|
Post by bruce on Sept 19, 2017 1:45:28 GMT
What color should I paint a late era Prussian cuirasse? I seem to recall reading that some regiments did not even have them, or wore captured French, but now I don't remember where and cannot confirm. For once Google is not really giving me an idea I am confident about. Thanks, Bruce
|
|
|
Post by john124 on Sept 19, 2017 10:24:51 GMT
I shall find out for you Bruce. I have a cracking book by D.Nash on the late Prussian Army. I don't think they wore a cuirass but I shall make sure. John.
|
|
|
Post by davidsh on Sept 19, 2017 21:50:58 GMT
A black laquered cuirass, front and back plate, was worn in 1815, copying that of the Russians. All regiments that year were with the main army on the Austrian border (even then they didn't trust each other!) Up to then, no cuirass was worn.
Hope that helps.
David
|
|
|
Post by bruce on Sept 20, 2017 2:01:33 GMT
Much thanks guys. It does seem curious, if I may use that word, that cuirassiers would not wear a cuirass. Why not just call them heavy cavalry since they lack the defining characteristic? Or dragons? Interesting, maybe they lacked the resources as the late Prussians sometimes did.
I have spent a lot of time painting French and Austrians over the years and now I find that I have not really done enough reading on Prussians and Russians. I have been wanting to do some gaming around 1813 and 1814 so I guess I need to do some more research! Bruce
|
|
|
Post by davidsh on Sept 20, 2017 7:14:13 GMT
Yes, for some reason both Russia and Prussia stopped using the cuirass in the late 18th century, with Russia re-adopting in 1810, and Prussia only in 1815.
|
|
|
Post by john124 on Sept 20, 2017 17:46:38 GMT
I can not add anything to Davids answer, he has nailed your question Bruce. The only thing I will say is that its an interesting point you make about the cuirass being worn. So when non-wearing cuirassiers, fight wearing cuirassiers should they be treated as equal or not? Just one to ponder. John.
|
|
|
Post by davidsh on Sept 20, 2017 18:08:28 GMT
A good question. Included in this debate is that I guess the French guard horse grenadiers are treated the same as cuirassiers in most rules? As are the carabiniers before 1809 and before they adopted the cuirass? To extend this further, the Life Guards and most british dragoons were viewed as 'big men on big horses', so presumably should be treated likewise? David
|
|
|
Post by john124 on Sept 20, 2017 19:36:45 GMT
David, I use an old set of rules, In the grand manner by P.Gilder. His cavalry combat rules are quite good using sixes to kill. There are 3 phases to a melee. In the first phase cuirassiers gain 1 in 2, subsequent phases gain 1 in 3. Line heavy first phase gain 1 in 3 subsequent phases the same. So a 8 figure cuirassier sqn would throw 12 dice in the first phase ect. I shall tinker with this rule slightly so that armoured cuirassiers gain over unarmoured cuirassiers by treating unarmoured as heavy cavalry in one or two of the combat phases. I can also use this when French cuirassiers (fully armoured) meet Austrian (front cuirass only). When any cuirassier meets any other type of cavalry they shall be classified as cuirassier (big men on big horses). I hope this is as clear as mud. John.
|
|
|
Post by oldskirmishman on Sept 20, 2017 20:24:07 GMT
Can you still get those Peter Gilder rules?
|
|
|
Post by john124 on Sept 20, 2017 20:41:49 GMT
Hi oldskirmishman, yes you can. Its a new edition with amendments @ £17.99 from Caliver books. The original had a green cover I think this edition has a tricolour on it. John.
|
|
|
Post by bruce on Sept 23, 2017 3:23:41 GMT
This has turned into an interesting discussion indeed. A brief tour of the web seems to indicate that there is no real consensus on how much advantage the cuirass conferred on the wearer. Whatever the actual physical value of this armor, I think I would not want to be a Prussian cuirassier unit facing a French cuirassier unit, knowing that they had protection and I did not. I think The intimidation factor alone confers some advantage on the French, Austrians, Russians.
Wellington's pithy remark about the final version of the French cuirrasiers at Waterloo is perhaps a bit unfair. Had he been on the receiving end of the French cavalry charge at Eylau, he might have felt differently. From a rules point of view, I agree that wearing this equipment should confer an advantage, and that you are not really a currasier unless you are wearing a cuirass. Bruce
|
|
|
Post by davidsh on Sept 23, 2017 17:16:33 GMT
The French cuirassiers were extremely effective at Aspern and Wagram as well. Riding through Austrian lines and back again to salvage the situation on both occasions (as indeed at Eylau). At Waterloo they were meant to have the same effect but Wellington's army weren't having it - they looked upon the cavalry advances almost as a relief as it ceased the deadly French artillery fire. David
|
|
|
Post by profjohn on Sept 24, 2017 21:34:00 GMT
I think certainly black. I don't know this but my guess is that the continuation of the name cuirassier after the abandonment of the cuirass was about regimental tradition. Isn't it also the case that Austrian cuirassiers only had breastplate and not a full torso cuirass? All the evidence - and common sense suggests - that cuirasses did offer protection so rules which strive to optimise accuracy of effect should allow for them. On the other hand you could argue that games above the skirmish level - which I assume doesn't happen very much at 6mm - are trying to reproduce broad trends and that allowing for troop types beyond the generic takes things to a level of detail which offers more questions than answers. It's an interesting discussion though.
|
|
|
Post by bruce on Sept 25, 2017 4:06:58 GMT
I had assumed black at first myself. I think I will just not paint them on for now, I can always change them later (these are H&R). I see your point about the detail and scope of play. I think it's a good topic to research, try to get some idea of how effective each country's units were considered to be, cuirass or no. I always thought the French had the edge due to their training and experience, tactics and leadership, as well as the full cuirass. Will start with Col. Elting, I am sadly deficient on this topic. Bruce
|
|
|
Post by profjohn on Sept 25, 2017 18:19:02 GMT
I really mean that the tactical unit at 6mm is likely to be the brigade. But different effectiveness is right. British cavalry famously skittish, Russian infantry hard to break down etc. those characteristics are certainly worth understanding and tweaking rules to cover.
|
|