What was the best unit of Napoleonic wars, and why were they Polish Lancers?
>>61297
Objectively the French artillery units.
Was always partial to the French Grenadiers and 42nd Black Watch desu.
>>61297
>Poland
>>61297
The French hussars under Lasalle were pretty baller.
Live fast and die soon.
Lasalle himself is an awesome motherfucker.
>Le polish cavalry meme
Pls. The best unit was les Grenadiers a Cheval.
Can someone explain me why weren't cuirassiers armed with lances?
Wouldn't it be logical to arm the heavy cavalry units with long-ranged weapons for even better effectiveness of the charge?
>>61515
It's French fashion, you wouldn't understand. You need to look classy when you die and obviously you cannot look cool with a lance.
>>61515
Because they're meant as proper melee cav for prolonged combat since they're slower, Lancers are hit and run and lightly armed to be that way.
Hussars>Lancers>Dragoons>Cuirassiers
Honorable mention of the Imperial Guard.
>>61366
>tfw your best friends died fighting your wars
;_;
>>61297
All you horsefuckers make me disgusted. Sharpest looking motherfuckers coming through
Anything Prussian. Silly frogs.
>>61600
C'mon, cuirass wasn't that heavy. This tactics worked pretty well for the winged hussars, who had much heavier armors.
>>61632
I kinda wondered about the riflemen actually. I know they are popular because of Sean Bean, but how useful were they in battle compared to the light infantry and the voltigueres?
>>61632
>Sharpest
Hue
>>61605
Cuirass was an effective protection against cold weapons though.
Also
>Hussars
They lost most of their fights against the lancers.
>>61635
>prussia conquered in two weeks
Top lel
>>61632
Actually the King's German Legion was pretty based as well, especially at Waterloo
>>61706
But lancers didn't conquer Stettin without a loss a life and with only their balls as weapons.
Hussars did.
>>61718
Reminder that Blücher was the one who won Waterloo, Wellington just kept Napoleon in place long enough for the Pussians to get there.
>>61635
"The Prussian army is in such a state of panic that the mere appearance of a Frenchman is enough to make it lay down its arms."
t. Marshal Lannes
The Black Legion of Brunswick
>>61763
It's sad that more people don't know this. Wellington flat out admitted this in his report. Also, bumping with best movie battle I've seen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ucl_PfzMmg
Why did Napoleon keep his best general as a garrison commander in Shit-fort when the fate of France hanged in the balance?
>>62034
>Davout was mad about Auerstadt
>he wanted to face the traitor Bernadotte in battle to punish him
>it never happened
>>62232
>he wanted to face the traitor Bernadotte in battle to punish him
This is the most infuriating part about the whole thing. Bernadotte a shit.
Wherever I am, I must also charge.
Ney4ever
>>62034
>tfw napoleon didn't have enough good generals
sacre bleu, i still get mad at how admiral nelson literally destroyed every attempt at putting a floaty boat in the water by the french, really pisses me off, he must have been a genius.
Where do y'all get this information? Id like to get into this stuff but I don't know where to start. Wikipedia?
>>62316
If you want NAPOLEON info go buy
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Napoleon-Great-Andrew-Roberts/dp/1846140277/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1407423149&sr=1-1&keywords=napoleon+the+great
and
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1853673463?colid=3AGAWBBG6BSB5&coliid=I25CN9DCLYWJU&ref_=aw_wl_ov_dp_2_3&ref_=redir_mobile_desktop&tag=viglink12687-20
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0025236601?colid=3AGAWBBG6BSB5&coliid=I1KLRQD66SQUL2&ref_=aw_wl_ov_dp_1_3&ref_=redir_mobile_desktop&tag=viglink12687-20
>>62299
Thats what you get when you put a French Admiral in charge of the fleet.
>>62316
http://napoleonistyka.atspace.com/
The best Napoleonic Wars site I know
>>62299
Funny.
If we're talking about Napoleon's Marshals then Davout was very much in a class of his own.
>>62299
>napoleon didn't have enough good generals
You wot? His Marshals were some of the best military leaders in Europe at the time. Even the people like Marmont and Bernadotte were better than what the other side had to offer.
>>62316
>>62336
This. Napoleon the Great is the best biography on the man there is.
>>61297
Hussars and Cuirassiers were all pretty badass.
I'm from the Holland and always thought we did nothing during the war but it turns out the Polish Lancers (re)trained a few units of Dutch hussars (or another type) to become lancers.
Interesting fact: Lancer horses were among the smallest horses during the Napoleonic wars.
>According to order issued on October 28th 1802 the horses for French cuirassiers and dragoons were to be >between 15 1/4 and 15 1/2 hands tall (154.3m-158.3 m). After war in 1805 the minimum height for horses were >relaxed, even for the cuirassiers. But when Prussian and Austrian horses were captured and new territories >annexed the requirements were heightened. In 1812 the height of horses was as follow:
>- cuirassiers and carabiniers - . . . . 155 cm - 160 cm
>- dragoons and artillery - . . . . . . . . .153 cm - 155 cm
>- chasseurs and hussars - . . . . . . . . 149 cm - 153 cm
>- lighthorse-lancers - . . . . . . . . . . . . .146 cm - 150 cm
>- Polish uhlans - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .142 cm - 153 cm
>- Polish Krakusi - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 cm - 142 cm (nicknamed by Napoleon "my Pygmy Cavalry")
>>62472
Even the horse size was reglemented? I didn't know that.
Also I just remembered the Imperial Guard had Mamluks.
>>62597
>Even the horse size was reglemented? I didn't know that.
honestly it was this, more than anything else, that effected what role a cavalry regiment would play in the campaign/battlefield.
smaller horses consumed less feed and thus made cavalry units more viable for reconnaissance and guarding lines of communication, while large horses greatly increase the weight of charge
>>62597
Yep and the height of the guys riding them.
I believe Carabiniers needed to be 6 feet plus (185 cm)
Hussars could be in the region of 165 cm
>>62273
>>61936
>Artillery is more essential to cavalry than to infantry, because cavalry has no fire for its defence, but depends upon the sabre. It is to remedy this deficiency that recourse has been had to horse-artillery. Cavalry, there-fore, should never be without cannon, whether when attacking, rallying, or in position
>Cavalry
>should never be without cannon
god damn it Ney
>>61936
Why don't we make movies like that anymore?
Any Napoleonic reenactors here?
And its objectively the Old Guard, see: Ligny
>>62934
we don't have literally thousands of soviet army soldiers "volunteering" to play extras
>>62934
We're in the era of CGI hell.
Voltigeurs
Jägers
>elite sharpshooters using natural cover and hit and run tactics
>>61366
Lasalle was truly a fucking genius
Who else could conquer two fortresses held by a bigger enemy force without a single death?
>>65344
my question is how?
>>65370
By being clever
>Lasalle marched to Stettin where he demanded its surrender in the early afternoon of 29 October.
>The French general claimed the Lannes' entire corps of 30,000 men was present. In fact, the V Corps advance guard got no nearer than Löcknitz that day.
>Lasalle's entire force consisted of 800 horsemen of the 5th and 7th Hussar Regiments plus two cannons.[15]
>The elderly Prussian general entered negotiations and capitulated during the night of the 29th and 30th.[17]
>Romberg surrendered the Stettin fortress, 5,300 troops, and 281 guns.
>>61297
imperial guard master race checking in
>>65344
>>65370
In both cases, he wrote a letter to the commander of the defending forces demanding surrender. After a refusal, he sent another which made it seem as though he had 80,000 men at his back. The Prussians were so terrified they agreed to surrender, and it was only afterwards that they realized they had just given up their weapons to a tiny force of hussars.
Lasalle was truly the ruse master.
Line infantry.
If you disagree you don't know shit about war of the time.
>>65515
>line infantry is all one unit
wew lad
>>65515
your retard is showing.
If you said something like the 9e régiment d’infanterie légère or something sure.
But 'line infantry' in general does not comprise a unite, but a type of unit.
>>65879
I think you are missing the point.
Of course one unit can be the best.
Any army would lose without its line infantry, but theres no denying the 9e régiment d’infanterie légère (Which Napoleon call L'incomparables) where better than the Mary Sue regiments of barely trained conscripts.
Don't try and give shit pretentious answers 'le the masses of shit are more important than the elite regiments'. We know they are, but they aren't better units.
>>66037
>Mary Sue
I meant Marie-Louises of course...
>>66037
>We know they are, but they aren't better units.
>We know that in any battle without superior line infantry you would almost always lose that battle, and the efforts of everyone involved would almost certainly be to waste because they make or break a battle
>dude how cool are cavalry and elite regiments lmao they're totally the best
>>66120
Napoleon used elite regiments like the Imperial Guard as a tactical reserve in several battle because they could be the plus that tipped the balance in his favor.
Faggot.
>>66120
Then name the line infantry unit you think could be considered the best you nonce. I named a unit of line infantry as one of the best units, and you just keep sparrowing on about how good line infantry in general are.
This isn't Napoleon total war, your units aren't just 'French Line Infantry'. Theres a huge disparity between the performances of individual units, and you are using this idea that without good line infantry everything else was worthless to hide the fact you can't name any exceptional units.
>>61763
>Blücher
>winning Waterloo
As an English schoolboy can tell you Blücher pushed himself forward with typical Prussian effrontery to share the glory which Wellington had won.
>Blucher
>standing a chance alone against Napoleon
>>66225
You're missing my point, I'm not trying to suggest any one unit of line infantry is amazing.
Suggesting any one unit was the best is redundant because they almost certainly won't have had a decisive part of a battle (which belongs to the lines), and if they did (for instance, cavalry) then it will be infinitely more due to tactics and the battle situation than the unit itself.
>>66207
Literally so? Reserves are for when the line infantry break down and holes need filling and tactical mistakes need correcting. You are not proving anything I'm saying wrong by bringing those up.
>>61297
>La Vieille Garde desu
>>66349
>Suggesting any one unit was the best is redundant because they almost certainly won't have had a decisive part of a battle
But I would argue that the 9eme Legere DID play a decisive role in the Battle of Marengo.
I don't think you are right at all.
>>61605
>dragoons
That's disgusting. I bet you're a coalition supporter. Even as a pole, it would be foolish to deny that the Imperial Guard Grenadiers were the best fighting force of the Napoleonic wars, if not of all time.
>>61661
They lost to voligeurs because...
Large numbers and speedy loading>small numbers and accuracy
Rifles were gimmicky.
>>61297
Russian guardsmen were easily some of the best infantry during the wars
>>61297
>anything cavalry
the Napoleonic Wars were the beginning of the end for offensive cavalry use. There's a funny and almost depressing bit from John Keegan's The Face of Battle that illustrates this at Waterloo:
>No actual dash was made upon us. Now and then an individual more daring than the rest would ride up to the bayonets, wave his sword around and bully; but the mass held aloof, pulling up within five or six yards, as if, though afraid to go on, they were ashamed to retire. Our men soon discovered they had the best of it, and ever afterwards, when they heard the sound of cavalry approaching, appeared to consider the circumstance a welcome change from being cannonaded --Royal Engineer with the 79th
>Macready, of the 30th, remembered that his men 'began to pity the useless perseverence of their assailants, and, as they advanced, would growl out, "here come those damned fools again"'. Confident in, even elated by their ability to outface the French squadrons (at Quatre Bras, after their second dispersal of a French charge, there had been 'a good deal of laughter and handshaking' in the 30th's square), the British infantry began to inflict on them heavy casualties whenever they were foolish enough or badly enough led to linger within range.
>Saltoun, commanding the Guard's light companies, ordered them to fire at a group of French cavalrymen who then 'rode along the front of the 52nd with a view of turning their right flank, and were completed destroyed by the fire of that regiment.'
>The 40th Regiment, alerted by an experienced sergeant who called out,'They are in armor. Fire at the horses,' brought down Cuirassiers in swathes. 'It was the most laughable sight to see these guards in their chimney armor - trying to run away, being able to make little progress and many of them being taken prisoner by those of our light companies who were out skirmishing.'
>>66349
>Reserves are for when the line infantry break down and holes need filling and tactical mistakes need correcting. You are not proving anything I'm saying wrong by bringing those up.
Napoleon also used them as a mean to break through enemy formations at what he deemed the decisive moment. That's something that famously failed at Waterloo.
>>66531
Akshulli...I think that pic is Pavlovski Grenadier Polk. Also, Russian guards were btfo at Austerlitz.
>>66531
Those are Pavlovsk Grenadiers
The Russian guard took none of the 5 Eagles at Eylau if i remember correctly.
>>66636
