The Combat of Strehla, 20th August 1760: A Scenario for ‘Tricorn’

As mentioned in recent posts, I’ve ALMOST completed the Reichsarmee for the Severn Years War! 🙂  When it comes to painting, I always work best with an objective game on the calendar, so on 15th April we’re going to be getting most of the Reichsarmee on the table with a refight of the Combat of Strehla.  So as usual, here’s the scenario (written for Tricorn, my SYW variant of Shako rules) and a bit of historical scene-setting/guff.

The campaigns in Saxony during the Seven Years War were very much a side-show compared to Frederick’s ‘main events’ in Bohemia, Silesia and elsewhere and as a consequence are largely given far less coverage than Frederick’s own battles.  However, they provide a wealth of historical wargame scenarios ranging from small actions of the Petit Guerre to brigade-sized actions such as the Combat of Meissen, to divisional-sized actions such as the Combat of Zinna, to larger multi-divisional battles such as Pretzsch, Korbitz and Maxen and then very large battles such as Torgau and Freiberg.  As a bonus, a lot of these battles also involved the colourful Reichsarmee! 🙂

As the Saxony Campaign of 1760s is not very well-known and can be very confusing with countless marches, counter-marches and intricate manoeuvres, this is a slightly long potted history, but I think it’s worth explaining where the Combat of Strehla fits into the Great Scheme of Things…

General Finck surrenders to Marshal Daun at Maxen 1759

Historical Background (The Saxony Campaign of 1760)

Frederick II

The capture of General Finck’s entire Prussian corps of 13,000 men at Maxen on 20th November 1759 was the last body-blow suffered by the Prussian King Frederick II during a terrible year that had also included catastrophic defeats at the hands of the Russians at Paltzig and Kunersdorf.

However, the situation for Frederick was not all bad.  In western Germany, Prince Ferdinand of Brunswick and his British, Hanoverian, Hessian, Brunswick, Schaumburg-Lippe & Prussian alliance army had won a remarkable victory against the French and Saxons at Minden, thus diminishing the French threat to Prussia and the rest of the alliance for the time being.  Ferdinand followed this up with a further victory against the army of Württemberg at Fulda.


The Russians meanwhile, despite their victory at Kunersdorf, had also suffered appalling losses and had consequently broken off their attack on Brandenburg and withdrawn into winter quarters.  This decision, later referred to by Frederick as ‘The Miracle of the House of Brandenburg’, had given Frederick vital breathing space to rebuild his army and restore the situation.

So despite the loss of Finck’s corps, the situation by the end of 1759 had largely stabilised for Prussia.  The situation remained quiet for the first half of 1760, as Frederick’s main army remained in Saxony, locked in a stalemate with Field Marshal Daun’s Austrian main army and Prince Michael of Pfalz-Zweibrücken’s Reichsarmee.


In June 1760 the armies began once again to move in earnest.  Daun finally left his winter quarters and marched for Silesia, to join an assault led by the ‘up and coming’ Feldmarschallieutenant Loudon.  Detecting the move, Frederick attempted to block and destroy Daun and another Austrian corps under Lacy.  However, Loudon in the meantime had managed to outwit and defeat Frederick’s close friend the Baron de la Motte Fouqué at Landeshut in Silesia, killing or capturing all but 1,500 of Fouqué’s corps, including Fouqué himself who was captured with honour, having suffered three sword-cuts in a desperate last-stand action.


As the news of Fouqué’s defeat arrived in Saxony, Daun made a renewed effort to break contact from Frederick, in order to reinforce Loudon’s success in Silesia and in accordance with his orders from Vienna.  Frederick immediately followed, leaving Generallieutenant Hülsen to keep the Reichsarmee busy at Dresden.  However, that still left Feldzeugmeister Lacy’s Austrian corps free to shadow and frustrate Frederick’s pursuit of Daun.

By 8th July, Frederick was near Bautzen, marching east in pursuit of Daun, with Lacy following.  However, it occurred to Frederick that he suddenly had an opportunity to not only destroy Lacy’s troublesome and now isolated corps, but also to recapture Dresden.  He immediately reversed his march and bore down on an unsuspecting Lacy!  By some miracle, Lacy managed to escape the trap and after a gruelling forced-march, managed to find safety on the western bank of the Elbe.


On 13th July, Frederick’s army also crossed back over to the west bank of the Elbe, crossing below (i.e. to the north of) Dresden, thus inserting themselves between the city and Zweibrücken’s Reichsarmee, which already had its hands full with Hülsen’s Prussian corps, further down the Elbe at Meissen.  Frederick was aiming to assault the old half of Dresden, which lies on the western bank of the Elbe.  The new half of the city (Neustadt) on the eastern bank had relatively modern fortifications, whereas the old city’s fortifications dated back to the Thirty Years War and were closely surrounded by suburbs which further reduced their defensive value.  Frederick didn’t have the resources for a protracted siege, but hoped he could capture the city by surprise.  However, he didn’t count on the tenacious and active defence that would soon be mounted by the city’s governor, Feldmarschallieutenant Macquire.

Dresden in the 1760s by Canaletto


The initial attempted surprise attack on 14th July by Jäger and the ‘Courbière’ Frei-Infanterie was a failure and so Frederick was soon forced to initiate a formal siege.  Within days, almost half of the old city of Dresden, one of the most beautiful cities in Europe, was on fire thanks to Prussian mortars.  However, the defenders held firm and the Prussians, lacking sufficient heavy cannon to make a practicable breach, were unable to storm the city.  To make matters worse for Frederick, he now received word that Daun too had reversed his march and was returning to Dresden.  In addition, the Silesian fortress of Glatz was besieged by Loudon and Prince Henry had reported that the Russians were once again on the move, marching into Silesia and outnumbering Prince Henry’s corps by two-to-one!  Frederick knew that he needed to end the siege of Dresden as soon as possible, break off and march to Silesia, all while trying to avoid being forced into a battle by Daun.


On 20th July, Daun arrived at Dresden and launched a surprise attack on Prussian entrenchments, only to find that the Prussians and their guns had gone.  However, the Saxon ‘Rudnicki’ Uhlans came within a whisker of ending the war when they raided Frederick’s headquarters, almost capturing Frederick in his nightshirt!

The Prussians maintained the illusion of a siege for another week, but on 28th July word arrived in both camps that Glatz had fallen to Loudon and Breslau was now threatened.  While the Austrians celebrated, Frederick managed to slip away during the stormy night of 29th-30th July, marching north to Meissen and crossing over to the east bank of the Elbe.  The Prince of Pfalz-Zweibrücken’s Reichsarmee completely failed to detect or block this move.  The race to Silesia was on!


Frederick left around 12,000 troops under Generallieutenant Johann Dietrich von Hülsen’s command to once again tie down enemy forces in Saxony.  However, Hülsen had his work cut out, as Daun felt confident enough to leave 25,000 Austrian and Imperial troops in Saxony, under the command of the Prince of  Pfalz-Zweibrücken, aided by the capable Hungarian General der Cavallerie Andreas Hadik.  Daun meanwhile marched east, pushing his troops hard to get ahead of Frederick.  Lacy’s corps once again followed in Frederick’s wake.

With the main armies having once again marched out of Saxony and the remaining Austro-Imperial forces outnumbering the Prussians by two-to-one, Hadik presented Zweibrücken with a plan to go on to the offensive.  Like the cities of Dresden, Torgau and Wittenberg, Hülsen’s base at Meissen straddled the Elbe and was a key crossing-point on that great river.  The Reichsarmee would therefore attempt to either evict Hülsen from Meissen, or shut him up within the city while the Reichsarmee removed other Prussian garrisons such as the one at Leipzig, at leisure.

However, Hülsen detected the Reichsarmee‘s manoeuvres and managed to slip out of the closing trap during the night of 16th-17th August.  Determined to remain at large on the west bank of the Elbe, he marched his corps northward along the river and on 18th August established himself at one of Prince Henry’s former fortified camps from the previous year, on high ground next to the town of Strehla.  Strehla wasn’t fortified and its beautiful castle was now more ornamental than defensive, but the old camp still had a strong line of entrenchments facing south.  Hülsen also occupied the ancient hill-fort of the Dürren-Berg, which commanded his right flank.  There was a further fortification, this one built by the Swedes a century earlier on a low hill known as the Otten-Berg, but this was positioned too far out to be worth occupying.

On 19th August, Hülsen received news of the King’s victory four days previously, over Loudon at Liegnitz.  Hülsen was so overjoyed that he immediately started planning a surprise attack on the Reichsarmee.  However, reports soon arrived from Oberst von Kleist’s cavalry, informing him that the Reichsarmee were manoeuvring to attack.

Frederick at Liegnitz, 15th August 1760

The Reichsarmee were advancing in accordance with the latest Austrian doctrine (used for the first time with great effect at Hochkirch in 1758) of dispersed columns, converging to attack at a single point.  The main body of the Reichsarmee, under the personal command of Zweibrücken and Hadik, would mount a frontal demonstration, fixing Hülsen in place at Strehla.  The Prince of Stolberg’s Reserve Corps and Guasco’s Grenadier Corps would then mount an assault on the Dürren-Berg, while Kleefeld’s Auxiliary Corps would conduct a long march around the Prussian flank, using the cover provided by the topography and woodland, to mount a surprise attack on the Dürren-Berg from the rear.  With that position taken, they would then proceed to attack the flank and rear of the main Prussian position while the main body advanced to complete the task.


However, in war ‘the enemy always gets a vote’ and having detected the Reichsarmee’s moves, Hülsen ordered his infantry commander, Generalmajor Heinrich Gottlieb von Braun, to reinforce the Dürren-Berg position and to take personal command of its defence.  The gap between the Dürren-Berg and the main position would be filled by the cavalry.

The Austro-Imperial plan began to unravel almost immediately as the firebrand Italian Feldmarschallieutenant Guasco, attacking the Dürren-Berg directly from the south, became uncharacteristically cautious and was content to engage in an indecisive artillery duel from the Otten-Berg.  The Prince of Stolberg’s Reserve Corps was similarly cautious, doing little except moving a few guns up onto the Liebschützer-Berg, where they too became fixated on an indecisive artillery-duel.  The exception to this was the Hungarian ‘Nikolaus Esterházy’ Regiment (IR 33), who took it upon themselves to join Kleefeld’s attack on the Dürren-Berg.


Kleefeld’s corps meanwhile, consisting of the excellent Imperial auxiliary ‘Blau-Würzburg’ Regiment, two battalions of Grenzer and a weak grenadier battalion, had successfully marched around to the rear of the Dürren-Berg via the village of Laas and was now attacking uphill through the woods on the north slope, as per the plan.  However, as they emerged from the trees, they ran straight into a storm of musketry and canister fire from Braun’s troops, arrayed along the crest and clearly waiting for them!  On Kleefeld’s right flank, the Hungarians had arrived to assist, but were also engaged in a fierce, short-range firefight and were seemingly unable to make headway.

With the attack stalling, disaster now struck in the form of five squadrons of the Prussian ‘Schorlemmer’ Dragoons!  They had been sent around the southern side of the Dürren-Berg and despite being exposed to Austrian artillery fire for much of the way, rode up the southern slope and over the crest, completely surprising the Hungarians and crushing their right flank!  The Hungarian regiment completely disintegrated and continued slaughter was only prevented by the personal intervention of one Captain Seeger of the general staff, who led the Swabian ‘Hohenzollern’ Cuirassiers to the rescue.

‘Green’ Kleist

Although those five squadrons of Prussian dragoons had been driven off, the rest of the ‘Schorlemmer’ Dragoons, along with ‘Green’ Kleist’s ten squadrons of hussars from his own regiment (HR 1) and four squadrons of dragoons from his freikorps (FD II), had ridden around the north side of the woods, where they encountered the cavalry of Stolberg’s Austro-Imperial Reserve Corps.

The Austro-Imperial horse had been sent beyond Laas to be in a position to cut the Prussian line of retreat.  However, they suddenly found themselves sorely outnumbered by the Prussian horse and the ‘Baranyay’ Hussars (H 30) and Pfalz ‘Kurfürstin’ Dragoons were immediately driven off.  The Austrian ‘Pfalz-Zweibrücken’ Chevauxlégers (Ch 39), being made of somewhat sterner stuff, attempted to make a fight of it, but were completely overwhelmed, suffering the capture of three standards and their Colonel, Prince Friedrich August von Nassau-Usingen.


With Kleefeld and the cavalry defeated and with Stolberg and Guasco seemingly unable or unwilling to make progress, the rest of the Reichsarmee remained in its positions while their commanders considered their next move.

In the event, Hülsen made the decision for them; the Austro-Imperial surprise attack had failed, but the day was still young and they still had massive reserves of uncommitted troops.  the Prussian defenders of the Dürren-Berg were fatigued and had suffered over 1,000 casualties for the Austro-Imperials’ loss of 1,800 and at that rate, the Prussians simply could not win a battle of attrition.  Hülsen therefore made the decision to make good their losses and to slip away northward, toward Torgau during the afternoon, before the Reichsarmee got its act together.

So historically, the Combat of Strehla turned out to be something of a damp squib, hence it generally being referred to as a ‘Combat’, rather than a ‘Battle’.  Both sides latterly tried to claim victory and biographies of the Prince of Pfalz-Zweibrücken still refer to this as being his victory, though the Reichsarmee had completely failed in its stated aim of either destroying Hülsen’s corps or trapping it against the Elbe.  Over the next few weeks and despite some setbacks, Hülsen would manage to grind the Reichsarmee down to the point of collapse in late October.  This event would coincide with the return of the main armies to Saxony and would lead to the colossal Battle of Torgau on 2nd November, but that’s for another article…

The Scenario

As mentioned above, the historical action turned out to be something of a damp squib, but if your dice-rolling is like mine, there’s still plenty of potential for it to be a great wargame/bloodbath!  And you get to field the bulk of the Reichsarmee, so what’s not to like?!  🙂

Of course, not everyone has a stack of Reichsarmee figures just waiting to go, so just feel free to use Austrians, French, Russians, or whatever you have in your collection.

There is of course, nothing stopping you from doing a ‘balls out’ battle until one side or the other breaks.  However, if you want to limit yourself to something a bit more ‘historical’, I suggest the following:

1. Limit the game to 12 turns (a totally arbitrary number I just pulled out of my arse.  Feel free to change it).

2. The Prussian player may issue any orders to his commands at the start of the game.

3. The Austrian player may not issue Attack orders to any divisions of the Main Body at the start of the game.  For all other divisions, once orders have been written and before the start of the game, roll on the Aides de Camp Table (Page 4 of the Tricorn QRS) to see if those divisions implement their orders, applying a +1 modifier to Kleefeld’s roll.  Remember that new orders may not be written and transmitted until the Orders Phase at the end of Turn 2.

4. In order to claim a tactical victory, the Austro-Imperial player must break two Prussian commands, including Braun’s command, by the end of Turn 12.

5. The Prussians may claim a tactical victory if they prevent the Austro-Imperial player from claiming victory.

Terrain Notes

The table-size for 15mm figures is 6′ x 8′, as indicated by the grid.  This assumes that you use the same base-sizes as me! 🙂 I use 60mm frontage for a battalion (80mm for a large battalion), so 4-5 battalions’ frontage per foot.

It’s worth noting that all maps of the battle disagree with each other, some markedly so!  I’ve gone mainly with Christopher Duffy’s map in his book ‘By Force of Arms’, as he seems to be the only one who has actually looked at a modern map with topographical contour lines.  However, I’ve added the small stream that is shown at the foot of the Prussian earthworks in all older maps of the battle.  While those maps are often wildly inaccurate in other respects, the contours do show a re-entrant in that location and Google Earth shows a ditch and culverts in that location, suggesting a stream that has been ‘canalised’.

Most terrain features function as per the terrain chart on Page 2 of the Tricorn QRS, but here are a few clarifications:

The hills are for the most part, gently rolling and do not provide a defender with a +1 melee modifier.  The exception is the ring-contour of the Dürren-Berg, which thanks to its ancient earthworks, is steeply banked.  It counts as a Linear Obstacle to cross and provides the defender with a +1 melee modifier, but no cover modifier.  The ring contour is big enough for roughly eight battalions to form a circle within it.

The Built-Up Sectors (BUS) marked on the map with thick edges are prepared for defence: namely the two southernmost sectors of Strehla and the villages of Klein-Rügeln and Clanzschwitz.  These BUS provide a defender with a +2 melee modifier.  All other BUS have a +1 melee modifier.

The Prussian earthworks are well-built and provide the defender with a +2 melee modifier.  Class as a linear obstacle to pass through (in reality there are covered gaps for units to pass through).  The old Swedish earthworks on the Otten-Berg can be ignored.

In terms of combat, infantry defending the earthworks may extend their firing-arc out to 45 degrees on either side, but suffer a -1 modifier if they do so (the earthworks are well-built and designed to enable enfilade fire, so defending units can mutually support each other).  Units defending the earthworks may claim flank and rear support, but attackers may only claim rear support.

It’s probably also worth reminding that units defending BUS may fire at opportunity targets in any direction as Skirmisher fire.  They may also conduct volley fire simultaneously at ALL units attacking the BUS, but do so with a -1 modifier.  They may not claim any support modifiers in melee, but the attackers may claim rear (not flank) support.

The Elbe is impassable to all troop-types.

The streams are very minor and class as linear obstacles, as per the QRS.

Note that no two maps of the battle agree on the layout of the road network around Strehla in 1760!  One modern map even shows a bridge over the Elbe, which there most definitely wasn’t and still isn’t! 🙂  There was a small ferry and the loop of the river could be forded at times of drought, but there was no bridge.  As 18th Century roads were largely irrelevant in terms of tactical combat I’ve left them off, but feel free to add them! 🙂


The deployment shown on the map above is only a rough approximation of where units and formations were historically positioned.  The labelled units are the ones where we’re reasonably confident of their location.  White indicate Austrian units, yellow indicates Imperial troops and blue indicates Prussians.

Note that at least one of the modern maps I referred to while researching this article shows Kleefeld on the Otten-Berg and Guasco attacking past Laas.  This is completely at odds with all accounts of the battle, which describe Guasco deploying his artillery on the Otten-Berg and Sand-Berg and getting bogged down in an artillery duel, while Kleefeld attacks the Dürren-Berg from the rear.  I’ll stick with Duffy’s version (and others), but feel free to swap Kleefeld and Guasco if you prefer.

The scenario map above should therefore only be used as a rough guide  to deployment and players may therefore adjust each formation within its rough deployment area, as shown on the map below (blue boxes being Prussian formation deployment areas and black boxes being Austro-Imperial formation deployment areas).

No units may be deployed on the east bank of the Elbe, even though one of the Prussian boxes slightly overlaps the east bank!

Prussian Corps of Generallieutenant Johann Dietrich von Hülsen

(Good – 2 Messengers)

Centre-Right (Entrenchments) (Good)
I. Bn, Infanterie-Regiment ‘Markgraf Carl’ (IR 19) (elite)     [5/2]
II. Bn, Infanterie-Regiment ‘Markgraf Carl’ (IR 19) (elite)     [5/2]
Grenadier-Bataillon ‘Burgsdorff’ (38/43)     [5/2]
Battalion Guns     [2/0]
Heavy Battery     [3/0]
Heavy Battery     [3/0]

Centre-Left (Entrenchments) (Good)
I. Bn, Füsilier-Regiment ‘Salmuth’ (IR 48)     [4/1]
II. Bn, Füsilier-Regiment ‘Salmuth’ (IR 48)     [4/1]
I. Bn, Füsilier-Regiment ‘Grant’ (IR 44)     [4/1]
II. Bn, Füsilier-Regiment ‘Grant’ (IR 44)     [4/1]
I. Bn, Infanterie-Regiment ‘Alt-Schenckendorff’ (IR 22) (elite)     [5/2]
II. Bn, Infanterie-Regiment ‘Alt-Schenckendorff’ (IR 22) (elite)     [5/2]
Battalion Guns     [2/0]
Heavy Battery     [3/0]
Heavy Battery     [3/0]
Heavy Battery     [3/0]

Right Wing (Dürren-Berg) – Generalmajor von Braun (Good)
Grenadier-Bataillon ‘Lubath’ (7/30)     [5/2]
Grenadier-Bataillon ‘Beyer’ (11/14)     [5/2]
IV. Stehende-Grenadier-Bataillon ‘Lossow’ (g1/g11)     [5/2]
I. Bn, (ex-Saxon) Füsilier-Regiment ‘Hauss’ (IR 55) (poor)     [3/0]
I. Bn, Infanterie-Regiment ‘Braunschweig-Bevern’ (IR 7) (elite)     [5/2]
II. Bn, Infanterie-Regiment ‘Braunschweig-Bevern’ (IR 7) (elite)     [5/2]
Battalion Guns     [2/0]
Battalion Guns     [2/0]
Heavy Battery     [3/0]

Left Wing (Strehla & Klein-Rügeln) (Average)
Grenadier-Bataillon ‘Manstein’ (2/g2)     [5/2]
Detachment, (ex-Saxon) Füsilier-Regiment ‘Hauss’ (IR 55)     [Skirmishers]
II. Bn, Frei-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Wunsch’ (F 7)     [4/1]
Jäger Detachment, Frei-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Wunsch’ (FJ 7)     [Skirmishers]
Feldjäger Corps zu Fuss     [2x Skirmishers]
3 Sqns, Frei-Husaren-Corps ‘Kleist’ (FH II)     [4/1]
Battalion Guns     [2/0]

Cavalry – Oberst von Kleist (Excellent)
I. Bn (5 sqns), (‘Porzellan’) Dragoner-Regiment ‘Schorlemmer’ (DR 6)  [5/2 – Large Unit]
II. Bn (5 Sqns), (‘Porzellan’) Dragoner-Regiment ‘Schorlemmer’ (DR 6)  [5/2 – Large Unit]
I. Bn (5 Sqns), (‘Grünne’) Husaren-Regiment ‘Kleist’ (HR 1) (elite)     [5/2]
II. Bn (5 Sqns), (‘Grünne’) Husaren-Regiment ‘Kleist’ (HR 1) (elite)     [5/2]
4 Sqns, Frei-Dragoner-Regiment ‘Kleist’ (FD II)     [5/2]

Prussian Breakpoints

Division                         FMR     ⅓     ½     ¾

Centre-Right Infantry       23         8     12     18
Centre-Left Infantry          40         14   20     30
Left Wing                             21          7     11      16
Right Wing (Braun)           35        12     18     27
Cavalry (Kleist)                   25         9     13     19

Army                               FMR     ¼     ⅓     ½
Prussian Army                   144        36    48    72

Prussian Notes

1.  II. Bn, Frei-Regiment ‘Wunsch’ may alternatively be deployed as 2x Skirmishers. Note that it was an excellent unit of its type, so has MR 4/1, rather than the more usual MR 3/0 for Frei-Infanterie.

2.  Count two broken skirmisher stands from the same unit (or two independent skirmisher stands in the same formation) as 3 morale points (4 morale points for II./’Wunsch’).

3.  It’s impossible to fully represent the complex of angles and enfilades in well-engineered entrenchments of the period.  They were designed to provide mutual support and to enfilade any avenue of approach, thereby catching any attacker in a crossfire.  Therefore, infantry units deployed in the entrenchments may offset their flank-lines (i.e. increase their arc of fire to 45 degrees on either side).

4.  It is often difficult or even impossible to physically place infantry models in fortifications where artillery models are already present.  Therefore, any infantry unit in base-to-base contact to the rear of a battery in the entrenchments will class as defending the parapet of the entrenchments against attackers.  They may therefore fire volleys and conduct melee as normal, even when the artillery has already fired from the same position (in much the same way as infantry support batteries in the normal Tricorn rules).

5.  I’ve arbitrarily split the main part of Hülsen’s corps into two wings for game-play purposes.  I’ve no information on the historical brigade or divisional structure.  The Right Wing is weaker, as that sector had already detached battalions to reinforce the Dürren-Berg position.

6.  I can’t find any information on a single cavalry commander for the Prussians, so I’ve arbitrarily placed Oberst von Kleist (‘Green Kleist’) as overall cavalry commander, as he commanded the bulk of the cavalry, namely his own hussar regiment (HR 1) and the dragoons and hussars of his own Freikorps.  Alternatively, feel free to split off the two battalions of the ‘Schorlemmer’ Dragoons (DR 6) as a separate formation, under the command of their CO, Major Marschall von Bieberstein (Good).

Austro-Imperial Reichsarmee of Reichsmarschall Frederick Michael Count Palatine von Zweibrücken-Birkenfeld

(Poor – 2 Messengers)

Main Corps – Under direct command of Zweibrücken-Birkenfeld

Main Corps Infantry Left Wing (Poor)
I. Bn, Infanterie-Regiment ‘Mainz-Lamberg’     [4/1 – Large Unit]
II. Bn, Infanterie-Regiment ‘Mainz-Lamberg’     [4/1 – Large Unit]
I. Bn, Infanterie-Regiment ‘Rot-Würzburg’     [4/1 – Large Unit]
II. Bn, Infanterie-Regiment ‘Rot-Würzburg’     [4/1 – Large Unit]
I. Bn, Swabian Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Baden-Baden’ (poor)     [3/0]
II. Bn, Swabian Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Baden-Baden’ (poor)     [3/0]
I. Bn, Swabian Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Rodt’ (former ‘Fürstenberg’ IR) (poor)     [3/0]
II. Bn, Swabian Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Rodt’ (former ‘Fürstenberg’ IR) (poor)     [3/0]
I. Bn, Swabian Kreis-Füsilier-Regiment ‘Alt-Württemberg’ [4/1]
I. Bn, Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Kurbayern’ (Bavarian I. Bn, ‘Pechmann’ IR) (poor)     [3/0]
II. Bn, Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Kurbayern’ (Bavarian II. Bn, ‘Pechmann’ IR) (poor)     [3/0]
III. Bn, Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Kurbayern’ (Bavarian I. Bn, ‘Holnstein’ IR) (poor)     [3/0]
Mainz & Würzburg Battalion Guns (Austrian)     [2/0]
Swabian Battalion Guns     [2/0]
Kurbayern Battalion Guns     [2/0]

Main Corps Infantry Right Wing (Poor)
I. Bn, Kurrhein (Kurpfalz) Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Effern’ (poor)     [3/0]
II. Bn, Kurrhein (Kurpfalz) Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Effern’ (poor)     [3/0]
Kurrhein (Kurköln) Leib-Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Nothaft’ (poor)     [3/0]
Kurrhein (Kurköln) Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Wildenstein’ (poor)     [3/0]
I. Bn, Kurrhein Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Kurmainz’ (poor)     [3/0]
II. Bn, Kurrhein Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Kurmainz’ (poor) [3/0]
III. Bn, Kurrhein Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Kurmainz’ (poor) [3/0]
IV. Bn, Kurrhein Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Kurmainz’ (poor) [3/0]
II. Bn, Kurpfalz Garde-Regiment zu Fuß     [4/1]
Oberrhein Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Hessen-Darmstädt (Prinz Georg)’     [4/1]
Kurpfalz Battalion Guns     [2/0]
Oberrhein Battalion Guns     [2/0]

Main Corps Cavalry – Obrist von Zedtwitz (Good)
3 Sqns, Franconian Kreis-Cuirassier-Regiment ’Bayreuth’ (unreliable cuirassiers)  [4/1]
3 Sqns, Kurrhein Kreis-Cuirassier-Regiment ’Kurpfalz’ (unreliable heavy horse)  [4/1]
5 sqns, Austrian Cuirassier-Regiment ‘Bretlach’ (C 29)     [6/2 – Large Unit]
5 Sqns, Austrian Cuirassier-Regiment ‘De Ville’ (C i)     [6/2 – Large Unit]

Imperial Artillery Reserve
Reichsreserveartillerie Heavy Battery     [3/0]
Reichsreserveartillerie Light Battery     [3/0]
Reichsreserveartillerie Light Battery     [3/0]

Prince Stolberg’s Reserve Corps

Reserve Corps Infantry – Feldmarschallieutenant von Würzburg (Poor)
I. Bn, Austrian Infanterie-Regiment ‘Macquire’ (IR 46)     [4/1 – Large Unit]
I. Bn, Austrian Infanterie-Regiment ‘Luzan’ (IR 48)     [4/1 – Large Unit]
Austrian Grenadier-Bataillon (33/46/48 IRs)     [5/2]
I. Bn, Oberrhein Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Pfalz-Zweibrücken’ (poor)     [3/0]
II. Bn, Oberrhein Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Pfalz-Zweibrücken’ (poor)     [3/0]
I. Bn, Kurrhein Kreis-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Kurtrier’ (poor)    [3/0]
Austrian Battalion Guns     [2/0]
Kurtrier Battalion Guns     [2/0]

Reserve Corps Cavalry – Obrist Prinz von Nassau-Usingen (Average)
5 Sqns, Austrian Chevauxléger-Regiment ‘Zweibrücken-Birkenfeld’ (Ch 39)  [5/2 – Large Unit]
5 Sqns, Kurpfalz Leibdragoner-Regiment ‘Kurfürstin’ (poor dragoons)     [4/1 – Large Unit]
5 Sqns, Austrian Husaren-Regiment ‘Baranyay’ (H 30)     [4/1]

Austrian Auxiliary Corps – Generalfeldwachtmeister von Kleefeld (Good)
I. Bn, Infanterie-Regiment ‘Blau-Würzburg’      [4/1 – Large Unit]
II. Bn, Infanterie-Regiment ‘Blau-Würzburg’     [4/1 – Large Unit]
I. Bn, Hungarian Infanterie-Regiment ‘Nikolaus Esterházy’ (IR 33)     [4/1 – Large Unit]
II. Bn, Hungarian Infanterie-Regiment ‘Nikolaus Esterházy’ (IR 33)     [4/1 – Large Unit]
1 Bn, Grenz-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Banalisten Nr. 1’     [3/0]
1 Bn, Grenz-Infanterie-Regiment ‘Karlstädter-Szluiner’     [3/0]
Grenadier-Battaillon (Blau-Würzburg & Grenzer) (poor)     [4/1]
Austrian Battalion Guns     [2/0]

Grenadier & Carabinier Corps – Feldmarschallieutenant Guasco (Average)
I. Bn/ Austrian Infanterie-Regiment ‘Sachsen-Gotha’ (IR 30)     [4/1 – Large Unit]
I. Bn/ Austrian Infanterie-Regiment ‘Pallavicini’ (IR 15)     [4/1 – Large Unit]
II. Bn/ Austrian Infanterie-Regiment ‘Pallavicini’ (IR 15)     [4/1 – Large Unit]
I. Kreis-Grenadier-Battaillon (Poor – Kurmainz, Effern & Baden-Baden IRs)     [4/1]
II. Kreis-Grenadier-Battaillon (Poor – Rodt, Kurköln & Kurbayern IRs)     [4/1]
III. Kreis-Grenadier-Battaillon (Hessen-Darmstädt, Pfalz Garde & Alt-Württemberg IRs)     [5/2]
Austrian Grenadier-Battaillon (Mainz-Lamberg & Austrian IRs)     [5/2]
4 Sqns, Swabian Kreis-Cuirassier-Regiment ‘Hohenzollern’ & 3 Austrian Elite Coys (poor cuirassiers)     [5/2]
Austrian Battalion Guns     [2/0]

Reichsarmee Breakpoints

Division                                              FMR     ⅓     ½     ¾

Main Corps Infantry (Left)                    47        16     24     36
Main Corps Infantry (Right)                 36        12     18      27
Imperial Artillery Reserve                       9          –        –        –
Main Corps Cavalry (Zedtwitz)             20          7      10      15
Reserve Infantry (Würzburg)               26          9      13      20
Reserve Cavalry (Nassau-Usingen)     13          5       7        10
Auxiliary Corps (Kleefeld)                     28        10      14      21
Grenadier Corps (Guasco)                     37        13      19      28

Army                                                   FMR     ¼      ⅓      ½
Reichsarmee                                            216       54      72     108

Reichsarmee Notes

1.  Grenzer battalions may alternatively be deployed as 2x Skirmisher stands. Count two broken skirmisher stands from the same unit as 3 morale points.

2.  Kleefeld’s grenadier battalion has been downgraded to MR 4/1 as it was weak and was 50% Grenzer.

3.  I’ve arbitrarily numbered Guasco’s grenadier battalions for game purposes. These were temporary units and would be known by the name of the officer designated to command them on the day, but they aren’t known. There were actually six four-company grenadier battalions under Guasco’s command, but I’ve reduced this to four six-company battalions for game purposes, as the four-company battalions were less than two-thirds the strength of a regular infantry battalion.

4.  The Austrian ‘Zweibrücken-Birkenfeld’ Chevauxléger Regiment (Ch 39) is a retitled Dragoon regiment (D 39) and is classed as Dragoons (MR 5/2) for movement, combat and morale purposes.

5.  One Light Battery of the Imperial Artillery Reserve is grouped with Guasco’s Corps. The remaining batteries are grouped with either wing of the Main Corps, at the player’s choice. The reserve batteries do not count against formation strength, but do count against overall army strength.

6.  The Hungarian ‘Nikolaus Esterházy’ Regiment (IR 33) was actually part of Würzburg’s division of the Reserve Corps, but joined Kleefeld’s attack on its colonel’s own initiative. I’ve therefore placed this regiment under Kleefeld’s command for scenario purposes.

7.  The ‘Baranyay’ Hussar Regiment (H 30) was listed as being part of Kleefeld’s corps. However, at Strehla it was operating alongside Colonel Prince Frederick August of Nassau-Usingen’s Chevauxlégers, covering the flank of Kleefeld’s attack. I’ve therefore transferred them from Kleefeld to Nassau-Usingen.

8.  I’ve arbitrarily split the infantry of Zweibrücken’s Main Corps into two wings for the sake of gameplay.  I’ve no information on the actual brigade or divisional structure or who the sub-commanders were.  Feel free to break it down into smaller formations if you prefer.

This entry was posted in Eighteenth Century, Scenarios, Seven Years War & War of Austrian Succession, Tricorn (18th Century Shako Rules), Tricorn Scenarios. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to The Combat of Strehla, 20th August 1760: A Scenario for ‘Tricorn’

  1. Norm says:

    Your presentation is always beautiful, a credit to the blogging community

  2. Jim says:

    I’ve just stumbled upon your very interesting blog, it is a wonderful read. I’m very impressed with your brushwork on the Eureka 18mm syw figures, having painted a few myself. I’ll be back!


  3. Ian Wilson says:

    Going to need a lot of figures to refight this!
    Excellent work on the scenario and maps.

  4. Rod says:

    Brilliant as always, I’m glad you’ve got your SYW mojo back at the same time as me, as your excellent work means I don’t need to do as much research as usual😁.

    I have got some SYW in 10mm for which I used Maurice. I quite like Maurice ( some good battle reports on Devon Wargames group, Card driven). But I quite like the idea of using Shako 1. & your excellent Tricorn I did buy Shako 1 from Oxfam for just over a tenner a while ago. Infantry & cavalry use the same frontages in Maurice. Mine are based 40 mm. I don’t really fancy rebasing for Tricorn, do you see any big issues in leaving them as they. Are?

    Thanks Keep up the excellent work

    • jemima_fawr says:

      Thanks Rod!

      I clearly need to charge more… 😉

      No, I can’t see any issues at all, but you could simply reduce the distances by a third? 🙂



      • Rod says:

        Thanks for the advice Mark. I’m really looking forwards to using Tricorn, the modifications look good and I already like Shako 😁
        In fact I like all of Arty Conliffes rules. I’ll dust off my 10mm but I must admit the facings aren’t as delicious as your 15/18mm. Looking forwards to your next post

        • jemima_fawr says:

          Hi Rod,

          Excellent, I hope you enjoy it! We’re going to be playing through Strehla next week, which should be interesting. 🙂


  5. Jim says:

    Herr Fawr,
    I have some British Eureka figures unpainted and after ogling the delicious eye-candy on your blog I’m feeling the urge to finally paint them. I don’t have enough for a reasonably complete force so I’ll have to plan some new purchases. Have you ever painted Blue Moon’s British infantry? Curious to know your thoughts.


    • jemima_fawr says:

      Hi Jim,

      The only Blue Moon figures I’ve painted are their British artillery figures and some generals. I found that the artillery figures fitted PERFECTLY with Eureka in terms of style and size (see my British and Hanoverian artillery articles), so the infantry should be good as well. I’ve got some of their French infantry in firing poses to use as Volontaires and dismounted dragoons, but haven’t painted them yet. However, the mounted generals were very small compared to Eureka (smaller than OG 15s cavalry), so I’m trying to avoid those.

      Re British infantry; You don’t need too many if you just start with the ‘Minden Six’ and then pad the army out with Hanoverians, Hessians and Brunswickers (which are FAR easier to paint). That said, I was just looking at the northern flank of Vellinghausen as a game and I’m going to need Highlanders for that…



  6. Jim says:


    Many thanks! I have a couple of packs of BM AWI Hessians + a few of FIW french+Highlanders all bought at closeout prices. I have used the Hessians to substitute for Prussian feldjaegers (for fun, they are excellent!) and fusiliers (I like their mitre more than that of the Eureka fusiliers). Haven’t touched the rest. The highlander does look very good. I love the Eureka figures but I don’t find them terribly easy to paint for some reason. Perhaps it is my eyes…

    My objective for the British was both Minden and Quebec. Not the same units but both smallish forces that one can hope to represent 1:1 on the table.

    • jemima_fawr says:

      It’s not just you. For some reason I find it very difficult to identify the coat-lapels when they’re covered in undercoat!


  7. Pingback: “Rogues! Do You Want To Stay In The Toolbox Forever?!” (Part 9: Prussian Hussars) | Jemima Fawr's Miniature Wargames Blog

  8. Pingback: The Combat of Strehla, 20th August 1760: The Refight | Jemima Fawr's Miniature Wargames Blog

  9. Pingback: ‘All The Emperor’s Men’ (Part 9): Yet More Reichsarmee Units! | Jemima Fawr's Miniature Wargames Blog

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.