling (Jr.) SL (Ed.) Great Northern War Compendium Volume 1. The Historical Game Company. pp. 197–210.


Thomas S, Coleby A and Dorrell N (2019) The Battle of Fraustadt - 1706, Introductory Scenario. In Twilight of the Sun King. The Pike and Shot Society Essex England.

Wye Forest Gamers (n.d.) The Battle of Fraustadt, 13th Feb 1706. https://www.wfgamers.org.uk/great-northern-war/gnw-battle-of-fraustadt

Move, sir! Why no, sir - you move! Corunna (1809) refought to a standstill

Extricating an army from a pursuing foe is surely never the easiest of tasks. Presented with the task faced by Sir John Moore at Corunna, options are few and the possibilities of defeat appear limitless. For Marshall Soult, on the other hand, time is as much an enemy as British muskets and rifles. For our refight we chose the straightforward arrangement from the Polemnos scenario list:

Four British divisions faced six French ones, albeit that three were cavalry. The Order of Battle we used is from Napolun (1). This was the sight from the halcón above when the game started. 

All our towns and villages are set on 4" squares, Corunna alone is figurative. Fraser's division is nearest the camera facing Franceschi and Lahoussaye off-camera to the lower right. Paget's reserve to his left and then of course Sir David Baird faced by Merle. Hope faces Delaborde, Merle and Lorge's cavalry. Sir John Moore has a plan, which is to attack Merment's division as it advances, cut the French army in two, and break their morale. However you can see the problem already: if there is not adequate planning, if Baird cannot get out of the way, Paget simply has insufficient room to deploy his troops. And here is the elegance of the Shako rule (7.8) in such cases: the earliest orders can be given to troops under such defend or reserve orders is the end of the second move. How I as Sir John wished that rule had not been there. As it was, I sent orders myself to Paget to move forward, and dispatched an aide to Fraser, who unfortunately lost his life, requiring me to send another. The consequences of these twin delays, I argue, were to cost me a victory. The view below shows Merle's division approaching Elvina. 

French artillery then made good play against the III/1st Royal Scots and the I/1st Guard behind. Hope's predicament is evident from the picture below. No attempt whatever was made to seize Piedralonga, which the French bypassed. Below how things stood at Move Four.

The advance continued, with an excellent triple-pronged attack on the I/5th Foot and the I/92nd Highlanders behind them by Lorge's dragoons and the 86th Ligne. In the picture below you cannot quite make out either that attack developing to the top left, nor Major-General Bentinck's 1/42nd Highlanders holding up Paget's division in the centre, the two generals arguing about who should move, although the reality was that by the time they came to have that argument, there was no longer the slightest possibility of trapping Merment's division between two fires. Securing Elvina was simply not enough, the Rifles largely using it for refuge. Meanwhile Sir John Moore, safely ensconced on the heights of San Cristobal, was simply in the wrong place.

Within a short space of time, Merment's 47th and 122nd Regiments were actively engaged, ignoring the British traffic jam to their left. It was a tussle that was to continue all day, largely to the advantage of the French, although neither side was especially interested in house-to-house fighting in Elvina itself.

On the French right, it was a story of consistent success. Below you see the effect of a well-coordinated French attack on a British infantry line. That's the 1/92nd Highlanders in square, with their English comrades-in-arms hard pressed behind them. British luck was very uneven throughout the battle - on at least three occasions they won melees with '6's' against '1's', but there were also plenty of occasions where they failed volleys, never something you especially want to do with British facing French columns. 

And then we saw a sight one does not often see: a broken British square. If it was not a good day for the British, it was especially not so for the Scots. Too many dragoons, too well-commanded.

Pushed back, at the end of Move Eight Hope's division rallied against the odds and reformed, albeit demoralised. French morale sank. Had Delaborde been too cautious about the furnace after all?

But it was not Hope's battle to win. As it was, he held on bravely against huge odds but the result was almost inevitable, eventually his division reached half-losses, failed its morale, and fled back towards Corunna. 

On the other flank, Marshal Soult had displayed understandable reluctance to throw forward Franceschi and Lahoussaye's dragoons. They eventually spent themselves in fruitless charges against the squares of the 1/38th and 1/79th of Paget's division that had eventually managed to pick their way around the army artillery thoughtfully deployed on the San Cristobal heights, but that was enough to take the shine off the British advance. If wars are not won by evacuations, as Churchill rightly insisted, then neither are battles won by forming square. Both are means of avoiding destruction.

But Marshall Soult's men were tired, too. They had fought bravely, eventually putting one British division to flight and breaking several battalions in another, but as dusk began to fall, artillery fell silent at last, and the possibility of complete encirclement faded with the light.  Fraser's division had been completely unengaged, whilst Paget's division was almost completely intact. On the French side, four battalions had been broken, three in Move 6 and one the next move, several others were in retreat, and there were mounting casualties on the dragoons, one regiment of which was in retreat. And so it was that nine moves into the battle, even with three more moves available, both sides agreed to retire even as Lorge's dragoons were about to enter the outskirts of Corunna. 

The British were thus free to evacuate overnight, and Sir John Moore lived on, never to exercise field command again. It had been a long, hard-fought battle at the end of a 'shameful disaster' of a campaign. Shako rules had again surpassed themselves in maintaining fairness and interest. No one thought that given the constraints they were under they could have done better, but we were left wondering: what would Wellington have done differently in defence? What of the Emperor himself in attack?

References

https://www.britishbattles.com/peninsular-war/battle-of-corunna/
http://www.peninsularwar.org/coruna.htm
http://www.peninsular-war.com/history/html/Corunna-Account-battle-10138.html
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/battles_corunna.html
(1) http://www.napolun.com/mirror/napoleonistyka.atspace.com/battle_of_corunna.htm#britishflee2
Oman, Sir Charles (1902) A History of the Peninsular War, Volume I. Oxford, Clarendon Press.


There are some magnificent other depictions of the battle available on line. Those I have seen and admired include the following

https://jjwargames.blogspot.com/2013/12/battle-of-corunna-january-16th-1809.html
https://grymauch.blogspot.com/2017/10/battle-of-corunna-1809.html
https://davesgamingplace.blogspot.com/2012/12/command-and-colors-napoleonics-corunna.html
http://www.mapsymbs.com/corunna.html
https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipNqX49rckv0V7vBjBCF8ONLZpNOkIDNoWLP2ickZXCrLHzJLC9Dr7xr-IADpajJiA?key=Uk5BbnloX3JvSVA3ekhRZ3NzUVY5YzdGcl9XaUhB

With supreme confidence in their fighting force - the Rebel attack at Fair Oaks, 31st May 1862

For our third Civil War game, I had the pleasure of selecting the first day of fighting (31st May) at the battle of Fair Oaks (known to the rebels as Seven Pines). A larger battle, this time, with two Union Corps and two rebel divisions involved, and the welcome opportunity for me to build a railroad as well as the Kuhn twin houses.We used the forces lists from the Osprey publication on the Virginia campaign at a scale of 1 stand = 200. https://ospreypublishing.com/seven-days-battles-1862-pb

Especial gratitude, however, to Brett Schulte for his painstaking recreation of the Fair Oaks OOBs in Excel: without those we would not have know the exact strength of each brigade.Not all of the Union forces would be engaged on our northern flank of the action, in fact - but Sedgwick's 2nd division was scheduled to reinforce from the North, and Kearny's 3rd division from the south.

This is what the historical battle looked like

My task as Brig.Gen Keyes in particular was in my view to outperform my historical counterpart to check the rebel advance and hold IV Corps position in time for reinforcements from Maj.Gen Sumner's II Corps to reinforce my position around Fair Oaks railroad station and prevent Gen. Johnston from achieving his objective, delegated to Gen. A.P. Hill on the rebel right and Gens.Longstreet and Smith on the right - to encircle and destroy my entire Corps.

We started from the historical deployments, which left Brig.Gen Casey's two green Union brigades, those of Wessel and Naglee, absolutely exposed to the lines of rebel assault as their pickets ran back to them.

I was surprised to see so much rebel artillery, and worried that my orders to Brig.Gen Casey, for a withdrawal to the second line, was likely to expose both brigades to fire in the open. Luckily I silenced one rebel battery, which withdrew to regroup, but there were more where that came from.

The rebels came on 'With supreme confidence in their fighting force' (Harmon, 1941:87), and stormed Casey's redoubt, as historically Wessel's brigade took the heaviest casualties of the action on the Union side, abandoning the redoubt, and worse still, mishandling of the 7th and 8th New York artillery batteries by Colonel Bailey, just as historically - sitting in their redoubts but failing to score casualties - saw both of them overwhelmed and captured by Rodes' brigade. We could well imagine the scene at Casey's redoubt, here depicted in the Osprey book. At that point I must admit I thought the rebel advance had become unstoppable.

But I had underestimated the cool determination of Brig.Gen Palmer, who flung his brigade forward without hesitation and retook the redoubt.

Eventually it became possible to infiltrate Brig.Gen. Berry's brigade through the woods to the rebel right, which left Rain's brigade outflanked after it had passed through rebel lines to take over the assault on Casey's redoubt.

Meanwhile in the centre Gen. R.H. Anderson's brigade had met its match in Brig. Gen Abercrombie's New York men, who held them off long enough for their assault to peter out, even if my original intention of outflanking them had proved a pipe dream. Eventually the lines became more or less parallel to one another, quite different from the historical action.

Here a view of the fighting in the centre and across to the twin Kuhn houses and the railroad beyond.

As always in actions of this complex kind, the schedule of reinforcements was crucial to the action. It turned out that both Gen. Smith's rebel division and the Union 3rd division arrived at more or less the same time - but significantly later than historically. The Union artillery managed to get off a few desultory shots, but the upshot was that there was no fighting at all around Fair Oaks station itself or on the right flank, as the picture below of the end of the action shows. Brig-Gen Gorman was especially slow in advancing.

And here, the arrival of reinforcements from II Corps around Casey's redoubt, which remained in Union hands at the end of the battle.

Casualties were fewer than those of the historical battle, the Union lost around 1,200 compared to 2,600 Confederate, although 1,200 'skedaddled' compared to 400. Historically, Casey's division lost 177 dead and 934 wounded. Our casualties were even heavier on Casey but much lighter elsewhere, mainly on account of the severe delays on the part of Sumner and Smith. Two Union brigades therefore ended the battle worn, one Confederate brigade was worn, and two spent. Almost all the losses were around Casey's redoubt. If it had not been for those two lost batteries, the brigade loss tally would have been even more even. As it was, we called it a draw:

And as Brig.Gen Keyes, I felt that my cautious strategy of withdrawal followed by a dogged defence had been justified. One of the most remarkable aspects of Fire and Fury, I repeatedly find, is the admiration one feels as the divisional or Corps commander for gallant brigades and their commands. Especial praise on the Union side should therefore go to Palmer's brigade for their recapture and stout defence of Casey's redoubt. As Keyes I don't mind admitting that I thought they would be swept away. On the rebel side, Gen. Johnston singled out Rodes' brigade as being heavily engaged and almost carrying the day. Mark rightly pointed out that the disparity Fire and Fury insists upon in melee capacity and inferior artillery is a real incentive for the rebels to engage in hand-to-hand combat. I keep telling myself that the poor dice rolls of the New York batteries could not have been predicted, but at least I could hold my head up high in reporting to the Army commander - and I might well earn promotion to Maj.Gen and Brig-Gen. Sumner not, judging by his tardy arrival on the battlefield.

The biggest change to history though, which this refight shares no doubt with many others, was the fact that Gen. Johnston came through the battle unscathed. The whole course of the Civil War henceforth would no doubt be very different without the expertise in the craft of war exhibited by his successor.

Roll on Antietam.

Sources:

Broadwater, R.P. (2011) The Battle of Fair Oaks: Turning Point of McClellan's Peninsula Campaign. Jefferson FC, McFarland.

Harmon, G.D. (1941) General Silas Casey and the Battle of Fair Oaks. The Historian 4(1), 84-102.

https://www.historynet.com/brigadier-general-silas-casey-at-the-battle-of-seven-pines.htm

http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/armies_seven_pines.html

Konstam, A. (2004) Seven Days Battles. Oxford, Osprey.

Mindil, G.W. (1874) The Battle of Fair Oaks: A reply to General Joseph E. Johnston. Available at: https://archive.org/details/battleoffairoaks00mind/mode/2up

http://jayswargamingmadness.blogspot.com/2017/05/acw-scenario-caseys-redoubt.html

http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=272379

https://www.brettschulte.net  [for OOBs]

Stranger than Fiction - Maxen (1759) refought

Historically, Lt-General Finck's entire Corps, some 14,000 men, surrendered to Field-Marshall Daun, one of the most successful Austrian actions of the entire Seven Years War. So the pressure is actually on the Austrian commander in this battle, rather than the outnumbered Prussians, who cannot really do worse than they did historically.

Herewith the original deployment.




We used Charles Grant's excellent scenario in  Refighting History. Here for comparison is his map.

.

The disparity in strength between the two combatants is very clear.

Historically, Finck ordered his 15 cuirassier sqns to advance against Brentano, but they failed and were driven back. If that can be avoided, then there is in fact a wide gap through which Finck can easily withdraw. And he should - here is a view from the Prussian position on the heights of Mazen at the Austrian army massing for the assault.




Source: http://www.wikigallery.org/wiki/painting_219148/Franz-Paul-Findenigg/The-Battle-of-Maxen

A helicopter view of deployments in our re-fight.

And here is our version of the assault on the Heights:

Success was not absolutely guaranteed, but as Daun I felt reasonably optimistic. As it turned out casualties were relatively similar, perhaps slightly higher but not twice, and of course there is the usual question surrounding how many wargames casualties were actually dead. We felt that the Zimmermann ANF 7YW rules did well in simulating the assault up a steep hill, especially in the difficult balance of artillery casualties.

Later in the battle, Prussians cleared away, the picture on this flank looked like this:

There had been some stiff fighting around the Redoubts and my grenadiers had suffered considerably, but sheer numbers told in the end.

My cavalry completely failed to get round the back of Mazen, however. And similarly you can see from the picture below the problem developing on Daun's left flank. The Prussian infantry have only to advance, and the cavalry will not be able to secure the retreat line marked here by two sheets of paper.

Which is exactly how it turned out:

My problems were multiplying elsewhere, too, and just as seriously. General Brentano did not do as well in repelling the Prussian cavalry as he did historically. The crucial advantage of the cuirass was well-taken, whilst that Austrian artillery piece just did not do sufficient damage. Here, the calm before the storm.

The aftermath - Brentano driven from the field and the Prussians in control of the entire flank

And here, what happened as a result of failing to win the cavalry mêlée - I failed to close the gap on the retreating enemy. This is C18th warfare, not Napoleonic - no need for the Prussians to form squares here. Those Austrian cavalry in the top right of the shot are retiring, leaving their Hussar comrades to fight their way out as best they can. The wide open space for the Prussian withdrawal is plain to see.

We were left thinking that Daun had been exceptionally fortunate on the day for General Brentano to win the cavalry mêlée. It really seems that anything less than what happened historically would have allowed Lt-Gen Finck to extricate himself without much more than the casualties he sustained on the Heights. Fact was truly stranger than fiction.


Sources:

Grant, C. S. Refighting History. Volume 5. Minden, Kunersdorf, the Action at Torgau and Maxen. Leigh-on-Sea, Partizan Press.

Project 7YW (2020) 1759-11-20 - Battle of Maxen. Available at: https://www.kronoskaf.com/syw/index.php?title=1759-11-20_-_Battle_of_Maxen, Retrieved 12 April 2020

Zimmermann, R. (1976) The Wargamer's Handbook. Rules for Wargaming in Six Periods of History. 3rd Edition. s.l., Z & M Publishing Enterprises.