"Marengo in Legacy of Glory" Topic

Following on last week's NB Marengo, we muscled through a few turns of Legacy of Glory, doing a portion of the battlefield. Unfortunately we didn't get much fighting done as we were relearning the rules and muddling through three versions of them. Still, everyone enjoyed themselves and we walked away feeling like we had a better sense of how it might have been to conduct a battle under these conditions.

link

Malcolm,

Glad to see the post. Currently we are keeping an eye on, but not using, the two later rule revisions for the time being running with the original set.

Your write-up was interesting. Our expectation is that being familiar with LoG (original) one could likely play in faster than real time. What's your opinion on the matter?

Cheers,

The Bandit

Certainly, it could (in theory) be played faster than real time.

LoG one was/is a solid system that bogs down a bit in the GBT (Grand Battle Turn) system where you are constantly checking for what the next phase is since not every turn had the same sequence.

The next version that they explored has 23 phases in every turn and 3 pages of charts for every phase. This was basically scrapped before ever seeing the light of day.

What they are trying now is to tune it into being a 4 phase turn (still simultaneous movement) with radically less charts. The less stuff that needs to be referenced, the faster the games will go. I think it will end up going faster than real time for two reasons:

1> The game embraces the notion that on the Napoleonic battlefield, units were not locked in combat throughout the day. Rather they were at engagement range generally across the battlefield with pockets of intense fighting for short periods. These conflicts maintained at engagement range are very quick to 'resolve'

2> The game specifically limits the numbers of decisions that a player can make every turn. There's basically a 'make 0-2 decisions' phase and then everything else is about seeing the results of those decisions be played out. Now, although this might not be to everyone's taste, it can certainly speed up play. When moving a division in Napoleon's Battles, for example, every unit moved involves multiple decision points and dithering.

2> Very agreed.

We found that just "throwing" forward divisions of battalions had the right feel to it, certainly no corps commander is getting concerned over the position of sub units, they want their divisions in position. Of course there are exceptions, but by definition these are not typical.

I've been keeping up with the discussion on the LoG Yahoo! Group and my emotions about the new rules are mixed. I was really hoping for clarity and a good index rather than new concepts but we will see how it turns out.

Cheers,

The Bandit

Bandit,

I completely agree with your comments on "throwing" forward divisions. In a LoG game of Craonne, I took the role of Ney and the "feel" was excellent; I was actually committing formations, not micro-managing battalions.

Colin

Bandit, malcolmmccallum, and colinjallen,

What you are experiencing is one of the joys and "frustrations" of the rules – that they really ARE trying to replicate Napoleonic command from the perspective of an individual. The reason the rules are so complex and hard to grasp is that they are designed to create a system in which there are other actors on the battlefield besides the players. Those actors are not just trying to execute the orders you give them, but they are reacting to the effects of the battle on themselves and their units. the "wave assessment" is a means of determining how those subordinates react to the situation they find themselves in. Ditto for combat results like "firefight" and the panic check.

This kind of thing is easier in a computer game, but computer games are "black boxes" and rob one of the fun of seeing rules lawyers flipping through 200 pages of rules to find the argument that will sway the jury! :)

Anyway, I am enjoyng the AARs, so please keep them up.

Doug

Yes, I'm also enjoying the AARs.

Oddly enough, the two threads about LoG have piqued my interest in blackpowder era historical gaming. I'm going to have to see if one of the old-timers at the FLGS has a copy of Legacy of Glory.