Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

thought I'd open up a thread to discuss Bill's poll, so we can talk here, and answer there [:D]

Anyway, someone mentioned the idea of putting out hypothetical games (such as an invasion of England in 1805). My answer to that at this point is "why?" It's not like we don't have plenty of historical situations to model yet.

Italy
Egypt
the Marengo/Hohenlinden campaigns
Austerlitz
Jena
Friedland-Eylau
Spain
Lutzen-Bautzen
Dresden
Leipzig
1814

and, that doesn't even include all the various Revolutionary battles in the region of the Rhine, or the non-Nappie battles in Italy.

FML Gary McClellan
1st Jäger Bn
Chief of Staff Imperial Austrian Army

Thanks for starting this Gary...

I was interested in the question regarding the Fixing of the engine.

IMHO I think that an engine fix is required.. We have all hashed out the various glitchs, flaws and what not. Lets get all the games fixed and then release a new game.

Marechal John Corbin
Chief of Staff
La Grande Armee

John,
I guess I'm a bit more cynical. We all know of some fixes. On the other hand, just what those fixes are can get to be seriously controversial. Just look at the fracas over how to prevent Panzerbrush skirmishers.

Anyway, I think we are much more likely to see incremental fixes through releases/patches than we are to see "Nap engine 2.0" with a new release in the future. So, while a retooled engine would be a good thing, the realist in me thinks that incremental is the best we'll get.

FML Gary McClellan
1st Jäger Bn
Chief of Staff Imperial Austrian Army

I am not sure I am so opposed to hypothetical battles. We are doing that all the time, "what if" is a mainstay of scenario variants in all the existing titles, and unlike pure fantasy things, an invasion of England was afterall contemplated by Nappy and an army assembled for it, so this is not really such thin ice or completely made-up. [:)]

Général de Division D.S. "Green Horse" Walter
Baron d'Empire, Duc des Pyramides
Commandant [url="http://home.arcor.de/dierk_Walter/NWC/3_VI_AdR_Home.htm"]3ème Division[/url], VIème Corps Bavarois, L'Armée du Rhin
Brigade de Tirailleurs de la Jeune Garde

Dierk,
It's not so much that I'm opposed to seeing Nappie tramp over the fields of England... it's just that I'm much more interested in seeing Lutzen or Dresden.

FML Gary McClellan
1st Jäger Bn
Chief of Staff Imperial Austrian Army

Oh yes, sure, me too.

Général de Division D.S. "Green Horse" Walter
Baron d'Empire, Duc des Pyramides
Commandant [url="http://home.arcor.de/dierk_Walter/NWC/3_VI_AdR_Home.htm"]3ème Division[/url], VIème Corps Bavarois, L'Armée du Rhin
Brigade de Tirailleurs de la Jeune Garde

Well I would surely like to see fully developed titles and see them released at 1 a year. 2-3 a year is for me too many to absorb and enjoy - and I am obsseive/compulsive when it comes to the titles.

I think 9 months to a year are what it takes to really begin to appreciate the depth that Bill, Charlie, et al put into the games.

<b>Général de Division Michael Cox</b>
<font size="4"><i>Principe <font size="1">della </font id="size1">Toscana</i></font id="size4">
Comte de Moselle

<i><font size="4">Armée du Rhin</font id="size4">
<font size="2">2e battallion, 1er Regiment de Chasseurs a Pied, Inf. de l'V. Gde.</i></font id="size2">


<font size="1"><u>In Regards to Skirmisher Flop by Melee Losers:</u>
<ul><li>Make it an optional rather than fixed rule (at the very least). </li>
<li>Skirmisher stack size relative to retreating formed unit should be a factor (whether in clear or covered terrain). </li>
<li>For skirmishers, (not leaders or wagons) covered terrain (swamp, building, city, town, forest, marsh, and perhaps orchard) should negate the overrun result.</li></font id="size1"> </ul>

In all seriousness I would love to see a module that would strategically link the games as they came out and optional mechanics to encourge massive multi-player games.

The game could start at the beginning of the French revolution and progress in yearly cycles. What happened that year would then affect the availability and numbers of forces for the next year's campaigns.

If Napoleon beats the Austrians then they are available for the invasion of Russia. If not, well maybe Russia waits another year.

What forces does England wish to send to Spain or perhaps Eygpt.

Will France attempt a landing in England. What if England attempts an invasion of France via the lowland countries?

We all have command staffs that could be despatched to various fronts and fight in various campaigns.

A well written decision tree could send history down a lot of different paths. For example what if the United States became involved as they actually were in 1812. Suddenly the maps from the Colonial Campaign games could become very relevent as the Yanks have a go at Canada and England attempts to retake the colonies.

How will England wait the allocation of resources between defending Canada, defending England, and what will be available for Spain?

This really was a World War with operations on nearly every continent.

Diplomacy at the strategic level is a game in itself.

Just some random thoughts..............



2nd Lt. Jon "Tex" Graswich
<font color="red">11th Light Dragoons
4th Cavalry Brigade
Anglo-Allied Cavalry Corps
H.Q. Staff</font id="red">


<i>Treu und Fest</i>
<i>Staunch and Steadfast</i>

The main ideas while I suggested "what if campaigns" have been well resumed by Dierk.
"What if campaigns" in HPS are not so far away from "What if scn" in BG, I think.

Now, these what if campaigns could be distributed in 2 ways :
a pure and isolated campaign, i.e. the invasion of UK or
integrated in a historic one, i.e. the campaigns of 1805 : make the best choice : invade the Perfide Albion or (and/or ?) drive your troops towards Austerlitz.
If conciliating supporters of historic and hypothetic, I realize that the second way would be a harder job for designers (campaigns trees, maps, oob, scn, ...) and for players because of the difficulties to play HPS engine at a "Diplomacy" level, such as Jon though.

In any case I agree with Gary too : there so many historic battles I would like to play and so few released up to now. [:)]

<font color="orange">2d Lieutenant Valère Bernard
Bataillon de Ligne Nº 7
[url="http://home.planet.nl/~boe01171/HQ/1Brig.htm"]1e Brigade[/url]
[url="http://home.wanadoo.nl/g.vanuythoven/home.htm"]2e Nederlandsche Divisie[/url]
I Corps
Anglo-Allied Army
</font id="orange">

Interesting thread Gary. I think you hit it right on with the incremental engine fixes BUT if the list that we sent John gets approved then hold on to your horses (you Hussars that is!). We may be seeing a really nice set of updates perhaps.

Given that the game series has some ways to go I feel that we should be careful not to put out too many titles at one time.

If we can put out 10-12 more titles that would be nice IMHO.

My very last game would be on the lines of what was discussed concerning a big European five year campaign.

It will be hypothetical and allies will join at random - and at times when you wish that they would have stayed neutral! The best way to model these games is with some uncertainty.

And to show just how much I want the history to be accurate I have asked Dierk to join our team. He will provide some historical insight that is lacking in my knowledge of the period.

I really think that you are going to like my next title. I am really giving the campaign a feel that you are reading a history book on the period. The maneuvering can take up to five decisions before you get to a battle. Just like in real campaigns.

The movements are anywhere from a few days to arrive in the campaign area to several HOURS. Thus as the formations get closer you get to change march routes (if you can and the officer hasnt marched in some other direction).

Supply depots will also be located by the commanders. Entire decision trees will be given to where you want to move your depot.

This system will now become standard in all of my titles. I really think that its far superior to any title I have done so far.

Thus its going to take me longer than the Wagram game did but I should be putting something into John's inbox well before the year is out. Other than that I will not elaborate on the title or date.

Oberst Wilhelm Peters
2nd Kuirassiers, Reserve Korps, Austrian Army

I am almost surprised to see that the graphic appearence (question 5. - Artwork) doesn't seem to bother people more. I wrote "almost" because many members of the NWC Club are hardcores; they would even play Napoleonic warfare simulation in DOS mode!!!

As far as I am concerned here in my little environnement, among my friends and collegues, I have no difficulty in creating interest into the Napoleonic Era. The formation types, the stakes of the important battles, the outcomes and even "technical subjects" such as the impact of the <i>Système de Gribeauval</i> on warefare, living off the land etc. look as very attractive matters to my interlocutors.

When I try to convince them to try a campaign simulation, the story gets different as run out of argument very fast when they see the poor appearence of the game. They prefer other games (ex. Battlefield Vietnam) and I can't blame them for it! [:I]

Having a better graphic interface, a nice looking game would make life easier to those who want to make their relatives buy HPS titles!

My two ecus!



[url="mailto:pyguinard@hotmail.com"]Capt. Pierre-Yves Guinard[/url],
6e Division, II Corp
AdN

I second Capt Guinard
s request for better graphics. Though I almost exclusively play in 2-D mode, I know better graphics would attract more people. The HPS system speeds the game up which also helps. Lastly a link to the NWC should be in every game sold.

General de Brigade Doug Fuller
Comte de Hainaut et Duc de Lutzen
CO Brigade de Voltigeurs de La Jeune Guard
7e Division/CC
II Corp
AdN

My input on what I would like to see from HPS is a little different from the other ideas.

I would like to see a game system that played at multiple levels.

I would like to play a Campaign, that did not take 100's of turns, but which was also not simply a random roll of the dice for each event. I've tried the game using "command control" and it did not seem to be a very good option.

I'm looking for an education tool as well as a game. Ideally for something like Eckmuhl I would have liked something in which I could have played an "entire campaign" in about 50 turns, and learn about a number of places were encounters would take place. Then I would enjoy going back and playing a few of those encounters in more detail, like the existing scenarios. And while the large scope of these games is one of their appeals, I think I would also like to be able to focus in on a number of the sub engagements of the larger battles, much like was done in the BG Waterloo game with its scenarios.

In a sense, I'm looking for an interactive history (or alternative history) lesson. Play some "campaigns" to understand the strategies (as well as the names and locations of all these places). Play some scenarios to understand grand tactics. Play some focused scenarios to understand unit tactics.





Col Sir Bob Breen KT

1st (The King's) Dragoon Guards
Commandant, RMA