Saturday, 28 March 2026

Po Valley Campaign - the Gallispans return!

After the Battle of Piacenza the combined forces of Montemar (Sp), Carlos (Naples) and d'Este (Modena) retreated to Parma to lick their wounds. The Austrians under Traun, assisted by the badly battered Piedmontese under Aspremont, got to work with their siege of Piacenza.

Unfortunately for the Austrians they were hit by delays. First they didn't have sufficient timber, tools and other materials to prepare their lines. This took two weeks to get in order. [In game terms they rolled a 6 in two successive turns, which meant an unspecified delay. At the last minute I felt that there wasn't enough jeopardy in my 'back of a fag packet' siege 'rules'. It also later occurred to me that I had no provision for attrition during sieges so I need to sit down to work that one out.]

Over in the west, King Victor Emanuel (Piedmontese) realised that he needed to adopt a more central position to cover Turin, Ivrea, Cuneo and Alessandria (the 4 fortresses of the province of Piedmont). He moved south to Saluzzo, meaning he was no more than 3 marches [less than one turn] away from any of the 4 cities. En route he told off one of the militia brigades in Turin to garrison Ivrea. [This is in addition to any local forces assumed to be in the fortress as permanent garrison].

It was a fortuitous move, for the Gallispans under the Infante Felipe and Prince de Conti erupted from the southern Alps to invest Cuneo. They calculated that they had enough troops to envelope the city and hold off any relief sent by Victor Emanuel. Would the Piedmontese King (technically King of Sardinia) regret sending detachments hither and thither?

The map after the moves of w/c 18 June 1742. Cuneo is bottom left: the big M is the militia garrison, R is Carlos Emanuel (il Re), I is the Infante and P is Ponti. Aspremont and Traun are at Piacenza whilst Francesco d'Este (F) Montemar and Carlos (the other King) are at Parma. S is the as yet inactive Genoans under Sale.

The Gallispan siegeworks were progressing according to the timetable. Naturally, since they were being led by French engineers, and they had ensured that they came fully prepared with timber, brushwood and all manner of supplies when they came down from the mountains. Victor Emanuel was close at hand to attempt a relief of Cuneo and marched south.  The Gallispans were not going to be deterred by the King, so by late June 1742 we were facing the third battle of the campaign. [I ummed and ahhed before deciding that Victor Emanuel would attempt a relief of Cuneo. The deciding factor was the fact that, under the rules, after 2 weeks there was a chance that a fortress will fall].

The forces available to each side (after deducting sufficient French to invest Cuneo) were as follows:


French

Spanish

Gallispans Total

Piedmontese

Cuirassiers

2

2*

4

4

Dragoons

2

0

2

4

Hussars



0


Grenadiers/Guards



0

2

Musketeers


11

11

8

Militia



0


Skirmishers



0


Artillery

4

2

6

4

Total

2,500

15,000

17,500

17,500

Cavalry

2,500

1,250

3,750

5,000

Infantry

0

13,750

13,750

12,500

The numbers against each troop type are bases, where 2 bases equals a brigade in the tactical rules. Fairly evenly balanced forces overall, with the Gallispans having an advantage in artillery and a slight advantage in infantry. * All the Gallispan cavalry will in fact be French since the Infante had none and was leant some by Conti in this game.

Naturally as Cuneo was the location of a real battle connected to the relief of the city, I will be looking to that battle (Madonna dell Olmo, 1744) for inspiration for the table layout. This time the rival forces are in their historical roles Gallispans covering the siege and Piedmontese relieving the city. Lightbulb moment. Should I dice for a sortie as happened in the historic scenario?

Meanwhile!! News had not reached this corner of Italy yet, but in Great Britain the Jacobites had risen up against the Hanoverians. This could prove a disadvantage to the Austrians and Piedmontese as it would be a distraction for their Maritime ally.

[On the first June turn (2 weeks/turns before) I diced for Events and rolled a double 1! So I had to roll on the Events Table. A roll of a 3 on a D12 meant that the Jacobites had launched an uprising against George II. This is like a 'Get Out of Jail Free' card for the Bourbons. It can be used to cancel another of Event: 'British Descent on Bourbon Coast', which itself would normally cause the Bourbons to remove some bases from the map. Throughout the War of the Austrian Succession, British naval power in the Mediterranean proved useful for the anti-Bourbon cause, so I made provision for it in the Events table. Incidentally, the 'Jacobite Card' can only be played once. If its number comes up again, it will mean an outbreak of plague affecting the Austrians or Piedmontese.]

16 comments:

  1. The Battle of Md’O, I know it well.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Fascinating stuff Chris. They may be "back of a fag packet" but the rules are producing a nice narrative campaign.
    No luck on locating Reed Browning to date :-(
    Neil

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No worries about the book Neil. To be fair, the whole rule 'book' is written on the 'back of 6 fag packet' equivalents. The siege rules take one on their own.

      Delete
  3. Plenty going on in the campaign and more battles to come 👍

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I fear I will run out of troops to fight until 1743 let alone 1748 at the present rate!

      Delete
  4. Gripping stuff. The Bourbons got a nice bit of luck.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Only a bit of luck. If the 'British descent' Event doesn't come up after a few years I might have to trade that 'Jacobite' Event for a 'Election in Britain changes the balance in Parliament and reduces the subsidy to Austria/Piedmont'.

      Delete
  5. Interesting developments - looking forward to seeing how the attempted relief of the city goes!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I need to have a look at Madonna dell Olmo and see if I can make that work.

      Delete
  6. Fascinating summary and background to your next battle!
    Best Iain

    ReplyDelete
  7. Interesting result Chris ending up with an historical battle.
    And with equivalent forces it makes for an interesting game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. If it carries on this way I’m going to run out of historical battles to use.
      Chris

      Delete
  8. Lovely update there Chris:). The siege part reminds me once again of reading Horace St Paul's accounts from the SYW, and the very hit and miss nature of them, with some garrisons surrendering quickly, other sieges failing due to lack of materials, the enemy arriving too soon etc.

    As for the Jacobites, I'm not sure how much effect it had on the Royal Navy's dispositions, as it's been a while since I read anything on the '45, with most of the focus being on land operations or failed French fleet movements etc.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cheers Steve. Duffy isn't very complementary about the Prussian Siege warfare efforts either.
      I'm not sure myself what effect the Jacobite rising had on RN operations in the Med. I reasoned that it's effect would be three-fold:
      (1) We needed the escort ships to protect the homeland, to prevent any large-scale French (or Spanish) landing;
      (2) We needed the troops given the relatively small size of the British army (there were in region of 5,000 troops landed near Naples at one point);
      (3) We needed the transports for (2) as well as shipping British and Hessian troops to Britain from the Continent.
      Whether any of this happened or not is another matter! I've allowed for the possibility of risings in France and Spain too. All 'what ifs'.
      Timing of 'playing the card' is dubious though. Chances of both happening at the same time has got to be slim!

      Delete