Messages

676

Historical Discussion / Re: False histories. What irks you the most?

« on: February 20, 2013, 05:53:24 pm »

Archduke_Sven, either you made that quote up or Peter Hofschroer is hilariously ill-informed about the events at Quatre Bras, because he seems two have confused to entirely different events.

You see, the only point in the battle that the 42nd and 44th formed squares was to repel the Kellerman cuirassier charge, and even though the cuirassiers twice smashed into the 42nd's square (they didn't quite reach the 44th) the combined fire of the two regiments handily drove the cuirassiers into the Bois de Bossu.

Earlier in the battle, however, during the charge of the French lancers, battalions of the 42nd and 44th were caught in the open in line formation. The 42nd formed an inverted square once the lancers had made contact and then proceeded to bayonet all the lancers within, but not without a great loss; the 42nd suffered some 300 casualties at the hands of the lancers, including the death of Colonel Macara (note that cuirassiers didn't carry lances). The 44th, on the other hand, decided to receive the lancers in line and were rather successful in driving them off with a fusilade. Although a lancer managed to grab hold of their colours and rip a piece off, Ensign Christie fell on top of it to prevent it from being taken.

This is clearly the charge Hofschroer was referring to, but there were no squares broken or even properly formed at that time. This is confirmed beyond a shadow of a doubt by eye witnesses from both regiments.

As for Waterloo the British claim that not a single square was broken. Siborne wrote that one square had a side "completely blown away and dwindled into a mere clump."

Is this some kind of straw man or what? I clearly agreed one British square was broken at Waterloo. I disagree with the French accounts that several were broken, though, as they clearly mistook shaken and disorganised squares for broken ones (it ain't broken 'til cavalry rides clean through it).

Docm, im not being defensive about the Prince, i just don't like the Brits always accusing others for their mistakes.  Don't believe everything you read in the Waterloo Industry.

Well, I'm not British and I'm not attempting to reassign blame for mistakes, but merely point out what I preceived as a historical mistake in a thread entirely about historical mistakes.

I've read an account of one of the 69th ensigns (By the way, only their kings color was captured, not the Regimental), and he says how their line was both spread out and how many men simply lied down and waited for the attack to be over. They took high casualties, but not extreme ones.

One battalion of the 69th suffered 152 dead during the charge of the cuirassiers, according to Siborne. That's hardly what I'd call light casualties.

For the record, my main modern (though far from only) source for the events at Quatre Bras is a DUTCH historian named Pierre de Wit.

677

Historical Discussion / Re: False histories. What irks you the most?

« on: February 20, 2013, 04:58:06 pm »

One British square was broken at Waterloo and none of the squares at Quatre Bras. It was these squares at Quatre Bras that wound up repelling the charge of Kellerman's cuirassiers. If the 69th had formed square it's highly unlikely the cuirassiers would have done such a number on them.

Your points about Picton, Pack and Kempt just show that there were a lot of idiots in the allied command, but they don't make the Prince look any better.

Even if the order to take La Haye Sainte didn't originally come from the Prince (though most accounts I've read say it did) he still agreed with the order and forced Ompteda to carry it out even after he pointed out that it was suicide. The fact that he didn't even know where his own cavalry was (assuming we disregard the heinous possibility that he lied about thinking the cavalry was allied) doesn't exactly bespeak of a great general, either.

The man was barely out of his teenage years and had never held a real military command before---it's perfectly understandable why he made so many mistakes, but he definitely made them and any attempts to claim otherwise require ignoring facts.

Now, I make no attempt to argue ad hominem, but you both seem awfully defensive about this have yet to present a proper counter arguement or any examples of good moves by the Prince.

678

Modifications / Re: Mod Idea Collection

« on: February 20, 2013, 04:08:33 pm »

Make one a firearm and the other a crossbow; they use different animation sets and both work equally well for guns. Problem solved.

679

Modifications / Re: Mod Idea Collection

« on: February 20, 2013, 03:51:10 pm »

How do you add different animations for the same type of weapon?

You can add variations to animations by simply adding more than one animation to the entry in module_animations.

If you look at the first entry in the life, "stand", you'll see it has four variations and four more commented out.

If you're wondering if you can have different animations for specific weapons of the same type, then no, animations can't be assigned on a per item basis.

680

Historical Discussion / Re: False histories. What irks you the most?

« on: February 20, 2013, 03:44:39 pm »

Unwinnable? Didn't they hold out for hours and eventually won with British and Brunswicher re-enforcements?

Quatre Bras was at best a draw, in that both sides were prevented from reaching Ligny, and it can, and has, been argued that it was a major success for the French. Either way, being that the allies failed to drive the French off and had no choice but to perform a tactical retreat, it's impossible to call it an allied victory.

What two battalions at Quatre-bras do you mean specific, Docm?

The 69th regiment of foot was ordered to form squares by Maj. General Halkett to receive Kellerman's charge of the 8th and 11th cuirassiers and was doing so when the Prince of Orange rode up to the regiment and told them that forming square was unnecessary and remaining in line would be sufficient. As you know, the 69th was crushed and lost it's colours.

This is a very well known incident that's in just about every history book and was confirmed by Colin Halkett himself in addition to several members of the 69th, including Captain Barlow, who wrote of it in letters to his father. The fact that it happened simply can't be denied.

I could also point out that he had earlier ordered van Merlen's cavalry to make an ill-advised attack on the much larger French cavalry force, which not only resulted in huge casualties for van Merlen's brigade, but also caused the loss of Stevenart's battery, which had not been given sufficient time to prep their guns and thus had nothing to fire at the French cavalry that drove van Merlen off.

Ompteda was orded by his divisionary commander (Von Alten) to attack a French infantry regiment which was attacking La Haye sainte. He refused, and THEN the Prince came up, ordering Ompteda to simply follow his orders. A lieutenant of the 5th KGL wrote in his memoirs how Ompteda himself ordered the line-formation, and then a bayonet charge against the infantry. After which they were charged by Cuirassiers, and the lieutenant in question taken prisoner. Yes, it was a suicidal mission, but what other options were there? Let the French simply take La Haye Sainte?

I respect your view, Docm, but if Omteda was so sure of a French cavarly attack, why did he order a charge, completly breaking off the formation he had?

It's true that the order had come through Alten, but Ompteda didn't refuse it, rather he was convinced there had been a mistake and asked for confirmation that the orders to retake La Haye Sainte were correct. This prompted the Prince of Orange to ride to Ompteda's position and tell him that he had personally ordered the charge and that it should be carried out forthwith. Whether or not the Prince had actually made the initial order I don't know, but he did tell Ompteda that it was him.

It was at this point that Ompteda pointed out the French heavy cavalry were sitting just south of the manor to prevent it from being retaken. Most accounts say that at this point the Prince assured him that the cavalry was Belgic and that if Ompteda didn't advance it would be a serious stain on his honour.

Ompteda advanced on La Haye Sainte because he had been twice ordered by his superiors and had no choice but to try and retake the buildings and drive off the cavalry before they could be over ridden.

Now, La Haye Sainte shouldn't have fallen in the first place, and it wouldn't have had Ompteda's requests for resupplies been granted (can't say Orange is to blame for that, though. The rifle ammunition for the KGL was probably lost during the retreat from Quatre Bras). But once it had, trying to retake it was pointless.

I know you respect the man and all, and I'm not saying you shouldn't (I understand he was a perfectly good king), but during the Waterloo campaign he made far too many mistakes to be considered anything like a skilled tactician.

681

Modifications / Re: Mod Idea Collection

« on: February 20, 2013, 02:11:24 pm »

For the record, those aren't the current animations used for L'Aigle. These are. I worked with the animator, Ranger_SLO, to get these accurate to period drill and as natural looking as you can get in this game. The head still sometimes turns away when firing, though not always, as there are different variations of the firing animations.

Anyway, thought I'd take this opportunity to set that straight and to plug the mod.

682

Historical Discussion / Re: False histories. What irks you the most?

« on: February 20, 2013, 02:00:25 pm »

The Prince of Orange was certainly a brave man, I'll give you that, and this portrayal in Sharpe may have been unfair, but to suggest he was a skilled commander is to completely ignore historical facts.

One of the incidents depicted in Sharpe is his ordering at Quatre Bras of two British infantry battalions to change from the square they were formed in and form a line to repel an incoming charge by French cavalry. This moronic decision went about as well as you could expect, with the two battalions being ridden over and utterly destroyed. His decision to remain on the battlefield after it became clear that the fight was unwinnable also delayed the allied army and prevented them from aiding the Prussians at Ligny, which had been Wellington's plan.

His great mistake at Waterloo was his ordering of Baron Ompteda to lead a suicidal mission to retake La Haye Sainte, which the good Baron (who was an excellent and experienced soldier) strongly recommended against, pointing out that the French cavalry was sitting nearby waiting for the British to do exactly what the Prince had ordered them to do. The Prince, of course, ignored the advice of the much more experienced Baron and the result was that the Baron was killed, the troops slaughtered and the wavering centre put in a position where if the French had followed up with a quick attack, the battle would have been over there.

The 22-year old Prince was too young and too eager to make a name for himself to have been given such an important command, which is probably as much the fault of those that put him in command as it is his own.

I don't mean to attack your king here, but he showed a great deal of incompetence during the Waterloo campaign. As a totally impartial observer, I can't just let that slide.

They did get wings for full dress uniform, apparantly

Epaulettes on top of wings, like those worn in the Foot Guards.

683

Historical Discussion / Re: Prussian Army Battalion and Company distinction

« on: February 20, 2013, 08:57:14 am »

As Vicccard says, the sword knots showed the company.



From left to right: the first eight are for the 1st through 8th companies. The next four belong to the fusilier companies. The next two are the first and second grenadier companies, followed by the NCO's tassel. The last is an honourary one given on 17 March, 1809 to privates who were in the army when the Treaty of Tilsit was signed.

I don't believe they wore any battalion distinctions.

Hope that helps.

684

Modifications / Re: My Pickelhaube fetish

« on: February 19, 2013, 05:07:19 am »

1916... the first Stahlhelm was a "Model 1916" and first issued in February of that year.

Technically, they were first issued in experimental numbers in December, 1915 to the 1st Assault Battalion.

685

In Development / Re: La Belle Alliance - A Waterloo Mod (Forging a team)

« on: February 19, 2013, 03:57:43 am »

Docm30 to the rescue!

Firstly, I'll start with the last picture. That is an Austrian issued uniform that was worn in the 1809 campaign. When the regiment was transferred to British service the long coat was replaced with the shorter, dolmanesque coat. It's not a Jaeger like the image is titled, though.

Judging by the background and the apparently French knapsack, I'd say the second picture is the Peninsula. The title of the image doesn't hurt that theory, either.

The first image is an accurate depiction of a line battalion circa Waterloo. Surviving shakoes held at the Brunswick Landesmuseum and contemporary illustrations confirm that both the Russian style "kiwers" and flat topped Prussian style shakoes were worn during the Waterloo campaign. This only applies to the line battalions, though. The leib battalions are thought to have worn only the Prussian style shako.

Anyway, that's really all I registered to say. Hope it helps.

Oh, and if anyone happens to be considering replying to my Taleworlds belgic shako post here, I probably won't see it if you do.