Warlord's Epic Battle Revolution Review: British and Continental Infantry

 

Dear Reader,

Like so many other hobbyists, Warlord was kind enough to send a few sprues of their new Epic Battles: Revolution range to me for review. I picked them up on April 14th, and have completed painting both a British and Continental Battalion for the rules I use, or two regiments each for Warlord's Black Powder. 

The British are painted as the 64th Regiment of Foot (where my ancestor, James Webster, served): red coats faced black. and the Continentals are painted in a common color scheme for New England and Pennsylvania Continentals: brown coats faced red. I have intentionally painted both units in linen (tan/beige) overalls or gaitered trousers, a long pant which was common summer issue in the middle and later years of the war. 

There is a more full review below after the photos. So, without further introduction: the two battalions. 

So: as a history professor and military historian of this period, how to I evaluate these figures? 

First of all: they are not figures that will make material culture perfectionists best pleased. The bayonets are on the wrong side of the muskets as a result of structural issues, there are minor errors with the officers' uniforms, some people were complaining today that the Hessians all have mustaches, for example. For me, more than any of that, the most frustrating part is that the British infantry are not in open order, but in a release like this, they were never likely to be. There are always gripes to be had with 10/15mm figures. If you are a material culture purist, go purchase Perry's excellent set of British infantry. 

Moving from the bad to the good: these figures, by and large, are an excellent depiction of the uniforms of British and Continental troops, and depending on how you paint them, can represent troops at almost all stages of the war. You can indeed, as I suspected, paint the troops in full gaiters, half-gaiters, or gaitered trousers depending on your preference. This is much less noticeable than attempting the same on Perry's 28mm figures, giving a great deal of flexibility of representing troops from all stages of the war with one sprue. 

Moving from the good to the excellent: the figures are exceptionally well designed for painting quickly. I've painted 400 figures since I received the review sprues on April 14th, despite the fact that it is a relatively busy time of year (finals) in my work as a professor. I won't say that they are easy to paint, or that they paint themselves, or something like this, but I do believe that Warlord has hit their stride in capturing an impressive amount of detail on the figures, but doing so in a way that is natural to paint. The way that the breeches, belt, and waistcoat are oriented on the front of the figure is natural and easy to paint. The facings, and even the lace on the facings, is easy to pick out (and this is coming from someone who would rate my painting skills as subpar). 

If you are looking for a great way to introduce your local club to the AWI, or even to eighteenth-century warfare more broadly by using the Hessian sprue for the Seven Years War, these figures provide a cheap, effective, and rewarding entry point. I will definitely be purchasing a selection for my university wargame club, as we prepare to game the 250th anniversaries of the American War of Independence. I hope you will as well.  

Thanks for Reading,

Alex 

Painting Warlord's Epic Battles: Revolution "Hessians" for the Seven Years War

 

Dear Reader,

Like so many other hobbyists, Warlord was kind enough to send a few sprues of their new Epic Battles: Revolution range to me for review. I picked them up on Monday afternoon, and have painted three stands. As I noted in my early review, I think these figures will be good for the AWI, but I actually think they will be great for the European Seven Years War. Let's dive in. 

First all all, the figures are modeled in such a way that they are very easy to paint, and paint quickly. I was able to paint and base these 60 figures between Monday afternoon and Wednesday morning, despite working a full day on Tuesday. I sprayed them black, and didn't really spend much time highlighting or shading, just thin base coats to get them ready for the table. You can see the results below.

Now, you say: those troops don't look very much they are from the American War of Independence at all. You'd be correct. They are painted as Prussian IR 6 (Grenadier Garde), Prussian IR 13 (Itzenplitz) and Austrian IR 4 (Teutschmeister) from the 1750s/1760s period. I am extremely pleased with the suitability of using these figures for the Seven Years War era: there are some very minor uniform changes, but on the whole they look great.

Modularity

With a range of sprues, it is very possible to model a variety of units with minimal effort: for example, I chose to represent one of the few Prussian grenadier units which carried flags during the Seven Years War. Most did not. You could make for the AWI, for example, the Hessian Grenadier Battalion von Rall, which carried flags, using the excess flag bearers leftover from your Continental units. You'll have flexibility with extra drummers, officers, and soldiers to modify your units how you need them.

Excellent Molds

With a few errors (such as the bayonets, or minor quibbles with the officer designs) aside, the figures are designed in such a way to allow for quick painting and shading with minimal effort. It is very easy to pick out the facings, waistcoat, crossbelts and waistbelt, and breeches, even if they are all the same color, and leave black to produce a shading effect. This pleasantly surprised me compared to other Epic Battles ranges, and even the 15mm figures that I normally use for the Seven Years War.

In conclusion: I remain very excited for the possibility of using the figures for the Seven Years War. I look forward to expanding my collection when they release. I'll be painting up the British and Americans next, to see how much of this holds true for the AWI.

Thanks for Reading,

Alex 

What were battles like in the Revolutionary War? A 250th Guide

 

Dear Reader,

We are approximately two weeks away from the 250th anniversary of the most commonly accepted starting point of the American Revolutionary War, or as also known, the American War of Independence. As a result, many organizations and companies (including wargame companies like Warlord Games with their new Revolution epic battles range) are rushing to commemorate and capitalize on this anniversary.

But what were battles in the Revolutionary War really like? It's a subject that, as a history professor, I have spent my life studying. 

I am creating this guide as a resource for those commemorating the anniversaries of the Revolutionary War. Maybe you are an interested member of the public, or a wargamer, or reenactor. Regardless of your background, this guide is designed to make research on the Revolutionary War available to you in a variety of formats. I have a large number of articles and suggested reading below, but for those in a hurry, are looking for something to listen or watch, we'll begin with podcasts and videos. At least in terms of the podcasts and blog links, a lot of this is my work: 

If you are looking for a beginner's guide to eighteenth-century warfare and battle, check out this two-part episode of the Prime and Load Podcast:

Prime and Load Episode Part-1

Prime and Load Episode Part-2

If you are more of a youtube learner, check out these lectures on the nature of war in the American Revolution and Eighteenth Century. 

Waging War in America Panel

Revolutionary War in the West (British Army)

Infantry in Battle at History Hive

Now, for those who are looking to read more on this in detail, I'd highly recommend the following articles on Kabinettskriege and there will be books below. So what were battles like in this period? And what about the soldiers who fought in those battles? 

Armies were divided into infantry, cavalry, and artillery, what an eighteenth-century English speaker would have called "foot, horse, and guns." This guide will mainly focus on the experience of infantry, for three reasons. First, it is my academic speciality. Second, more troops served in the infantry than any other branch of service, so there are more written records from these men. Third and finally, especially in the American Revolutionary War, battles were largely decided by infantry engagements. 

The average soldier would take part in 3 or 4 major battles, which lasted roughly 4 hours apiece. In the course of his career, he also fought in innumerable sieges, skirmishes, and smaller actions. His chance of being wounded in an individual battle was quite small, but rose to almost 60% over the course of his career. What did the infantry firefights in this period look like? The experience of battle looked very different here than in movies. 

First, soldiers often fired at comparatively long ranges, perhaps 75-300 yards. Both British, European, and American infantrymen did frequently aim their weapons, and were instructed to, despite the challenges of their flintlock smoothbore muskets. They were trained to fire quickly, perhaps around 3 shots per minute. Particularly in the Russian and American armies, soldiers would fire buckshot from their muskets, in addition to larger musket balls. Despite this, with the level of smoke and relative inaccuracy of these weapons, many firefights were indecisive, leading to ammunition shortages. These problems were exacerbated by the fact soldiers often fired without waiting for orders, and fired as soon as they loaded rather than waiting to all fire a volley together. Soldiers didn't always march in cadence or lockstep, they frequently jogged and ran on battlefields, to rapid close the distance between themselves and the enemy or to get out of the line of fire. At least compared to its frequent depiction in Hollywood, hand-to-hand combat in open fields, were soldiers mutually charged into melee combat, was quite rare. Hand-to-hand combat was common when fighting cavalry, when fighting over defending obstacles like fortifications, and when fighting armies outside of military Europe.

For much of the last hundred years, we have misunderstood how the British tactically fought in the Revolutionary War. They were much more flexible, fastmoving, and aggressive than displayed in movies like the Patriot. That's one of the reasons it was so difficult for Washington to win the Revolutionary War: the British army was well-suited to fighting in North America. Like many eighteenth-century armies, they used cover and concealment effectively.

And now the soldiers. Who was the "average" eighteenth-century soldier?  More than likely, he had been a day-laborer or apprenticed weaver before enlisting in the service. He had first enlisted in his early twenties, and after seven or eight years of service was around thirty years of age. He was unmarried. The soldier was tall compared with many civilians, likely around 5 feet 8 inches (approx 172 cm). When on the march with his regiment, the soldier was capable of covering an average of 14 miles per day, although that could easily be increased in times of extreme need, such as when 10th Regiment of Foot dashed 70 miles in a 24 hour period in the Seven Years' War.[1] His daily calorie intake ranged from roughly 2200-3000, and mainly consisted of meat and bread of some type.  Even when not marching or fighting, his daily life was quite rigorous, as he and the men around him were often engaged in strenuous physical labor. He was far more likely to die from disease than enemy action. Talk of his propensity for desertion has perhaps been overblown.

Finally, some suggested readings.

If you read one book on the eighteenth-century armies and the AWI, it should be Christopher Duffy's The Military Experience in the Age of Reason. 

If you read two books on eighteenth-century armies and the AWI, the second should be Matthew H. Spring's With Zeal and With Bayonets Only.

If you read three books on eighteenth-century armies and the AWI, the third should be Martin and Lenders 'A Respectable Army'. 

Good luck as you read on the period and commemorate the anniversaries of the Revolutionary War. 

As always, 

Thanks for Reading

Alex Burns

Early Review: Warlord Games Revolution Epic Battles

 

Dear Reader, 

Before we get started, spend a moment thinking of Warlord today, their co-founder, Paul Sawyer passed away yesterday.

I want to review what we know now about the new Warlord Games Revolution Epic Battles range. Those of you who don't know me, I am a history professor at a small Catholic college in Eastern Ohio, USA, and I study eighteenth-century warfare.

First of all, let me say, I am incredibly excited about this new line of miniatures, and as someone who is the faculty sponsor for an undergraduate university wargame club, I will absolutely be purchasing these for both myself and the club. I wish Warlord the best of success in this venture, and hope brings increased attention to eighteenth-century wargaming. 

First, some detailed photographs of these miniatures, front and back. 

The review will progress from the bad to good: from the things that I am disappointed about to what I absolutely love.

The Ugly (Errors that should have been caught) 

I'm not a button counter when it comes to wargames, but I was surprised to see that the bayonets were on the wrong side of the muskets. Bayonets were locked into place with the blade on the right side of the weapon, or when reversed while marching, on the left side (opposite the soldier's head). This is not a hard thing to grasp, and Warlord even got this right for their Napoleonic sets. It makes me wonder if there was a structural issue, or logistical reason for this choice. If so, no worries.

The Bad (Things that we should know about the British Army by now)

For the vast majority of the Revolutionary War (1776-1783) the British army fought in open order. That is to say, they fought in a two rank line with a man-sized gap between each of the files. The result is, that while the figures Warlord has produced are excellent for depicting redcoats just before the American War of Independence (indeed, they look just like the soldiers in the image above, training in the Caribbean before the AWI), they are not very accurate for how the British actually looked and maneuvered during the AWI on the battlefield. The British army was a very flexible, fastmoving, and adaptable force, which is why they won the majority of the battlefield encounters of the American War. I'm a bit concerned these miniatures will reinforce the stereotype that the British lost the war because they fought a European war in North America. 

The Neutral (Cavalry Sculpts)

People have complained that the cavalry look bland. I'm not really bothered by this. Warlord hasn't been nailing the cavalry in their Epic Battles Range for some time now, and honestly, the AWI was an infantry war, much more than in contemporary Europe. If cavalry is a priority, I would encourage you to still invest in the range, but supplement with 3D printing.

The Good (Uniform Flexibility)

Without examining the figures in my hand, it is hard to prove this with certainty, but I think that both the line infantry (the Continentals and the British are the same sculpts, see above) have been sculpted in such a way that depending on how you paint and shade them, they could appear in tall gaiters, half-gaiters, or gaitered trousers/overalls. If this is the case, and I believe it is, it would go a long way to improving my opinion of the range, and catapult if forward into one of the better small-scale AWI ranges.

The Exceptional (a relatively complete range)

Unlike the Battle of Waterloo Epic Range, Warlord has actually delivered a relatively complete range with these miniatures. I know that folks who love the French and Spanish in the AWI are revving their chainsaws to behead me, but for the vast majority of the fighting in North America, you have militia and regulars of both sides, American Riflemen, British Grenadiers and Light Infantry, Hessian Grenadiers, Musketeers, and Jaegers (pick me up off the floor with this one), Native Americans, and a smattering of cavalry. For the vast majority of the fighting in North America (outside the siege of Savannah and Yorktown) this is a fairly complete range. Sorry, French mains.

The Vince McMahon Falling Backwards (SYW Adaptability)

With this line-up, Warlord has almost given us a two-for-one range. With this range as it is now, it would be possible to represent a large degree of the soldiers from the Austrian and Prussian armies in the European Seven Years War. British infantry and Grenadiers can stand in for Austrian Fusiliers and Musketeers. Hessian Infantry and Grenadiers can stand in for Prussian Musketeers and Grenadiers. Artillery is available. Jaeger are included. Cavalry would need to be 3D printed, but, and I love you here, Warlord, that would probably be the case even in a dedicated SYW range. 

Putting it all together, Warlord has provided 18th century wargamers with a lot of chew on. I am absolutely ecstatic for this release, and look forward to seeing these troops on the table in games across North America and the UK.

You can find the miniatures for pre-order here: 

https://us.warlordgames.com/collections/revolution-epic-battles

Thanks for Reading,

Alex Burns 

Introducing Prime and Load

Dear Readers, 

As I announced in December of last year, changes are ahead for Kabinettskriege. The first couple of episodes of a new podcast, Prime and Load, are now available for your listening pleasure. 

Over the last couple of months, Lee Gugino and Andrew Bamford signed on to the project. Lee Gugino is a public historian, reenactor, teacher, and Marine Veteran out of Buffalo, NY. Dr. Andrew Bamford is an academic historian, reenactor, editor, and Yorkshireman currently living in the Midlands in the United Kingdom. Together, Andrew, Lee, and I make the core team of this new podcast focused on eighteenth-century warfare. If you have enjoyed Kabinettskriege over the years, I hope you will give Prime and Load a chance. Like Kabinettskriege, it aims to bring scholarly research to bear on questions that enthusiasts, wargamers, and reenactors have long been interested in. 

As always, thanks for reading (and hopefully, now, listening).

Alex 

Changes Ahead for Kabinettskriege

 

Dear Readers,

For the last 11 years, I have been overwhelmed by the level of support that Kabinettskriege has gathered. Many of the articles which began in this forum have been turned into chapters of my forthcoming book, Infantry in Battle, 1733-1783 releasing in December/January with Helion & Co. 

It has been a long time (over a year!) since I published anything on Kabinettskriege, and folks on social media have questioned the silence. Kabinettskriege is not done, but is changing. My academic work and writing projects take up a lot of my time that, in graduate school, I could happily spend writing articles for Kabinettskriege.

Unified with the desire to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the American War of Independence beginning next year, along with a couple of trusted friends/colleagues, I have decided to expand Kabinettskriege into a podcast. Finally, at long last, it won't just be me running the show, and Kabinettskriege can be the collaborative project that I always hoped it would be.

In 2025, Kabinettskriege will be returning as Prime and Load: A Kabinettskriege Podcast. Watch this space for further details.

As always, Thanks for Reading.

Alex Burns

Book Review: The War of Bavarian Succession by Alexander Querengässer

 

Dear Reader,

Today, we are reviewing the first English-language book covering the military aspects of the War of Bavarian Succession. Alexander Querengässer has provided a fine short volume, replete with many plates that will delight wargamers and reenactors. Often ignored for the more well-known Seven Years War and War of Austrian Succession, the War of Bavarian Succession is the final military showing of Prussian King Frederick II ("the Great"). The lackluster performance of the armies in this war (there were no decisive set piece battles) has led many historians to underestimate the war's importance. It is popularly remembered in Germany as the "Potato War" or Kartoffelkrieg, after the crop that starving soldiers turned to in order to feed themselves. 

For those who are blissfully unaware, the War of Bavarian Succession was a central European war running during the same time as the American War of Independence. During 1778-1779, Prussian, Austrian, and Saxon forces clashed in and around what is today Czechia and Poland. The war was fought over the disputed inheritance of Bavaria. If Bavaria passed into the hands of Austria, it would have completely upset the central European balance of power which emerged in the aftermath of the Seven Years War. Eventually, Russia entered the conflict as a mediator, causing a diplomatic victory for the Prusso-Saxon alliance, who did not want to see Bavaria in Austrian hands. 

The result is a book that provides broad coverage of the war, with particular focus on the opposing armies. All of this comes together to test the central idea of Querengässer's study: was the Prussian army in decline? Querengässer's answer to this question is that the army had flaws, but was not in decline in the way that we often think. He provides careful coverage of the failings of the Prussian army supply system, and the way that the lack of supply handicapped Frederick's armies on campaign. The lack of substantive Prussian light troops also played a role in the shortcomings of the 1778-9 campaigns, but for Querengässer, the Prussian army still had many bright days ahead before its defeat in 1806. For him, the Prussian army was a stable force that struggled with severe limitations throughout Frederick's entire reign: the highs were not as high as we have been led to led to believe, but neither were the lows as low. Teleologically assuming that the Prussian army of 1757 was declining at a steady rate until 1806 is not tenable in his model. 

The book's greatest strength lies in the structural treatment of all armies involved in the conflict, in the chapter titled, "Opposing Forces." Here, Querengässer spends twenty-four pages on the Prussian army, and eleven pages each on the Austrians and Saxons, living up to the book's subtitle. Prince Henry, the brother of the Prussian king, comes across as more innovative than Frederick the Great, as he formed light infantry battalions composed of volunteers when the shortcomings of his forces became apparent. This book is very much a structural history: there are forty pages covering the military operations of the war compared to forty seven on the structure and organization of the armies. None of the skirmishes or small actions of the war are presented at the tactical level, but a admirable amount of detail is given regarding Prussian logistical shortcomings. 

Querengässer is fully open with the reader regarding the impact of COVID on the book: he had planned for a larger volume with much more archival research, including a trip to Vienna. COVID made this impossible. As a result, the book is heavily based on research that Querengässer performed at the Sächsiches Hauptstaatsarchiv Dresden. This is understandable for a scholar based in Saxony, but a bit more research in the Berlin-Dahlem Geheimes Staatsarchiv could have strengthened an already enjoyable volume. The printed sources include most of the standard references one would expect: the political correspondence of Frederick, as well as Berenhorst's writings; it was surprising not to find Schmettau or Holtzendorff's writings on the conflict included. 

All in all, this is a volume that will become the natural starting place for study of the war in English, and the large amount of both period and modern visuals included will delight wargamers, reenactors, and historical enthusiasts. Querengässer should be congratulated on filling a long-absent gap in English-language historiography. Recommended. 

If you enjoyed this review, or any of our other posts, please consider liking us on facebook, or following us on twitter. Consider checking out our exclusive content on Patreon. Finally, we are dedicated to keeping Kabinettskriege ad-free. In order to assist with this, please consider supporting us via the donate button in the upper right-hand corner of the page. As always:

Thanks for Reading,

Alex Burns