The Loose Association of Wargamers

I did plan it, but then baccus redid his, and so other things went to the top of our list.

FreddBloggs wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 11:10 am Also remember his key general in the WAS was the Old Dessauer

Ohhhh yes. Now your talking!
What a guy!

Clean up in aisle nine!

FreddBloggs wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 11:25 am I did plan it, but then baccus redid his, and so other things went to the top of our list.

WSS TEASING!!!!

I wish you hadn't mentioned it, baccus.co.uk

FreddBloggs wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 9:59 am Rather than continue on the ecw thread I decided to muse here.

The wss I feel is the first of the lace wars, it was not just the ring bayonet or metal ramrods and the beginnings of platoon fire and 3 rank lines. But also the use of multi line formations, dragoons being used far more as cheap cavalry and the very beginnings of hussars, firstly hungarian, then french.

A wss battlefield and formations would have been instantly recognisable to fred or napolean or even grant, in a way that ecw ant tyw or even 9 years war would not.

I agree that the WSS probably marked the start of the period known as 'The Lace Wars', but I don't see the Lace Wars as defining a genre of warfare. While the WSS is on the cusp of pike and shot and linear formations of well drilled arms, I think it has more characteristics of the former than the latter. And also, that it's reasonable to lump the GNW in with the WSS.

Cadence step, or marching in step, was not a feature of the period. Troops continued to be pushed and shoved into the required formation and once in it, pretty much had to stay that way. Everything happened very slowly, and with the absence of anything much more sophisticated than back, forward and stop. This allowed nothing of the manoeuvrability, such as it was, enjoyed by mid 18thC generals.

I'm not sure the metal ramrod was universal until long after the WSS, and I'm not sure it was a game changer anyway. I accept that my argument is severely hampered by the socket bayonet and the minimal impact of the few pikes that remained. But, during the war, there were pikes, formations were still very deep and shooting was done by rank. Very close call.

But there's no denying that the period is so very pretty.

The Baccus WSS range is recently resculpted and very pretty. GNW resculpts to follow soon.

The gnw is an oddity, in that you are generally dealing with far more aggressive pikemen than had been seen since the landsneckts and swiss.

British and dutch used platoon fire for the whole war, by the end of the war over half the french regiments were using it, as were the germans, danes, swedes and russians. The advantage lay in not a greater firepower (it is about the same) but the fact you always had loaded muskets available to back up bayonets, and that 3 deep, each battalion could cover a third or more frontage.

As to cadenced step, that actually meant they marched faster, and were less impeded by woodlands and obstacles. For an example of how that worked look at Oudenard.

One of the aims in the wss for the allied side, was to NOT to fight like the 9yw.

I have a theory about the Swedish use of the pike. It's a very, very woolly theory.......

I wonder if the Swedes had pikes because they lacked muskets, and quality powder, for all the men to be so armed. Otherwise, I can't see why they would have had them.

There, I've said it, and I feel better for it.

Iain

Essex Boy wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 5:09 pm I have a theory about the Swedish use of the pike. It's a very, very woolly theory.......

Colour me amazed