Volley effect

[le fusilier]

Hi all.

I'm new to Kriegsspiel but have had an interest in Napoleonic strategy for years now. I've read the Reisswitz rules on fire effect. He covers the parameter of distance from target, target formation, type, potential cover, and dismisses any height effect.

What about target orientation/facing though? If an enemy half-battalion is looking straight at your firing piece then just looking up the tables will suffice, but what if you are firing down it's flank? The enemy would present a much smaller target and thus receive less casualties. Not to mention the fact that many bullets will end up hitting the same individuals that were unfortunate to be on the outer edge of their half-battalion.

Is there a rule set that covers this, or for simplicity's sake was this never examined? Does anyone have any suggestion as to how to deal with such cases? Thanks.

[YogahofYag]

First of all I would abandon Leeson's book. It is full of many egregious mistakes.

If you're referring to flank-fire with muskets, I don't know if there was a rule in the book for this. Rule 46 gives that 1/4 more is added to effect against a unit fired upon with roundshot or shell than is shown on the die. Until I can find a passage in the original to the contrary, I would suggest a ruling where infantry-fire at a flank is only 1/4 of what is shown on the die.

Best wishes.

[le fusilier]

Thanks for the reply

p.s. pm sent

[Gamer2000]

I am very interested to know more about the mistakes. Could you please tell us what they are?

[YogahofYag]

I am very interested to know more about the mistakes. Could you please tell us what they are?

To ennumerate all the errors which I have found would take a lot of time and space which, unfortunately, I do not have at present.

In short, his work is more of a very sloppy paraphrase than a proper translation.

Best Regards,

Yogah of Yag.

[Gamer2000]

Yoga of Yag, do you have a copy of the kriegsspiel rules that are a different translation, or maybe the original German text?

[YogahofYag]

Yoga of Yag, do you have a copy of the kriegsspiel rules that are a different translation, or maybe the original German text?

The original German book with the original illustrations.

[Gamer2000]

You suggest abandoning the Leeson text, may I ask why? It seems to be used by quite a few people very successfully.

[Guy]

Yogahofyag, You say 'abandon the Leeson book', and in another thread you utterly condemn the TFL version - could you suggest a readily available alternative in English?
I think it better for people to play Kriegsspiel in some manner rather than abandon the attempt becasue the perfect translation has not yet been made available. I suspect most people don't play as a means of honouring Reisswitz, so don't consider minor deviations a sin or an affront. No doubt they would prefer to play the original version if it were available but if it isn't...
Where anomalies/confusions/omissions occur I would suggest umpire knowledge fills them in. At worst assign values to outcomes and throw a die - better than not playing at all.
Guy

[MJ1]

Yoga of Yag, do you have a copy of the kriegsspiel rules that are a different translation, or maybe the original German text?

The original German book with the original illustrations.

If you get in touch with Richard at 2FL I am sure he would be interested in making corrections available via the WWW or if you could provide a full and correct translation then perhaps an updated version?

I am not absolutely sure of the history of the work done by Bill but he at least had a crack at doing it and has opened the door through which you could add further insight and help to English speakers throughout the world. If I were you and had the ability to see mistakes I would attempt to help correct them in a constructive manner.

We are all human and not always perfect in what we do, but at least Bill did something for others by trying to translate the work.

I am not sure he even wanted it published but because people asked he helped out by making it available.....

Anyway just a few thoughts that might help you understand that everything is not black and white......

[YogahofYag]

Efforts are currently underway to remedy the situation. Your collective patience is appreciated.

For those of you who continue to praise Leeson, whom among you have read the original Prussian document and seen the illustrations? How could one know how accurate Leeson may be without comparing his work with the original? How, then, could you competently assess the accuracy or lack thereof with regard to Leeson's book?

Addendum: Could someone please tell me the provenance of the illustration on the KS News site that depicts the stones? All I know is that it is not from von Reisswitz.

[Guy]

For those of you who continue to praise Leeson, whom among you have read the original Prussian document and seen the illustrations? How could one know how accurate Leeson may be without comparing his work with the original? How, then, could you competently assess the accuracy or lack thereof with regard to Leeson's book?

Don't know if this was addressed to me but, although I wasn't 'praising' Bill particularly I thought your comments regarding his work were unnecessarily ad hominem. I have not seen the original Reisswitz, nor do I particularly care if my playing of Kriegsspiel is an exact replication of an early nineteenth century experience, so the Leeson work is entirely satisfactory from my game playing standpoint. I don't believe there is anything sacrosanct about the original game and make no comment regarding the accuracy of Leeson's work.

I would be quite happy to try a game played to your translation if it is published, and I wish you well if that is what you are planning (I really do, I would love to see an original and/or a translation of it). It is not necessary, however, to denigrate the work of those who went before you. That the number of English speakers interested in Kriegsspiel is as large as it is, is due in no small part to Bill's efforts and you owe much of your potential market to him. I have no idea whether your translation will be more accurate or more sympathetic to Reisswitz' intentions but Bill got there over twenty five years ago and did his best. You would attract more interest and sympathy from Kriegsspielers by saying nothing about his work if you cannot find it in you to say anything positive, and let your own work stand alone to be welcomed.

[YogahofYag]

For those of you who continue to praise Leeson, whom among you have read the original Prussian document and seen the illustrations? How could one know how accurate Leeson may be without comparing his work with the original? How, then, could you competently assess the accuracy or lack thereof with regard to Leeson's book?

Don't know if this was addressed to me but, although I wasn't 'praising' Bill particularly I thought your comments regarding his work were unnecessarily ad hominem. I have not seen the original Reisswitz, nor do I particularly care if my playing of Kriegsspiel is an exact replication of an early nineteenth century experience, so the Leeson work is entirely satisfactory from my game playing standpoint. I don't believe there is anything sacrosanct about the original game and make no comment regarding the accuracy of Leeson's work.

I would be quite happy to try a game played to your translation if it is published, and I wish you well if that is what you are planning (I really do, I would love to see an original and/or a translation of it). It is not necessary, however, to denigrate the work of those who went before you. That the number of English speakers interested in Kriegsspiel is as large as it is, is due in no small part to Bill's efforts and you owe much of your potential market to him. I have no idea whether your translation will be more accurate or more sympathetic to Reisswitz' intentions but Bill got there over twenty five years ago and did his best. You would attract more interest and sympathy from Kriegsspielers by saying nothing about his work if you cannot find it in you to say anything positive, and let your own work stand alone to be welcomed.

I knew about the von Reisswitz work by reputation before learning of Leeson's efforts, not the other way around.

I can only assume, based on your remarks, that you are Mr. Leeson himself. Otherwise, why would you take such unnecessary offence at comments directly at the author's distorted and misleading paraphrase?

My opinions are not ad hominem. My measured criticisms -- not excessive whatsoever, I assure you -- are directed fully at the man's work, such as it is.

If you feel that Leeson's (your own?) work is sufficient, I wish you many entertaining hours of wargaming.

Cordially,

YoY.

[Guy]

'I knew about the von Reisswitz work by reputation before learning of Leeson's efforts, not the other way around.'

Good for you.

'I can only assume, based on your remarks, that you are Mr. Leeson himself.'

Assume all you like, I'm not.

'I wish you many entertaining hours of wargaming.'

Thank you. I look forward to your 100% accurate version of the rules.

Guy (not Bill)

[YogahofYag]

Thank you. I look forward to your 100% accurate version of the rules.

Guy (not Bill)

That's very nice of you. Be sure to drop by one of my book-signing events in the near future, and I would be delighted to sign a copy for you. I always look forward to meeting my readers.

Best Regards,

YoY.