"Napoleon's Battles 3 Availability" Topic

There was a post a while ago, indicating that NB3 would be available in September.

Is it available yet and if so, where can it be purchased?

When ready it will be published by Lost Battalion games:

lostbattalion.com

An additional note, apparently LBG has a policy to not publicize a game that is not out yet, so if you are looking for info on release dates you will probably have to go to the yahoo group and ask Bob.

I've heard this before, and I've checked their site several times, but I've never seen a single mention of Napoleon's Battles on their web site.

Napoleon's battles is dead….

Is not….

Thanks for the info.

According to the September 08 newsletter at the Lost Battalion's website, it will be published "next month." I guess that would be October!

The post said the end of September. The publisher is layinhg out the rules now (not an inconsiderable job considering the contents). There are 3 books and the army cards. The army cards and two books have had a final proof and have been turned into the publisher for layout. We may miss the end of September by a week or three.

Good gaming.

Bob Coggins

Or five.

NapoleonicWargamer08 said:

"Napoleon's battles is dead…."

heh… it's SO not dead it's actually funny. ;)

How many times will people want to keep buying the same game? At seventy-five dollars, I suspect rather few, notwithstanding any nifty packaging or wooden blocks.

Still using a rotary phone Soup? (hehe, I'm just kidding, but I couldn't resist.) ;)

…no, probably the kind that you turn the little crank first to get some current and then blow into the receiver to get the operator's attention….

I for one am a cat on a hot tin roof with anticipation over this one. $75 USD doesn't seem so high a price to me…

Just to clarify, Napoleon's Battles III is now available. Information is available from Lost Battalion's Web Site at link

So, what's it like? (No, I don't know anything about the previous versions either.)

It is well crafted and presented. There are no great changes from previous editions though the language has been made more accessible. The packaging and contained pieces are good.

Napoleon's Battles is a rules set that divides the hobby. Because the intention is that it allows to recreat historical battles, alot of the lower level details are abstracted away to where many find them non-existent. The player, for example, doesn't get to see skirmishers deployed. There are no concrete bonuses for flank attacks because it is assumed that the brigade commander is dealing with it in some manner. Interpenetration is likewise not an issue. We don't get to make decisiopns about canister or ball. Personally, I like that it takes this approach and find no disconnect. To me it makes perfect sense. To others, it doesn't.

The rules do make some compromises for the sake of spirit and colour and do play more 'elegantly' than some games that require more precise chart consultations.

For me, it captures the ebb and flow of the grand battles of the period. It is the perfect ruleset to play Austerlitz on a Sunday afternoon. On Sunday we're doing Talavera.

Should this be purchased if one already owns 1st edition or 2nd edition? Not necessarily. It does have the advantage over the others though of being purchasable. I'm happy with my purchase and am hoping that this new edition will increase the likelihood of finding other Napoleon's Battles players.

I don't wish to start an argument, but after playing a few times I found that in my opinion Napoleon's Battles is a battalion-level game parading as a brigade-level game. If you like playing bathtub versions of large battles using tactical level rules it could be the game for you.

I don't wish to start an argument

You'll find that you can best avoid starting arguments by not using weighted, disparaging terms to describe things that are not to your taste. 'parading as a brigade-level game' and 'bathtub versions of large battles' are terms intended to belittle anyone thinking differently from you.

So, now you know and you won't ever need to start another argument that you don't wish to.

I've enjoyed the games of NB that I've played in the past and am tempted by this latest release.
My only problem is the time scale means cavalry moves can "out range" the guns and the ease with which you can achieve a combine arms melee. Both situations were house rule fixed.
Anyway for the sake of those who haven't played NB. I found it a fun game to play.
Max

"You'll find that you can best avoid starting arguments by not using weighted, disparaging terms to describe things that are not to your taste. 'parading as a brigade-level game' and 'bathtub versions of large battles' are terms intended to belittle anyone thinking differently from you.

So, now you know and you won't ever need to start another argument that you don't wish to."

Actually I meant that I wasn't going to derail the thread by arguing about why I derived my impression (and whether or not it's right).

There's more than one way to avoid an argument.

This is me not getting into an argument. Enjoy your rules.

How does NB3 compare with Grande Armee (Sam Mustapha) and Marechal de l'Empire (Polemos) ?

How does NB3 compare with Grande Armee (Sam Mustapha) and Marechal de l'Empire (Polemos) ?

GA and MdE are a lot cheaper…

>"GA and MdE are a lot cheaper…"<

Especially since I already have those. :)

I already have them, and I have NB first edition too.

I am fairly interested in looking at NB3 but I don't want to blow $75 USD on it just for a bit of reading matter.

Mr. Murvihill,

Your admitted limited experience has led you to draw an incorrect conclusion regarding whether or not the rules are grand tactical or not. I recommend you read the rules, subscribe to the Yahoo group, propose questions on the LBG website or if you are attending Historicon, stop in on Craig's and my talk and pepper us with questions.

Don Lowry,

I am unfamiliar with the Polemos rules but I find GA and AoE well designed playable sets of grand tactical rules that represent their designers' perspective on the Napoleonic Wars.

NBs is an excellent rules set that provides a reasonable perspective on warfare in the Age of Romance (Napoleon. Being playable and, yes, fun, it has stood the test of time.

NBs is not now nor has it ever been in competition with any other set of rules. It is in full color. The rules are more extensively cross referenced than any other set of miniatures rules (this saves gamers hours of leafing through a rule book to locate a rule in contention). It provides seperate army cards that rate hundreds of units for all the nations that participated in the Napoleonic Wars for the various different years. It rates every unit and general for points in order that gamers may design their own scenarios and to help out it provides a section on how to design a balanced scenario. The rules include seperate game and templet cards for movement and fire and even skirmish spread cards. There are 12 historical scenarios, each on a seperate card, with Orders of Battle, full color maps, unit information charts and special rules. It includes wooden markers for units and round wooden markers with stick ons for game play and, yes, dice. Finally there is a CD which provides full color unit tags (downloadable)for each scenario, a list and ratings for the 3000+ generals at various levels of command from division(column)to army, biographies for many that identify different generals which share the same name, and some other gegaws the LBG Computer Guy put in.

Hope the above helps, but have a look for yourself. Is it worth $75? That's up to you.

Good gaming.

Bob Coggins

I'm disappointed that the later NB versions didn't fix some of the major problems in the rules. I say this after playing NB pretty much every week for 5 years. First, I agree that it is a superbly written and indexed set of rules. I can't really think of another set that has been so completely written as NB. But there are problems that the designers seem resigned to that ultimately proved unworkable to us. The most egregious to us was the ability to make combined arms attack and the decisive impact they have on the game. We also found the bobbing and weaving of units moving into combat in order to avoid fire to be very time consuming and game delaying. After 5 years we finally gave up and moved on to other systems. But before we had "broken" NB we had many games of considerable fun.

Napoleons Battles is also available from Wargames

wargamesminis.com

Marcus Brutus,

Thanks for the kind words about the rules. Most especially I am gratified you had fun.

One of the hazards of wargame design is gamers are always looking for a prettier girl. So over the years those things that annoy one about the rules sometimes become intolerable.

For whatever reason combined arms has gotten a dirty name. Hitorically it occurred much more often than gamers think. Marengo and Mockern immediately jump to mind but there are many other instances over the years. Mostly, however, combined arms on the NBs table is the residue of poor play by the gamer, such as sending individual infantry divisions out and about without cavalry support. In the end everyone will believe what they wish.

No designer can allow for all of the rules lawyers and in our group we did not see the extent to which gamers would go to get around a rule. The new wheeling rule in NBsII updated in III mostly eliminates the problem.

In any event, whatever rules you landed on, have fun! That's what the hobby is all about

Good gaming.

Bob Coggins

Our group's fix for the abuse of the combined arms rules (if an infantry unit sprints up to an inch from an enemy unit, it cannot form square when charged by cavalry) was to require impacts to be moved first. The pin could still happen that way but now you had to either be there at the start of the turn (and so require more advance planning) or risk contacting with the infantry also.

It solved all the problems.

The best solutions to people exploiting rules though is what we did to the fellow that would routinely voluntarily rout his troops (with commander attached), 27" inches forward and thereby seize objectives behind enemy lines: we stopped playing with him.

Don't supose there has been any discusion about bringing out a "paper back" version? IE with out the wooden blocks etc for those of use who already have the minis. Thsi might seem to be nit picking but out here in Aust those things that add to mailing costs realy up the prices.

Check the Lost Battalion Games site. The standard mailing fee was $5 USD in the US and $10 USD overseas, with the company eating the remainder. Mailing rates were increased as of Feb 1 so this may have changed.

Good gaming.

Bob Coggins

Bob, I don't disagree that combined arms attacks in Napoleonic battles occurred. The problem is that in Napoleon's Battles they are so easy to manufacture and so decisive that they become the dominant mode of attack (which is not historical.) We modified the rules as Malcolm suggests making impact necessary to pin but the problem still persisted.

Marcus,

Well I'd like to play against your opponents. The longer our group played the less decisive they became.

While many NBs gamers can set-up combined arms attacks, most get lost in the forest for the trees. They use combined arms attacks to run down infantry brigades with little thought to the grand tactical situation.

In armies of the day you were lucky to have one cavalry brigade for every 4 infantry brigades. Lucky being the operative word for most of the time its one for five or six.

Under such circumstances, all other things being equal, I am willing to trade an infantry brigade for a cavalry brigade. The average cavalry brigade is 12 with a dispersal of C and a rout of 3. So it routs an infantry brigade not in square and loses 1 for that rout. The rally number is the brigades initiative minus 2 or less than 50%. So without a general attached the chances are greater than 50% the cavalry will run at the nearest enemy to its front disordered. If nothing is to its front it will charge off into the abyss, disordered in the middle of the enemy, out of command, sitting there. Unless you have a general attached. In which instance the chain of command will be broken. On the other hand if the cavalry hits an enemy unit the best outcome to be hoped for would be the loss of another figure. If it hits cavalry supported by artillery the most likely outcome is one fire casualty and a 3 and rout or 4 figure. This effectively wrecks the cavalry for the next figure disperses it. In the best instance the brigade could maintain control and withdraw.

The point is, if my opponent desires to display his combined arms prowess I am willing to suffer the rout of an infantry brigade to batter or destroy my opponent's cavalry brigade. As Vandamme said, "You've got to break some eggs to make an omlette."

Good gaming.

Bob Coggins

Thanks Bob. I normaly buy localy but have contacted Lost Bats direct this time.
Max