Introduction to the WDS Napoleonic Battles series - Fourth Installment

Welcome to the fourth installment in our series focused on the Napoleonic Battles series of games. We will follow the same presentation format set forth in the first three installments. If you haven't read those you can do so herehere and here.

We have setup a thread on the forum where this article can be discussed if you are so inclined. The comments section at the bottom doesn't allow interaction and easy response... you can visit that thread here. You do not have to be registered to read - only to post.

Note: All images can be clicked for a full sized view.

So let's get going with the next installment!

Advanced Training

The larger the battle, the more challenging it becomes to comprehend its complexity and scale, especially on larger maps with lots of space for maneuvering. The greater the number of factors, plans, and considerations that players must keep in their minds, the more likely they are to make mistakes. In warfare, it's those who make fewer mistakes that emerge victorious.

This chapter introduces a practical approach to minimizing the effects of the chaos of war, scale and fog of war. It essentially involves using some tools to replicate a process which historically was handled by the general staff which emerged during the Napoleonic era as a distinct military discipline.

Prior to the Napoleonic wars, there was generally no organizational support for staff functions such as military intelligence, logistics, planning or personnel. Unit commanders handled such functions for their units, with informal help from subordinates who were usually not trained for or assigned to a specific task. The Napoleonic wars revolutionized warfare in that sense and a professionally trained staff corps emerged to handle these critical functions in a more structured and consistent manner.

The topic covered in this section isn't the easiest and certainly falls under a special category. It's likely to interest a specific group of players, and not everyone may find it appealing and useful. The game can be played and enjoyed without the approach described below.

The concept described below holds particular relevance for the Campaign mode played with FOW, where information about the enemy's size and location is limited. It is also applicable to large scenarios set on large maps that allow for extensive maneuvering.

In my opinion, campaign mode is how serious Napoleonic wargaming should be done. Not only does it offer a true FOW element rarely found in scenarios, but it also enforces continuity of losses from battle to battle across most campaigns. When players realize that casualties from one battle carry over to the next, their entire approach to the game immediately and radically changes. In scenarios, there is no "tomorrow," prompting French players, for instance, to readily commit their French Guard at the battle of Borodino. However, Napoleon's considerations not to commit the Guard were beyond the battle of Borodino. Campaign mode brings this historical experience as performance in each battle often has implications for the rest of the Campaign. This play mode stands as the hidden gem of WDS Napoleonic Battles series, providing access to a richer and more rewarding gaming experience.

Preparation Phase 

Start a large scenario or campaign to grasp the time limit and an understanding of the composition of forces already available on the map and any anticipated reinforcements. Utilizing tools ranging from paper to excel spreadsheet can assist in documenting the number of turns and the scheduled arrival of reinforcements. For optimal organization an excel spreadsheet is my choice, and I suggest using a simple template pictured below: 

The template consists of the following columns: "visibility," "time," and "turn number". A Weather column can be added if weather conditions are abnormal or expected to worsen.  Additional columns are located to the right, designated for reinforcements arriving in their respective turns: Leaders, starting from the divisional level to indicate the C&C situation of the arriving units, followed by a rough count of infantry, cavalry, and guns set to arrive. You may not have the headcount of arriving units so alternatively you can just record a number of battalions, squadrons and batteries.

On-map forces should be counted and recorded as a separate step. This count can be done either by tallying the number of squadrons and battalions (for instance, 8 infantry battalions, 8 squadrons, 16 guns) in each division or by calculating the cumulative headcount expressed in thousands of soldiers (e.g., 4,000 infantry, 1,000 cavalry, 16 guns) which is found in the Strength Dialog under the Info menu.

This comprehensive approach ensures clarity in assessing the overall strength and composition of the forces in each sector and should be the first task of your staff when developing a battle plan. Maintaining up to date headcount records of battle-ready troops along with reinforcements on the march with estimated times of arrivals (ETAs) was historically compiled and reported by staff officers.

Mapping Phase

Another area staff officers would be responsible for is to pinpoint the forces available on the maps. To replicate this in game terms it would involve capturing an entire map snapshot using the File menu (File--> Snapshot option), saving the image in a separate folder and then pasting the image into some software or even printing it in A3 size.

Excel works best for me. I typically paste the image into the same spreadsheet file mentioned in the previous section (named after the battle), alongside the reinforcement columns. What you end up having is you units’ roster with headcount in columns and the entire map of the scenario next to it. Now it’s time to position your units on the map.

If you use paper, you can just draw it by hand. This is how Napoleonic era staff officers would do it. Or, use sticky notes which can be moved as a scenario progresses. If using Excel, use the "Insert--> Shapes" function to place icons based on their positions as of Turn 1. I use icons in a shape of a brace (see image below).

Each icon mapped would represent a division or a corps depending on a scenario and formation size. Overall, this method mirrors the historical process of mapping units in pre-modern era War Rooms.

The snapshot below illustrates this process, using the 1807 Campaign as an example. Each icon has the outline color-coded indicating the particular Corps or Wing it belongs to. A black outline is Left Wing, yellow is Right Wing, and purple is the Guard Corps. The information next to the Divisional icons is the division number and the division headcount in thousands (i.e. 3.5k).

Victory Points (VPs) are added to the map in yellow shapes providing easy to spot markers. Creeks and bridges are added to facilitate the situational awareness of the key terrain features.

 As the battle unfolds the divisional icons can be moved every 3-4 turns. When committing to a maneuver, it's not a bad idea to review your plan every 3-4 turns to account for evolving circumstances. What was the reason I started moving this division into this area 4 turns ago? Is this reason still relevant? These are the question you should be asking yourself rather than mechanically moving your forces with local tactical gains in mind. The process of reviewing the map would shorten your response time to the operational developments.

The next step is to take on the role of an intelligence officer within your HQ and map out enemy units. Remember that a division is the basic operational unit. Divisions are typically moved as a single body and composed of 10-15 infantry battalions and 20-25 full-sized squadrons of cavalry. You can estimate the number of enemy divisions in each sector as the intelligence about the enemy becomes available. Cavalry divisions can be easily identified by their uniforms, and typically, heavy cavalry are grouped into separate divisions.

Then the icons representing enemy divisions can be moved on the map to represent their movement and likely destinations. Any on-map markings that help you visualize and understand the situation can be added. Armed with this information, try to pause and ask yourself: what is the enemy doing? What is their likely battle plan?

With a growing level of intelligence about the enemy, your own orders might become outdated, making it important to refrain from automatically moving units along the roads each turn while sticking to the original disposition. Pausing to review, looking at your map, and adapting is the way to go. Changing the original plan is perfectly acceptable. It's not uncommon for me to revise my battle plan 3-4 times within a single scenario.

In assessing the situation you can go a step further and analyze the opposing force in each sector of the battle. For example, in the screenshot from the 1796 Campaign below, the assessment of the Austrian forces spotted on the French left flank is presented:

French intelligence assessed the opposing Austrian force as two combined arms divisions, made up of (total is indicated in yellow at the bottom of the screen):

  • ~11,000 infantry
  • ~2,500 cavalry
  • 42 guns

The French forces in the sector are made up of three divisions (total is indicated in white at the top of the screen):

  • ~15,000 infantry
  • ~2,700 cavalry
  • 36 guns

The French left flank was initially planned to deliver the main blow in this battle. However, considering the possibility of unspotted Austrian units in the area, it's evident that the French lack numerical superiority to execute the main assault on their left flank. The French plan clearly needs some adjustment. The consistent intelligence gathering and mapping total headcount in each operational sector help in understanding the strategic situation at a glance.

Planning Phase: Defining the orders

Now we have the map, our own and probably some of the enemy units and their headcount mapped in “as is” position. The next step is to create a copy of your map (if you use Excel, just copy the current tab) and name as “to be”. Now we start our battle planning.

While on defense take the time to study the map and identify a few good defensive positions with secured flanks. Ideally, you may identify a few positions where you would be prepared to deploy for battle and consider the pros and cons of each one.

Apart from tactical aspects, mostly described in the previous blog posts, the defensive positions should also be considered based on VPs locations. You need to do a review of VPs and victory conditions to see if giving up some of the VPs without a fight is justifiable in exchange for a superior defensive position. Going back to the illustrative example from the 1807 campaign:

The Russian army starts scattered all over the map. On turn 1 and before any moves are made, we need to:

  • Assess victory conditions and VPs locations.
  • Study the map and identify critical features of the terrain.

In this case there are two impassible creeks cutting the map into a number of poorly connected sectors which is crucial for building a defensive plan.

Below is the intended battle plan, with designated “to be” positions:

On Turn 1 movement phase, units are not moved chaotically in response to the local tactical situation but follow the assigned location following the overall battle plan:

  • Right Wing (braces outlined in black) divisions are to cover the northern sector with both of its flanks anchored on the creeks and with the overall shortened front which allows a better concertation of artillery fire.
  • Left wing (braces outlined in yellow) is to cover the narrow front on the south with two divisions in the first line and one in the second.
  • Guard Corps (outlined in purple) to remain in reserve in the center close to the central bridge ready to support either wing.
  • The first line of VPs (circled in red) is to be abandoned without a fight as defensive positions in the area were found to be unsuitable, extending the front and exposing flanks. In this particular case I could give up these VPs while maintaining a score of a major victory.

Once we have outlined the overall disposition it is time to wear the hat of Wing/Corps level staff officer and allocate divisions to their respective sectors considering the composition of each division. Are the troops within each division suitable for the sector they are being assigned to?

To demonstrate this in example see the below defensive battle plan from the 1814 Campaign:

In the given example, the Russian 8th division has 3 light battalions (compared to only 2 in the 22nd division), making it a better outfit to be deployed on the left flank in the woods. Similarly, the 10th and 11th Prussian brigades have excellent light battalions of A quality, making them suitable for deployment in positions with obstructed terrain on the right flank.

The right flank is where the major French effort is expected so the Prussian force being the strongest was to take the right flank and the center, while weaker Russian force but with a strong artillery, was to occupy left flank and to cover the approaches to the center with its heavy artillery.

The 9th Prussian brigade, with a significant share of line infantry, is assigned to hold the first line in the center. The 12th brigade and Prussian cavalry division are kept in reserve.

The size of the divisional icons depicted on the map approximate the effective frontage that each division can defend adopting an in-depth positioning. Icon sizes are not random but represent the true frontage of each division for an in-depth defense. This is done to visualize the “to be” position clearly and assess whether there are enough troops in the first place. As elaborated in the "Defense in Depth" chapter, a general guideline of 1.5 infantry battalions per hex of frontage is required for a defense in depth.

Having all this planning done on Turn 1 (or as soon as your current plan becomes outdated), allows us to issue optimal marching orders for each corps and division moving them in accordance with the overall battle plan.

With all these considerations in mind, it might seem that we are prepared to commence movement phase of Turn 1. Not yet, however.

ETA Measuring Phase 

So far, we have:

  • the map.
  • friendly (and possibly enemy) Divisional/Corps icons & sizes.
  • friendly and enemy icons mapped into the “as is” map.
  • a copy of the “as is” map named “to be”.

This is where staff routine kicks in as the next phase is to estimate the time of arrivals (ETAs) to the assigned positions. All the planning mentioned earlier can be seriously compromised if the enemy manages to disrupt your units' arrivals by reaching a location ahead of them or appearing from a different direction making your well thought out battle plan obsolete.

Remember it’s a Campaign so FOW is in effect and you have limited intel of the enemy locations and strength. So what we need is to measure distances and calculate the ETAs for our own troops, as well as attempt to predict and account for enemy ETAs to the same locations. This where the Range tool build into the game proves to be especially useful. Refer to section 10.4 of the User Manual:

From Turn 1, begin measuring the likely ETAs of the enemy forces in front of the planned positions using the Range Tool. This involves measuring the number of hexes along potential axes of advance and then dividing that distance by a relevant number representing movement costs for infantry column. For example, in 10 minute per turn scenarios, infantry covers 5 road hexes in one turn, hence it would take infantry 25 turns to cover 125 road hexes.

In the below example, from Campaign 1814, is my estimation of French arrival in front of my Main Resistance Line (MRL):


Starting from Jtoges village, where the enemy advance guard was detected, to my main resistance line (MRL), the range tool indicates it would take the French around 25 turns to cover the 125 hexes of road. Considering it is Turn 7 now, the French army would be arriving in front of Allied MRL around turn 31. Factoring in approximately 5 turns for deployment into a battle formation, the French player has roughly 12 turns to launch an assault on the allied MRL. The allied army is expected to hold out for 12 turns and there is no ammo shortage for such action.

Furthermore, the possibility of the MRL being outflanked by the French to the south and north was assessed. In both cases, there is no concern, as the French would be limited in the time (3 turn flanking via south and 6 turns via north) to launch an assault from either flank. Even a limited reserve should easily delay the French flanking force until the scenario runs out of time. 

ETA measurement becomes even more important when on the offensive, given the potential need to coordinate multiple forces across a large map. Use the Range Tool to estimate your units' ETAs and record likely arrival times. This allows for better coordination and timing of the main assault.

Presented below is an illustrative case of such planning, drawn from a PBEM game set in 1807 Campaign. This snapshot corresponds to the situation as of Turn 18:

The Russian army started the scenario with only part of the Advance Guard being on the map, while a number of columns of a corps size each (Left Wing, Right Wing, Reserve Division) were arriving at the various locations at different times.

Extensive planning and distance measuring was required to come up with the battle plan where each Column was allocated with specific tasks and objectives as follows:

The Advance Guard (yellow outline: 17k strong) had the critical task of moving swiftly towards the center avoiding contact. Their objective was to capture the central hill, provided it was not heavily defended (however, it was later realized that this objective was too ambitious).

The Left Wing (in purple: 10k strong) was assigned to join the Advance Guard from the west. Their role was to provide support to the Advance Guard outflanking the likely French position on the central hill from the left.

The Reserve division (in white; 8k strong) was to join advance guard in its assault on the French right flank.

The Right Wing (20k strong) was tasked with crossing the creek, running from north to south on the east of the map, by constructing a pontoon bridge by turn 35. This would enable the Right Wing to flank the enemy and capture a few VPs in the area.

Cossacks detachment of 1,500 sabers, arriving at the north-west edge of the map were to raid enemy rear from the west capturing the VPs in the French rear.

(RH) Just a note here to say it is only possible to "construct a pontoon bridge" in the engine currently if a damaged bridge with a 0 strength already exists on the map at your desired location. Creating a bridge from scratch is not currently supported.


The above plan materialized into the following deployment (below) by turn 35-40, close to what was planned. All columns were in their designated positions, ready to launch an all-out assault from multiple directions, aiming to destroy most of the French corps. The objective was to envelope the French corps from three sides, leaving the French commander with limited options: either be outnumbered and enveloped from three sides or to attempt a retreat through marshy terrain to the south, with no roads and no terrain suitable for cavalry and artillery movement. 

The French indeed found themselves surrounded from three sides, ultimately leading to a major victory for the Allied side. The coordination and planning of the Allied maneuvers were facilitated by:

The use of the Range Tool allowed for measuring distances and estimating ETAs for each allied column and also enemy forces. This ETAs assessment provided valuable information for coordinating movements: waiting for all columns to gather, being in support of each other. Maintaining ETA records of various columns at different positions, the allied player could effectively track and manage the movements of the allied forces and adjust the plan accordingly. The Excel file was used for records. But using paper would be just as good, whatever you feel comfortable with.

Timing: planning the timing of the main assault. Rather than rushing into immediate confrontation, the allied forces adhered to the overall battle plan giving up on minor tactical gains. The Advance Guard, in particular, was instructed to move towards the central position without being distracted by minor tactical engagements. The main assault was not to be started until at least two out of three columns were in position.


1. Preparation phase: Thoroughly study the OOB and take note of on map forces available and reinforcement composition and ETAs, if applicable.

2. Mapping phase: Create a War Room by taking a snapshot of the map and adding your own and enemy units, VPs, and key terrain features. This visual representation enhances situational awareness and aids in decision-making. Regularly review your plan and the position of your forces in relation to the enemy to keep it relevant.

3. Planning phase: identify defensive positions/axis of advance and create a “to be” map. Divide the overall disposition into divisional sectors, considering the frontage and composition of each division.

4. Measuring phase: Use the Range Tool to test the attainability of identified positions, considering the distances involved. This should be done for both Allied forces and the enemy's potential avenues of advance.

As demonstrated by Napoleon, a well-structured staff system can indeed lead to favorable outcomes and successful operations. Before the 1796 Italian Campaign, Napoleon spent two years studying the maps in Northern Italy and the history of past wars in the region. He developed a clear plan for how the campaign should be conducted. He took his time to prepare. Likewise, turn 1 is arguably the most important one and there is homework to be done before you start moving your units. So, gentlemen, it's time to gather your staff officers and kindly remind them to set aside their drinks and focus on the planning task at hand!

"The battlefield is a scene of constant chaos. The winner will be the one who controls that chaos, both his own and the enemies" - Napoleon

Undoubtedly, there is a certain satisfaction that arises from well-planned and executed operational plans. While tactical successes, such as capturing a French grand battery, can be thrilling in the heat of the moment, it's the strategic accomplishments and the broader success of an operational plan that truly bring lasting fulfilment.

(RH) Good stuff here in this section and I agree with Alex's thought process - so I elected to hold my commentary till the end. While I am not as methodical in my planning, I do endeavor to take similar strides when entering a battle such as this. I too prefer to play huge map scenarios or campaigns that give the extra added layers of FOW to work with. The best are the huge map meeting scenarios that use the campaign front end for each side to make choices - and then the battle results from those. This prevents any foreknowledge coming into play of the opposing forces. I will just make a few comments on the topic...

1) When I am engaged in an Army level meeting engagement my initial planning is done at the Corps level, not Divisional. Divisions come into play once I am nearing the area of combat.

2) This topic has done a great job of illustrating the importance of Intelligence. It makes it clear how important your Light Cavalry is for scouting when you are on the offensive. You must get your "eyes" out there and discover where the enemy is and any applicable details.

Likewise, it illustrates why armies of the time used Cavalry Screens on all sides of their force - to keep the enemy guessing on the exact location and composition of their forces.

There are multiple levels to a game in this format. What a player wants to do, what they think their enemy is going to do, and then what is actually happening. Controlling the exposure of your forces (concealing your exact strength) is as equally important as discovering the details of your opposition. Wellington knew this, hence his use of Reverse Slopes for example. Waging a counter-intelligence operation can be as significant as fighting a tactical battle in many cases.

For these reasons I am a strong advocate of limited "maximum visibility" settings in a scenario - about 20 hexes seems right to me - and the use of the Strict LOS optional rule. I believe players should have to work a bit to gain intelligence on the given situation. 

3) As Alex said, you want to "work your plan", not be worked over by your opponent. Guide them to the battlefield of your choice. Especially in huge map situations it is good to refuse battle if your don't have the right mix of forces on hand or don't like the terrain. Getting sucked into a battle you don't desire can spell the end of your campaign before you can achieve your goals.

4) Planning Maps do exist for some of the games already. For example, in the \Manuals folder of Campaign Eckmuhl you will find the file "Eggmuhl Bayern Map WB2.JPG" which can be used as a base for your planning operations.

It should be noted when using the Snapshot feature that the entire scenario map will be captured in 2D view. It will also include all the units on the map, both friendly, and opposing within LOS. So if you want a completely "clean" map you need to create a new scenario with the base map in the Scenario Editor and save the file without placing any forces on the map. Then you can go to the main program and open that new scenario and create your snapshot.

Below is a sample of the full-map Waterloo scenario at the beginning of the match. If you right-click on the image below you can download the 48 MB PNG file for local viewing.

And final comment before moving on to the next section... you *may* see some enhanced tools within the games to facilitate tasks like these in the future...


Avoiding battle with the enemy on your tail is always easier said than done. There are a few challenges around that:

  • Enemy cavalry will eventually catch up with your retreating columns, outpacing your infantry.
  • A skilled advance guard commander might concentrate their cavalry to create a high threat level, disrupting rearguard units attempting to change formation.
  • An aggressive advance guard commander may even engage in melee against the odds to disorder, slow down, and isolate rearguard units. 

Let's examine a few tips and tricks how to deal with it effectively.

First of all, a flee or fight assessment is to be done. There are typically two types of Rearguard actions: a shorter scenario assuming the defender is to make a stand and the longer type, often more common in campaign mode, where a player is expected to retreat fighting a delaying action, and defending the exit zones.

For shorter actions consider making a stand. The map is likely to be small and the scenario is constrained in time. Assess the terrain, looking for bottlenecks and key artillery positions. Favor a position at a distance away from the enemy axis of advance: the more unproductive marching the enemy does the less time there is to concentrate and to assault the rearguard.

If the rearguard's battle line is breached and defeat is imminent, there is a way to minimize the damage: leave a square behind to cover the retreat and break away into multiple directions. Once on the edge of the map you can exit each unit via Remove From Map command (Ctl+X) negating the enemy the opportunity to eliminate your units and to gain victory points.

(RH) You only receive points for exiting units when at an Exit Objective Hex.

For longer rearguard scenarios involving large columns and long marches, start by doing some numbers crunching, assessing on map VPs to be lost. What outcome the battle would have if you lose all VPs on the map?

Aim for the draw. Figure out how many troops you are able to lose on top of on some of the map VPs to retain a draw. These would be your rearguard troops allocated to cover the retreat of your column and to delay the enemy as long as possible. They are to be written off. 

If there is an enemy exit objective hex(s) then retreating off the map is not an option. The enemy will do the same via their exit hex(s) gaining major victory. Pick a position with a bottleneck, and flanks covered by obstructed terrain. See the example below of such a position (from Campaign 1814):

The open ground frontage is narrowed in this location with the flanks covered by orchards and woods. There are also defiles where some of the battle line infantry can be hidden from enemy artillery fire. In this scenario, defending this position would lead to a draw considering all other on map VPs the Allied army has given to this point, and the imminent clash with the French advance guard would result in equal VP losses.

Make sure to use the Range Tool (Shift + Left-click) to assess the risk of being outflanked within the time available. Position your batteries and deploy for battle. The closer to the target exit zone the better. The enemy will need time to concentrate and deploy for battle and some of the enemy units will not make it on time evening the odds.

Below is another position from the same rearguard scenario where the Allied army has retreated to the edge of the map, covering the exit location:

Both flanks are covered by the map edges and there is substantial open ground for the French to cover under fire from ~100 allied guns deployed across the narrow (14 hexes) frontage. The downside of the position is that it only covered the French exit zone and all other on map VPs had to be given up. Adding all the VPs lost due to Allied casualties to this point, resulted in Allied minor defeat.

This particular scenario was part of the campaign game where losses are carried from a battle to battle. Considering this factor and lack of time to concentrate and assault the position the French player gave up on the idea to assault the position accepting French minor victory.

The Russian army is the best suited for rearguard actions as it was historically. By 1813 there was no army which would probably have the matching experience and the endurance to sustain the pressure of rearguard actions. Russian army rearguards were systematically impenetrable to the French in 1805, 1807, 1813 and especially in 1812, consistently frustrating French commanders and keeping the French advance guards at a respectful distance. If you play an 1812 rearguard action with +2 fanatical bonus you can handle the pressure easily.

Within the game the Russian army typically has the best structure to handle rearguards:

  • It has smaller battalions of around 300-500, and the smaller battalions are the perfect outfits to be deployed in squares as a covering force. Austrian and Prussian battalions are typically larger presenting a juicer target for the French advance-guard to isolate and eliminate. However, light infantry battalions of any nationality of 100-200 men formed in squares can be used instead, risking less VPs to be lost.
  • The Russian army typically has a larger proportion of artillery pieces per 1,000 men ratio with lots of horse guns which are best suited for the rearguard actions.
  • Cossacks! Smaller squadrons of Cossacks can be broken down further into half squadrons blocking French advances at low victory points costs. Cossacks are also very likely to be routed breaking away from the enemy rather than standing their ground, being isolated and destroyed.


1. Do a flee or fight assessment on turn one.

2. Figure out the battle result based on on-map VPs loss and the number of troops you can afford to be written off on retreat.

3. If pitched battle cannot be avoided: pick a position to the rear and away from the enemy axis of approach. With flanks covered by either obstructed terrain or map edges.

4. Always stand your ground to cover enemy exit hexes, otherwise it is a guaranteed major defeat.

5. Pick smaller battalions or light battalions of around 200 men formed in squares to block the enemy advance via ZOC covering the retreat of the main force.

6. If playing a mixed Allied army from campaigns of 1813-1814 favor the Russian force to cover the retreat.


And that brings us to the end of this installment. We still have one more installment to go covering the topics of:

  • Navigating the emotional challenges of PBEM
  • Methods of play

As we said last time, if you are reading this and are really passionate about another series of our games - and would like to be involved in making something similar happen for them you can drop us a line at to discuss further.

Until next time...



  • Juan Modesto

    Very dear Alex and Rich:

    I have read thoroughly, studied carefully, these five installments. I have learnt so much and enjoyed even more that I am deeply grateful to you both.

    This work is impressive.

    I dream in similar series of instalments regarding the other two series I’m fortunate to have: Musket and pike and First World War campaigns.

    Eager to see these enhancements on staff work tools.

    Thank so much for the incredible élan you have pushed to John Tiller’s heritage.


  • Tim

    Thanks for this, especially the strategic map thought process. I’ll routinely spend just as much time setting up elaborate spreadsheets for OOBs as I will on early game. More of these guides for other series would be welcome!

  • Kerry Fox

    These four installments have inspired me to buy Campaign Austerlitz. Very informative, looking forward to the next installment.

  • James Grcevich

    Although I am a competent historian on Napoleonic history I am still relatively new to to WDS. This series has truly help me a lot.
    Thank you
    James Grcevich

  • Stan Kasper

    Live play. Its been awhile since I looked at this. I am not even sure it still exists. If it does, a short write up on it would be nice. Things like router firewall settings to start. How to get the best experience. Etc.

Leave a comment

Please note, comments must be approved before they are published

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.