Why Waterloo is bad for Napoleonic Wargaming

[@sirrathersplendid4825]

I went “all in” for Waterloo for one main reason - as a twelve-year old in a pre-internet, pre-Sharpe age it was the only Napoleonic battle you could easily get complete information on. Lots of books with colour reconstructions of uniforms were available, and of course there was the De Laurentiis film of 1970. And let’s not forget the Airfix figures!

[@OneofInfinity.]

Ah those battles I had in 1/72 scale, got one French guard cannon and crew left since the 80's.

[@sirrathersplendid4825]

@@OneofInfinity. - Still have all of my Airfix Napoleonics. Oddly enough the last ones I painted have started to get very brittle, but the older ones are still fine. Most of them are now refurbished and rebased and I still use them for gaming.

[@chrisangus7078]

Did the 100 days with my dad in 1/72 plastic spent hours doing research from the age 12 now doing it 28mm with friends and found the information is more available then ever.

[@sirrathersplendid4825]

@@chrisangus7078 - The research was more than half the fun. I’d spend hours poring over battle maps and unit rosters during the more boring lessons at school.

[@chrisangus7078]

@@sirrathersplendid4825 had the old avan hill game the map was lots of fun using it to manove to get in to a battle .

[@musculusiv4172]

7:51 I mean Ney still played a major part in the 1815 campaign ;)

[@Epicurus78]

While the French certainly had quite a few problems in 1815 I don't feel these are the problems you pointed out. First, the army was practically uniformly French, for the first time in a long time there were no suspect allied troops fighting alongside them. Also, the majority of the soldiers had seen combat in previous campaigns. Of the three armies involved the French army was actually the most experienced. The weakness of the rank and file was their distrust of the general officers, some who had betrayed not only the emperor but also their charges to the enemy during the 1814 campaign. Also, the cavalry had mounts of lesser quality. Secondly Napoleon faced a different political reality. His power base was quite precarious and depended on the support of political allies who could withdraw that support if the situation turned against him. It caused him to appoint suboptimal commanders; Ney to secure the loyalty of the army, Grouchy to court the old nobility for example. It quite possibly also caused him to make decisions he would not have made such as the overcommitting himself at Waterloo instead of preserving the army. Thirdly, Napoleon was still an excellent commander. His health however was failing. I suspect that his lifestyle and the stress of the situation caused him to become in effect incapacitated at important junctures during the campaign. It is said Ney suffered from PTSD, which might very well have been the case, and it did him little good in command. Of course Ney never showed any skill beyond that of a corps commander but still. I also do not agree with the assessment commanders were lacking in professionalism and skill (which is how I interpreted it). Marshals Soult and Davout were both excellent soldiers, and I expect L' Armee du Nord would have done much better with them in command of the left and right wings respectively. I can't say whom he might have best appointed as his chief of staff yet I feel Grouchy would have been more at ease commanding the cavalry reserve. With Lefebvre not on active duty Ney might have been appointed commanding the guard, a prestigious position, yet one which did not engender responsibility and decision-making beyond his ability. A shuffle of senior commanders would have made a big difference in my view.

[@MiniatureRealms]

I’ve always been drawn to the Peninsula far more than Waterloo itself, but I recognise that’s not exactly original, and almost entirely because of Sharpe 😂

[@petermillar8866]

I often wonder if Napoleonic wargaming as a hobby would either exist or even be as popular as it is without Waterloo?

[@sirrathersplendid4825]

Simple test to that theory: check out HG Wells’ “Little Wars”. I don’t think Wells obsessed entirely on that one campaign. Easy to forget that Britain had an extensive colonial history that we were once allowed to be very proud of.

[@billmasters385]

Excellent reply. I was always a fan of WWII, but history has a way of expanding and filling the niches of our intellect. :)

[@horuslupercal9936]

Waterloo brought me to Nappy Gaming 40 years ago. The 1813 Campaign has kept me here.

[@epicurda]

Being spanish, the Peninsular War is a must. Although our history books are kind of interesting, depending on who you are reading the british and the portuguese are just some chaps running around our country while the guerrillas did all the work. In my particular case was the Sharpe series who made me want to take the minis to the table.

[@Martin-hj1fg]

First of all: love your Videos, thanks!!! I was born and grew up in Leipzig, so I think its not too hard to guess which battle I heard and know most about. On the other hand you get a lot of informations about the saxons in the napoleonic wars in general. Which was quit... changeable one could say. From an historical point of view in germany you find a lot literature about the role napoleon played in the unification of germany and if he was helpfull or if the Confederacy of the Rhine was more a step back in the longer term

[@kodosdh]

Being Austrian, while Waterloo is famous, specially because of the popculture (music and movies), the war of 5th coalition is well known. Not so much for the battles but everyone knows the Tyrolean Rebellion (a scenario not really explored in Wargaming, yet it makes in interesting setting for Skirmish games which usually focus on the French & Indian War for that time frame) and that the fortress on the hill in the centre of Graz was destroyed as a requirement for the peace treaty ( There was also the Austro-Polish War in 1809 (more famous in Poland as they won), and the failed invasion of the Netherlands by the British (I guess a reason why there is not such a big focus from their side)

[@danmorgan3685]

When it comes to the brits they bury every defeat they suffered. For an English speaking history buff you would think the brits never lost a fight before, say, WWI. Then it's all the US all the damned time.

[@cathyharrop3348]

The Walcheren campaign, the attempt by the British to destroy the naval arsenal at Flushing gets little treatment for a variety of reasons: 1: The British were asked to participate in the Fifth Coalition in central Europe to take some heat off Austria, but didn't land there until after the Austrian capitulation, 2: The operations objective had nothing to do with the land campaign, 3: The commander of the force was so incompetent that he blew any chance of sucess, 4: The medical support was wholly inadequate, 5: And because of this what English soldiers that made it back were mostly suffering from the long term effects of Malaria for years, but remained on the units books. The upshot of this was that a number of good units remained understrength even when they could be fielded, which included three of the British few light infantry trained battalions. In short, von Schill's freikorp's did more to help the Austrians then the whole British army, and he was just a mutineer, rather than an actual ally.

[@johnhood9567]

Seeing this 2 years out. Fun and interesting, valid commentary!

[@khankrum1]

I set a Napoleonic battle for a friend where a small town cross road was being defended by a small force. What I did not tell him was It was Buford's defence of Gettysburg. A great game was the result.

[@johnrohde5510]

Read Clausewitz on the 1815 campaign to see why Napoleon was still a genius, Ney was as good as ever and the French army was still the best in Europe. They just had too much to do.

[@tommyxbones5126]

The peninsular war I thought would've been a good one, there are sieges, line v column, plenty of action in the Corunna retreat cavalry-wise - guerillas fighting small actions ,the list is endless

[@stephenbarker7793]

Agree with most of this. Waterloo Campaign needs to be seen within the overall perspective of the period 1792 to 1815. Anglocentric views of history only take one so far.

[@AyebeeMk2]

French in Blue, french in greatcoats (grey) french in greatcoats (blue), french in Shakos, french in hats, blue grey and white and buff trousers, black / white gaiters, dismounted dragoons (at a push), lots of mud colours, then dried mud colour by the afternoon. The Cavalry in any colour you like (within reason) and yes a swiss unit in red

[@markkelly9621]

Obviously there will be Anglo bias towards Waterloo over other campaigns due to the British involvement but I expect that Waterloo is a big deal because it was the last big battle of the wars and led to a relatively long period of peace in Europe.

[@cathyharrop3348]

The English sources are pretty big on the Peninsula campaign as well. Less so on the burning of Copenhagen for instance.

[@davidcollins2648]

Spot on Tim, I find it hard to argue with anything you said. Waterloo is the starting point for most to begin learning so all in all it's a good thing I suppose. I agree gaming battles like wagram or leipzig would be far more interesting to do. As for Ney he was mad impulsive but his decision to charge was based on 2 factors; the British were pulling back and firing had died down and the battlefield was so thick with smoke it was impossible to see what the overall situation was. Nor could he see over the hill and i doubt even he would have ordered charges against so many squares. Remember the visibility was so bad the Prussian artillery opened up on the allies thinking they were French. The way Ney was executed was a terrible shame as arguably no soldier had served France more bravely than him.

[@-Benedict]

Well, Waterloo drew me in, as you say. The Warlord Games starter set was a big part of that - it's a very affordable way for two pals to club together and get started. But had there been a Wagram starter set instead, that might have been more appealing. Hard to tell even with hindsight. Either way, I'm deep into my 1815 Anglo-allied army, and I've got about 140 or so Austrians to start painting when I get sick of red.

[@robertfisher8359]

I just came across this video, but I have to say, even if you didn't mean it with a bit of tongue and cheek, you make some damn good points. I don't do Napoleonic wargaming, but I have noticed similar instances with other periods. WWII, it's often El Alamein, Normandy, Stalingrad, the Ardennes, and Berlin (all the major Allied victories). In the case of Rome, it's usually Caesar in Gaul or Britannia. In the case of the medieval period, it's the Henry V or Richard the Lionheart. The examples go on. Splendid video!

[@BaronsHistoryTimes]

Another super clip -> with as you know by now, my favourite accompanying narration on all of youtube. :D I will fondly 'explore' several of your view points if you don't mind :) - but I do agree with your perspective on the dramatic* Danube Campaign being underplayed by english-speaking wargamers in comparison to Waterloo actions. I think it's as you stated - that it's just because a wealth of tactical and uniform information is so widely available for the Waterloo campaign, which is why english speaking wargamers gravitate to that campaign overwhelmingly. It's much like why the Prussians don't get as much wargaming fanfare for their actions at Gilly, Ligny, Wavre , or even Plancenoit to a degree, in the campaign. I think the French wargamers will gravitate to victorious French campaigns - of which there are tons of info in French languages. 4:30 - It's only by luck, in my view, Wellington and Blucher won the Waterloo campaign > in the end. Napoleon's plan to divide them on June 15th, with a classic Napoleonic central position strategy should have worked except for 2 things; 1) The Nassau Saxe Weimar's Brigade refusing to retreat as per Wellington's orders, and being backed up by the Netherlands top staff of war vets, Perponcher, Renecque and the Prince of Orange, to stand defend the Quatre-Bras crossroads > British commanders would have abandoned it fearing Wellington's known wrath against those who disobeyed strategic orders. They saved Wellington's arse twice that day; keeping the allied armies united, and overcoming Wellington's poorly misjudged belief that he could reunite his whole army with the Prussians within 24 hours should Napoleon surprise attack them; Wellington barely got half his army to Quatre Bras within 25 hours of Napoleon's invasion. 2) Ney - in all his stupidity, calling D'Erlon away from his march on Ligny which would have definitely cut off Blucher from Wellington and sealed Napoleon with a crushing defeat against the Prussians. 5:45 - I agree, the Prussians were super-humans in the Waterloo campaign; Vengeance was on many of their minds; all sides committed atrocities during the campaign to varying degrees, but most were by the Prussians on June 18th/ 19th. 9:40 - hah, Waterloo was the riot of all colours..... in terms of uniform diversity, the French had very colourful units, a huge Red Lancers regiment, and likewise the red/green of the chasseurs a cheval.... the two carabiniers regiment in copper breastplates, numerous dark blue light infantry regiments with colourful red/ yellow / green options for shako and facing decorations, the green lancers, the cuirassiers; grey greatcoats worn by some infantry units..... Then in Wellington's army, well , you know > Netherlands army - blues and greens/ Brits > reds and blues / Germans - reds / Nassauers Greens and Blues ... It's a massive misconception to 'imagine' it was just red vs blue > many green rifle units intermixed among the redcoats on the frontline; Brits/Germans have uniforms of both. Also, with the general slurs the Netherlands cavalry get, scenarios for them are dismissed. But contrary to the myths, the Netherlands cavalry did fight in close combat against their French counterparts, as did especially the Germans in their Light cavalry regiments - casualties were heavy in most Allied cavalry units; the untold stoty is that again, contrary to myth, Ney's French cavalry charges pretty much ended up decimating as fighting units, all of Wellington's cavalry in the center. 19:40 - absolutes in history are interesting to predict, and shocking when they do not come about as predicted - how many times has history absolutely ironically twisted. I would recommend to Waterloo wargamers - throw some twists into scenarios. ie, have the French already breaking into the garden of Hougoumont, and then attacking the chateau's east gateway, with French reinforcements randomly arriving from the orchard, and as in reality have Allied reinforcements arriving from the north-east,, such as Brunswickers and Hanoverians, AND the not often mentioned fact that Wellington pushed his British Light Infantry Brigade of Adam > forward over the Mont St,Jean Ridge for over an hour to secure the dead ground between the strongpoint and his main line; which exposed Adam to skrimishers, cavalry charges, French cannonfire.... another great scenario with a time limit to consider, Count Lobau's fighting one mile retreat back to Plancenoit area against Bulow's Prussian IV Corps > but to recreate the historic FEEL and reality, allow the Prussians to be immune to morale reversals except getting routed -> this creates the Prussian steam roller machine as their soldiers pushed forward like robots, except when routed back by only the fiercest French counterattacks.... Well, you get my drift..... Waterloo seems only to be known for the few main phases discussed in forums and books, but in fact, many many subtleties and mini-battles took place, which deserve recognition and wargaming. Great tongue-in-cheek clip - thanks again!

[@guylawrance2216]

Your models are fabulous....... I’ve never really been into Napoleonic’s because the thought of painting 100’s of miniatures exactly the same terrifies me. But yours look great !

[@roundie99]

Ironically I think the most boring thing about the 100 days campaign is Wellington. He just doesn't do anything. He didn't order the stand at Quatre Bras, he didn't send Picton forward when the Dutch were overwhelmed. He didn't order the great British cavalry charge to save the centre. He didn't order the light cavalry to save the heavies when they got into trouble. No risky forced march to reach the battlefield (like the Prussians). No leading cavalry charges like Ney or Blucher. He just forbade counter-battery fire and shuffle his troops around behind a hill. Never what I would call an exciting general in this campaign, he reaches new levels of boring. :-)

[@johnhood9567]

"They came on in the same old way, and we beat them in the same old way..."

[@Johnny-Thunder]

When starting to build Napoleonic armies, I very conciously did not want to do Waterloo, simply because I didn't like the look of the uniforms as much. Not only are the French wearing those greatcoats, but all armies were starting to get more practical and less fancy than they were in the years before with the shorter tailcoats and the short plumes. If I'm gonna go through the trouble of painting Napoleonic troops I want them to be as overdressed and flamboyant as possible.

[@brucerutherford9163]

I really like your observations on this topic. I agree it's boring though I have books that breakdown the battles into individual combats Quatre Bras, Ligny & Placenoit. I recently took up 15mm Napoleonics and am working/building regiments for a game of Battle of Lippa 1813. Fought in northern Croatia by 5 Italian battalions + guns vs 3-4 Austrian battalions/cavalry & guns. It's small and manageable with interesting units involved.

[@JamesTruwood]

Maybe a comment better suited to the other waterloo video but one benefit for a complete beginner of bkue vs red is that learning to paint is simplified if youre doing the same type of uniform over and over, allowing you to learn with one scheme

[@rickrussell8382]

I started my Waterloo journey in 1968 when I read David Howarth`s book Waterloo day of battle. That lead to Anthony Brett- James 1812. Then it was F. L. Petre, C. Grant , D. Chandler ect. I was painting Airfix then moved to Minifigs. I have Russians, Prussians ,French and Anglo- Dutch. One of the guys has French and Austrians. One of the guys had COT Rhine. Waterloo was always my goal. I figured out how many models I would need and bought them all in the early 80s. I built custom cabinets to hold the French and Anglo- Dutch forces. I built 4 tables that will form a 10v6ft surface. All the buildings , terrain. Painted over 1000 + figures. Mark and I played Waterloo this past May. It seems the French lost again. Lol bad for wargaming! Now they tell me !

[@Corvinuswargaming1444]

Your point about the outcome of Waterloo not being significant in the end is also a great one in the way we think about history, especially as wargamers. Battles are not always historically decisive as we would like to think (although of course many battles were). Napoleon could probably not have translated a victory at Waterloo into logistical or political success because of larger strategic factors.

[@fogh]

A great vid! 👍 I love to hear you talk so passionately about the wider Napoleonic period. If this doesn’t get people to look at the other parts of the wars, then I don’t know what will 😀. As a fan of the Thirty Years War /ECW, I completely get what you’re saying about the dangers about being too Anglo-centric - you may miss out on some great wargaming opportunities elsewhere.

[@doomhippie6673]

Waterloo is so well known as it is the very end of the Napoleonic wars. And there is drama that is not met with the same finality in any other campaign. That said as a German (from northern Germany) the battle of Jena and Auerstedt and the battle of Leipzig are very important in the "national tale", if you know what I mean. Hence you will find a quite a bit of literature about those.

[@Corvinuswargaming1444]

There is a lesson for wargamers of all periods here, which is to try out different subjects within that period. The Napoleonic era also laster nearly 20 years, there should be many exciting areas to explore within it outside of the most famous or significant battles.

[@williamballangarry2995]

In regard to the brand recognition of Waterloo, there’s the story that George IV used to tell people he was at Waterloo. He’d even ask Wellington for confirmation, to which Wellington would reply: “So you have told me, sir.”

[@AS-qy1zl]

I always liked Ney. I don’t care that he wasn’t technically great or consistent. There’s more to him than power rankings that makes him interesting.

[@NapoleonicWargaming]

Yeah. Certainly ly he was a guy that his men would follow to the very end.

[@tommckinnell2001]

I've done Waterloo (in an absurdly large mini scale). But both in terms of painting, and practicalities, the way to do Waterloo is in a very small scale. I'm printing and painting 2mm 1.3men per fig Napoleonics at present. That's the way for this, I think, using General d'Armee

[@neilburton2803]

I'm in the process of building all Napoleonic armies in 2mm and agree its the perfect scale to play this period with as near accuracy as to the armies of the period without excessive abstraction I am using Irregular Miniatures but with 2 to 3 packs per nation so that figure ratio is as small as possible and ground scale as realistic as possible . Yes others may say you lose figure painting detail but you gain accuracy in actual historical representation on the table I am looking to start from the revolutionary wars up to 1815 ..yes a challenge but I have a deepening interest in the whole period almost to the point of building a separate adjunct to my library

[@Mrbird-pw2mg]

Well in germany I would say that Waterloo is probably the most famous battle thou Leipzig also isa very well known as it is a very important partof german history especially concerning the german unification.

[@imrahilvondolamroth4205]

But lots of german books about Waterloo and British generally tend to say wellington is overrated, he was saved by Blücher and only won so many battles because he was so stubborn.

[@majorclanger6974]

GOOD stuff , Waterloo is a road block, Ligny forces are massive I only have the Prussian 15th Brigade and support ,the battle Lipezig( my forces are being slowly being recruited for this ) will be impossible. I like this video , most thought provoking.

[@MoggAssassin]

I am actually focusing on the 1809 campaign from the perspective of the Austrians and their invasion of the Duchy of Warsaw. In writing this the scenario I am trying to make it ahistorical so that the sides don't know exactly what they are facing and to give them agency i the ending.

[@cathyharrop3348]

The Austro-Polish campaign is interesting because you also have up to four Russian divisions involved, and you are not really sure on whose side. It's like the Russians are really trying to prevent either side from just making massive gains. It seems the Russians mobilized divisions of two musketeer brigades of four battalions each, one Jaeger brigade of four battalions, two dragoon regiments of four squadrons, and one light regiment of Hussars or Uhlans or either one or two battalions of four squadrons. We know that at least one Battalion of the Mariapol Hussars was mobilized with just four squadron from the memoir "The Cavalry Maiden ". Her squadron supported the Cossack cordon placed on the Polish-Russian border to prevent Poles from joining the Franco-Polish Legion. The Cuirassiers regiments from these divisions were kept in Russia near the border.

[@mbmbmbm]

3:52 you got a high resolution version of that photo. Seems to be the 52nd ❤

[@sultanbev]

Now the last bit is worth another article, the Russians in Belgium fighting Napoleon in July 1815. If I recall they had sent 180,000 troops, and the Austrians another 120,000 troops? Plus there was the fighting in Italy at the same time.

[@cyrileaton940]

On books about Napoleon's campaings there is quite a lot in french. For Black Powder though, Is there something like the clash of eagles supplement that covers earlier campaigns in central Europe?

[@pw972]

As always, thank you for a nice video with food for thought.

[@usauk3605]

I agree with most of your points, and I definitely see how one, important event can overshadow other equally interesting events. However, I have a couple of different points of thought. Whereas battles such as Austerlitz and Jena were the lightning strikes of the earlier phases of the wars, Waterloo was the ending thunderclap. It brought a true end to Napoleon, and began the era of British domination of world affairs. I understand that much of the color of the wars had been lost at this point, but that makes sense to me. As you pointed out, Waterloo was total war, everyone there knew that the fate of Europe was in the balance. Also, as an American with British heritage, I love some of the units which appear at Waterloo, particularly the Household and Union cavalry brigades. You make a good point about the amount of material available on Waterloo vs other campaigns, but as an add on to that, again, Waterloo was the Argonne of Napoleon’s time, the final great battle of an era of battles. For that reason, it earned its place as the penultimate episode of the wars. And, while some of the characters of earlier battles were absent at Waterloo, there were still plenty of interesting personalities to go around. After all, it was a contest between Wellington and Napoleon, arguably two of the greatest strategists of all time. The supporting cast wasn’t as important. You were right in saying that some of the dash had drained away, but that was partially because it was more costly than effective. Murat for example led some awe inspiring cavalry actions, but ultimately his cavalry lost more than they gained. Just look at the British heavy cavalry at Waterloo, they charged and destroyed a French infantry division, but then got into trouble when they overextended themselves. That proves that daring and valor are not substitutes for careful strategy. Anyways, these are just my thoughts, again I agree with almost everything you said, and it is a shame that some of the other battles don’t get as much attention. But I think Waterloo deserves its place, and not just because of the Sharpe series.

[@johnhood9567]

I think a lot of people's imaginations are captured by the events at Hougamont, Papelotte and La Haye Sainte, for somewhat the same reasons people like zombie movies and TV shows: the "can we hold out in our encircled stronghold" scenario seems to push a button in the collective unconscious, no doubt a sort of reflexive internalised herd memory of seiges throughout the long ages?

[@catr-wilde856]

I've been at Napoleonics for quite a long time. Like a good gaming hipster grognard, I can go on about the joys of trying to research the Russo-Swedish War of 1808 or the Austro-Neapolitan War of 1815 with what scraps of information are available in English or even French. But really, Waterloo is a great gateway into the hobby and what got me started way back when. Heck, Napoleon at Waterloo was the free introductory board game to all wargaming that came with every subscription to SPI magazine from 1971 onwards! If you want boring uniforms for horse and musket gaming, that's what the American Civil War is all about! ~,^ These days, I'm gaming with DBN and fighting big battles with small figure count armies opens up all the campaigns

[@cathyharrop3348]

Zouves?

[@catr-wilde856]

and then a sea of drab after that...

[@peterfmodel]

As someone who's root are Austria, the battle of Waterloo is not my main focus. I like the 1813 campaign the most, especially the battle of Leipzig. 1809 is my 2nd main interest. I get interested in the battle of Waterloo, or i commonly call it La Belle Alliance, because the Prussians were at their peak and fought a battle, by themselves, against the French.

[@HouseDelaque]

My Boys and me are from Germany and we will start or napoleonic Hobby with the Völkerschlacht von Leipzig. A few of us voted for Waterloo, but there are no russians or austrians and the french uniforms are more interesting. In myself I will collect a generic austrian Army from bohemia with the austro-german Legion, so i am more in the war of the 6th coaliation and not only in Leipzig. I try to hold the motivation to create 48 men per Battalion and would Like to have 4 regular, 1 German Legion and zwei Grenadier Battalions. Additional hussars and dragoons. Waterloo ist not my favorite, because there are no austrians.😁 Sorry for my Bad english, Hope you understand everything.

[@NapoleonicWargaming]

Don't you worry about your English buddy, it was perfectly understandable, and as I've proved countless times, much better than my German! 🤣 Austrian armies, with those large units can be a slog, but contrast paints can help! Plus when those 48 man units hit the tabletop, they'll be the best looking units on the board!

[@leonleese4919]

As a campaign 1814 is great with Napoleon running rings around the allies. Kevin Zucker’s board game will give you all the campaign details and the map of where the important fighting with Napoleon

[@philennis1545]

I have a British / Portuguese division plus force (11,000) for the Peninsular war and a Corps size Austrian force for 1809 (18,500) and a Franco German corps (18,500) that can be used against both, all in 10mm Pendraken at a scale of 1 fig to 20 field. I love the different way an Austrian force fights compared to the Anglo Portuguese one.

[@campbell1871]

I've started my Napoleonic journey with Leipzig. It helped that I happened to have the Nafziger history book of the battle on my shelf. But I love it because pick any sector (in my case I chose Wachau / Liebertwolkwitz) and there are about 7 or 8 nationalities to chose from. Having brigades of Prussians, Russians and Austrians side by side up against the French, Poles and Saxons just really excites me. On the smaller scale I'm also really looking forward to doing Elschingen 1805. Not a big battle or lots of countries but nice to that mix of bicorn French Ligne and early empire Legere into some consolidated elite company battalions. Also can still use the Austrian grenadiers and cuirassiers I would use at Leipzig anyway. I like Waterloo but I think I was more interested in reading and learning about a campaign that I personally knew much less about.

[@adamfox1669]

Nafzinger orders of battle. My go to resource material

[@stuartsimpson3696]

When I started Napoleonic wargaming in the late '70s, All I could get/afford were the Airfix figures (1/72). the range was primarily based on Waterloo. but I can say that we never really played out the 100-days campaign, and until this day I haven't. My first 15mm metal army was Austrian, as I found the campaigns 1800-1814 are far more interesting with various armies invovled and campaign maps in Italy, Bavaria, and throughout all of Europe. Battles like Marengo, Ulm, Austerlitz, Jena- Aurestadt, just to name a few. Doing these campaigns one can change the outcome and play "what IF" scenarios. Marengo for example what if Desiax didn't make it to the battlefield when he did? To wargame Waterloo for me personally is not very appealing, and to have every unit is madness.

[@jamesbarbour327]

I enjoyed this video. I have similar thoughts about Waterloo myself. I think it would be interesting to host a battle post-Waterloo to the east of Paris with Davout in command. My current project is one I call "Early Leipzig" where the Austrians suddenly show up on the south eastern flank of the Grande Armee at Friedland. FASCINATING potential for wargaming, with early Prussian and Russian troops, and slightly reformed Austrian armies against the top line-up of the French marshalate and general staff--Lannes, Davout, Soult, Ney, and Lasalle and D'Espagne!

[@andrewnawarycz3026]

I'm so happy the shop next door to the butchers mum used to sell metal minifigs at 23p each in 1980. Used to get 4 every week with my one pound note pocket money 👍

[@nickrhodes9031]

Vague memories of reading in an old wargaming magazine about a post Waterloo action between Rapp and the invading Austrians, looked like an interesting action

[@johnlongshore9660]

Waterloo is so atypical.. Napoleon was past his prime and ill, his troops were boys, and even the Guard was only the equivalent an elite line infantry unit of any other campaign. Politically it makes him look like a loser rather than the chronic gambler he was

[@keyserpacha3033]

As a french i can say that Waterloo is rather non-existant in our historiography (funnily enough) and is overshadowed by Napoleon's other campaigns (however i also feel that Napoleon is a bit "too" present in our historiography too :P ). To the point that the best book about it that i've read was written by an italian historian. It's called "The battle" by Alessandro Barbero. It somehow challenge the "classical" historiography about the battle, that is, "Wellington's account". And it's a good read, really.

[@neilburton2803]

From reading it is probably the most "objective" account of the battle I have read .

[@baldiesbattlesinminiature5902]

Glad you mentioned lack of Russians. Great topic and well presented as ever. Certainly interesting to see everyone's comments.

[@martinradcliffe4798]

Waterloo does cast a long shadow. Many years ago when my friend and I played a LOT of Napoleonics, the French ALWAYS attacked, the Guard ALWAYS attacked last. Personally I prefer the 1813 campaigns.

[@leonleese4919]

Waterloo is a small compact series of battles but everyone in the UK has heard about. It’s a small campaign in area as well as number of troops involved. There has been more books in English than any other battle. More beginners having watched Rod Steiger want to play the game or something like it.

[@christopherhorner7570]

The thing that annoys me about waterloo is that the British changed their shakos to that stupid false front shako. Now I must collect two British armies. The stove pipe shako is so 😎

[@tommiatkins3443]

You don't have to. It's a choice

[@blahblah-hw3xg]

ABSOLUTELY!

[@christopherhorner7570]

Well he asked about a possible negative about the waterloo campaign . That's all I can think of. Not a problem for me though, I absolutely love the painting and collecting process!!!!

[@martinradcliffe4798]

I agree- the different shako thing is a bit annoying!

[@ratelmike8825]

For me Napoleonics grabbed me with the Peninsular war, with an intention to move to Waterloo but its not my main focus. The more i read about the earlier part of the Napoleonic wars the more Im fascinated by it. I will no doubt get to the crescendo of Waterloo but its all the previous history im truly fascinated by and thats thanks to this channel

[@pw972]

In terms of books and sources I can say that there are plenty of books about all aspects of the coalition wars. From 1790 onwards there are sources for the wars against revolutionary wars in the spanish, german and italian campaigns. The same goes for the campaigns of Napoleon in Italy, Germany, Spain, Prussia and Russia. A better focus on the 1800, 1805, 1806 1809, 1812 and 1813 to 1814 campaign is given. Especially a focus on the reforms of the russian, prussian and confederation of the Rhine forces. At least the german books are far less anglo centric. There are the english, french and german books on the 100 days and spain as well, but also on the Austrian-Ottoman wars, the Swedish-Russian war and the formative conflict of the 8th Russo-Ottoman war. A lot of these conflicts seem to be forgotten in the english speaking world. At least in terms of general history about the periode.

[@foucher77]

Unless you play it that Grouchy march to the guns i dont know how else to play Wellingtons trap and Bluchers coming to his aid was a complete mouse trap,French did not have much options the only hope was if Ney didnt bash the French Cavarly reserve into smitherines.

[@foucher77]

Unless you play that Napolen took Davout as Second in Command not Ney,for heavens sake.

[@markcole5108]

The main issue I have with wargaming Waterloo is that experienced or historically knowledgeable players often know every brigade commander, unit strength, rating, location on the battlefield, etc. They know that the Prussians will arrive and when and where the arrival will occur. The lack of fog of war often causes games to play out very repetitively and cause players to make decisions based on their knowledge that is far beyond their historical counterparts. So I think for a 100 Days game to be more interesting, it should be played as a larger campaign where the teams determine how and where their forces will deploy and arrive.

[@felixgoodhew7723]

Waterloo and this channel got me into the hobby. I bought the Waterloo starter set from warlord honestly I don't think it was worth the money. Like you said the soldiers are just a bit boring I don't think it's a great hook for new people to give them 48 guys in dull coloured greatcoats. Although it was an easy way to start painting

[@mitchellline4242]

I'm surprised there isn't more wargaming campaigns about the 1814 battle for France. You have Napoleon at his finest, he also still has a decent number of foreign troops like the Poles and Italians, French fighting like 1945 Germany, Wellington marching north from Spain, Russia, Prussia, Austria, Sweden, and all of Germany marching West. It has everything Waterloo has and much more

[@patricklioneljonson2747]

Finally a British man that gets it! Yes, 1815 campaign should not be and should have never been the highlight of the Napoleonic wars for any type of game or movie. His campaign's in Italy, and against the third fourth fifth coalitions we're epic. The battles and campaigns of his early times need to be the highlight presented to newcomers.

[@manuelkong10]

Love you and your vids

[@NapoleonicWargaming]

Haha, thanks man!

[@MarekKrassus53]

Would you like to show in a movie how to control the French army and play an exemplary (theoretical) battle against e.g. the Austrian army? No figures but a battle plan. Turn by turn, taking into account an example (typical) placement of units. The French army is perhaps the most difficult of all large armies in the Napoleonic period to control. Of course, I've seen your videos on how to play with individual armies. However, I would like to see how you put it together.

[@phil73805]

I agree with you wholeheartedly. When Warlord games released their epic Waterloo sets I was crestfallen. Yay, another bloody Waterloo centric wargame, goody. I’ll pop it on the huge pile with all the others. My area of study and focus is the Peninsula War. If you want drama, tragedy and, more than one big battle then that’s the place to go. I know, every grognard has their pet project when it comes to Napoleonics, but why the obsession with one big battle?! I know it’s the end of Napoleon and I’m not blind to its historical importance but the obsession with one battle vs so many longer campaigns with so much more wargaming potential drives me a bit potty.

[@nicofolkersma2535]

About to start this and focussing on the 1809 Austrian campaign. would go for Waterloo if they bring out plastic Dutch-Belgians.

[@kevinfischer8647]

The movie Waterloo drew me into Napoleonic Wargaming as did Horatio Hornblower but when I started and paused my Napoleonic French, it was the Peninsular Campaign. I didn’t want to do the Russian Campaign and I preferred fighting British and not Waterloo as everyone seemed to do Waterloo convention wise (appearances can be misleading) so the Peninsula Campaign seems to fit the bill.

[@LordNikku]

I did Waterloo campaign French because a. Starter box was cheaper b. Those great coats are easier to paint!

[@thescarletpumpernel3305]

*sees the Warlord Games announcement for epic scale Waterloo*

[@CheckYourLeaderTV]

Waterloo is my bag and I dooooooo it. But I also do The peninsula and 1809 and 1813 and 1814 campaigns.

[@bangboats3557]

Yes, Waterloo good and bad? yep it's both. So well known that people who don't know ANYTHING about the period have heard of it (even if only an ABBA song... okay, let's not go there...) so it has a lot of light and focus for most people to understand, but bad in that people think this is how all battles of the era were, when it is in fact not a typical Napoleonic battle. Say "Waterloo" and even the dullest lay man can manage something like "Wasn't that where that Frenchie fella... Blownapart, lost?" But say something like Austerlitz, Leipzig, Borodino etc... people go "huh, what?" So yes it's both good and bad for Napoleonic history and wargaming all at the same time. Great video, thanks.

[@emmetminiatureswargames2424]

I’ve always been more interested in the Peninsular War, Austrian and Russian campaigns. All the figures and books I’ve bought so far have been geared towards those three theatres. I expect watching/reading Sharpe is what started me off and sparked my interest in the Peninsular.

[@leonleese4919]

From a campaign point of view it is a shed load of troops in a very small area. Wellington couldn’t move into France before Napoleon crossed the Franco Belgian border. The allied Army was spread out to cover all the options that Napoleon had. To fight the campaign properly Command Quality has to be taken into account troop quality was a problem for both the French and the Allies. The French had many conscript regiments, but the British were Volunteers, so many were short of well trained regulars. Another problem the veterans, they have hade a year of peace, and now they have to face it all again. You mention fighting Quatre Bras a then Ligny but in actual fact they should be fought together then Napoleon has to choose, chase the Prussians and destroy them leaving Ney to get between the British and the sea ports or quickly March on Brussels.decisive action was a failure of wellington and Napoleon/Ney. Playing a large battle on a small battlefield like Waterloo can teach players a great deal about organising the movement of an army. My old club Stoke Wargames Group used the order of battle for both armies and fought a campaign between Market Drayton and Shrewsbury using Ordnance Survey Maps. I learned how to use a British Army and my opposite number read more about Napoleon so I was pushed back until I found some high ground, not a ridge but three low hills that was poor for cavalry and I won a battle which made my other Generals Happy. The campaign was never finished as these things do, but it was interesting. It is difficult to fight historical battles because rules don’t really give the correct results for firepower, melee, morale and command and control but play for fun and overlook the shortcomings. But keep looking for rules that give a better result. The race to find quick, easy rules can’t help but each to his own.as a matter of interest I’ve played DBMM and they have kept players happy for the best part of 15 years and you can get a game no matter where you live in the UK. That can’t be said of Napoleonic games. Just my 2P worth to kick over the hornets nest😎

[@georgecoventry8441]

It's rather comparable to how much greater emphasis is given to Gettysburg over the many other significant US Civil War battles. You are quite right that a victory for Napoleon at Waterloo would not have changed much, and the Russians and Austrians would have beaten him after that anyway. He might have held out for another 2 or 3 months, but in the end he had no chance. It would, of course, have ruined Wellington's future career if he'd decisively lost the battle, and the British would not have been pleased about that.

[@ADHDlanguages]

I think your last point is the reason why Waterloo/100 days has never interested me as much as earlier parts of the Napoleonic Wars. Waterloo is pitched as some big turning point, but Napoleon's little comeback tour was just never going to last.

[@packersfanforlife7903]

I'm going to be doing Napoleonics after my AWI. Although I'm British, the AWI is more my thing but Napoleonics is a very close 2nd in my heart. I must be honest, I would love to have an Army of all the Nations involved in the Napoleonic Wars however it'll be too much cost and effort. For me Waterloo and it's campaign makes it easier for new comers. I understand it's the same old however for newer players it is a great start. I suspect as time goes on interest in the wider period would happen eventually. For me it has and always shall be the AWI (barring figuring out what uniform to paint the Continentals, one year in 1776 the 3rd New Jersey is light grey faced blue, by 1780 they are blue faced red 😭). I have been trying to find information on the Austrian Army which was threatening France in the 100 days Campaign but sadly I've found nothing great as I'd most likely create on of those too. Love the video however and it has sort of made me think maybe I should look more broader into Napoleonics before jumping straight in to Waterloo.

[@tomasanderson6815]

Leipzig !!!! what a great mix of armies

[@geebards]

Really good point bout the Armee du Nord being a French army and not an Imperil one.

[@Holdit66]

Very interesting video and I'd agree with a lot of what you say. Waterloo does have value, however, in that it's an excellent "gateway drug" to the period. For me it was seeing the movie one Christmas. My local toy shop sold 1/72 guess what...French, British and Prussians (actually Prussian Landwehr but sold as "Prussian Infantry"). Russians? Austrians? Spanish? Forget it. First reference I saw to them was in the WRG 1685-1845 rules and Bruce Quarrie's "Napoleon's Campaigns in Miniature". The latter gave a whistle stop tour of the other major battles of the era from Marengo to Leipzig, and discussed uniforms and some of the personalities*, and that was the start of my branching out into the wider Napoleonic and French Revolutionary periods. I'm Irish so I don't exactly feel a need to concentrate on British victories 😛, and I do my Napoleonic wargaming on computer rather than with figures, so I'm not constrained by budget or time in terms of which campaigns I can play. I do modify some of the game's unit graphics to include some uniform types that are absent, so that acts for me as a substitiute activity for painting figures. My last three games were from 1794 (vs Prussia) , 1809 (vs Austria), 1812 (vs Russia), and I can say that that apart from Russia vs Ottoman, and the Egyptian campaign, there is no campaign I won't play a game from...but it was Waterloo that got the ball rolling. I stil have the first two Waterloo books I ever bought: Haythornthwaite's "Uniforms of Waterloo" and "Waterloo: Battle of the three Armies" by Chalfont et al. Quick note on 1815 uniforms - they're not as boring as might seem at first sight the French wore a lot of non-standard uniforms due to th erush to mobilise, and a number of Prussian regiments had not yet been converted to the standard Prussian ionfantry uniform e.g. some of the Freikorps, Berg infantry, etc. *I love the claim that Miloradovitch loved posturing with a pair of flashy pistols espcially when he thought the Tsar could see him, but I've never been able to find a corroboration. Under personalities, a contender for top billing must be Sir William Erskine, whom Wellington described as "a madman" but was reassured by a Horse Guards bureaucrat that: ""No doubt he is sometimes a little mad, but in his lucid intervals he is an uncommonly clever fellow; and I trust he will have no fit during the campaign, though he looked a little wild as he embarked.""

[@NapoleonicWargaming]

Haha, great comment! I absolutely agree, in fact I've also done a video on why Waterloo is good for Napoleonic wargaming and that's my main argument there! I've also just done a 4 part series on the Irish Regiment. Absolutely fascinating stuff!

[@Holdit66]

@@NapoleonicWargaming I'll definitely check those out - thanks. (Subscribed - keep 'em coming!)

[@olympiangamers7007]

Know one local gaming group that exclusively plays the 100 days campaigns…. Biggest barrier to getting into Napoleonic gaming

[@bonysminiatures3123]

i'm focusing on the Russian campaign and Austrian campaigns more than enough to paint all them Austrians , Russians and french

[@richiehall3042]

Completely agree about uniforms, but 1815 give the allies some superb units and the French still get some Bonny units

[@gkspain1]

Very nice video, I'm not sure I totally agree with you regarding Waterloo, although Waterloo drew me into the hobby I soon became more interested in the 1812 Russian invasion and what lead to it, however, there is a lot I agree with and I love the history, all the best, Garry

[@andreaspersson5639]

Hottest take, but isn't Waterloo just a bit dull? :p Sure, it's a big battle, but that's about it, there's just this one big battle (with some foreplay at the crossroads, and Ligny. In the older campaigns, you have actual campaigns, with maneuver on a grand scale (which, I will admit, can be harder to catch on the tabletop, but a grand story gives the battle *meaning*... and it helps if it's not as apocalyptic) (Yes, I am joking, at least to some degree ;) )

[@igranigra]

1813/1814 campaigns are pretty solid for me

[@DasUnbekannte]

I speak Spanish and Russian(besides English of course), although I’m neither-I’m Mexican. I can attest that Russians don’t think much about Waterloo. Their focus is, unsurprisingly, on Napoleon’s failed invasion of Russia in 1812. In fact, I’d say the average Russian is just or more aware of this event than even Germany’s invasion during World War II. The other "Great Patriotic War" in Russian history, against the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, also holds significant relevance, as it ensured the survival of the Orthodox Church. This might be partly because great Russian novelists have immortalized Napoleon’s campaign in their works. Tolstoy’s War and Peace is the most famous example, but Pushkin and Dostoevsky also set their narratives against the backdrop or context of Napoleonic conflicts. As for Spanish-speaking countries, the perspective is more fragmented because Spanish is spoken far beyond Spain itself. In Latin America, Napoleon IS associated with Waterloo, as Latin Americans often don’t draw the (very obvious) connection between Napoleon’s invasion of Spain and the triggering of the Spanish-American Wars of Independence. In Spain, Napoleon is of course, primarily linked with the Peninsular War (the Spanish War of Independence as is known there). Although typical Spaniard knows much less about the conflict compared to the Russian. Russians are very patriotic, while Spaniards remain as divided as it was 200 years ago, so the way Napoleon’s invasion is remembered (if at all) depends largely on where you are. A Galician, Andalusian, Catalonian, or Basque person might have very different perspectives on the legacy of Napoleon’s invasion. On a personal note, I’ve recently started collecting Napoleonic miniatures for the first time. I usually play Pike and Shotte games set during the Spanish-Dutch Eighty Years’ War-the heyday of Spanish dominance in Europe. This time, I’m focusing on St. Cyr’s campaign in Catalonia. The diversity of uniforms is fascinating: the French had their typical light, line battalions bu also a small ragtag Pyrenean conscripts and a contingent of Italians and Neapolitans, while the Spanish fielded their typical collection of colorful battalions.

[@Dark_Wooki33]

Imho, the 1812-14 Period is the most interesting, the Russian Campaign with the french at their height and all their colourfull 'allies' (prussians, austrians, saxons, poles, bavarians, italiens, smaller german states) is the most interesting and then ofc the french retreat and all nations switching sides and picking on them ;) (btw. i am from leipzig, so i am biased towards the battle of the nations as the most 'awesome' thing, waterloo is kinda boring(truth be told the peninsula campaign is more to my liking)), but i really hope that their will be more stuff in the future about the defensive battles in france. They are kinda underrated.

[@dogmadogma5398]

I'm French and Waterloo isn't known by us Frenchies. Never heard of it. Same as WW2 from 1940-1944 (Blank years)

[@dzelman444]

Ahhh yes, the War of the 5th Coalition. When the Coalition was actually France and its allies vs Austria and Stadion's mess.

[@seanhejnal246]

Not to ever cast a shadow on my addication....but 40 years on I find Waterloo dull . With nothing but the desire to win at whatever cost, Nappy can't lose. The Coalition doesn't have the command ability to handle a Ney massed charge, infantry squares up n in comes the gaurd n guns with massive losses but Vive la France, it's another victory. France has no army now, but that's outside the scope of the scenario.

[@gunhojput]

Get hold of the boardgame series Les Bataille the individual games have so much information relevent to a lot of battles

[@mini_moemoe_cow1179]

There are alot of dutch documents about the russian campain

[@manuelkong10]

You mention Napoleon being off his game later....makes me wonder about that 1809 divorce----LOOK at what the golfer Tiger Woods divorce did to him! Seriously off his game for YEARS

[@Darthvegeta8000]

Only campaign that holds little appeal to me is the Peninsular one.

[@michamalinowski8015]

I think the bias you are talking about comes from the fact wargaming is a british hobby. Most known rules authors and publishers are from UK, many miniature manufacturers are from the UK. Here in Poland we have a system called "Bogowie Wojny: Napoleon" and that has many supplements and promotional battle reports focused on battles close to Poland like battle of Kaczawa or Świdnica mostly between France, Russia and Prussia. So each nation will have it's preferences- that's probably British authors (who were first in the hobby) focus on Spain and Waterloo.

[@leandromobile6927]

Being belgian, waterloo is THE thing

[@francklyonel3825]

Hi, no french comments here??!.. Too bad)))