"any rule set to replace Foundry's Napoleon" Topic

Is there a rule set that uses the same mounting system as "Napoleon" …roughly 1 to 30 or so.The rule set is mostly a pretty advertizement for Foundry figs and not a lot more.The number of facts that this set of rule dose not even acknowledge is a sorry joke in it's self.
(i.e. Prussians have no rifles,,,everyone has the same organization ,,except the austrians…heavey cavalry regiments are always twice the size of light cavalry regiments.all the germans state have to use bavarian stats.

I just want a rule set that is a rule set and not a catalog.

Runicus Fasticus

I agree with your critique. I can't remember how figures are based for Napoleon, and I can't bring myself to crack open the damn thing to find out.

Lasalle uses four bases per unit (or six bases for large units). It doesn't really matter how many figures are on them though

PDF link

I think you might do well with Black Powder as well. You will have to do some of your own research as far as number of troops in units and so on but it sounds like you already have.

Hi
LASALLE!
Cheers

Lasalle and Black Powder are good recommendations. Any of the nominally 1:20 sets could work as well. A paper strength 1:30 battalion is right around the same size as a field-strength 1:20 one in many cases. GdB, Republic to Empire, etc…

Lasalle or Black Powder would be my recommendations also…Lasalle would be my first choice.

-Scott
djokergaming.wordpress.com

I like Black Powder a lot. And it really doe not matter the number of figures, since you never remove stands, If both sides are based the same and they look good to you, then you are ready to go.

Republic to Empire would be my recommendation, but I'm biased.

My recommendation is for Black Powder.

I'll put my hand up and say I've never played with Lasalle, but to my mind the rules seem rather complex – perhaps its just because they've been written in that thorough US way to be crystal clear, but I personally couldn't get on with them. I love the attention to detail represented by the two range zones for roundshot, for example, but with the game size me and my mates play, I need a simple mechanism to represent the overall effects of arty fire…

BP, on the other hand, are fun to read, fun and quick to play, and to my mind still manage to give reasonably historical results if you use the relevant tactics for the era. Don't be put off by the fact they cover such a long time period. They are just fine for Napoleonics if you already have a fair knowledge of the period and can pick out the appropriate add-ons from the special rules 'toolbox'.

Its also worth mentioning that the word on the street is that the perennial 'General de Brigade' is being reissued in a fancy 'bells and whistles' hardback format sometime this year – there will no doubt be a lot of razzamattaz about that starting to build up. They are a sound workable set of rules, but my advice would be to hold off investing in the current edition until you hear about the new realease schedule…

Kind Regards,

Sparker

I like Shako 2, which our group plays a lot.

Lasalle is a simple and elegant system and I highly recommend it for fun enjoyable games.

I have not played Black Powder but have heard a lot of good things about it and will pick them up at the next convention.

La Feu Sacre would work and includes a Command & Control system and a morale system and some other things useful in a Napoleonic rules set.

All of the above are good suggestions, for different reasons, and you should think beyond basing to what kind of game you want to play. Some are old school (General de Brigade is a solid chart system, I suppose Shako might count as such now but is a simple d6 morale factor system), but most are innovative in different ways: Lasalle focuses on smaller battles but offers a very solid core of rules with some innovative mechanisms, but overall a comfortably familiar feel, although there is no C&C system; Black Powder builds on the less familiar (for Napoleonics) Warmaster core for a much looser and less well defined game focusing on fairly unpredictable C&C; Le Feu Sacre probably represents the best of the "command point" sets and the most recent version offers a bit more detail and crunch without interfering with the streamlined nature of play. To these I would add my recent find of the Crusader rules Rank & File, which is a fairly simple, straightforward old school game that appears to have a pretty balanced core of rules – it's probably the least rules intensive of all the above, and for instance I'll probably use it for games with my son and his friends.

Cheers,

Christopher

Idiosyncratic basing systems are the curse of wargaming.

It's interesting how many rule sets seem less and less dogmatic as they suggest that it doesn't matter if both forces use the same system. Actually it does in some cases but most can be sorted with an odd tweak.

I have to say Black Powder reads (I haven't played it yet) as if it's hit this flexibility par excellence.

"I have to say Black Powder reads (I haven't played it yet) as if it's hit this flexibility par excellence."

It is even more flexibel, because you can use different based armies against each other.

I would recommend the computer moderated rules Carnage&Glory II, if the computer doesn't put you off. Basing isn't as significant as in some rules – no figure/stand removal. It is the frontage of the unit which counts.

The game measures everything in actual paces. In 25mm, the usual scale is 1"=25 paces. For 15's it is usually 1"=50 paces.

Web site is here:

carnageandgloryii.com

John Snead

I recomend both Lasalle and Carnage and glory II

You can use the same baseing, base for Lasalle and use it for C&GII also, thats what I do.

I couldn't get on with Le Feu Sacre- the basing rules confused me too much!

Black Powder is almost anything you want, as long as both sides stay the same. The way the authors play is with units of 24-36 men, with a total line frontage of 9-11 inches, but its just what they have based. If going down a measure (CM instead of inches, you need a frontage of approx 10 -12cm – 4 x30mm base would work

'I couldn't get on with Le Feu Sacre- the basing rules confused me too much!'

I agree completely. I know that Lard rules allow a bit of leeway for research and interpretation but this set just left me cold. I have no idea how companies are organised in different armies etc. I'm not a fan of army lists but basic organisations would have been nice. No, I'm not going to ask on the Yahoo group, they went in the recycling bin ages ago.
I play a lot of Lard rules but not these. Avoid.

Phew- I thought it was just me. I was disappointed. I too am a big Lardy fan, and was really looking forward to LFS, but it was just too complicated- not just the basing. It was the basing however that was the first thing.
"It's not a figure based system, and works with any basing, but use 12 figures per Bn at a frontage of 8mm per figure, unless it's British, when you have 10 at 11mm, but this is half a bn, unless you use what you have, as long as a infantry unit isn't twice as wide as a cavalry unit"

No Hussar it's a common thing among my gaming group. I went the Black Powder route and was glad I did. Reading LFS reminded me of the first time I went to a club and tried to play Newbury Napoleonic rules, I felt a bit left out and stupid!
Napoleonic gaming is at best impenetrable, at worst impossible for new gamers or those wanting to pick up and play.

I like LFS. There not expensive unlike most recent rules. But one thing most of my group doesn't like about them is the lack of infantry fire. The rules assume that the battalion CO decide whether lead or steal not the Corps commander. Doesn't have figure removal, but you do need to keep track of the unit strength.

Lots of free rules out there.

freewargamesrules.co.uk

And these will lead you to may other sites.

I like the idea that units come together and it is all being sorted out at a low level- the player doesn't care. I did something similar with some ACW ones

link

(Incidently that is #1 on google for 'Large Scale ACW' ! Fame at last!)

I thought the LFS idea of pinning was interesting, its just that there appears to be so many specialist rules/exceptions I despaired of understanding them.

I have Black Powder, but think I am going to have trouble finding opponents- my club are all Shako players.

"Idiosyncratic basing systems are the curse of wargaming"

The ruleset that requires a specific basing is the curse.

The great thing about Lasalle and FoB is that no specific basing is required as the game is "base" driven rather than figure driven. Have the same style of bases on both sides and you are set to go, no other requirement beyond that.

I play LFS III easily and without the hassles discussed above. My 15mm AB figures are based 4 on a 1" x 1" base and four bases of them go together to form a French/Prussian/Russian battalion and 6 form an Austrian battalion. The bases re-arrange to show line, square and columns. Works like a dream. With LFS I get a smoothly working fog-of-war system that allows for surprise and reserves and flank marches, I get a C&C system that shows the strengths of good commanders and HQ's vs poor commanders and HQs and I get a morale system that means my battalions and brigades dont fight to the last man and will experience gradual, escalating fragility through an action. I also get to see how the 95th rifles can outshoot Prussian Landwehr and how 2 battalions of Old Guard re-captured Plancenoit against 17 Prussian battalions. Artillery and cavalry both exhibit their traditional strengths and traditional weaknesses. And I can fight a Corps vs a Corps in an evening. Whats not to like?

Densely packed text with an exception to every rule.

Don't get me wrong- I really want to play them, but it would mean convincing one of the Shako crowd to give them a go, and I have found them over complicated compared to the elegant simplicity of other Lardie rules. How are your cavalry based?

I am one of those who really like LFS having migrated from other more traditional sets that tend to deploy armies in full view of each other with no Fog-of-war. Personally I don't find that sort of game interesting to play. If you can find somebody who plays LFS who'll run you through a game you may find they click for you. They do play quickly which I like and I prefer to avoid all the moral/firing musket tables that more traditional sets have. Of course YMMV.

However, I do think we're spoilt for choice with rules so there should be something to suit everybody.

I'm increasingly reading good things about Huzzah! from Ian Marsh and have a copy which I'm starting to read. Worth a look.

We play "In the Name of Glory" (ITNOG)4 bases per unit,either an inf.batt.or cav.reg. each unit has a morale value which is reduced as the unit takes hits.The unit is broken when the morale is reduced to zero. Each player has a certain number of "activation" cards which are used to move/fire/charge your unit.There are more units than you have activation cards so you need to establish what you believe are your prioritys(sp)Free to download from their Yahoo group and there are also versions for the ACW "Honour and Glory" and ECW "For Parliament King or Glory" both using the same mechanics.Jack.

Last Hussar, I base cav at 2 figures to a 1" frontage and depth varies – I love AB figures but they are big – 18mm really – so my heavy cav I base on 1" width x 1.25" depth aligned side by side. Light cavalry and cossacks I base on 1.5" depth and offset them a little to present a more irregular line than heavies. Works well and looks good for AB cavalry.

Timmo's right, you need to get someone to lead you through 'em the first time or two. I play them from the Reference Sheet not the rulebook. Reference sheet is wonderfully clear and concise. LFS III Reference Sheet has everything you need on 2 A4 sides and I laminate them together. I've tried dozens of sets over 20+ years, including the recent razzle-dazzle production ones and keep coming back to LFS for feel and simplicity.

'I play LFS III easily and without the hassles discussed above.'
The hassle was having no basing examples or lists. Does this mean that LFS III has some examples? I must have had an earlier version possibly. Is it worth me paying out for this edition?

BT

I have LFSII and LFSIII both have basing examples and sample OOB so I can only assume you have the very first edition. Is it worth it? Well of course I'm going to say 'yes', because I like the rules… but its something like £7.00 GBP for a PDF so its not a huge outlay if you still decide they aren't for you.

LaSalle is not a complex game. Definitely on the 'basic' side of Napoleonics Rules.

mjc

Like Timmo said.

And I can fight a Corps vs a Corps in an evening.

Nick

Can you really do that? 30 or 40 units a side in three or four hours?

I appreciate that £7.00 GBP for the pdf is very cheap so I might as well have a copy, but I have never played a 40-unit per side game to a conclusion in an evening.

- Allan

Allan,

I have many times.

In terms of the battalion level sets of rules, in my time I have played Empire III, IV & V, Legacy of Glory, Valmy to Waterloo and Shako, plus others whose names now escape me.

To my mind a key advantage LFS enjoys over these others is that it appears serious thought has been deliberately given to the mechanics and sub-system that can slow things down in other rules sets. These "bottle-necking" elements (for want of a better term) have then been weighted in importance and evaluated against time value for money, loss of napoleonic flavour, etc and then either deleted or new mechanisms designed to handle them.

For instance – with most battalion level rules a lot of time is spent man-handling lead around the table. I tremble to think of the hours I've spent just methodically moving march columns of figure stands onto a table along roads or re-deploying cavalry reserves of a dozen regiments from rearward position to rearward position. And all this often before a shot has even been fired. Hours can be wasted just advancing to contact. BUT, part of a napoleonic action was seeking to gain a terrain or positional advantage against your foe. The French Army, trained to manouver and well lead by good officers seeming to dance around their Austrian/Russian opponents. Do we want to cut this out – no, but we need a way to do it quicker. In LFS the early manouvering is done using blinds and a special subsystem with specific, simple mechanics to allow rapid movement and initial deployment and introduce fog-of-war. Better officers and commanders strongly influence this process and with LFS III also the differences between Linear & Impulse driven armies also affects this. Within a few minutes the divisions and independant brigades of my corps have moved onto the field, manouvered, gained or lost field position and terrain advantage and are advancing to contact and steadily being reconnoitered successfully, revealed and deployed from blinds onto the table. Reserve formations back behind the lines can be concealed longer and need to be so that they can be raced to reinforce threatened sectors of the line.

Just one example of the first hour or so of an evenings battle being streamlined to a few minutes plus some very real fog-of-war introduced and the advantages of superior command structures and officers starting to come to the fore already.

Then there is the command system, morale system, combat system, etc, etc.

It actually works and feels right,

Nick

Allen asked:
Can you really do that? 30 or 40 units a side in three or four hours?
---------------------
You can certainly do that with Shako, and I'd imagine you could also do it with LFS and Lasalle, too.

Shako and LFS both play at the same scale of battle (corps a side)

I find shako quite a bit faster but more dicey due to the single d6 thing.

Although I personally liked a lot of things about LFS it fallen out of favor in our club. I think the card activation and combat system put some people off.

Black Powder