Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

Caveat: this thread is sanctioned by the NWC Cabinet. I checked with them prior to posting it. I also checked with John Tiller who checked with HPS Simulations and gave me the nod ...

This is a poll preliminary to me posting a site for personalized Napoleonic campaigns. Here is the concept:

In our games we can only cover a finite amount of campaign paths. We try and choose the most common routes that an army would take but often it ends up with a narrow category due to the fact that if we were to add in a large amount of choices we probably never could finish the campaign file in our lifetimes! (think power of 2,3, etc). Jena campaign for instance had an ambitious campaign file of something like 7-8 branches in depth. NRC had a great campaign as well where it concerns depth and options. Etc.

My concept is to develop a campaign for players as it develops. I am looking to start with the army matchup process, build a custom OB based on one of the games. Then discuss with the players an in-depth preliminary situation setting. Location of depots, forces, etc. Build planning maps for the players to use in deciding their strategy. Then start building the beginnings of a campaign file for them.

The players have march routes to choose from or select something of their own design (crossing the Alps?). The initial choices would be made - I would then develop the Outcome dialog and inform the players if there in fact was a battle. If there is one then I would build the next branch which would be how they are going to deploy their troops. They would be given a planning map of the battlefield and tell me where they wanted their troops place. The setup would be made in the scenario editor by me or optionally the by player if they so desire. If the latter choice I would then merge the setup files together into one scenario. I would then point the campaign file outcome to that scenario and the players would then fight the battle.

If no battle occured then a planning branch would be next. And so on until the campaign ends.

Building of depots would be done in key locations and the movement of replacements from depots in their home country up to the front to the depots would be performed as well.

The campaign conclusion would be when one side forces the other to sue for peace - campaign path (as is usually done in our campaigns) would have no bearing on the campaign as its irrelevant. The players would decide when their national military assets are used up. This would include diplomatic energies, home morale, etc.

Loss of minor battles would not effect army morale but major battles would. Each side would start out with a national morale and a prestige level. While the latter will not effect the outcome it will determine the way that countries view the belligerent.

Violation of neutral terrain, attack without formal declaration of war, all of this will effect the campaign.

Campaign site:

I will have a website that will allow the players to sign up for campaigns. There will be sign up form and a PayPal link or you can send me the funds by mail but it must be cashed and in my bank before I will proceed. A receipt will be emailed to you once payment has been made by mail. Your PayPal receipt will be your receipt. I will not charge you for the funds that PayPal is going to charge me. There will be a space provided for you to enter in your PayPal username so I know who paid me if you are using that format. Once I get paid by both players then I will start the communication process. No international checks: PayPal is a must from the folks "across the pond" in non-Canadian/non-US countries.

My fee is simple: I base it on the Scope of the Campaign and for each campaign POINT you get to there is a small fee paid to me to furnish the materials you need. The fee will be 5 dollars per player. The max paid to me will be 15 dollars per player per ENTIRE campaign. Yes, for the entire campaign its only 15 dollars for the Campaign Points. I think that is VERY reasonable. You will have a great time commanding an army in a non-linear format. I will have the opportunity of furnishing with something I could not do when I designed my titles.

There is an extra fee for very large campaigns. What is a "very large campaign." Well think of something like the size of the Fall of 1813 in Germany or Russia where the order of battle and scenarios more than likely will be large and time consuming to build. What is a normal sized campaign: 1809 or 1805 in Austria. 1800 in Italy. The increase would be paid at the beginning of the Campaign start. One time fee would be 5 dollars per player. The OBs would take some time to assemble.

I do not want to make this terribly expensive but this will be the opportunity for many of you to participate in a national campaign where you will have an entire army (or theater if you desire) at your disposal. And its going to take me some time to put everything together. Believe me I wont retire on this.

A campaign point is where I develop planning maps, discuss your strategic options, diplomatic channels, etc. Build scenarios and so on. Basically once you start up the battle that ends the campaign point as it relates to the fee.

Thus after THREE campaigns points you will have paid to me the entire campaign fee and are after that playing for FREE. I will note that I would like to conclude the campaign after no more than 12-15 campaign points. But hey, the battles could be long and I may not hear back from you for some time. You then go at your own pace, record the game in this club or wherever (INWC or Blitz) and then get back to me JUST prior to ending the scenario (as I do not want you to finish the battle and have it move on to the next point in the campaign as you would get a campaign error message - but all of this will be explained in an easy to understand manner).

If you have difficulty with English and want to participate a translator may be obtained from the club ranks to help you through the process. If the translator wants a fee (somehow I doubt it but hey, that is their call) then that would be between you and that person. But I would like to offer that out to folks that have a difficult time with reading and writing English. But all communications to me need to be in English and something I can understand so that we dont get into a fight over your intentions and so on.

Battles: these can be played in any game in the series. And in order to use different maps we can also jump from one game to the next. The only caveat here is that this feature is not yet fully realized as not all of the games are up to the Austerlitz update (Eckmuhl being the only one so far). Hopefully that will not be too long out ... and probably well before this would be necessary.

For instance: we may be fighting an 1809 campaign and need to use not only the Piave map from Wagram but also the Sacile map from Eckmuhl. Right now those two games use a different version of the game engine. Thus for right now campaign game switching is limited to using maps from Eckmuhl and Austerlitz. Thus the large Piave to Sacile and Caldiero maps from Austerlitz and the Soave map from EC could be used.

The particulars:

OBs - you can BUILD a custom OB or you can just BUY brigades and divisions based on a standard schedule of points you will be given. You tell me how you want the formations organized (two infantry divisions and one cav brigade for a corps, etc) and I then build your OB. If you just want me to do it for you I can. The points will be based on the scale of campaign. Obviously a simple campaign in Germany between two armies of four corps will need less than one that has six to seven corps per side.

There will be a mix of division/brigade STANDARD types to choose from if you do not wish to build a custom OB with me:

For example:

Infantry:
Line division - French - 3 brigades, one legere regiment total. Ligne will be 4 morale and lights will be 5 morale.
Guard division - French - Old Guard - two brigades - Chasseurs in one brigade and Grenadiers in the other.

Cavalry:
Corps Cavalry Division - two brigades of light cavalry. Chasseur and hussars in one and chasseurs in the other.

Heavy Division - Austrian - two brigades of cavalry - one of Dragoons and another of Cuirassiers.

and so on.

Increase in morale will be costly. This will in effect reflect the idea that its a veteran-elite unit. Only one level per unit type will be allowed either way (yes, you can downgrade to conscript if you like).

Artwork: the players (read: BOTH must agree to this) are welcome to offer up alternate artwork if they like - they just must work on my PC - that's my only caveat and I must be furnished with a spreadsheet listing of the unit types and the Units.bmp and 3D file number for the unit as I would need it when I go to build the OBs. I have Ultra Edit and in a very short period of time can change every artwork number in an OB or you can just provide me with a sample list of units if you like and we can build the OB from that. A copy of the game played would have to be made to allow for this. You would not want to use your default installation of the title for these campaigns anyway as we might accidentally use the same filename as is in the main folder. Copying a game is very easy and instructions will be provided. Its just making a copy of the entire folder structure for a game and then giving the new folder a unique name.

Multiplayer - I can accommodate more than two participants. You could take turns with the payments if you like. I don't care how you figure out the payments. One player could be the Right Wing while the other is the Left Wing. But all communication would be to ONE participant per side. I do not want seven to eight different people emailing me. You person would discuss the OB building process, operational choices and so on with their team and then send me an email with the team's decision.

----

My website will have an example of the maps used, OB construction process and orders format that you will see used in a campaign. Basically a way of showing you what you will be getting if you sign up.

So take the poll and let me know what you think. Based on feedback from this and other sites I will know how to proceed.

_________________


Generalfeldmarschall Wilhelm Prinz Peters von Dennewitz

3. Husaren-Regiment, Reserve-Kavallerie, Preußischen Armee-Korps

Honarary CO of Garde-Ulanen Regiment, Garde-Grenadier Kavallerie

NWC Founding Member

For Club Games: I prefer the Single Phase mode of play. I prefer to play with the following options OFF:

MDF, VP4LC, NRO, MTD, CMR, PR, MIM, NDM, OMR (ver 4.07)

I am adding this as Addendum:

The Club is welcome to consult with me for a club campaign where each army participates. This might be a fun way of waging war and involving players in MP games. Each Army could designate a person that would communicate with me on the OBs, choices, etc. This will cost a bit more as the OB will be huge.

I am also going to look for HELPERS! This will be a paid position. You will get the fee for the campaign and basically work with a group of players. You will use standard processes we agree on when working with the players. I will monitor the campaign process but it will be your "baby."

This may grow to where I need 4-5 helpers. Especially if I get a lot of feedback. Payment terms to be discussed but hey, this is a chance for more designer input as well for the players. Your name will be listed on the site. If folks want to get you to do a campaign for them then they can select you as their choice from the "Available Designers" list.

I want to make this fun, a way for me to make some lunch money and mainly to continue to pump life into the Napoleonic wargame genre as well.

---

I also wanted to give a bit more detail on how the campaign file builds:

1. The players will get the maps that they normally would see from the campaign branch and situation point but I would be the one that would start up the battles. They WILL be encrypted.

2. You play the battle. Once you near completion I get involved in the End Game process. You do NOT complete the game. The last turn will be an off limits turn and this will be told to you when you start. Thus 45 of 45 turns will in fact be 43 turns long as the first turn will be "burned" by me encrypting the files and the last turn will be forfeit. And we can discuss "infinite" length battles too. Basically I would set it for something like 900 turns and you would just play until you feel that nothing else can be accomplished. Rare yes, but its an option.

3. I then finish off the battle for you and then we go back to the Campaign Point process as described in the original thread.

----

Note: I will not build a campaign for the entire Napoleonic wars for two players. Just too ambitious. Think campaign year or something like that. Like I said - I would like to offer this at a reasonable fee but at a reasonable length for me too. After 12-15 Campaign Points I think that something will have been decided.

Note on small actions - I am lenient on this. Hey, if its only a 15 turn scenario of a rearguard action I will merge the next Campaign point into one. In other words if you fight a delaying action of a small size I am not going to count it.

Another point since we are on the concept of Campaign Points - you can decide to just bypass playing small actions and I will determine the losses for each side. For instance: two brigades of cavalry pursue after another - you don't want to play the action - I decide that one side lost 30 troopers and the other lost 43. Something like that.

On the other hand - if you are laying an ambush you must play it out. I do not want to argue with the offended player ("man, I would have smelled a trap") about him losing a large portion of his division.

I plan on having Awareness Levels for formations on the march. This will be based on the cavalry you send out, the terrain, etc. Ambushes can happen in other words just based on the situation. The troop placements in the battle if its a march-ambush situation will be for me to determine for the marching player based on input from him on how he has set up his column.

Leaders will have values: some are lax and do not put out cavalry scouts. Some are ambitious (like Ney and Murat) and plunge into a battle. Others you can't get to budge without persuasion (Bernadotte and numerous Allied leaders).

National Army Staff - I have not decided how to reflect the lightning ability of Napoleon to descend on an army. Or the muddled format that the Allies used for their planning sessions. But something of this will be reflected in the troop placements and so on.

_________________


Generalfeldmarschall Wilhelm Prinz Peters von Dennewitz

3. Husaren-Regiment, Reserve-Kavallerie, Preußischen Armee-Korps

Honarary CO of Garde-Ulanen Regiment, Garde-Grenadier Kavallerie

NWC Founding Member

For Club Games: I prefer the Single Phase mode of play. I prefer to play with the following options OFF:

MDF, VP4LC, NRO, MTD, CMR, PR, MIM, NDM, OMR (ver 4.07)

BILL
I vote #1 (very interested). I think that this will be an very interesting experiment, much like playing a campaign game with an umpire. Bill

_________________

This all sounds interesting but I would rather see some major improvements in terms of tactical aspects of the N series.

Let’s be honest, as of now HPS tactical engine has so many problems from historical perspective that campaign will open a new can of worms before current tactical issues are properly dealt with.

_________________
General-Leytenant Alexey Tartyshev
Leib-Guard Preobrazhensky Regiment (Grenadier Drum)
1st Brigade
Guard Infantry Division
5th Guard Corps


(I don't play with with ZOC kills and Rout limiting ON)

No, lets be honest, the venue for sounding off on your dissatisfaction with the game is not here but to the HPS Support email. And no, we do NOT all agree that its got glaring historical issues. We like the series and can overlook the minor issues it has because as we all know (you too) that no one game will ever get it right.

Second, I fail to see how the game engine itself has anything to do with the ability to conduct a campaign. Many of us play the campaigns in the game and if anything my format will allow things that the campaign engine doesn't cover such as more interaction with the players on things like building bridges, forced marches, etc. These could be factored into the Situation/Branch dialog but it would mean something like 4000 branches that would need to be built for the campaign file.

And this is not an issue of me not sounding off to John for improvements in the game series which I have been doing along with others for some 10+ years now. What have you done to suggest to John that the series be improved? Have you gone the extra mile like some of us have? As a matter of fact if it wasn't for some of us you would still be playing Eckmuhl 1.0 or something close to it.

You picked the wrong guy to come to - sure, the series has issues but its one of the best series ever for Napoleonics.

Name me ONE game that ever has been 100 percent historically accurate. Please start your long list of titles as I am dying to see what they are. Even one of my favorite games of all time, Avalon Hill Squad Leader (the original game and gamettes, not ASL) falls short. Berg's Civil War series (TSS, Bloody April, etc) lacks some historical flavor.

_________________


Generalfeldmarschall Wilhelm Prinz Peters von Dennewitz

3. Husaren-Regiment, Reserve-Kavallerie, Preußischen Armee-Korps

Honarary CO of Garde-Ulanen Regiment, Garde-Grenadier Kavallerie

NWC Founding Member

For Club Games: I prefer the Single Phase mode of play. I prefer to play with the following options OFF:

MDF, VP4LC, NRO, MTD, CMR, PR, MIM, NDM, OMR (ver 4.07)

My point is that Campaign will divert your limited resources from improving the current tactical engine. If it won’t – superb – let’s have a Camping then, but I was under impression that you Bill is one of the main drivers for patching, improving etc.


In fact I and officers of my army did and it is still work in progress. As of now “the extra mile” is 37 pages PDF and dozens of testing hours. Hopefully it will be posted here by the end of November. Let me know if you are interested to read this and I will email you the PDF - your feedback would be appreciated.

Totally agree that no game can be 100 present historically accurate and as of now HPS is the BEST N tactical simulator but certainly there is a room for improvement.

PS Have you tried combat mission series? very decent tactical simulator – but this is about all – can’t name any others.

_________________
General-Leytenant Alexey Tartyshev
Leib-Guard Preobrazhensky Regiment (Grenadier Drum)
1st Brigade
Guard Infantry Division
5th Guard Corps


(I don't play with with ZOC kills and Rout limiting ON)

Yes, I played Combat Mission, prisoner bug and all. It was a fun game but it had issues. Mainly with tank vs. tank combat.

All I do now in the game engine change area is suggest things to John that pertain to the game I am working on.

For instance: I am noting that in our Italian maps I did for Austerlitz that we need Vineyard terrain. So I suggested that to him recently as obviously if we do the Italian campaigns it would be helpful. Sand for Egypt.

I rid myself of the role of being the "engine changer" long ago. I just send him what I need for the game I am working on. No more than that.

The game engine is his business. Do my sales suffer for things not in the engine? Yes. But I spent 11 years getting the engine changed. We need to move on. I want to finish up work on this series and do something else. Maybe you could become the guy that works with him on changing the game but frankly he has tons of work to do as it is. A change here or there is about all we can expect.

I would like to see a resolution to the Single Phase dilemma but I am not the guardian angel of the series. Thus I am doing everything I can to get out of that role and move on to doing things that can help me generate more income. This happens to be one of them.

I also plan on working with game companies in building boardgames. I have many design ideas including an area movement game for the Eastern Front in WW2 that will use cards, simple counters with cards that have the values based on the tech level of the army per type (thus a Motorized Infantry card that will have all of the values you normally see on the counter) with the combat routine offering a card draw that will vary the values a tad to give them some unique flavor.

If you played Empires in Arms you remember that "rock, paper, scissors" approach to combat. You would pick your form of attack and the defender would do the same. The outcome would be based on the combination of choices. I intend on doing the same for that boardgame.

I also would like to see a computer game that uses card drawing. I have no idea why developers have not come up with something like that. The Card Driven Game concept is limitless in what you can do with it. Nice computer graphics cards would look nice and hey, they wouldn't get nicks and cuts in them.

I want to move on from this series as far as spending hours pounding my head via emails, thinking on how to solve the issues, and so on. Let someone else do it. I want to use my creative talents to create things, not try and repair what is a 1996 game engine with tons of code piled on top if it.

Wouldn't you rather see this series replaced by something totally brand new anyway? Nothing down the pike like that and Napoleonics is definitely not a huge seller anyway but if John develops an engine for say the ACW that we could use it would be much easier selling him on making a Nap version based on it than to constantly try and sell him on changing older code.

So no, I am not interested in the PDF you guys are building - hope that doesn't offend you. Send it to John if you want but I would rather create new things based on what we have than to try to work with John on making drastic changes at this point.

Dont forget to take the poll. Tons of folks have stopped in but very few took the poll. Hope that we can get at least 50 votes before the month is up.

_________________


Generalfeldmarschall Wilhelm Prinz Peters von Dennewitz

3. Husaren-Regiment, Reserve-Kavallerie, Preußischen Armee-Korps

Honarary CO of Garde-Ulanen Regiment, Garde-Grenadier Kavallerie

NWC Founding Member

For Club Games: I prefer the Single Phase mode of play. I prefer to play with the following options OFF:

MDF, VP4LC, NRO, MTD, CMR, PR, MIM, NDM, OMR (ver 4.07)

Certainly would love to see something totally brand new and modern but this is miles away if at all.

We were thinking about something more tangible, short term and hence more realistic like PDT, SCN and OOB changes.

As of now players are stuck with 1000 cavalry per hex, 50% losses and above, gamey melees and hence unrealistic tactical developments.

But the business of a business is doing business. Point taken. Hence I don’t think I am in position to email John.

PS. Took the poll on day one.

_________________
General-Leytenant Alexey Tartyshev
Leib-Guard Preobrazhensky Regiment (Grenadier Drum)
1st Brigade
Guard Infantry Division
5th Guard Corps


(I don't play with with ZOC kills and Rout limiting ON)

Bump

_________________


Generalfeldmarschall Wilhelm Prinz Peters von Dennewitz

3. Husaren-Regiment, Reserve-Kavallerie, Preußischen Armee-Korps

Honarary CO of Garde-Ulanen Regiment, Garde-Grenadier Kavallerie

NWC Founding Member

For Club Games: I prefer the Single Phase mode of play. I prefer to play with the following options OFF:

MDF, VP4LC, NRO, MTD, CMR, PR, MIM, NDM, OMR (ver 4.07)

I voted 1, although I do not have time for another month or so.

_________________

Jim - and the campaign site wont be ready until after the first of the year when I have found a new place to live. Must get the move out of the way, hang pictures, do the usual things you do with moving, before I can set up a campaign for anyone.

_________________


Generalfeldmarschall Wilhelm Prinz Peters von Dennewitz

3. Husaren-Regiment, Reserve-Kavallerie, Preußischen Armee-Korps

Honarary CO of Garde-Ulanen Regiment, Garde-Grenadier Kavallerie

NWC Founding Member

For Club Games: I prefer the Single Phase mode of play. I prefer to play with the following options OFF:

MDF, VP4LC, NRO, MTD, CMR, PR, MIM, NDM, OMR (ver 4.07)

Thanks to all of you that took this poll. I appreciate your feedback and hopefully by mid to late January/early February I will have a link where you can go to sign up for a campaign.

_________________


Generalfeldmarschall Wilhelm Prinz Peters von Dennewitz

3. Husaren-Regiment, Reserve-Kavallerie, Preußischen Armee-Korps

Honarary CO of Garde-Ulanen Regiment, Garde-Grenadier Kavallerie

NWC Founding Member

For Club Games: I prefer the Single Phase mode of play. I prefer to play with the following options OFF:

MDF, VP4LC, NRO, MTD, CMR, PR, MIM, NDM, OMR (ver 4.07)