| David Brown | 18 Sep 2010 7:25 a.m. PST |
In response to the many questions regarding the differences between General de Brigade 2nd edition and the Deluxe edition I'll listed the main changes below. This is in addition, of course, to hardback and full colour throughout! General de Brigade has been revisited and revised. Much thought has gone into virtually every rule mechanic with a view to enhancing and accelerating game play. General de Brigade rules remain quick to learn and provide for fast, historical games with a minimum of record keeping. The General de Brigade core game mechanisms remain but the Deluxe Edition is however, a slicker animal than its predecessor. The reworking of the rules followed a desire to avoid unnecessary and continual reference to charts and the amendments to such areas as command, melee and morale now significantly reduce some of the need for chart referencing, so speeding up game play appreciably. Brigade orders still contribute significantly to command and control, these orders limit the "nippy little battalion" syndrome and restrict the wargamer from doing whatever he wants with any unit. In addition, generals are now graded as to their ability and this directly impacts on their capacity to command on the battlefield. For example, the number of charges they can order per turn is now linked to their ability and this effects the timing and deployment of attacks, so players will notice the greater use of attacks en echelon and less reliance upon massed column formations. The key challenges in playing General de Brigade Deluxe are command and control, correct formations, (for both battalions and brigades), and appreciating or compensating for particular national traits. Please feel free to use the General De Brigade website (www.generaldebrigade.com) for any questions or assistance. General de Brigade Deluxe Introduces:
• Additional information of Divisional Organisation.
• Command Differences between C in C's
• Command Differences between Brigadiers.
• Regimental Colonels
• Command Confusion
• Broken Brigades
• Fog of War Deployment Cards
• Command Restrictions on Charges
• Massed Column Charges Restrictions
• Tactical Marches
• Formation Tests – covering difficulties when changing formation whilst being charged or when close to the enemy, interpenetration, recalling skirmishers, etc.
• Cavalry charges by squadrons
• Artillery Deployment
• Firing based on unit's formations rather than counting the number of figures firing.
• Skirmishing differences between troop grades
• Chosen Men (95th Rifles)
• Revised Close Combat & Melee mechanism and results
• Revised Unit and Brigade Morale Tests and results
• Revised Victory & Defeat Chapter introducing a Divisional Falter and Divisional Breakpoint.
• Rules for Ottoman Turks and War of 1812
• Three new scenarios
• Revised points list Hope that helps. DB |
| Maxshadow | 18 Sep 2010 7:55 a.m. PST |
Thanks David. I'm looking forward to hearing what the devotes think of the new streamlining. |
Gunfreak  | 18 Sep 2010 8:01 a.m. PST |
"Firing based on unit's formations rather than counting the number of figures firing.
" Now that sounds intresting, any chances of getting more info on this? |
| David Brown | 18 Sep 2010 8:54 a.m. PST |
GF, "Firing based on unit's formations rather than counting the number of figures firing." There are now only 5 entires to the Musketry Casualty Table:
Column of Companies/Battalion Squares
Column of Divisions
Lesser Line (20+ figures)
Medium Line (28+ figures)
Major Line. (36+ figures) So you no longer need to do a figure head count each time you fire. DB |
| Gunfreak | 18 Sep 2010 9:30 a.m. PST |
Thank you, that sounds great, does that also mean that big units are not less super killers? I found that any units over 36 would murder almost everybody els in ranges combat, it got the the point were I almost always kept my 24 strong unit in reserve becasue they didn't have much chance against those 36+ units, unless you got realy lucky with the dice. |
| 12345678 | 19 Sep 2010 2:37 a.m. PST |
Gunfreak, 48 figure units inflict an extra casualty when firing. The "super killer" effect of large units has been massively reduced. Colin |
| CATenWolde | 19 Sep 2010 3:16 a.m. PST |
I have to admit that I had tired of GdB for exactly some the reasons seemingly addressed in the new version. This more detailed description now has me thinking that a second look might be in order. |
| 12345678 | 19 Sep 2010 3:21 a.m. PST |
We are playing them today; a nice 6mm 1809 French v Austrian action. Some of the Austrian battalions are 60 figures so we may need to tweak the firing rules a tad:). |
| John Tyson | 19 Sep 2010 12:36 p.m. PST |
I'd like a link that I can use to order the new Deluxe edition. Does anybody have one for the USA? |
| Marc the plastics fan | 20 Sep 2010 4:22 a.m. PST |
cja Well, how did it go on Sunday with the game? |
| David Brown | 20 Sep 2010 8:50 a.m. PST |
|
| barcah2001 | 20 Sep 2010 11:56 a.m. PST |
I've always played grand tactical rules. What is the limit of force size practical for General de Brigade? |
| David Brown | 21 Sep 2010 9:03 a.m. PST |
B2001, Any force from a division to a corps is compatable for a medium to large sized game. DB |
| 1815Guy | 21 Sep 2010 1:37 p.m. PST |
A corps is pushing it a bit imho…… but a Division is a good force for these rules. |
| John Tyson | 21 Sep 2010 9:35 p.m. PST |
For a U.S. source of the General de Brigade, Deluxe Edition, On Military Matters as of September 21, 2010, has updated their website so the Deluxe Edition can be ordered. Select "RECENT NEW BOOKS" and then just scroll down the page until you find General de Brigade, Deluxe Edition. onmilitarymatters.com/pages I placed my order today. |
| 12345678 | 24 Sep 2010 1:13 p.m. PST |
The game went very well indeed; we had a corps aside with five players in total. The French had more but smaller units so had three players while the Austrians, with fewer but much larger units, had the remaining two. Three of us were experienced GdB players, one had played a couple of games, while the other had never played at all. The Deluxe edition adds a lot of detail to the rules system but does it in a way that does not decrease the pace of play. In fact, we found that the rules played faster than the previous edition, despite being more detailed. The workflow is much improved and the rules play very well. It was a very good experience and one that we will definitely repeat. By the way, the French won after a hard fought day of battle, grinding the Austrians down with their superior artillery, using four infantry divisions to engage the Austrian line and finally launching an attack with the remaining division and the attached cavalry with which the weakened enemy were unable to cope. The remaining Austrians withdrew from the field, still with a viable force but in no condition to continue the fight. The French cavalry escorted them away while the horse artillery peppered them with shot. |
| Bottom Dollar | 25 Sep 2010 7:25 a.m. PST |
I've only read it. Would be interesting to hear how different players implement the requirement for declared and/or written objectives for brigade orders. Does anyone take the assumption that they can be changed on demand without the requirement for rolling ? Or play nationality restrictions such as certain nationalites at certain times may change 3 brigade orders on any given turn, others 2 and still others only 1? Something along those lines. Maybe that kind of thing is already in the system. For instance, if a brigade doesn't implement its order requirements and/or a nationality/side couldn't automatically change the order, perhaps its should have to roll for "Loss of Nerve"? That kind of thing. Interesting and detailed system. I would definitely tweak it with my own variations. Unfortunately, no time in the long term moment to dive in ! :) Wouldn't lancers have an advantage over other cav against infantry squares ? |
Chortle  | 26 Sep 2010 6:51 a.m. PST |
It sounds like the new GdB is a simplified version of In The Grand Manner (ITGM), as I would say Le Feu Sacre is (by the Too Fat Lardies). Having read the LFS rules I would say they will take some beating. Has anyone had experience of the new GdB and Le Feu Sacre? |
| 12345678 | 26 Sep 2010 8:48 a.m. PST |
Chortle, I use both. GdB and LFS are hardly simplified versions of ITGM. They are utterly different, and much better, rules systems than ITGM ever was. I am not quite sure how you managed to reach the conclusion that you did. Regards, Colin |
| Bottom Dollar | 27 Sep 2010 9:09 a.m. PST |
I¡¦m not an expert by any means on General de Brigade or Napoleonic warfare, but here are some initial impressions. If I were to delve into Napoleonics with GdB, which I don¡¦t have any plans to do. I would investigate the possibility of allowing skirmishers to deploy as approximate company units, ie by company stands, rather than predominantly as a singular Brigade Skirmish Line. This would allow a player¡K or a General de Brigade¡K more freedom and flexibility in how they deploy skirmishers and this, in turn, is something which others on other more recent threads appear to be arguing was the actual case on the Napoleonic battlefields. Directives from above were issued, and manuals gave instructions, but tactical deployment and use was often left up to or was unable to be entirely dictated down the echelon to local/tactical commanders who were on the ground, many of whom had lots of trial and era experience and their own practical ideas for how skirmishers were best deployed. For instance, deploying by approximate company units might allow a player to have 2 or 3 skirmish lines or ranks, each capable of performing independent tactical actions or combining them. Furthermore, I would investigate the possibility of allowing skirmishers to charge units other than skirmishers or to attempt to stand to charges made by units other than skirmishers. Perhaps formed and unformed should play a deciding factor in this calculation? Why wouldn¡¦t a line of first rate skirmishers charge a formed enemy that has just routed or become unformed? Or perhaps a shaky and inexperience formed one? My philosophical approach to war gaming is, imagine what would¡¦ve been tried by common sense and then see if you can figure out why it was or wasn¡¦t done. Also, allow players more flexibility to do what the commanders could¡¦ve tried, let them take more tactical risks, not that GdB doesn¡¦t allow this. For instance, allow skirmish lines to deliberately move within charge distance of cavalry. They either get ridden down or the general of the cav sends out his own skirmish line to contend, or shifts his cav unit. In short, better to allow them to move within charge distance of cav and then recreate within the system the risks of doing so, rather than saying ¡§no, they can¡¦t move within charge distance¡¨ when in actual fact they could, but the majority of the time the local commander made a conscious choice not to because in the majority situation, the risks out-weighed the gains. But what of the minority situations? In twenty years of Napoleonic warfare how many of those existed, but never made into the books ? Or did they and they are yet to be found? Just throwing my impressionistic conceptions out there for the sake of doing it. Now back to the ACW ! :) |
| John Tyson | 05 Oct 2010 2:50 p.m. PST |
John snaps to attention and salutes Mr. Brown for a first rate, well written, wonderful rule book. I am more impressed with General de Brigade Deluxe Edition than anything in wargaming that I have ever seen before. Stunning. Absolutely stunning! I am proud to own this book. It makes you want to read it! Folks you have got to see this rule book to appreciate just what an outstanding production this Deluxe Edition is. It truly is a "Deluxe" Edition. |
| 1815Guy | 11 Oct 2010 4:29 a.m. PST |
3,2,1 a snap of the fingers and John Tyson is back in the room……. |
| Peeler | 12 Oct 2010 6:52 a.m. PST |
Played ITGM many years ago, started on them in fact, and very nice they were too,happy days, (may play them again, since they've been mentioned!), but I don't think GdB are similar really, having played them for years also. Nothing against ITGM at all, but GdB are just much more in depth, historical & varied, and have C&C for starters.It's a cracking De Lux book, I obtained the Gents edition, and I have to say other rule books pale into the "hmm" categary after seeing these, with the rather wonderful photos etc. Future rulesets may well have to up their game to compete I'd say. All IMHO of course! :-) |
| Musketeer1 | 14 Oct 2010 1:53 a.m. PST |
Have played and still play both In The Grand Manner and General De Brigade. The latter with its new content and presentatiion is an exceptional rule set, and despite suggestions to the contrary will play well with corps sized games but will need a reasonable umpire at hand, as does Grand Manner.
Was involved with Rudorff in play testing GdeB it was I can assure you a lengthy process which near the end I was becoming rather frustrated with. I now can see why the play testing was so lengthy by the way the rules have developed. No Dr Brown has put a great deal of thought and effort into this project and in my view has come up with the goods. Excellent rule set excellent presentation. Many thanks. |
| trailape | 14 Oct 2010 4:49 p.m. PST |
How many miniatures are we looking at here for a good, (not "passable") GdBde army / force?
Cheers |
| baxterj | 15 Oct 2010 2:53 a.m. PST |
Trailape, I think that you would need a division a side consisting of say three brigades of infantry minimum plus perhaps a battery or LC brigade. Perhaps 10 units per side to play a game. You dont need huge numbers of units, but it is based on 1:20 so the units are bigger than most rules. Have a look at the GdeB Forum for more info. John |
| David Brown | 15 Oct 2010 6:01 a.m. PST |
Will be putting on a Demo game at SELWG this Sunday – Davout's Attack at Wagram 1809. It will provide a good opportunity to see the rules in action and give an insight into a typical sized game, for those who can make it. DB |
| pbishop12 | 15 Oct 2010 6:28 a.m. PST |
I suppose it depends on table size. I use a 12'x6' in my gameroom for 28MM. To allow room to move around on th4 flanks, I keep it at a max of 12 battalion, 3 cav regiments and 2 batteries per side. That's at 20:1 scale. i can get a Corps of 16+ battalions if part of that is in reserve. Laying the entire Corps out at cnce is tight. I've been playing GdBde for a few years now. Best ruleset I've ever played. Paulie |
| Steve Lampon | 18 Oct 2010 4:48 a.m. PST |
:)
Is it essential to the rules to use large battalions – 20-36 figures? I usually play Shako 2/LFS which mainly require 12 figures to a battalion. I have been interested in GdB for a long time but have never quite been tempted enough to buy the rules as I don't want to rebase or change what I have – I know I could combine units but then I probably wouldn't have enough for a decent sized game. Can GdB be played effectively with mainly 12 figure battalions? Many thanks Steve |
| 12345678 | 18 Oct 2010 8:13 a.m. PST |
Steve, I have been known to play GdB with 12-18 figure battalions. My solution is to assign each battalion 24-36 "points" (which equate to models in GdB) and mark them off a roster sheet as hits are taken. I do not bother adjusting groundscales as the frontages are not too different. Regards, Colin |
| Scruffnz | 18 Oct 2010 9:33 p.m. PST |
On a similiar note, the rules have tickled my fancy a bit, but everything is based for LaSalle, 6 figs to a base, 4 bases to a unit, 50mm x 50mm base size. Cav being 2 to a base. Would this work alright without breaking up units and mixing them? cheers |
| 12345678 | 19 Oct 2010 1:31 a.m. PST |
Your Lasalle basing is perfectly ok for GdB. In fact, DB and I were just discussing that the other day. |
| Peeler | 20 Oct 2010 8:53 a.m. PST |
Likewise, I've used 80/90 figure Btns, in 10mm, and just count the French as 36's, Brits as 30's and so on. I know of others who use 12 figure Btns, and do similar. It works, and you can please yourself with the basing & figure numbers. |
| Shootmenow | 30 Oct 2010 4:13 a.m. PST |
A couple of friends and I are currently painting up 28mm Napoleonic units but are still looking for a set of rules. From what I've read on here and elsewhere, these sound a good set but what would be the minimum table size we'd need for a Divisional sized game (10-12 units a side)?
Thanks. |
| Skatey | 31 Oct 2010 4:06 a.m. PST |
You will do fine on a 6x8' table. |
| Whitestreak | 01 Nov 2010 12:36 p.m. PST |
These rules look interesting. Any suggestions for a seller in the US? |
| Greystreak | 01 Nov 2010 6:09 p.m. PST |
Check the 10th post down from the top, for the link to 'On Military Matters'. |
| Whitestreak | 02 Nov 2010 6:17 a.m. PST |
Ah. I've been pleased with ordering through OMM, so that'll be no problem. Let's see… Tomorrow is payday… |
