Rules for Austrians

Hello all,

Writing national rules for Austrian for an 1809 campaign I'll be running soon

1. A command card cannot be played directly from hand. It must be placed in preparation for the next turn. Scout, Counter-Attack and First-Strike cards are exceptions; they can be played as normal.
2. A line infantry unit which did not move will have 1 additional battle die in ranged combat
3. Unlike most light infantry, Grenzer units gain no bonus to ranged combat.
4. All cavalry units have 4 Stands

Full post with some additional thoughts on my blog here
Austrian Army

Wrote up a test scenario based on the Battle of Sacile for this
Battle of Sacile
There's a link to a pdf of the scenario in the post as well.
Played it twice on Thursday, one victory for the Austrians 6-4 and one for the French 6-3

Any comments on either, here or on the blog very welcome

Thanks
Donogh

Hello,

Thank you for these infos : a lot of new austrian rules for testing..

Thank you also for the scenario of Sacile, noticed on your blog :

I couldn't figure out how to place labels on the map.

To place an annotation, you must open the window <Label Annotation> and drag the word "Annotation" where you want, as for the other elements. With a right click, you can change (menu <change label>) the text of the annotation, as for the leaders's name (see the Manual or Help in the editor).

Cheers

I'll say a few words.

1. This is one of "russian command rules" from Memoir 44, I liked it when I used to play them, it makes you be more accurate with orders, but this shows that army Austrians army had poor command. Going this way we leave nothing to russian army - their officers were poorest, in fact

2. This is British LI rule and it says to us - these guys were cool. Previous rule describes Austrian as weak army - so I see no sense. Bad officers - good shooting soldiers?

Oleg wrote: I'll say a few words.

1. This is one of "russian command rules" from Memoir 44, I liked it when I used to play them, it makes you be more accurate with orders, but this shows that army Austrians army had poor command. Going this way we leave nothing to russian army - their officers were poorest, in fact

2. This is British LI rule and it says to us - these guys were cool. Previous rule describes Austrian as weak army - so I see no sense. Bad officers - good shooting soldiers?

Maybe I've been playing it wrong, but don't British LI get a bonus in ranged combat whether they move or not?

I'm not especially well-read on the Russian campaigns, but I had thought that the Russians did well enough.

Thanks
Donogh

Donogh wrote: Maybe I've been playing it wrong, but don't British LI get a bonus in ranged combat whether they move or not?

I'm not especially well-read on the Russian campaigns, but I had thought that the Russians did well enough.

Yes, you've been playing it wrong.
English LI recieves additional die in ranged combat only if it does not move.
LT gets it in ranged anyway.

They hadnt won any battle till Berezina and were running from Bonapart like rabbits leting him burn russian capital.
During Borodino "great" Kutuzov was holding his reinforcements under tremendous gunfire a whole day, so some regiments lost up to 50% of men vainly. He did not dare to let this troops fight. I cannot agree that it was "well enough".
Anyway, lets leave some "bad" rules for russians

Donogh wrote: Hello all,

Writing national rules for Austrian for an 1809 campaign I'll be running soon

1. A command card cannot be played directly from hand. It must be placed in preparation for the next turn. Scout, Counter-Attack and First-Strike cards are exceptions; they can be played as normal.
2. A line infantry unit which did not move will have 1 additional battle die in ranged combat
3. Unlike most light infantry, Grenzer units gain no bonus to ranged combat.
4. All cavalry units have 4 Stands

Full post with some additional thoughts on my blog here
Austrian Army

Wrote up a test scenario based on the Battle of Sacile for this
Battle of Sacile
There's a link to a pdf of the scenario in the post as well.
Played it twice on Thursday, one victory for the Austrians 6-4 and one for the French 6-3

Any comments on either, here or on the blog very welcome

Thanks
Donogh

Hi Donogh

it seem Austria is fascinating for a lot of gamers. Rich Borg is testing a future Austria expansion for CCN. I'm also developing a complete Austria system with 12 basic scenarios (empire period).
As an Austrian army researcher I have some comments to your nice job:
1 - Sacile or FontanaFredda. Where did you find a creek crossing south of Fontanafredda and ending near Sacile. I didn't realize it (and no bridge of course) ans I'm very puzzled. I try to attach my scenario of the Porcia-Fontanafredda battle.
2 - Command Cards and not-moving infantry rules are good ideas.
3 - It is a normal and very common thought (among anglo-saxons historians) to consider Grenzer as Light infantry-like troops. Completely wrong. They were well trained line infantry with own artillery. The mistake originates because Grenzers were often employed in vanguard duties. This was mainly for their own organization in autonomous companies (satnje) which allowed to split battalions among columns.
Austria did have its Light infantry (Jägers or Feldjäger) and trained Volunteers to act like Light infantry.
4 - All cavalry with 4 blocks. This depends from tha game scale you use. Austrians acted per divisions (two squadrons). However Light cavalry regiments did have 8 squadrons in 1809, while dragoons and cuirassiers only 6. See my pages at
www.napoleon-series.org/military/organiz...rianArmyCavalry.html
and following

Ciao Enrico