Napoleonic Wargame Club

Leipzig and 1814 Update Note
Page 2 of 2

Author:  Bill Peters [ Mon Mar 13, 2017 3:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Leipzig and 1814 Update Note

No, I understand, Colin and thanks for trying to be helpful.

I went to the link location but it wouldn't give me access. Happens with me with book sites from time to time.

ROF is a definite factor. Something no one has really ever addressed. All of the games for the Nap series and before with Talonsoft always give the big guns the higher effectiveness rating.

Not sure I want to dink around with it at all as you know me: once I get going I would do the entire set of games I did and frankly that would take a lot of work and I could mess something up.

What I suggest is to use an "alternate PDT file" for scenarios. Just copy the .scn file but use a modified PDT file for any scenario where you want to model the 6lber or any other weapon in a different way.

We have covered so much ground in the wars at this point that its hard to go back and redo things. So many PDT files and while Ultra Edit could do the job in minutes I also could introduce a problem too if I made an incorrect entry.

Author:  Colin Knox [ Mon Mar 13, 2017 6:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Leipzig and 1814 Update Note

Hey Bill
Yes I understand and agree, to roll it all back has little value. I would rather we get new titles!

Actually the point you make is mirrored in history too, as you say the horse gunners (according to that book) complained about losing their 8's as they assumed calibre mattered most, just as we all have over the years.

It was only the tests in 1824 (at least according to that source) that proved the 6 more effective at medium ranges. So even the real gunners of the time had the same perspective as us. I have held this point of view for a long time too ie an 8 was better than a 6, so I just wondered why N would allow the change. So its interesting to read this.


Author:  Bill Peters [ Tue Mar 14, 2017 5:49 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Leipzig and 1814 Update Note

Well just to let you know .... I am nearing the end of building new battles for the latest project - finished up the large Neresheim map and the historical battle scenario and am now playtesting it with Mark Nelms (French player).

I did a lot of leader image work today to get the leader numbers on track. Added in some leader images.

Someone complained about the name "Colonel Phantom or BG Phantom" so this time I am using "Col Unknown #1 ,#2, #3, etc" ... I hate to guess on names of leaders or use fictitious ones. Later on I can always enter in another name but the Unknown thing helps me know where the are gaps.

I want to be done with the battles for the game by the beginning of May at the latest. All depends on whether I can stay afloat here ....

Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group