Campaign Map
French attack Luena
4 French army – regroup and resupply at Mansfield
5 French army – retreat to Eisleben
6 French army – attack Luena
Russian hold Luena and regroup at Halle
1 Russian army – regroup and resupply at Konnern
2 Russian army – rally and regroup at Halle
3 Russian army – defend Luena
Battle of Luena – Move 4
The Russian army occupied a very strong defensive position behind the river Saale. The river could only be crossed by bridge, and only the two western ones were available to the French. It would take a considerable time for 18th (left) or 17th corps (centre) to cross. 16th corps (right) had no obstacle on the right bank of the river. The Russian army was not allowed to advance towards the river as it would be impossible for the French to cross if either bridge was within artillery range of the enemy.
On the left the village was the first objective. It took five moves, almost half of the game, for 18th corps to cross the river. They had to attack the village without waiting for artillery preparation. The Russians withdrew to avoid their artillery, but counter attacked as soon as the French entered the village. The fight for the village was between two elite brigades, and was fought during the last two rounds of the game. The French won and took the village.
The hill in the centre was the second objective. This would be an infantry battle, as cavalry cannot fight on hills and artillery can only fire on targets lining the front of the hill. Despite support from both 16th and 18th corps, 17th corps was unable to take the hill. They also took five moves to cross the bridge and had only two moves to attack and take the hill. The Russian infantry withdrew to the rear of the hill, which further delayed the attack. The hills was still in dispute at the end of move 12.
The bridge on the right was the third objective. The winner would have to hold both ends to secure it. The French CinC took command of the artillery of 17th and 18th corps and advanced down the left bank of the river. The rest of 16th corps were on the right bank. The Russians outnumbered the French on the right bank, so the French artillery would have to force them to retreat. They did so, and the French took and held the bridge.
The French were the clear winners.
The French lost 4 infantry and 1 cavalry (1710 casualties)
The Russians lost 5 infantry, 1 cavalry and 1 artillery (2200 casualties)
Comments
Defended river crossings are very difficult in a wargame, just as they are in real life.
If there are a limited number of crossing points, and the defenders can position their artillery close to each one, it is pretty well impossible for the attacker. He must cross the river in a long single file. If his leading brigade is forced to retire, this will disrupt the rest of the corps behind them.
There are only two alternatives. Either the attackers start the game on the defenders side of the river, or the defenders are not allowed to position their artillery within range of their side of the crossing points. I have tried both options, and I think the former results in a better wargame. However it does rob the defender of a major advantage.
The crossing of the river takes much longer than it would do in real life. In my campaign each operational day is 12 hours or 12 wargame moves. This is normally long enough for the attacker to advance within artillery range, fire his guns for 2 to 4 moves and still have sufficient time to fight the infantry battle. But if it takes 4 moves to cross the river he must attempt an attack with insufficient artillery or cavalry preparation.
I, as the French attacker, was lucky in this game. I did not suffer any setback due to Russian cavalry or artillery, which often happens. So I was able to reach the objective and carry out an infantry assault. This worked on both flanks, and would have done so on the hill in the centre if I had another two moves. I managed to take half of the hill, and outnumbered the Jan, the Russian defender, on the other half.
An interesting and enjoyable game. But it did feel unfair and artificial that the Russian artillery were not allowed to deploy within range of the two bridges.
Thistlebarrow,
ReplyDeleteI must admit that had I been the Russians, I would have risked putting my artillery in a position where it could dominate the approaches to the bridges.
That said, the French did well to get across the river and push the Russians back.
Judging from this battle report, I think that itmust have been a very interesting wargame.
All the best,
Bob.
Hi Bob
ReplyDeleteI completely agree that it would have been logical for the Russians to start the game with their artillery within range of the bridges. But that would have made it impossible for the French to cross the river, let alone win the game.
Perhaps a better solution would have been to allow the French to deploy on the Russian side of the river. But on the campaign map they were clearly on the French side. Indeed it is not possible to move within one square of the enemy on the campaign map.
This is just another example of how all wargamers have to "fudge" things to close the gap between wargaming and real life. No matter how hard some wargamers try to recreate a real battle, it is simply not possible. Until we have model soldiers who can think and move on their own, we will always have to compromise to make the game work.
I have been at this so long that I no longer even try to refight an historical battle. I have often played a wargame of, say, Waterloo. But I have never deceived myself that it is anything more than a game. Its great fun to pretend to be refighting Waterloo, but it makes me smile when wargamers claim that they have actually done so.
regards
Paul