Thanks Nev surprised he didnt comment on the incorrect pompom colours if he could see the flags :)

Saved the picture to hard drive and magnified it a little, the third white battalion in the back row carrying the blue standard is very clear.

But that did bot really answer my question

Nice figures Andy they look spot on

Dave
where are the flags from? as they do appear to be correct versions not the commonly seen reversed ones that can be found free on the net.

you must have exellent eyesight to see those flags from those pictures

Neville

Very nice army would like to see this one day in full. Hopefully I can get to the next Lasalle tournament in the UK and get drawn against it. I do like to see figures that have had a lot of work put into them.
where are the flags from? as they do appear to be correct versions not the commonly seen reversed ones that can be found free on the net.

Mycenius - yes the casualty bases and subcommanders have slots for cards, the casualty stands for disr and the sub commands for tactics and vigor.

Currently I am painting the Polish core force, of which elements can be used as reserve choices for the Saxons and vice versa. Aside to this I am also starting empire French so I may draw on Polish and Saxons as support choices.

Nicely painted troops Andy....are they your own work? excellent painting , no wonder Napoleonics is back in the limelight!

cheers Paul:)

Casualties

The system I went with is to use round casualty markers that look very similar to Andrew's sans slot. I have some with one casualty figure on and some with two. The doubles are larger than the singles. I then use them in the appropriate combinations to record the total DISR. The only problem I find is that being senile I sometimes forget to move the dead forward with their unit and then get confused as to which unit they belong to!

I think any system that is 'scenic' is good. Can't abide shiny plastic counters, marbles, dice etc. as it ruins the look.

Mycenius

I would agree that bigger figures look better. However, all my Napoleonic figures are 15mm. Reason being space. I like a game with the equivalent of core and 2-3 support choices and this would be impossible for me in 28mm on my 7' 6" x 5' table. And I would expect that even a core plus 1 in 28mm would be cramped on a traditional 6' x 4' assuming larger element bases.

Having said that all my projects for this year are 28mm (which are of course really 30mm!), but not for Napoleonic :-)

I notice you have some kind of holder slot on the casualty bases. Do you slot a little number in there to score the DISR?

:-)

And great looking army Andrew, well done! Pity it's only 15's though... ;-) ;-p

Very nice work Sir

Limbers and caissons will be added in the future, as they need some conversion work.

I choose 6 figures because I like the look (it saves a few pennies too), and 8 seemed too much for my taste, 8 does fit but feels crowded and does not give room for much scenic basing. Also some of the good guys I game with have done the same, and when the full army is on the park it still looks very impressive.

P.s.
they had a couple of baptisms already thanks to a certain Austrian player, so far the decisively lost one and marginally won one, but I will be arranging a game with you shortly after Easter Alan.

Andrew

Those figures look lovely. You have put some excellent work into both the troops and the bases. I think it is the prettiest Lasalle army I have seen.

When am I going to get to give them a baptism of fire?

I particularly like the round skirmisher bases. After I had done all mine on rectangular bases I concluded that they would have looked better on round ones, seeing these I can see I was right. One day I will have to find the time to redo mine but as there are a couple of hundred it is a low priority project.

I notice you have some kind of holder slot on the casualty bases. Do you slot a little number in there to score the DISR?

Will you be adding limbers & caissons for the artillery in the future?

I see you have gone with 6 infantry to a base rather than 8. Did you find that with the AB figures being quite large that 8 looked too crowded? Just wondered because I have done all mine 8 to a base but I only have older Anthony Barton Battle Honours figures in some of my units (and then only cavalry) and they were much smaller than the current ABs. I am particularly interested because if I add to my Napoleonic collection in the future they will most likely be ABs.

the infantry

the cavalry and foot battery

Army command and subcommanders

a couple of my skirmish stands

a couple of my casualty bases

Almost the full army, the horse battery is missing as the figures have to be converted, I have not painted the Guns yet

Well they are almost completed and I thought I should share some images of the Army from the PDF download. Figures from the AB ranges

Agree that it's not easy, but it should be done nonetheless....reason I say militia is shaky and not unpredictable is that the only militia that I can think of that fought well was the Georgia militia at times and the new orleans city militia....both of which should be classed as volunteers IMO

I was tinkering around with some War of 1812 AB stuff and ratings last year. I wrote some notes down and I should try to find them and share them here. It wasn't a serious effort because anyone who has studied this part of Napoleonic history - yes, I consider the war in America an off-shoot of the Napoleonic Wars - knows that its not easy to make a generic AB list that fits nicely into a "Lasalle" format.

As for troop ratings, again, not easy to "standardize" this for the forces involved, especially the American forces. For the American forces, and in some extent for the British/Canadian forces, one might need to make board reaching assumptions keeping in mind that not until later in the war were US troops of better quality. But there are exceptions. As the war progressed, some US forces were as good or even better than British/Canadian forces. For example, I would say that Scott's Brigade in 1814 would be first rate. And for those that think the British regiments were all top notch, think again. The 103rd Foot for example was one of the worst regiments to serve in Canada, and performed just as bad as any militia unit.

Speaking about the militia, and on both sides, I think Unpredictable is a good choice. Even though President Madison was a strong supported of the militia concept, he quickly changed his mind after he witnessed the fiasco outside Washington. He said, "I could never have believed that so great a difference existed between regular troops and a militia force, if I had not witnessed the scenes of this day in person."

Militia & Artillery

Militia Infantry
Shaky/Amateur/SK2 (special US shooting rule?)

Artillery
Medium/3/1
Light/3/0

Volunteer Troops

Volunteer Infantry
Reliable/Amateur/SK3 (special US shooting rule?)

Volunteer Rifles
Valiant/Amateur/SK3 (special US shooting rule?)

Volunteer Cavalry
Reliable/Amateur/Pursuit (may dismount + special US shooting rule?)

Troop ratings
Decided on a mix of our idea

1808 est. US Regulars and late war US Regulars
Reliable/Experienced/SK2

Other Regulars
Unpredictable/Experienced/SK2

U.S. Rifles
Valiant/Experienced/SK3 (special U.S. Rifle rule?)

Light Dragoons
Reliable/Experienced/Shock/Pursuit

2 regiments of regulars and marines too and a troop of light Dragoons and a battery of artillery or two. Besides, the Battle of New Orleans wasn't just the fight at the barricades, there were some rather sharp clashes before that in which cavalry/regulars played major roles. Jacksons regulars were his dependable workhorse and formed the vanguard in advance and rearguard in retreat.

Two regiments of regulars at new Orleans was a rather significant part of the army

While the cavalry was small, it could still play a decisive role when used correctly

Point is that we can't try to make an army list that would suit every battle, we have to make something that will work against other lists and at the same time capture the American fighting style and spirit. I think each force above would give you something representative of an American force.

I just don't see how you can rate the original us regiments as second class, these were long service troops who have been fighting for years. Malaria took it's toll in 1806, but were talking six years to replace the losses.

The New Orleans point was about the regulars being a small part of the army and therefore that list would not apply. It is so anomalous that I might just not bother with it for list generation - my New Orleans scenario has 5 batteries per side for instance.

As far as first rate/ second rate I think we are in agreement about what who we are talking about - where we differ in on whether there was a mix of the two in the same army or if they were two distinct armies, one with 2nd rate (1812-13) and one first rate (1814-15) - I am of course in the latter camp.

My point for cavalry is that it should be rated low for both sides as there was so little of it.

No debate about the rifle regiment.

I agree about the militia brigade, but I was thinking about bladensburg

Second rate would be almost any unit of regulars that wasn't part of the original army.....which was actually quite good well trained and had pleny of experience. Most of these troops were spread thin in forts out on the Frontier at the war started, but some were grouped back together as things progressed. Later in the war, some of the new regiments behaved well (Winfield Scott's brigade etc.) and shouldn't be second class either.

Why would the exception be New Orleans? The 7th Infantry was a damn good unit.

Both Jackson and Harrison always had some mounted infantry throughout their campaigns. Not cavalry in a true sense, but used like light Dragoons in a pinch.
The U.S. Regular Light Dragoons, especially the 1st and 2nd regiments, along with the first three regiments of Infantry and the rifle regiment were far and away the best units in the army. They were at least the equal of any British unit in Canada at the time. It wasn't there fault they were badly led for the most part. I don't see how they could be rated anything lower than regular

Mostly I can only speak to the East list as that is where I am focussing. There I think you need volunteer cavalry - I wouldn't rate them as light dragoons ever as there was never enough of it (same issue for the British too).

I don't think you ever want 2 cavalry for the Americans so I would drop it from the Militia brigade.

Which units would you consider second rate? My lists were based on the opinion that they are all second rate in 1812-1813 and regulars in 1814-1815 (the exception being New Orleans).

This is sort of a rough draft "East" would cover all the fighting along the border of Canada....South & West would cover the rest....."East" would give you a more conventional army while "South & West" should be a lot of decent, fast moving good shootin' troops that wouldn't necessarily stand up to a bayonet charge by the imperial guard, but could harass the he'll out of it or shoot it to pieces before it could get close

Of course I'd still have to do ratings etc. so if you have any opinions on that let me know.....I think the volunteers and riflemen were probably the best shots in the world at that time. Just reading about they toll they took on Brit officers when they were well deployed is telling. Even the 95th would have trouble matching their shooting.....of course the 95th was perhaps the finest infantry in the world, but they (the 95th) could do so much more. Point is, U.S. Rifle armed troops should have something special they can do for their shooting, like if a unit takes a certain number of hits by them, it could be paralyzed for a turn or two while it sorts out it's command structure

Core Units

East 
2 Regulars
4 2nd Class Regulars
1 Rifles 
Medium Artillery
(1 Regulars)
(1 Second Class Regulars)

South & West 
1 Regulars
4 Volunteers
1 Rifles
1 Volunteer Rifles
Light Artillery
(1 Regulars)
(1 Volunteers)

Options 

Volunteer Brigade (South & West Only)
3 Volunteers
1 Volunteer Rifle
1 Volunteer Cavalry
Regular Brigade (East Only)
3 Regulars 
1 Light Dragoons

2nd Rate Regular Brigade (East Only)
6 Second Rate Regulars 

Militia 
6 Militia 
1 Militia Cavalry 

I had to take a course on this war for my BA and read volumes on it. I'm no expert, but I know enough...

I don't think just "militia" and "regulars" cuts it.....you should have "militia," (bad troops that run at the first sign of trouble) "volunteers" (good militia like Jackson and Harrison had or well equipped militia like the new Orleans militia units), "second rate regulars," (hastily organized regular regiments) "first rate regulars," (marines and good U.S. Infantry units)...... "rifles" (US rifle regiments, which should also be able to stand and fight as formed troops in the open as well as skirmish) and then "volunteer rifles" (like Jackson and Harrison had)......for cavalry, you should have "Light Dragoons" or "Volunteer Cavalry," both of which should be able to dismount and fight on foot.

I kept all my books and would be more than happy to draw up a little US list if it gives us something official....gimme about a week

I would recommend digging out the post that Cam did for point systems for the AB. It is a great tool for designing AB for other theaters of war. I am using it to design the AB for South American War of Independence ( I'll post the updated version soon ).

cheers
Francisco

No question - I meant more that a battalion in 1812 was 3-4 companies which fits in fine with Lasalle.