"GdB Vs R2E main differences" Topic

Hi Folks.

Hope the topic has not been extensively discussed yet.
Cannot find it anyway…

What experienced gamer could tell the differences between "Général de Brigade" and "From Revolution to Empire" in term of feeling for the period, playabilty, amount of historic detail and system of play.

Any feedback wellcome.

"En Avant!"

I feel that RtE is in many ways GdB 2,

They have the same feel, the big diffrence is

1. Even more details, to improve realism, but it does mean RtE does take quite some time to learn, atleast if you are on your own. You do need a kind of mathematical mind to realy learn it quickly, something I don't have, so I'm having to reread the rules alot.
2. Manouvre Points, in GdB you don't have it, if you want to move a unit you just do it as long as the battalion havn't moved or fired. but in RtE you get suplied with MPs that you use to give orders, also you give orders to whole brigades or single battalons, to change formation you need to use MPs, to get a brigade from defence to advance you need MPs, ect.

But to me the rules feel alot a like, they are kinde the same KIND of rules, that go for realism even if it does mean there is alot to absorb before you learn them.

Not being familiar with RIE, I can't comment much. I have played other rules that had some sort of MPs, and I never really understood the thought behind it. Perhaps RIE rationalizes the purpose, but from behind the keyboard here I'll guess its to portray how organized the Brigadier is on each turn?

It's to simulate how easy or hard it is to get your battalions and brigades to move, the better the unit and brigade the less MPs you have to spend to get brigades and battalion to do as they are supose to do.

There is also the aspect of explotation, thats when you have the opernunity to to realy do something important, you spend lots of MPs to move unit or brigades more then once pr. turn, that way if you see an opening or possiblity of expolting the enemis mistake, you spend lots of MPs and you can bascily move a brigade across the table in one turn, BUT if you aren't carefull that brigade will be cut of and destroyed, so you can't use the exolotation all the time, it's a great risk great reward thing, also it takes ALOT of MPs so it's not always you can do it.

Another new thing, is the charge threat, Light cavalry can charge 48", wihch mean you can use the light cav or any cav to use it to check advancement of infantry, I still havn't gamed the rules so I know only the theoratical, not the practical

Both sets of rules as well as few others aim at 1:20 unit ratio, so battalions are of good bulk (to me anyways).

MPs in RtE are not the same as some rules I have seen, where you have 50 units but can only move half of them. You should be able to move and fire all your units if you wish, where you have to use the extra MPs is to change brigade orders, force brigades and units to make additional actions.

Both rules are good, I like RtE more, but that just my 2 cents. Why not pick up both sets and make your own choice, take into account what your friends like as well.

For very large table, and large armies do not discount ITGM, its and old set but it does work well in what it was designed for.

Or just play all the rules, basing is the same.

Cheers

AFAIK in the coming months GdB2 will appear

I know that the Federal Napoleonic Rules Police (You know who you are, Doctor) disapprove of posters mentioning other rules sets off thread, but since hexblade has already mentioned ITGM, I will stick my head above the parapet with my 2 cents:

For large games on large tables, you could also look at Black Powder, since their main 'raison d'etre' is to complete a large game over a large table in an evening. And they are designed for a 1:20 ratio as well.

Since they are loosely based on Warmaster Ancients they are a completely different feel from GdeBde, concentrating on the command aspect, with the capacity for large sweeping actions, rather than the rivet counting invoved in GdeBde…

Thanks Folks!

Sparker.
I know about ITGM and BP but my point here is to learn about the main differences between two tactical games for the Brigade sized actions we play usually.

Beside of the MPs, is there a "playablity" difference?
I understood R2E has more details but remain playable, how could it compare with GdB?

Do you mean "From Revolution to Empire" or "Republic to Empire"?

Sorry! I did a mistake… You're right.
I mean from "Republic to Emire", the "new" game at brigade level from the League of Augsburg.
Any experience with those games?

Ah, ok.

Having played both (GdB a lot and RtE several times) I see the main differences as being these:

1. GdB is somewhat simpler and more streamlined while giving very similar results.

2. The MP system in RtE is something that I do not like. Commanders need to spend MPs just to keep a group of units or a unit following its previous orders. To me, this seems wrong; a Napoleonic era commander did not have to spend resources every 15 minutes or so to keep a formation doing what he had told it to do; he gave the order and the formation carried out that order until it was achieved, the order was changed, or the unit met with a problem that stopped it carrying out its order.

Overall, RtE, although a fine and well-written set of rules just seems too complex for what it is trying to achieve, and what it manages to achieve.

Colin

R2E is really written for Divisional and Corps sized battles whereas we have found that GdB struggled to cope with larger sized actions but they are a good set of rules for what they are aimed at.

Release of GdB2 in September has now been announced by Caliver Books.

David,

We have played many large games with GdB (Auerstadt, Leipzig, Waterloo and Eckmuhl among others) and they work very well.

On the other hand, we found that RtE bogged down with even divisional level games as the processes are slow and do not seem to add anything to the experience.

Colin

I don't know how you are finding RtE slow? We just ran two battles over the weekend both at Corps level and all the players, half of them had never played the rules before found them very fast and both were fought to a conclusion but if GdB fits what you like in gaming then that is good. I think this is a great period for Napoleonic wargaming with a wealth of rule sets and figures to choose from. What suits one style of play may not suit anothers so choice is good.

David,

Indeed; it may be down to a greater familiarity with the GdB system. I really like the RtE rules and I admire what the authors have tried to do but, for me, they just do not work as well as I would like them to.

Colin

So at Brigade, and Division levels over the family's dining 6ft table I understand I cannot be wrong with those rules.
I gonna have a further look, and mostly some trials with both to make my own opinion.
Thanks for the comments gentlemen.

Tirailleur,

Given the paramaters you describe, either set will do nicely; it really depends on personal taste. They are both excellent sets of rules.

Colin

I'm in a similar quandry with these rules. I really like R2E but have problems finding regular opponents here in NZ. However, I do have some mates who play GdB regularly and, having rwad through the rules, they look quite similar and very playable. Which ever set you finally plump for, I don't think you will go wrong.
As Dave say's, this is a great time to be Napoleonic wargamer; There are so many different figures appearing on the scene it's mind boggling. Not sure if my credit card will be able to stand the strain though!

Hello Raymond. I'm the guy you met just after Friday lunch with Craig W.

I too am very interested in R2E and am hoping to give them a damn good thrashing after NAPCON. A bit of Sharp Practice, a bit of R2E and lord knows what else perhaps. We should talk about this at NAPCON.

Salute
von Peter himself
web.mac.com/nataliendpeter

Thanks folks!

Just got my copy of R2E saturday last.

Good to meet you the other day Peter. We definitely need to have a chat at Napcon.