OK third time lucky?
In a midday kick off the French hoped to get revenge on the Rosbifs and their allies. Gussie Cumberland followed the same approach that had been successful twice. The French were to stand off a bit more and not get pulled out so far on the left. That was the theory, anyway.
The start positions: by way of a reminder |
The battle started in the same way with Ingoldsby attacking the Arquebusiers de Grassins in the Barry Wood. And almost immediately things didn't go as well as before. The French skirmishers held off the first attack. It took some time to get the Royal Artillery limbered up to get to close enough range to do some damage to the redoubts. The Anglo-Hanoverian cavalry also struggled to shake itself into column ready for their flank march. This changing of formation and direction and changing formation again was to be a feature of the action for the Pragmatic Army on their right.
Over on the Dutch wing, similar delays occurred with the artillery getting limbered up to move into range. Nevertheless Waldeck got his men moving forward in echelon. The Dutch met with some success, eventually driving off the Swiss and taking the redoubts between Fontenoy and Anthoing, but at the loss of two brigades. The French on this wing sensed the weakness and started to advance on their far right.
In the centre the British artillery finally had success against the first redoubt d'Eu and cleared the path for the infantry to advance without being shot up on that flank. The infantry action in the centre lasted a long time without any of the units engaged breaking.
Back on the allied right, after a few turns of charge and counter charge, the French gained the upper hand and routed all 3 brigades, including the famed Horse Guards. It helped that this time the French despatched more cavalry to this wing. This was a change to the original intention of standing back in a compact mass, and it worked. Encouraged by this, the Irish advanced to attack the British foot in the woods where they were waiting to see what transpired in the cavalry battle. With the rout of the Anglo-Hanoverian cavalry, morale on the right wing of the Pragmatic Army collapsed. The Irish and their supporting French marched through the now empty woods.
By this stage the reinforcements under Richelieu had arrived. Richelieu fed his men forward to re-inforce the French centre and right.
In Fontenoy a British brigade advanced to the rear of the village where they were met by a French brigade. This must have come as a shock to the British because after a brief exchange of musketry they broke! This was the penalty paid for not supporting them. They needed a 3 on 2 D6 to survive: 3 is normally a failure but they get a plus one for facing inferior firepower. They rolled 2.
On the far side of Fontenoy the French took the fight to the Dutch. Initially the Dutch held off the French, but with a further lost brigade morale collapsed and the Netherlanders made for home. It took some time for news to reach Cumberland and he persevered in the middle. Eventually news of the Dutch retreat arrived and the Duke decided to withdraw. With both wings gone, the army morale had to be tested. The test was passed in two successive turns. On the third army moral test, Cumberland's luck ran out.
The French cavalry on their left move to counter the Anglo-Hanoverian move on that flank. |
"For Orange and the States!" is the cry as the Dutch infantry attack Fontenoy and the redoubts. |
Things have gone badly on Cumberland's right. With defeat in the cavalry battle, a failed wing morale test leads to the infantry in the woods beating a retreat. |
After the rout of the Dutch wing, Cumberland's army survived 2 army morale tests, but third time was unlucky. The Duke's die was cast and it was a 1. After 19 turns the game was over. |
Allied losses to the left, French to the right. |
So, why did the French win this time? Firstly, they took more decisive action on their left and made sure they outnumbered the allied cavalry. This helped them win this action. Elsewhere, on the Dutch wing, the luck was more evenly spread. This effectively meant defeat for the Dutch was more likely as each unit had one less morale failure/hit before it routed than the French. In the centre the British failed to break any French lines, partly because the French had a string of high rolls. So a combination of better use of resources leading to an enemy wing collapsing, and a little bit of luck in the centre. But even with worse luck, the French centre was pretty solid and looked unlikely to collapse.
The Fontenoy board has been packed away. I was pondering doing a different battle involving Cumberland, but I had some additions to the lead pile, and some previously unpainted SYW infantry that have been prepped and undercoated. The reinforcements include a unit of Highland light infantry for the AWI, plus my first unit of Loyalists. Plus some neutral 'assets'. Maybe more on that later.
Another fine game there Chris, with excellent post game thoughts on why the French won this time, ditto at the end of your previous games too.
ReplyDeleteThanks Steve. I was pleased in the end to get a French victory. It's always nicer when things go roughly along historical lines.
DeleteOne thing that still bothers me though is why I can't seem to get anything really decisive in the centre. Even in the historical battle, the British blew holes in the French infantry lines big enough for their cavalry to charge through. Oh well, too late for now. On to something slightly new now.
It is always interesting to play a game a few times and adjust tactics, and the tabletop layout looks good.
ReplyDeleteThanks Peter. Coming from you that’s praise indeed.
DeleteI would have kept playing until the French won.
Chris
Good stuff, Chris!
ReplyDeleteWith three rapid-fire games, I could barely keep up with the action. Having lost the first two trials, the French came back to score an impressive victory. While you suggested more decisive action with a a little more luck led to victory, how much did your tactics and strategy evolve for the French over the three games? Would a fourth replay likely see French maintain this momentum? Of is the allied plan evolving as well? If so, then you learned a lot in these replays. Time well spent.
The question is, what is next?
I think I learned enough in games I and II to give the French a good chance of winning eventually. In the initial set-up it look a very tall order to breeches for the Allies to win. I found a way round that (with a little luck) and in the end I found a way to counter that to bring things back in favour of the French.
DeleteIf I were to carry on, I would look at how I could make the infantry combat in the centre more decisive. But I’ve decided to roll the map up and look at another battle. All will be revealed in due course.
Chris
I liked the comment "I would have kept playing till the French won" Chris - that could have been quite amusing if you got up to game 9 or 10! Of course, you had to have the French win, or they would have sulked for a decade at least :)
ReplyDeleteI’m not saying anything Keith. I’m sulking after the England defeat in Sydney.
DeleteChris
Excellent stuff, and very interesting - impressed that you managed three goes at the battle in quick succession! Would Laffeld be a nice 'compare and contrast' for a future game? It seemed to have similarities, with roles reversed..
ReplyDeleteRunning the game 3 times is partial payback on the investment in time. Reading up about the battle, calculating orders of battle, seeing what figures you have, then selecting a map and converting it to the table, and finally laying out the figures. Given I can get through a game like this in 3 hours, playing is the quick part.
DeleteLaffeld is an interesting suggestion. It's twice as big in terms of numbers of troops (120k v 90k). I have enough figures, not necessarily in the right colours. Should take a lot longer to play. Hmmm!