The original version of Lasalle was a favourite of mine because it was a divisional size game that reminded me of the WRG House and Musket rules that I cut my Napoleonic teeth on. The first game I had a few weeks ago showed me enough to believe the changes were all positive and that this would become my Napoleonic rules system of choice.

The Battlefield around Eselbach

Having grown up on WRG Napoleonic rules in the 70’s I have always like the divisional size game. Don’t get me wrong I like Sam Mustafa’s Blucher as an army level game but my preference has always been for 28mm with about 10 to 15 units per side. As we are just learning the second edition of the rules I chose to set up the Introductory game from the Lasalle website – the “Battle of Eselbach”.

The French had 8 Infantry units, 2 Cavalry units and 3 batteries of artillery. The Austrians had one more cavalry unit. The game consisted of 8 turns and the break point of both armies was 4 units, or failing that, the one that destroyed the most units after eight turns was the winner.

A big thanks goes out to Bucko and Dave K who drove from Cowes to Melbourne to save me the trip to them because of the tough times we have had of late. Thanks guys thus really meant a lot to both of us.

Unfortunately I was in the middle of replacing my old cardboard bases with mdf and not all of the units basing was fully completed.

The objective of the day was to learn the rules and as such we decided that we did not care how long each turn took but we wanted to look things up to make sure we were doing things right. Unfortunately I was the Lasalle “Guru” as I had played ONE game!

The French Order of Battle:

General Lasalle and the French Baggage

Desoulle’s Cavalry Brigade

Verlier’s Infantry Brigade

d’Armagnacs Infantry Brigade

French headquarters sheet

All of the French units were powerful skirmishers with all having a skirmisher value of three. The crossed swords means that they can use attack columns.

The Austrian Oder of Battle:

Austrian Advance Guard

Kretschmann’s Advance Guard Brigade

Senfknodel’s Infantry Brigade

Schimfppen’s Cavalry Brigade

Archduke Charles, in his famous pose, and the Austrian Baggage

Austrian Headquarters sheet

The Austrian Advance Guard artillery is only equipped with light guns and only hits on a 5+, but their Hussars are both stronger than any of the French cavalry units.

Skirmish dice tray prepared with 24 blue French dice and 18 Austrian white dice.

During the game we forgot to alter the dice depending on unit formation which we will need to be more alert about next time.

Turn 1:

In order to speed up the game, I deployed all of the troops so that we could get down to the serious stuff straight away. I had the Bubbly suitably chilled!

The French left move towards Eselbach with cavalry in support.

The French right try to outflank the Austrian left.

The Austrian left moves south of Eselbach to defend the road.

Austrian infantry cannot garrison the town because the French are too close, so instead decide to attack the French from its right.

The main Austrian force is deploying to attack the French in right.

The Austrian cavalry brigade deploy to threaten the French infantry.

Turn 2:

The French right moves forward.

The French cavalry move forward to protect their infantry from the Austrian cavalry.

Austrian cavalry are threatening both ends of the French line while their infantry move up to provide support. The Austrian horse guns deploy to obtain the maximum bounce through impact.

French infantry threatened by the Austrian Cheveaulegers.

Austrian deployment in depth.

Austrian Hussars poised to attack the French infantry’s flank.

The situation at the end of the second turn. The skirmishing phase of turn 3 is crucial as the Austrian cavalry and infantry can attack along the line.

Turn 3:

The French elect not to deploy their General to allow formation changes ,banking on their advantage is skirmishing to win the initiative. Unfortunately they do not and the Austrians charge, The Hussars wipe out the French batttalion on the right and the Cheveaulegers do the same in the centre.

The French cavalry charge and repulses the Austrian cavalry without doing much damage.

The French square repulses the Austrian infantry charge. There is no disadvantage for squares against other infantry.

The French right advances towards Eselbach.

The situation at the end of turn three.

Austrian infantry have moved up to support the cavalry breakthrough.

French Cheveaulegers poised to charge the French artillery.

Turn 4:

The guns try to escape but fail to do so and are run down by the Austrian cavalry.

With their horses totally “blown” by running down a French battalion, before it could form square, and the French horse artillery, the Austrian Cheveaulegers finally succumb to the combined shooting from two french squares and retire from the field.

The Austrian Hussars finally break their French counterparts causing the French morale to collapse. The game ended with a clear victory to the Austrians.

From Ian and Dave’s arrival to completion the game took about four hours with a substantial break for a sit down lunch at the end of turn 1.

We found the rules easy to learn and more importantly, they created many decision points for both sides throughout. I am now reasonably confident we have the game “basics” correct, but of course the devil is in the detail. A few more games are required but we do like the system very much.

With the 1809 campaign beginning with a bloody French nose the “Little Corporal” will need to treat the Austrian with more respect next time!

Bucko’s sent an email to all of our regular group after the game and here are his comments as well:

“Gentlemen! Excellent game and fine fare provided at the “House of War” Doreen style yesterday –many thanks to “mine hosts”!  

Overall impression of Lasalle 2? It’s certainly different to anything Napoleonic I’ve tried before, and requires a slightly different “mindset”. For example, in yesterdays game a strong looking building occupied the centre of the table. My instinctive reaction was that such was a “bastion” that needed to “gone around” either side. Not so! As the building was “ungarrisoned” I could have pushed through the buildings by spending an extra momentum (think “command”) point.

There is no such thing as “emergency squares” et al., but then Cavalry don’t get to charge across half a table just to hit you in the flank. That units have to, in effect, stop or pause when coming within 4 base widths (“near the enemy”) of their opponent, gives the defender an opportunity to respond in an effective manner (form square, change facing, volley fire, etc.) provided you have retained some momentum (again, think “command”) points to do so.

The game certainly encourages Napoleonic tactics – weaken your enemy with Bombardment (long range) and Volley (short range/canister) fire before charging in. Attackers have to win and win big, or it seems attackers usually get the worse of the results.   The rules are well written with the usual excellent examples and designer notes by the author. The index could be a little more “expansive” but on the whole is good. It is testament to the author that after one (solid) reading by myself, Guru your second game, and Dave K.’s first game, that on reflection I don’t believe we made many mistakes and concluded the game in around 3 hours.

As stated yesterday I had “brain strain/headache” after the game, but such more caused by trying to think of what actions to take with my momentum points rather than trying to flip through a rulebook (read ”Fog-N”) or QRS trying to figure out how a rule is meant to work.   If I were to have anything negative to say about the game (more “quibbles” really), it would firstly be that the game scale is not my preferred choice. I like playing Grand Tactical games with Brigades, or if possible whole Divisions, i.e.; “Grand Tactical”, rather than more “intimate” tactical games with Battalions and Regiments, so scale wise “Blucher” or “Fog-N” are more my style.

The “chaos” of the movement system with frequent “interruptions” when enemy armies get close is, I think, a strength of the system, but I can anticipate many who may not like such.   I believe apart from the odd instance we used the rules correctly. Guru – you have already pointed out we need to pay a little more attention when calculating skirmish dice. I can advise that changing formation when near the enemy does not cost an extra momentum point (“complication” is the game term), see p.37 top section. It does trigger an interruption. Regarding why Infantry in attack column vs. squares gets no advantage in combat, see Mustafa’s explanation on p.85. I note attack columns don’t get any advantage against a line either.

There is no “magical” +1 for charging, etc. As discussed yesterday other rules ask why are you charging instead of shooting? Firing against a square gives a “shift” advantage (hitting on 3’s instead of the standard 4’s). One may disagree with Mustafa’s conclusions/rationale, but at least he states for you why he has designed a certain aspect of the rules in a certain way.  

Phew! What a (load of drivel) mouthful!

In summation, although not my preferred scale, these rules are well worth continuing with. Very different i.m.h.o. to standard rules yet very encouraging of historical Napoleonic tactics.   Many thanks again to Guru and Maree for hosting and the most excellent lunch, Dave. K. for the splendid company during the journey to and from.  

Happy festive season everyone. Cheers Bucko“