New Napoleonic Rules in development for Partizan Press

[steve_holmes_11]

I enjoy a bit of Napoleonics, have signed up, and look forward to the day when I am approved.

Contrast with the tiny goblin's school "Portal".
Still attempting to get a working account after 4 weeks trying.
Some organisations should not be let loose with advanced technology.

[Keith57]

If anyone who has applied to join the group hasn't been approved yet, let me know. As far as I know all applications should have been processed.

Thanks, Keith.

[Chris Pringle]

I'm happy to endorse the choice of groups.io. Yahoo effectively shut down my BBB Yahoo group in December, so we migrated everything to groups.io. That all seems to be working fine, plus we got a surge of new members.

Keith, best of luck with your new rules!

Chris

Bloody Big BATTLES!
https://groups.io/g/bloodybigbattles
http://bloodybigbattles.blogspot.com/

[Keith57]

Thanks Chris. The continued interest in BBB is a tribute to their quality and originality.

[Chris Pringle]

Well, thanks, Keith. I can say the same for HOW. (I've been reading up a bit on Frederick the Great lately - might have to get John M to lay on another HOW game for us, now the OWS club is back in action!)

Chris

[Dave Fielder]

Following the successful demise of the Rubarbian Forces in our PBEM (see BatReps for AAR) how can I not join this group? Application sent in and awaiting entrance ;-)

[Dave Fielder]

I'm wondering what the acronym will be for these rules? Gamers love to identify their rules with TLAs etc:
SoTE
STE
SOTE
"So-Tee"
Keith's Nappies

[Last Hussar]

Does it need the historical background?

[Dave Fielder]

Does it need the historical background?

I think it will, these may be the only rules a non-Napoleonic Gamer has. Imagine someone from the 40k Universe landing at Waterloo with no background as to what's going on ... probably think it's a rather aggressive Morris Dance with all those uniforms and wooden sticks.

[Steve J]

I've found the historical overview useful.

[Last Hussar]

I do wonder why these are put into rules - who buys rules for a period they know nothing about, especially given the amount of stuff for free on the internet.

[mmcv]

I do wonder why these are put into rules - who buys rules for a period they know nothing about, especially given the amount of stuff for free on the internet.

It can surely be a good way to introduce yourself to the period you think you may be interested in. Some historical periods, especially 18th-20th century, can suffer from information overload to the uninitiated and knowing where to even start can be daunting. Having a flick through a rule set with some interesting background and scenarios gives you a good summary and a starting point to start digging deeper. And the rules provide you s nice framework to work from and build out from.

If by free stuff you mean rules, then there usually for those already having background knowledge so meaningless to someone without knowledge. If you mean general historical information, then knowing where to start to find what's relevant and interesting can be difficult. There's so much. But if the relevant bits are easily laid out and there's a particular summary that peaks interest then that gives you a starting point.

[Steve J]

Having the info in one place and quite concise is handy for me. I have a broad overview of the period and several old school wargaming books too. Even so, I still like to have it.

[Keith57]

Including some historical background, in a section which I call 'Wars and Campaigns', has 2 functions.

Firstly, a basic background to the 23 years covered by the rules, in particular indicating a structure around which the military events can be understood. The Napoleonic period is hard to get to grips with for a newcomer.

Secondly, the section acts in place of army lists. It is intended to show how the various armies changed over time, i.e., how the balance of tactics, command, doctrine and quality altered between the various campaigns and so how it affected the result of those campaigns. In wargaming-speak, this section is where a good deal of the 'period flavour' is injected. The rules themselves articulate some of this, but the differences between, say, the Revolutionary period and the 1805 campaign are significant and should be part of any set of Napoleonic rules. This the 'Wars and Campaigns' section sets out to do. It does so in a fairly basic way, I'll admit, but the effort is necessary IMHO.

Writing this historical section has been as time consuming as writing the rules. I hope to get a reasonable initial version online in a few weeks.

[Keith57]

mmcv - thanks for your response, by the way. You have indicated much of my reasoning very eloquently

[Steve J]

The Napoleonic period is hard to get to grips with for a newcomer.

One of the reasons I've been put of this 'period' for so long.

Secondly, the section acts in place of army lists. It is intended to show how the various armies changed over time, i.e., how the balance of tactics, command, doctrine and quality altered between the various campaigns and so how it affected the result of those campaigns. In wargaming-speak, this section is where a good deal of the 'period flavour' is injected. The rules themselves articulate some of this, but the differences between, say, the Revolutionary period and the 1805 campaign are significant and should be part of any set of Napoleonic rules. This the 'Wars and Campaigns' section sets out to do. It does so in a fairly basic way, I'll admit, but the effort is necessary IMHO.

This is so important IMHO as an aide memoire as it were to the changes over 23 years. I know those steeped in the 'period' will find it too basic or unnescessary, but you can't please all the people all of the time.

[paulr]

Having a Historic background in rules makes good sense to me

Keith's explanation above of how he has made use of it in his rules makes even more sense

We, experienced gamers, are inclined to forget just how much we know and take for granted about warfare and different periods

[hammurabi70]

I'm wondering what the acronym will be for these rules? Gamers love to identify their rules with TLAs etc:
SoTE
STE
SOTE
"So-Tee"
Keith's Nappies

SotE

If Age of Eagles is AoE then the acronym falls out quite straight forwardly.

[Keith57]

Well, 'Keith's Nappies' is definitely out. Dave, it's hard to believe that you were joint winner of the 'Most Gentlemanly Wargamers' award at a prestigious wargaming show last year.

Dave Ryan has quite a good idea - he calls them SHADOW, Post of Honour are POST, and HoW are HONOURS.

SotE has been my choice so far.

[Keith57]

Version 9 is now available for free download. All comments and questions appreciated.

https://groups.io/g/eagles-shadow

Keith.