1840 - 1880
I'm aware of the Battle of Königgrätz where the Prussian forces with their breechloading Dreyse needle gun faced off against the Austrians who had muzzleloaders. How much of an impact did the needle gun actually have on the battle? Did the Prussians win due to tactics or organisation rather than their superior technology.
Also in the American Civil War, if I am correct repeating firearms were avaliable but were not widely adopted. Are there any accounts of repeaters vs muzzleloaders in the ACW?
And finally -- what did the small arms of the rest of the world's army look like between 1840 and 1870? Were nations slowly replacing their muzzleloaders with breechloaders, etc.
Sorry this is my first question on AskHistorians! I'm just curious because I'm developing a world based on various militaries in the mid/late 1800's
P.S -- Conversions from flintlock to percussion/caplock did happen, however was it possible on a large scale to convert caplocks to breechloaders?
Were there any differences in tactics between armies using different weapon systems?
Regarding the Austrians and Prussians, tactics and technology were closely related. The Prussian adoption of breech-loaders allowed them to make use of open-order fire-based tactics (think of the modern idea of a long, sparse line of riflemen shooting down the enemy from a distance.) Prussia's technological and industrial advancement allowed them to create such weapons, and their population's superior education and literacy provided the skilled officers necessary to implement the tactics necessary to use them. (This was not solely due to inspiration or genius, rather a rational reaction to their strategic dilemmas. Largely outnumbered by their likely enemies, it was only logical to replace manpower with firepower. Quality over quantity.)
Conversely, the Austrians lacked the technological sophistication and well-educated and cohesive soldiery of the Prussians. Thus they tended towards simpler tactics and weapons, which is all they believed their army of ethnically-mixed and poorly educated peasants could handle. This led them to using Napoleonic-style close order tactics favoring volley fire and bayonet attacks delivered by densely massed and more easily controlled formations. Think of the Battle of Waterloo, with ranks of men marching into the face of the enemy.
As a result, the fights between the two armies tended to follow a distinct pattern of the massed Austrians marching in rank towards the sparser Prussian lines, and being decimated and routed by fire before they could even close to within bayonet range. Almost similar to the experience of European colonial wars against tribal enemies. This had a predictable effect on Austrian morale as the campaign wore on.
Thus the already formidable difference in the two armies' equipment was both the cause of, and vastly magnified by, the resulting difference in tactics and organization. The resultant mismatch was largely the deciding factor in the fighting, and thus the war. The needle gun was not simply a singular technological advantage, but reflected the generally superior ability of the Prussians to harness their national war-making potential.