"Has anyone played Iron Duke?" Topic

link

The above site has computer-moderated rules for various periods, including Napoleonic (Wellingtonic?) rules called Iron Duke.

Has anyone played them? If so, how are they?

I played them a few years ago. I may have been lucky, but one unit of French Line lancers had the ability to rout three Russian cavalry regiments in as many turns.

As much as I liked winning the game it didn't "feel" right to me. There has been an update to them since I played, so I would like to hear what others think.

D

Not nearly as good as Carnage and Glory…

db

oldnorthstate: in what way(s) is C&G superior (I have played C&G once, not ID at all)?

I have played Iron Duke V6 and think it is very good. What is it you are after in a wargame?

I should add Iron Duke has naval as well as land warfare so there are a number of scenarios that involve both (eg battles around the Great lakes in the AWI) that it can handle that C&G cannot. Also Iron Duke has Grand Tactical, Solo and Campaign which C&G does not. (C&G may have added Grand tactical recently.) So it depends what you are looking for. I work in the IT industry and it is the same question with all software – how much does it fit with what you want. I don't think these games are simply good or bad. Paper rules have their plus and minus features as well.

Work out what you want or you will wander forever in the rules maze!

Sorry. Evidently the editor removed this thread from the Napoleonic Discussion forum, which is the only one I usually check, so I had not seen the last couple of answers until now.

What I'm after:

1. Solitaire gaming: Definitely! I have no regular opponent(s), tho there is one fellow I have met, who plays C&G; which is what got me onto this question in the first place. But I might be able to convert some of my board-gaming friends, if the computer does enough of the work that they can get right into the battle without having to learn a plethora of rules.

2. Grand tactical: Definitely, if by that you mean using basic units larger than battalions. My figures are currently based for Grande Armee rules, where infantry and cavalry units are mostly brigades (or sometimes large regiments or small divisions), and I DON'T want to have to re-base them if I can help it.

3. Campaign: Yes, a definite plus; but not absolutely essential.

4. The naval rules would be a nice, but very small, plus. (I have some old sailing-era ship models that I might want to paint and use if I had some rules for them. Not that I need more stuff to paint!)

Sounds like ID is closer to what I want than C&G. I'd still love to hear any more details about how it plays. Battle reports would be very welcome!

I use Iron Duke and think it is pretty good. Easy to use and a good range of options.

I mainly field Prussians (1814, lots of Landwehr) and find it handles the historical side really well. It has a battle sequence that inclusdes formation changes, scouting, bombardment, direct fire and melee. I have lots of skirmishers and it allows you to detatch skirmishers and to split or combine units during battle. I can detatch a sub unit to operate on its own.

What else do you want to know.

Pyrrus has probably covered the main battle features. I mostly play solo battles using them. Are there specific questions or features you are looking for? I think it would satisfy the list of requirements you have stated above.

I ordered ID and it arrived a couple of days ago. It looks pretty good so far.

My main issue with the Computer Strategies games in the past is that they were always very poorly documented (usually including manuals that were incomplete or covered the wrong period), and very difficult to get one's head around, compared to Carnage and Glory, which is pretty easy to get the hang of in a relatively short period of time.

I'm told some of the software from CS has been greatly improved, but have not seen anything new from CS personally recently, so I'd suggest a bit of caution.

-A.

My doco is fairly recent and seems OK. I actually don't use the doco much as I find it easy to play intuitively which is how I prefer it.

Aurelian

I have used CS rules for a number of periods for over 10 years, and do have to disagree with you on their documentation. As far as I am concerned, their documentation is second to none,and could stand as a model for many.

They are laid out with the same format as a miniatures set,easy to read,and very understandable…

You should have contacted Clinton if you had a problem,, his customer service,and relations is second to none…

anvil