Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

So who prefers what?

Recently there seems to be a number of players looking to recreate "historical conditions" with all sorts of house rules ranging from MOE or cherrypicking parts therefrom; Embedded Melee; Tabletop and various idiosyncratic variations; Historical and Realism; Command and Control..... What exactly are these "historical conditions" and how can they be implemented in a game? Given that we don't know how the battles were fought in practice; most evidence cited seems to be culled from secondary sources or from movies; the fact it's a game not an historical simulation; and Napoleon of all people certainly broke with established practices and I'm sure would not be a fan of any rule other than what wasn't possible.

Over the years HPS has addressed most of the issues which caused most controversy. In fact most controversy now is argument over the meaning and application of a house rule. Or which house rules are most "historical". Or despite wanting "historical gameplay" arguing endlessly over all the Optional Rules so as to gain an advantage over an opponent.

Just curious as to who, if anyone, simply plays the game as it is any longer.

Although I'd like to keep things fairly uncomplicated I honestly wouldn't enjoy the Napoleonic games without one or two house rules. I especially don't like the way they play without the embedded melee rule. But, each to his own...

_________________

The arguments for Embedded Melee for me became weaker when the NME optional rule was introduced. Playing in multiphase is a bit like embedded melee anyway, to a point at least, albeit far slower. Other problems are how to implement them in large battles - it's easy to either miss some section, or worse, make a tiny mistake which an opponent pounces on and asks you to replay the whole turn. My biggest issue against it is that in the games, enemy artillery are killers (especially with ADF and column pass through fire on) and that it's essential to target the guns and neutralize them as fast as possible - in recent titles guns have a stronger defensive bonus anyway, so that blitz tactics aren't always successful.

I agree generally with you Andy. In my view some of the suppossed historical house rules are actually not historical at all. A while back a list was posted and I was able to site events througout the Napoleonic period that happened and were documented by different sources that made half of the house rules arguable. Herein is the problem the subjectivity of history

As Napoleon said 'what more is history by a fable agreed upon'

That said I will play with house rules and without. Depending on my opponents wishes as its fun playing different people.

In 15min moves I do prefer embedded melee (I generally wont play the 15 min without it but 10 min is fine)

I don't like cavalry charging into to towns or forest but apart from that I am happy to align with what my opponent wants. As long as its agreed in advance not launched on you mid game.

With the new game engine you can have a very enjoyable game without house rules I think. As so many things have been fixed and the 10 min moves make it better. Just like our massive Leipzig game. Its so enjoyable to just move and not have to worry when you have such large forces.

Don't worry Andy you therefore have a gauranteed opponent with no house rules if you can abide my fancy uniform.

_________________
Marechal Knox

Prince d'Austerlitz et Comte d'Argentan
Ordre national de la Légion d'honneur

"What is history but a fable agreed upon"

I also tend to side with Andy on this, although I will play with some simple house rules.

I believe that with NME and 10 minute turns we get a decent approximation of Napoleonic tactics. The embedded melee rule adds one more level of detail and is not supported by the system (leading to errors). It totaly changes defensive formations and makes it difficult for me to go back and forth from a game with it and without it.

I also think that some things take care of themselves. For instance, some people like a skirmisher lease. Leave your skirmishers out of command range and see how long they last.

I personally do not like too many rules because it makes me have to think outside of the mechanics of the system that I know well. These games make me think enough as it is!

But to each their own...

_________________

Having plyaed with them so often now I like MOE rules and embedded melee phase for 15 minute turns. I feel it eliminates the blitzy tactics some players are really good at.

_________________
Field Marshal Sir Edward Blackburn, 1st Duke of Aberdeen K.G.
85th (Buck's Light Volunteers) Regiment of Foot
16th British Brigade
7th Division
III (Peninsular) Corps
2nd Battalion, Coldstream Regiment of Foot Guards

I DON'T PLAY WITH ROUT LIMITING OR NME OFF

Hi Ed
Have you played the 10 minute moves much with the new game engine?
Would you play embedded with 10min? Just curious what people think about that.
Salute!

_________________
Marechal Knox

Prince d'Austerlitz et Comte d'Argentan
Ordre national de la Légion d'honneur

"What is history but a fable agreed upon"

Hi Colin,

I think in general I would not insist on embedded melee with the 10 minute turns. That is unless I play Paco, then I have to have embedded melee, and I get to move twice for every turn he moves and he gets no cavalry at all...

_________________
Field Marshal Sir Edward Blackburn, 1st Duke of Aberdeen K.G.
85th (Buck's Light Volunteers) Regiment of Foot
16th British Brigade
7th Division
III (Peninsular) Corps
2nd Battalion, Coldstream Regiment of Foot Guards

I DON'T PLAY WITH ROUT LIMITING OR NME OFF

I find the concept of the embedded melee rule interesting, but impracticable in large games. I move units from one corps, then the next across the battlefield. If I'm smart, I hit "highlight moved units," and find those I forgot to move. Can't do that with embedded melee rules.

I'm open to house rules restricting supply wagons being used as screens and Officers being used as radio equipped scouts.

My personal pet house rule I'd like to use is NO cav charges when stacked with or through friendly artillery.

Talking about house rules - artillery never fired once the troops moved forward. Or how about fire THROUGH your own skirmishers. Another oddity that has always bothered me.

I also would like to see fire on skirmishers diminished even further. Now they are just a serious nuisance but if you do some tests you will find that Lines can blow them away in few turns. Now whenever did Lines fire on skirmishers? Not often.

Anything goes runs amok of wild and odd play. I just know that if I said that to an opponent that something I have never seen would be used and I would become disinclined even more to play that format.

One big thing I am for is for non-reaction in our games. That is if the lone cavalry squadron 200 hexes away sees Grouchy marching for La Belle Alliance then I should not be moving my Prussian corps to block him ... when my men are not even within courier range let alone LOS.

I think that there is way too much reaction in our games and really it is easy to fix - you just use a delay system for the major command - Corps or large divisions. But watching entire armies pack up based on the 200 hex report of a squadron is getting a bit old.

If I had my choice between miniatures and computer games I would play miniatures as we had some rules we used that included orders writing. Now this club is filled with miniature players - Paco, Jeff Mathes, etc - these guys have done that for years. You just give the formation orders and only an act of Napoleon can get them changed or an encounter with a strong force.

I am moving now to playing LESS games (1-2) where it is all based on an orders system and reaction ranges, etc. What use is saying we are trying to simulate Napoleonics if afterwards we look back and say that the game was more like a WWF match?

_________________


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)

Hullo -
I like the idea of experimenting with more complex command & control functions.
I too feel that the most anti-realistic/historical aspect of the game is scouts with radios. The
most realistic one could get is to regulate communication of knowledge. If one has ever
played the games with any semblance of the ideas being discussed under command control,
etc, you know how different they are.
On the subject of writing the orders for formations out, I grew up playing a board game from the 60's - 70's called DIPLOMACY, which involved just that (though it was on a strategic level of play, certainly not tactical).

Warren the embedded melee rule is often played 'regionally' so you just observe in one area of the field then move on etc. This allows the free flow in a large game. I still prefer 10 minute moves without it though.

Salute!

_________________
Marechal Knox

Prince d'Austerlitz et Comte d'Argentan
Ordre national de la Légion d'honneur

"What is history but a fable agreed upon"

As I said above, HPS/Bill P have addressed most of the issues raised in the past, as far as I am concerned. It's great to see the games supported. The 10 minute turns make embedded melee almost redundant and I rarely play 15 minute versions nowadays....although as a caveat, Borodino would be even tougher for the French if they had to advance against the Russian artillery at a slower pace.

One of the biggest issues is indeed the instant transfer of orders. That would require a huge change in the engine and I suspect will not happen. Micromanaging couriers, on top of the already large amount of micromanaging, is a nightmare, I tried once in a small Cobexlaw game. One has to accept that the generals reacted to changing circumstances so we have to credit them with more initiative in the game than they probably had in reality.


That is if the lone cavalry squadron 200 hexes away sees Grouchy marching for La Belle Alliance then I should not be moving my Prussian corps to block him ... when my men are not even within courier range let alone LOS.

Well obviously that's hyperbole. Visibility doesn't extend that far for one thing and clearly if the cavalry unit sees Grouchy then he must be in LoS of something. And it works both ways, you know you have been spotted because the unit box says you have....even if in reality it was by a bloke lying on the ground in the bushes. So Grouchy acts accordingly unless you want to pretend the Spotted sign doesn't exist and blithely march on. You could debate that ad nauseum.

Another issue, and partially related to the above, is the bird-eye view of affairs, something that was lacking in that period. Too bad. That would require a completely new game and won't happen. I personally like to see the whole picture and watch the situation develop.

It's very difficult to simulate Napoleonics when we don't know what in fact it was really like. Neat battle maps in books. Memoirs that are personal embellishments or written with faded memories by the higher orders; and a rare few from the lower orders who by definition survived, and whose accounts are really about men hoping to live through something they don't really understand.

Other than that I love the games as they are. House rules, well meanining as many are, simply make a game more complicated, makes for controversy, and to a point are an excuse to cover for poor gameplay due to a failure to understand the game mechanics.

Colin, I prefer embedded melee with 10 minute turns as well as 15 minutes, which perhaps puts me in the minority. I just like the way it encourages you to manoeuvre at the brigade level, mass your troops, soften up with fire, and then attack in a very straightforward fashion, with less dancing around and intricate manoeuvre once in contact with the enemy, in what would have been a very chaotic situation with limited communication and reliance on the simplest of orders.

However, what I don't like is skirmishers being able to constantly hold up the attacker and his formed units. In reality they would withdraw. For this reason I simplify the MOE rules and allow melee against skirmishers of ANY number (instead of 100) outside the embedded melee phase. This tilts things slightly more to the attacker and balances out the effects of embedded melee slightly.

_________________

I am for the first time playing a game with NME, no Isolation rules and no multiple cav melees. 10 minute turns. With this optional rules set, embedded melee phase is not needed.

It seems to me that orders based command rules work more naturally in WEGO games than in I Go You Go games.