Militia Infantry (MI)

More
15 years 4 months ago #6771 by alecrespi

Alessandro - Website Admin

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 10 months ago #6772 by RiverWanderer
Replied by RiverWanderer on topic Militia Infantry (MI)
According to the charts (published 2013 and 2014), French Militia moving fire is round UP.

The same charts make no mention of retreat distance, which would normally imply 1 hex per flag.
However, I notice that the retreat rules state that Militia units are 3 hex per flag. It seems a bit redundant to have that information embedded in the rules when the Nationality charts are the prime reference. Was it an oversight on the French chart to omit this detail or was an exception made for the Revolutionary Fervour of the French townsfolk ?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 10 months ago #6773 by Mark-McG
Replied by Mark-McG on topic Militia Infantry (MI)
I'm opting for an omission in the charts, and by the Spanish expansion, the retreat distance for Spanish militia is in the notes.

It is stated in the rules that militia retreat 3 hexes per flag

Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever.
[img][/img]

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 9 months ago #6814 by RiverWanderer
Replied by RiverWanderer on topic Militia Infantry (MI)
Thanks Mark; I agree it is "hard-coded" in the rules that is what gave me pause for thought.

Your reply prompted me to check base game charts that I had stored away (2010 printing); lo and behold those charts do have French Militia down as a 3 hex retreat. So it is an omission in subsequent printings - in compliance with with GMT's errata policy of "one out, one in" :)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 9 months ago #6815 by RiverWanderer
Replied by RiverWanderer on topic Militia Infantry (MI)
for completeness:

The charts in the Russian expansion also show a 3 hex retreat for French MI and, like the other charts, has them rounding Up in moving ranged combat.

Russian MI on the other hand, do round down, unlike other Russian units.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 month 2 weeks ago #14525 by Mark-McG
Replied by Mark-McG on topic Militia Infantry (MI)
something that has bothered me for a little while.. why is Spanish militia worse than other militia? If anything the Spanish mobs and militia fought longer and harder than most other nations militia.

Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever.
[img][/img]

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 month 2 weeks ago #14526 by RiverWanderer
Replied by RiverWanderer on topic Militia Infantry (MI)

something that has bothered me for a little while.. why is Spanish militia worse than other militia? If anything the Spanish mobs and militia fought longer and harder than most other nations militia.

Perhaps Andres and Juan have a view on this.

Throwing out some ideas...

Mobs could be dealt with by scenario special rules; something like the levy attack rule from Samurai Battles, maybe.

Conventional, trained militia ... I wonder if there's a role for the Guerilla Action token - it could be an alternate token use, such as Blúcher's Iconic action with Iron Will or just like normal Iron Will, ignore a flag (or all flags).   Or as an augmentation from card play - e.g. a Bayonet Charge gives ordered Spanish Militia ability to melee with Sabres counting or with +1die.

Mark B

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 month 2 weeks ago #14527 by Juan M Núñez Olarte
Thank you Mark for your suggestion.

Both Andres and myself share a common view regarding the Spanish militia. The militia units of the early years of the Peninsular War (1808-1809) were little more than a mob of armed peasants thrown into combat with almost no training at all. We believe the official standard rules for Spanish Militia reflect very well the combat effectiveness of these units during those early years. On the other hand, as the war progressed the peasant mob, supported by routed regular troops, started devoting its efforts to guerrilla warfare. As the tide of the war changed (1812-1814) and favoured the Allied effort, the guerrilla units had already become a feared menace for the French Army. The Spanish military kept increasing throughout the war the integration of guerrilla units into the regular Spanish Army. Most of the guerrilla fighters readily accepted their new status, and became quite efficient light infantry and light cavalry units. Those who did not accept integration into the Spanish Army, are the ones we consider militia in the upcoming "Late War" Spanish Army module. They can not be as efficient as their regular army counterparts, as they disdained orders and coordination with the regular forces, but we consider them as efficient as any other militia unit in any other national army.

As relates to the issue of the Guerrilla Counter, we consider this Counter as something quite different to other national counters. We will try to share our thoughts about its significance, and the way we use it in our scenarios.:
  1. When we place a guerrilla counter at the start of one of our scenarios, we always take into account wether the guerrilla was active or not at the time (e.g. in Alcolea and Medina de Rioseco the Spanish player has no guerrilla counters to start with, reflecting the fact that we are so early in the war). 
  2. We assume the Guerrilla Counter translates the impact of the wider strategic situation into the tactical decissions in the battlefield (e.g. in Sagunto the Spanish player starts with 3 guerrilla counters, reflecting the fact that: the French Army of Aragon was overstreched in its attempt to conquer Valencia while having to defend continuosly its supply lines from guerrilla attacks; plus they had no intelligence whatsoever of the arrival of Spanish reinforcements; plus the Spanish command was well informed of every movement and strength of the opposing French force)
  3. We understand there is a chance of gaining during the game a Guerrilla Counter by playing a Scout Card, and that this fact is in contradiction with the two previous points. We believe that the new set of official rules for Guerrilla Counters, published with the last expansion of CCN, limits severely the "improper" use of the counter. Nevertheless, if gained through a Scout Card in a scenario where no guerrillas were availiable, we accept this conceptually "improper" use as reflecting the complexities of fighting a war in Spain in the Napoleonic period: Spain is the second most mountainous terrain in Europe after Switzerland, good roads were few at the time, living of the land was resisted by force by the peasantry, 3/4 of the French troops dead during the Peninsular War were due to disease/ epidemics induced by a poor diet, 3/4 French officers killed in action died fighting against Spanish forces etc.  
In short, we believe that using the Guerrilla Counter with extra options, as with the Prussian Iron Will Counter, is not going to be helpful and might disturb the strategic significance that we perceive underlies the counter.

For the sake of ending in a more humorous tone, but also related to the present topic, I will end with a short story around Wellington`s 1813 campaign that led to the victory at Vitoria. I have to apologize in advance to those who are still reading these lines if you already know about it. Wellington, every morning after breakfast, had to read the intelligence concerning the latest dispatches from the French command to Napoleon, thanks to the Spanish guerrilla units intercepting them. At this point in the war three copies were sent to Paris by different routes, and escorted by a minimum of 400 dragoons, in order to guarantee that at least one would get through!!!. Small wonder Maucune`s 6000 men division was not able to reinforce the French troops at Vitoria on time.

Sorry for the long response, but Mark`s point is a relevant one











 

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 month 2 weeks ago #14528 by Mark-McG
Replied by Mark-McG on topic Militia Infantry (MI)
as a quick reply, I think conflating militia with guerillas is an error. Militia is poorly trained infantry fighting in conventional battles. Guerillas are fighting a different war, one of ambushes and surprise attacks on lesser opponents. Doubtless these could be the same troops at different times, but employed in different roles.

I've long thought the Guerilla token should be used differently, primarily because of the way I've seen it abused.
boardgamegeek.com/blog/10429/blogpost/10...-guerrilla-rules-ccn
of the 3 options, the third (Strategic option) has been the most popular with players. Kind of irrelevant to militia, but I bring it out to show why I believe militia and guerillas are not at all the same.

Thank you for the views of the Spanish peasant mobs, it sort of answers why Spanish militia should be treated differently to other militia, and the inmtegration of the guerilleros into the regular army to an extent why Spanish troops are poor quality compared to other nations. 

Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever.
[img][/img]

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
1 month 2 weeks ago #14529 by Juan M Núñez Olarte
Hello Mark, and thanks for your very interesting remarks.

We were not aware of your 2020 post in BGG. As newcomers to the field of scenario designing, we are quite relieved by the fact that most of the viewers, and yourself, side with us in considering the Guerrilla Counter as an strategic asset. We have also witnessed through the years, improper use, or rather abuse of this token. We have not yet had time enough to play-test the new set of Spanish Guerrilla action clarifications in the latest CCN expansion. We hope it might contribute to the proper use of the counter. We had already grown accustomed to consider the counter as part of the impredictability and "fog of war" that Tactician cards bring to our favourite game.

As for the issue of militia versus guerrilla topic. We certainly agree with your comment that they are two completely different issues, But the fact remains that guerrilla units did stand in the battle line in several battles. You know, much better than we do, how dificult is to find a balance between a scenario that is fun to play, and one that is historically reasonably accurate.

Allow us take some of your time, and share with you our current debates while reviewing already designed and play-tested scenarios under your proposal for a "Late War" Variant for the Spanish Army national reference card. We have two scenarios that focus on the Allied left and right flank at Vitoria, in order to highlight the Spanish forces contribution to Wellington´s victory. Take for example the left - that is an easy one, as Longa´s division, although made up of former guerrilla fighters, was already incorporated into the Spanish Army as a regular force. Therefore we consider them a light infantry division, with 4 block units, reflecting French doctrine adopted by the Spanish Army at that time. Now let us go to the right. In fact the right was anchored by guerrilla forces stationed in order to guard the approach to Vitoria through the road to Logroño. The Spanish forces were made up by the 1st and 2nd Alava Infantry Regiments of Espoz y Mina famous Navarrese division, plus the also already respected Lancer cavalry of Julian Sanchez. Here is our dilemma:
  • We can consider Espoz y Mina guerrilla forces as light infantry just like Longa`s, although Espoz was used to fighting quite successfully alone and so we should then consider them "Late War" militia
  • Julian Sanchez`s guerrilla lancers had been fighting in battle under Wellington at least since Fuentes de Oñoro in 1811. They had no formal training with the lance as all lancer forces had in Europe. Their skill in wielding this weapon derived from their job in Extremadura, were they used the lance daily for cattle herding. How should we consider them?. Do we consider a new type of troop in the "Late War" variant, somewhat like Prussian militia lancers?  Is it worth the effort for the sake of just a very specific unit?. I think we will probably end up considering them as standard "Late War" light cavalry. 
  • The historical report of the commander of these Spanish forces, "Dos Pelos", to his superiors after the battle is quite straightforward without any hint of self-glorification. At 14.00 hours he was confronted by 2.000 French dragoons that did not attack him. When they retired he pursued aggresively with both cavalry and infantry, always following orders coming from Rowland Hill.
For the benefit of any Spanish speaking viewer who wishes to dive into the complex world of the Spanish guerrilla, I would suggest two recent titles:
  • Several authors. Guerrilla en España, siglos XVIII-XIX. Cuadernos de Historia Militar. Desperta Ferro ed; Madrid 2022. A fine introduction to the current academic debate within Spanish military historians.
  • Carrasco Alvarez AJ. Guerrilla: Una historia nueva de la Guerra de Independencia. Desperta Ferro ed: Madrid 2025. I consider this new book a turning point in our historical studies of the topic. The book is in fact a doctoral thesis by a young historian who has researched extensively in previously unveiled primary sources in Spanish archives. He describes the evolution from an armed mob into a regular army force, with the Spanish authorities managing the process by allowing letters of marque to the "land corsairs", which was the term used to name them.
Thank you again for your contribution to this fascinating and currrently evolving topic. Thank you also for your support to our efforts in scenario designing.

Juan M

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.444 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum