Styopa

AFAIK Austria had both Grenzers and Jaegers as early as 7-years' war, well before 1792. Jaegers were very small units, and few in number, but the Grenzers were a significant fraction of the standing army. I don't believe Grenzers were used against the French until 1805 at the earliest, more likely 1809. Clearly, they were considered second-rate troops and deployed as such, until the rough experiences with the skilled French skirmishers taught them a thing or two, then Grenzers were used more aggressively. (They never were Elite in any sense of the word, however.) BTW: BTW, Napoleon didn't really improve the artillery itself, just deployed it in massed batteries. Gribeuval (sp?) (working as a Royalist before the revolution) significantly improved French artillery by adapting Austrian carriages and limbers and refining them slightly.

Another newbie question, but cannot find it in searches: personally, I find the engine much improved from CMBO, so will it ever be possible to have west-front units in the CMBB engine? French/Brit/American late war equipment. (I mean before CMAK comes out (on my "buy it no matter what list anyway)?) Thanks!

http://www.strategy-gaming.com TSIA

I re-read my article again, and I wish I had made the point clearer. It sounds like I'm just saying "wargamers want prettier games" - what I should have stated more accurately is "wargamers want better graphics WHERE IT CAN IMPROVE THE GAME, and this is now including 3d (such as in CM)." I guess I just get sick of the "grognards" lowest-common-denominator expectations reinforcing the release of games that could look better. Let's accept the advancement of the hobby, jump on the bandwagon of better machines, and support developers that produce cutting edge games *even if they do look good*. I guess I've just heard so many wargamers' opinions sound too much like computer-gaming Luddites ("If it's pretty, then it CAN'T be a REAL wargame.") IMO CM puts the lie to that. My $.02 ------------------ -Styopa http://www.strategy-gaming.com