Franco-Austrian War Playtest

Last weekend I only had the chance to play one game. I chose to try out my recently completed amendments for the Franco-Austrian War of 1859.

I detetermined the terrain and force composition and then allowed the Austrian side (under Archduke Granz) a more defensive deployment. The French (led by Baron Jomini) had the edge in artillery effectiveness and the overall quality of their infantry vs some poorer Austrian grenzers.

They proceeded to move towards a couple of hills where the Austrians were positioned in strength. Surprisingly their attacks and the movements this prompted from the Austrian General forced most of the fighting into the open areas between the hills and outwith the settled areas (composed of towns, orchards and vineyards).

An initial gamble for the French proved to be a costly mistake in the long run. They charged their Hussars in a spirited rush on the flank of Austrian uhlans but unexpectedly lost the melee and had their retreat blocked by some French Chasseurs. The unit, already reduced by the melee was then completely eliminated by the illegal interpenetration.

After this the French stepped up their main attack and did force the Austrian centre to respond and launch their reserves in support. The French musketry was close to breaking the Austrian centre but the larger numbers of Austrian units and the encroaching menace of the superior cavalry on the French right flank meant that the French reached a high water mark and were then forced back on a defensive line. With units starting to be eliminated by patient Austrian artillery and some nimble Jaeger firing the French were reduced to their Garde Imperiale and a depleted Line Infantry unit.

The Archduke had six remaing units. A couple such as his Grenadiers and Dragoons were largely intact as the had not been involved in the major action, the others were far more battle weary.

Overall a great game in what I always find to be an exciting conflict to simulate. The dash of two H&M armies with Napoleonic perceptions, using evolving technology.

One of the consistent perceptions I'm getting playing now my 20th game over a number of periods is the feeling that the battles have the ebb and flow you would expect. What would appear to be a forgone conclusion can quite easily unravel and move the opposite way. The opponents wax and wane throughout the game. I think it must be down to the combined impact of the game mechanisms on the battle. On the surface these would seem to generate consistent results, however, the outcomes that do arise can be surprisingly variable and this is where the fluidity is injected into proceedings. I really like this being a solo gamer. It means I don't have to impose too many mechanisms to invoke some sponteneity.

One area I did think about was the timing of morale tests in the H&M games. Based on the Napoleonic Rules these are not numbered in the sequence of play. Ive assumed that they are resolved at the end of the player turn although I can perform them earlier if they have no impact on subsequent phases. Anyone else have other interpretations eg. strainght after firing for tests to firing casualties?

Regards

Brian