Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

They look great too....some are a bit difficult to see, but most are fine. There are literally thousands of great images out there....

I personally respect all men and women who have the courage to put their lives on the line for their country and beliefs. War is a terrible demon that tries one's soul.

My comment was really directed more towards what I perceived to be your personal inconsistency in this matter, not to argue at all who was 'best' or 'better'. That determination is too heavily influenced by personal perspective and perception. Even the firsthand accounts of participants give a widely disparate view of a Napoleonic engagement.

Am I not allowed a more complex viewpoint on the situation?? Just because I was a Prussian in the Club doesn't emulate everything I think about the Wars. The War wasn't won or loss by one specific force. Yes do I think very favorable of the Prussians, sure I do, probably more than others, but their story of overcoming a crushing defeat and setting up trends and systems that are still used to this day is a very far reaching impact.

Also in military studies, doing a comparative analysis of a component such as different commanders is key to the study of such a subject. It is a foundational root of military studies. What they did right, what they did wrong, what one can learn from them et al...

We all respect the Prussian reorganization. We all study the leaders, strategies, and tactics. We all have a solid background in military history. We are all academics to one degree or another. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, however "complex" you may deem it to be. Every member of our club is equally entitled to thier opinion. From my perspective, you are inconsistent. That is my opinion.

You were not just 'role playing' when you were in the Prussian Army. You fervently believed it. I know this about you beyond any shadow of doubt. A statement by you that the Russians were the best is inconsistent. It comes across to me as pandering, because I know it is not what you truly believe.

Who would I be pandering to? What would I have to prove? The same fervent feelings I have for the Prussians I also had when I was the French CiC at the iNWC. You are trying to discredit me and it won't work. So in the moment yes I did say the Russians were the best, but I have long felt that way to a degree. They had superior junior officers than the Prussians did in many cases. They also had great cavalry and a great use of the Cossacks. I have read tons of accounts of Cossacks performing various different, decent combat. You want to know something else, I also think the Dutch-Belgians are wholly unappreciated in a lot of ways and there were excellent writings by former Dutch members of the Club that I learned a lot from and enjoyed. David Hendrik Chassé's division made the very critical difference at Waterloo, at an important time, for the British. Karl Philipp, Prince of Schwarzenberg was a good Austrian Commander, not the best imo, but he had a lot of deal with when it came to the three argumentative monarchs. Joseph Radetzky von Radetz is the brains behind many of an operation and is the father of the brilliance of the Trachenberg Plan. One would think Blucher was my favorite Prussian of all time, but I actually prefer Gneisenau. He's again the brains behind a lot that happens. Rowland Hill, 1st Viscount Hill is one of my favorite British officers, he is reliable and dependable on so many counts. The Prince Poniatowski & Eugène de Beauharnais are some of the unsung and underrated generals that Napoleon had. It is a shame he did not use them better.

You seem to be stuck on a very small part of this overall discussion. I have known you to change your mind on many topics too.