Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

Would the club consider adding this to its list of games after it gets released?

I think that its going to be a hit and if we keep the gamers HERE rather than running for another club it would make sense.

No, its not TS/HPS - yes, its just about one of the most POPULAR games out in boardgame form and in computer form.

Could we have some discussion here about the game from the Cabinet? I would like to hear your individual or collective views.

I also think that the members should chime in.

I ask this as new game systems are always a thing of some trepidation. If we get say 5 dissenting voices vs. the rest I would say bring in the game.

However, if the VAST majority of the club think that the game is not for us then we definitely can it.

And if we have a split (50/50 or something like that) or down to 30 against/70 for we should discuss the game at some length.

Its not grand tactical Napoleonics by any means but it is a GRAND game.

I am excited about this game coming out. It will definitely keep me out of the next Diplomacy game if it gets released on time (Winter 2004 is still the word).

Beside that there is World in Flames. There is no doubt in my mind that Matrix has the inside track these days on great games. We at HPS need to stay competitive or they are going to take some of our market share. It wont be a case that they do different games. It will be a case that they do BETTER games.

I am playing Uncommon Valor at the moment and frankly if it was done for Barbarrossa or any of the campaigns (Smolensk) then it would be hands down the better system over Panzer Campaigns.

The pole has been raised. Can we make the hurdle.

But anyway, back to the club. Can we discuss this without getting heated? I think we all know about the game. For those of you that have never played the game let us know and those of us that have played it will give you the scoop.

And of course I think that we should try the game out a bit before we are sold on it.

Happy Thanskgiving to all. Enjoying the Colts game at present!

Oberst-Lt Wilhelm Peters
2nd Kuirassiers, Austrian Army

This is the Napoleonic Wargame Club, isn't it?
I don't see a problem in adding a Napoleonic game, even if it would be of an other type!
On the contrary, more members to the club would possibly mean more players for TS/HPS games!

But how would would it affect the (rather poor) server's performances?

[url="mailto:pyguinard@hotmail.com"]Lieutenant Pierre-Yves Guinard[/url],
6e Division, II Corp
Armée du Nord

I think Empires in Arms ought to be added to the club list of games. I own a copy of the boardgame and have never managed to con any of my friends into playing it (takes too long for most people). It would be nice to have a place where I could actually play the damn thing (computer or otherwise). It also has the virtue of adding a strategy-level game to our otherwise tactical-level fare.

Regards,

GdB Michael Arrett

Hi.
I am all for this,And can not wait untill it is out,Lets just hope they get it done as this should have been out in 2002.

Marechal BEECHAM. Commandant
3ème Division de Cuirassiers,
1 Corps Res Cav,ADN.

"Toujours féroce,jamais étourdi"

I am all for adding EiA to the list! I would suggest the Cabinet figure out a way to award both admin and victory points for this game once it comes out.

Bill are we still on for a game once they ever release it? I think we had a few people ready to play awhile ago.

Brig General Doug Fuller
7e Division/CC
II Corp
AdN

I am up for a game....

General John Corbin
Commandant of Cadets
L'Ecole de Mars
L'Armee du Rhin

Waiting anxiously for it to be released (finally), and favor adding it to those games recognized by the club.


Colonel Jeff Bardon
11eme Regiment de Cuirassiers
"Toujours au chemin de l'honneur"

Comte de Toulouse,
Duc de Castiglione
Commandant de la Vieille Garde
Marechal de France

In answer to your questions: yes, yes, and yes! hehe

Oberst-Lt Wilhelm Peters
2nd Kuirassiers, Austrian Army

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by buffpilot</i>
<br />I am all for adding EiA to the list! I would suggest the Cabinet figure out a way to award both admin and victory points for this game once it comes out.

Bill are we still on for a game once they ever release it? I think we had a few people ready to play awhile ago.

Brig General Doug Fuller
7e Division/CC
II Corp
AdN
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">


Must be the most announced game in history. I too am still keen, although I note the release date is still a long way off.

Capitaine Neville Worland
7ème Régiment de Dragons
Ier Corps de Réserve de Cavalerie
Army du Nord

Gentlemen
I have not discussed this matter at full Cabinet level but I think they will agree with my sentiments.
Of course E.in A. will be considered. What I would suggest is that four long standing Officers of repute act as an assessment committee.
They should have as neutral a stance as possible on any new game . They could come up with a scoring system that would be debated by the full membership via The Tavern.
However a word of warning. As I understand it this club was initially formed to play Battleground Games, when HPS was added there was a LOT of debate about the scoring system and I think it still upsets some Officers.
In my time at the Club I have looked at Total War, a beautiful game but I cant find common ground for a scoring system. There are other games Sid Meier's, Adanac and La Grande Armee (Matrix) for example which may fall into the same category.
When the game is published lets give it a really good looking at, is there a date[?]


Field Marshal Sir "Lucky" Jim (K.G.)
Army Commander
Allied/Dutch Army

"And let my sword not sleep in my hand"

Gents,

I realize I may be putting the cart ahead of the horse considering that the game has yet to be released and may never materialize. In any event, I think Jim raises some interesting points about other Napoleonic Era games that our club could potentially consider and embrace. The club may have begun with a narrow range of interest, but there seems no good reason not to expand our coverage. We all like the Napoleonic Wars, no? Why limit ourselves to a few games or types of games?
I applaud Jim's suggested approach for Cabinet level discussions followed by a hashing out in the tavern. I eagerly await any positive results that EiA's impending release (I hope) may bring about.

Regards,

GdB Michael Arrett
Cmdr. 17th Div.
V Corps, AdR

P.S.- I am driving myself nuts imagining how fun a computer-based version of EiA will be. Strategy-level games are so wonderful...

Jim - according to Neville the game is still a ways off. I have seen on the Matrix website a date of Winter 2004 but the discussion forum lists it as later and I think that Gary McClellan had a better date from the last time I talked with him.

Suffice it to say that I would be willing to server on the committee if asked. I think that since its turn based and that it is always going to be an MP game that the points for turns method works just fine.

As to the problems in the past with the BG vs HPS games I think that that is a good point. I remember the issues all too well. However, we did handle it correctly. Its like what happened with the BGG games in the ACW club when they went to the 32 big system. Here was the issues for each game system:

1. Napoleonic

BG - 6 files per turn - really didnt take that much longer to play one of those games and the guys like the control.

HPS - 2 files per turn for SINGLE Phase - 6 files per phase if you play with MDF turn ON and ADF OFF - yes, you zip through the games but are we here for turns sake or how well we can play? HPS is to WW2 (blitz unless you play the Embedded Melee system) what BG is to WW1 (trench lines with skirmishers basically holding lines). However, some (few) like to play with the ADF OFF using the six file format. They HATE seeing the A/I fire the guns during the movement phase at skirmishers only to be run down by formed infantry that comes in untouched.

each has its own inherent issues.

If John Tiller had made the Nap 32 big engine for the BG games allow for A/I control during the Defense Phase then that system would have 2 files per turn. And HPS series lack auto-squaring, auto-limbering/unlimbering and counter charging for the non-phasing player's units. Thus you cant limber before you get meleed by infantry. Or counter charge cavalry before they rip your lines in two.

2. ACW - BG system - originally 6 files per turn. 32 bit engine changed all that but some didnt like to let the A/I fire their guns (albeit few members felt this way) - 2 files per turn after the update was put out.

HPS system - 2 file per turn regardless of whether you play single phase or not IF ADF is ON. 6 files per turn if ADF is OFF (old BG 16 bit method).

The ACW club didnt have a problem as they had been using the 32 bit engine format for some time.

Now for EiA:

1. Its turn based. The turns represent months. Thus a five year game would have 60 turns for it. That is about the length of an average battle in the BGG series (Murfreesboro or Chickamauga lets say).

For the longer scenarios I would imagine that they can go 10 years (1805 - 1815). Thus 120 turns. Not a long as Gettysburg but believe me two guys playing BGG or HPS Gettysburg Historical will finish LONG before the MP guys do.

Thus for the problem of the EiA crowd outscoring the BG or HPS crowd forget it. The latter can get two battles done or even three in the time it takes to play one game of EiA.

2. Content - its Napoleonics. Its not grand-tactical but it represents the fighting of the period on a wide scale. And it would be great for French vs. Coalition challenges.

3. Participants - I dont see over 50 percent of the club buying the game but I could be wrong. Thus we should see how many folks would want to buy the game. I recommend a poll (form) be created when the game comes out. Quetions could be:

- do you think that we should add EiA to our club?
- will you buy EiA when it comes out?
- would the addition of this game to the club cause you to resign?
- would you get the game if and only if the club added it to the lists?

Again the poll should be for use just as the game comes out.

I would have liked to have seen Frank Hunter's games added to the club and still believe that they are great simulations. I enjoyed the 1806 Campaign and look forward to playing the 1805 or 1809 campaign if and when my opponent answers my response to his wanting a game.

Oberst-Lt Wilhelm Peters
2nd Kuirassiers, Austrian Army

Computer <i>Empires in Arms</i> would be a great addition for this club, and not even a totally new development. One of the first groups activities in which I became involved after joining the NWC in 2000 was a game-mastered PBEM <i>Empires in Arms</i> match. It was enormous fun, especially as all the players were enthusiastic and creative in their role-playing as world leaders and corresponding in character! [:D] See http://www.wargame.ch/wc/nwc/newsletter/June2001/Empires.html

<b>Général de Corps d'Armée Bill Peterson</b>
Duc de Zurich, Comte de Besançon
2ème Régiment de Grenadiers à Cheval, Cavalerie de la Vieille Garde
Commander, Ier Corps de Réserve de Cavalerie (<i>Vae Victis!</i>), AdN, NWC

I throw my hat into the ring as well, we should include it and work out a system for scoring points. I was involved in two PBEM versions using CYBERBOARD run by Todd Davis and it was an awesome experience. I think Bill Peterson was involved in that game as well.

As to Bill's remarks about HPS vs Matrix, I think it is important to note that HPS is one of the few gaming comanies out there that offers continuous updates and support to their customers. Remember Superpower or Napoleon's Last Battle: Waterloo ? Ask anyone who bought those little gems about post release resolving of gaming issues.

Personally I love the HPS engine, and with a few house rules in place have enjoyed and do enjoy many a battle and campaign. I am sure that HPS is not standng still, and I look forward to future titles from them as well.

Marechal Mitchell
Duc de Rivoli
Comte de Bordeaux
1er Regiment de Grenadiers a Pied, Veille Garde
CO I Corps AdN