I have Lasalle and whilst I enjoy it for me there is something missing that I just cant put my finger on. Also tried Napoleon at War and whilst similar to Lasalle it has more holes than ementahl...

Interesingly i'm off to Burton this weekend for a 900pt FOG doubles tournament!

I'm still not overly convinced by FOG, having intiatially tried it on release and rejected it for 2 years.  I've recently come back to it and its not a bad set of tournement rules.  I certainly haven't embraced it the way i did with DBM.

FOGN...hmm...not sure.
FOG seems to me to be essentially a tournament ruleset with all the gamist quirks therein.  Napoleonics for me has always seemed essentially a scenrio play period.  I'm not sure how that will transfer to the tournament ethos of FOG.

Frankly though, i find it sort of odd when any company brings out a new Napoleonic ruleset...after all, unless its bringing something truely revelational to the period, isn't it just a case of 'bandwagon?!  I'll have some of that!'

What I may do is wait two years until they're flogging off FOGN cheap (like i did with FOG) and pick it up then...unless the chaps at the club are keen on doing it right now of course...unlikely i suspect.

My copy of the FOG:N rules arrived today. No idea how good they are, and I have no experience of the previous FOG rule sets, but it is a beautifully presented book. I hope to get a chance to look through it at the weekend.

There was a copy at the club last night.  Certainly the usual eye candy, but since we haven't sorted out FOGR yet, i think FOGN will be a way off for me!   

If anyone is interested Amazon still have FoG:N up at the pre-order price of £15.48 instead of £25.00 retail price.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1849089264/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=youchoosenet&linkCode=as2&camp=1634&creative=19450&creativeASIN=1849089264.

I've considered stocking things like FoG, but it's prices like that on Amazon which mean there's no point as the profits are so low.  I can't remember the exact details, but I don't think we could buy them in at that price with trade discount!

Quote from: Leon on 10 March 2012, 12:24:11 AM
I've considered stocking things like FoG, but it's prices like that on Amazon which mean there's no point as the profits are so low.  I can't remember the exact details, but I don't think we could buy them in at that price with trade discount!

You certainly have a point Leon. I order the vast majority of my books from them even if there is sometimes delays. I cant see the point in paying full whack with (normally) excessive postage costs added too. It just sials against my breeding (tight-fisted Yorkshire git)

However what I think might be worth PD's time is creating battalion/regiment packs of infantry/cavalry and artillery that match the rules. I'd certainly buy in such ways and I am sure this would make 10mm a more attractive proposition to naps gamers.

I think that FoG Napoleonic, Lasalle and Napoleon at War all have pretty much the same basing conventions, so at a stretch you might get away with packs that could cross three rule sets - if you added mdf bases to packs.....

Quote from: Nosher on 10 March 2012, 10:57:40 AM
However what I think might be worth PD's time is creating battalion/regiment packs of infantry/cavalry and artillery that match the rules. I'd certainly buy in such ways and I am sure this would make 10mm a more attractive proposition to naps gamers.

I think that FoG Napoleonic, Lasalle and Napoleon at War all have pretty much the same basing conventions, so at a stretch you might get away with packs that could cross three rule sets - if you added mdf bases to packs.....

This comes up quite often, but the thing that stops us is that the current rules-specific army packs don't sell in huge numbers, so we're unsure how worthwhile it would be to add more types.  The WM Ancient and Medieval 1000pt'ers go very slowly, maybe only a dozen over a year, the Fantasy DBF ones even less that that.  I think the only ones which have proved decent are the BKC packs, which we sell a couple a month of, and they go quite well at the shows as well.

Quote from: Leon on 10 March 2012, 02:33:11 PM
This comes up quite often, but the thing that stops us is that the current rules-specific army packs don't sell in huge numbers, so we're unsure how worthwhile it would be to add more types.  The WM Ancient and Medieval 1000pt'ers go very slowly, maybe only a dozen over a year, the Fantasy DBF ones even less that that.  I think the only ones which have proved decent are the BKC packs, which we sell a couple a month of, and they go quite well at the shows as well.

Sorry Leon - my post might not have been that clear. What I was suggesting was battalion packs which would be packs (with relevant command) that would be 30-40 figures per pack, not complete armies. The advantage you would have is that battalions/regiments in FoG/Lasalle and NaW are practically the same figure wise. Similarly this could include Brigade Packs of 3/4 battalions/regiments. I dont think that this would be too different from what you do already, and naturally the pack prices would have to go up in proportion.

I know this is a Magister Militum 'Model' but I do think players of others scales considering 10mm would see your new ranges of Naps being even more competitively priced. When I approached MM to ask if they would do 'different' pack structures for Lasalle they were accomodating BUT at it came at cost when they wanted to charge almost £1 extra per pack for what was about three or four figures different.

I think with things like this, it comes down to which method is going to result in the easiest experience for the customer, and then whether it works for us.  

As a complete change in the way we structure our packs, I can see the advantages of doing packs to suit certain rulesets, and including command etc., but would that make it better/worse for the average customer?  At the moment, around 5% of our orders are custom '32 of these, 48 of those' style orders, which is fine.  If we went to more specific pack compositions, would that % increase with people wanting just line troops, or just the command figures?  That's without factoring in the way the moulds are set up and the increased time needed to spin 2/3 moulds for each pack.

Alternatively, offering it as a separate option could be done, but that would require time to put the pack compositions together, and then make all the changes to the website.  Unfortunately, we just don't have the time at the moment to sort anything like that, and our priority has to be getting more photo's up and getting orders out quicker.

As always though, folk are more than welcome to place custom orders for whatever odds and ends they need, it's no bother at all.  And we won't stick an extra £1 on for the priviledge...  

FoG arrived yesterday. Lot of reading to do before we can try them.

Chad

Mine has just arrived and will be looked at during my lunch hour

Whoop, whoop!

24 or 36 figure regiments and 12 or 18 figure cavalry units. 1 gun per base.

I think I feel an Austrian *order* coming on! Look out for a request along the lines of:

Dear Mr Nice man Leon, can you sort me out some 24 figure units with relevant command etc. What is the exact composition of pack XYZ12? and pretty please with cherries on top can I have etc etc , pretty pretty please, pendraken reallly are very nice men, witter witter etc.

Hi

Is Napoleonic FoG the same thickness as FoGR.

As FoGR came in handy to stop my dinning table from rocking.

That was about the only use I could find for them.

Jim

Quote from: Jim Ando on 17 March 2012, 05:04:35 PM
Hi

Is Napoleonic FoG the same thickness as FoGR.

As FoGR came in handy to stop my dinning table from rocking.

That was about the only use I could find for them.

Jim

OOOOOhhhhhh

Sticks and stones....

Quote from: Leon on 10 March 2012, 03:50:51 PM
I think with things like this, it comes down to which method is going to result in the easiest experience for the customer, and then whether it works for us.  

As a complete change in the way we structure our packs, I can see the advantages of doing packs to suit certain rulesets, and including command etc., but would that make it better/worse for the average customer?  At the moment, around 5% of our orders are custom '32 of these, 48 of those' style orders, which is fine.  If we went to more specific pack compositions, would that % increase with people wanting just line troops, or just the command figures?  That's without factoring in the way the moulds are set up and the increased time needed to spin 2/3 moulds for each pack.

Alternatively, offering it as a separate option could be done, but that would require time to put the pack compositions together, and then make all the changes to the website.  Unfortunately, we just don't have the time at the moment to sort anything like that, and our priority has to be getting more photo's up and getting orders out quicker.

As always though, folk are more than welcome to place custom orders for whatever odds and ends they need, it's no bother at all.  And we won't stick an extra £1 on for the priviledge...  

Having had a closer look at the Naps range and then thinking back to this conversation I'm now a bit confused? Soem of the new packs in the 1809 ranges are 20 figures for £2 of which 3 figures are command figures?

Whats the thinking behind these packs?

Quote from: Nosher on 17 March 2012, 09:56:07 PM
Having had a closer look at the Naps range and then thinking back to this conversation I'm now a bit confused? Soem of the new packs in the 1809 ranges are 20 figures for £2 of which 3 figures are command figures?

Whats the thinking behind these packs?

The new Naps packs are 16 figures for £2, which allows folk to buy smaller quantities of things like light troops/grenadiers, and we can fit two codes-worth into a single mould.

Alles klaar

Playtested 800 points of 1812 French and Russians tonight and I have to say that after some false starts (Lasalle/NaW) I may have found a half decent Napoleonic ruleset in FoG. Sorry but no photos, wnated to concentrate fully on the rules rather than pissing around with a camera (which I'm not very good at anyway!) Plus the figures were my very dusty 15's from years ago!

I had four divisions per side - the French had two standardish infantry divs, one cavalry division and a 'mixed' allied division of Pole/Badeninfantry and Neopolitan Cavalry. The Russians had two standard infantry divisions, one cavalry division and a grenadier division.

In a nutshell the game was a fair scrap - with both sides evenly matched and the game swang this way and that throughout the four hours it took to play - the French eventually winning through but not without receiving a very bloody nose.

What I can say is that FoG Naps is NOT FoG ancients, neither is it FoG (R), the game play is almost entirely different. I found the rules pleasantly surprising with soem neat new mechanics. Yes the wording could be better and a few more diagrams of play would help, but all in all I think I will be back for more.

Sadly I dont think FoG Naps will have universal appeal to sceptics who see FoG as purely competition gaming, but to those open to trying a new game mechanic with half as many modifier tables as has previously been seen in the FoG stable I think you might be pleasantly surprised. After a few turns I could remember most of the modifiers.

Hi alll,

during the week we tested, in the club, Song of Drums and Shakos large Battle, written by Sergio Laliscia using the game engine of Ganesha Games.
The first impression is very god. The game flow smoothly with few modifiers ad the activation system which add lot of suspence to the game.
The rules can be played at Division/Corp level (we tested the latter), and with any figures scale, but it's perfect for 10mm.
We wil continue the testing, but I think this set worth really a try.

Sandro