The 16th to 17th century saw some extremely destructive, extremely destabilizing wars in Europe such as the French wars of religions (which killed anywhere from 10% to 22% of French population) or the 30 years war (which killed anywhere from 35% to 45% of the HRE population) We heard tales of massive depopulations, massacres, mass pillages and looting, disease and plagues ravaging whole area, and it was so bad to the point that many Germans still thought of it as a calamity as bad, if not worse, than WW2.

Yet you did not hear the same thing about wars in the 18th to 19th century. War in these eras were massive, especially in the Napoleonic areas when armies in the hundred of thousands took to the fields. The logical conclusion is that with a much larger war, the suffering for the people will be greater (especially when there was little to no advancement on fronts like agriculture or medicine to prevent widespread famine and disease outbreak as seen in the 30 years war) and with better literacy you will have more people writing about their experience, and therefore more material to work with. But you don't hear much about the destruction, the plague, the refugee: you hear more about the genius of Napoleon, the daring charge of Murat, the indomitable Polish lancers from hell, the British ruling the sea.

So what was life like for your average German peasant whose lands became a warzone for different armies, be it the Imperial French army, the Napoleonic French army, the Prussian, Austria, Russian. Was his experience better than that of his forefathers in the 30 years war ? Or was his experience simply overshadowed by the majesty and fame of the great men of the age like Louis XIV, Prince of Conde, Napoleon, Davout, Frederick the Great ?