"New Warhammer Historical Napoleonic Rules - Waterloo" Topic

I'm not sure how much of a gateway to the hobby this book will be, as Warhammer Historical has gone to direct buy as the only way to purchase their products. It will probably be fun, as games with toy soldiers should be. I'm less certain it will do anything for me that Black Powder doesn't already do.

I might point out that TSATF's "historical organization" is equally fanciful, but those who get into TSATF via normal historical gaming just accept it as a mechanism that simply makes the gamev work

Oddly, I thought about TSATF when read about the '3-company' battalion thing.

I, for one, welcome this kind of initiatives, even if they are not my thing. Specially, if they make some kids interested in the period.

Yes, I would be thrilled if the book includes some 'Napoleonic fluff' based on actual history, but even if it doesn't at least it will be showing kids that besides Empire, Orcs and High Elven there is also interesting armies to collect and play with in mankind's history.

I plan to get at least one copy of the book and give it to my kids. May be it will get their attention enough to convince them to play some Napoleonics with their old man.

Black Powder may work better for kids. At least my 12 year old enjoys playing it with me.

Maybe it's a difference in countries/cultures but don't see how a "direct only" £36.00 GBP book is going to find an audience of kids. For that price (and easier availability) they'll choose Fantasy/Sci-Fi game system rules or buy cheaper historical rules if they're being guided by parents. Oh, and if they're just getting "into" Napoleonics and buying miniatures I suspect they'd be quite likely to purchase a rule book at the same time, whether online or in a store or at a show. Last I checked I couldn't buy Warhammer Historcials online (along with historical miniatures), at a store or at any HMGS convention I attend.

While it says that a btn consists of 3 companies, it then goes on to say that up to 5 additional companies can be purchased. If you have at least 6 companies you can upgrade 1 to grenadier and 1 to light.

It also says the elite/reg/raw is per btn not per company.

I know they're still wrong on a historical level, but what they appear to be trying to do at a rules level is let you model understrength battalions by reducing the number of companies instead of having to reduce the strength of each company.

More importantly, how does this rules set handle bricoles?

Can squares attack? do elite units have berserkers?.how many attacks does wellington have?does blucher use armour?

I need to know,now wheres my skaven bodyguard unit

"how many attacks does wellington have?"

Two

Gents,

Has anyone got any idea how many units this game is meant to typically handle in 3 hour game? Would 3-4 battalion per brigade, perhaps two brigades be about right for infantry, including around 3-4 cavalry units and as many gun batteries?

What about table sizes for such a force?

Any info on the actual play of the game would be useful and what perhaps makes the game different/unique from other games (note, I didn't say better or worse).

Does it touch on the heroic aspects of the period with unit and leader attributes?

Cheers

HappyW

Certainly looks very pretty with some great images. .Other picky issues there shouldn't be an engineer officer with an infantry battalion and KGL cost less than British line. Also according to p 128 a line battalion is commanded by a Captain and only elites can be drilled.

Will probably go the same way as Trafalgar.

I agree with frosty dog nothing new just pretty pictures and who in their right mind will pay £36.00 GBP quid for one set of rules?????? A nutter thats who.

I looked at Trafalgar, played Trafalgar and binned the idea of buying them.

M

Hope the Perry's charged plenty for all the photo's of their figures and box tops.

I note that a generation of gamers will now grow up thinking that both sides used "Shrapnel".

Also, that there are stats for Pike in Melee weapons, so those British Sargents you have all painted will now have some practical use!

what happened to Trafalgar???

and was Paget really a Field Marshal at Waterloo as the book suggests? I mean , that should raise a redish sort of flag..

SERIOUS COMMENT

I've been told by a game store that these products are no available for sale by retail outlets…..is that true? What sense does that make?

well so far none of it makes much sense so this is just one more no sense event

Let's see… a French General of Division is 150 points mounted, a Brigadier is 110. A unit of British regulars is 90 points for 3 stands, you'll probably want to bump them up a bit to take advantage of the formation rules mentioned in the reference sheet. Each additional stand is +20. So let's say 130 points for a 5 stand unit. We can only guess what artillery and cavalry cost, but it's probably comparable to the infantry. So, for 2000 points, which seems to be a standard sized game for GW rule sets, that gives you a division commander, 2 brigadiers and 2 brigades of about 6 units each. An army would be around 150-180 figures. Old Nosey eats up a lot of points at 325, so he's probably only worthwhile in games of over 3000 points.

All the snark here is unbearable. Get off your high horses, people. GW's Skirmish games (LOTOW/HS) are pretty fun, so I don't see the problem with a Naps game…

This isn't a skirmish game. It appears to be a shiny new book for use with troops based and organized exactly like troops should be in the other shiny new books.

Clay, your comment about the availability of Warhammer Historical products to retail outlets is my biggest gripe. My FLGS has no motivation to promote any of the Warhammer Historical stuff, as they can't sell it to their customers.

Hi

'All the snark here is unbearable.'

I would imagine that it is based around a few issues:

Price, does it not seem a bit stiff?

What does the rule set bring to the table that makes the investment worthwhile – a few revolutionary rule mechanisms … somehow I doubt it – if they had them they would be advertising them – wouldn't they?

When I read the game sequence and saw the bit under artillery fire about 'guessing the range' and then writing this down to compare with the actual range … I started to worry!

Of course, people have free will – don't like, don't buy – opinions will always be forthcoming though.

Let's be realistic: when a company sets a premium price on its products they set the bar high on expectation – many people thought an equally expensive set of rules called 'Napoleon' were poor in the extreme.

I liked the overall package as it was informative (beyond the rules) – but as that whole 'eye candy thing' has been done already I don't think this rule set can use that excuse.

On the 'eye candy' comment – why do people talk about such content as if it was a viable reason to produce a book – if a gamer needs a bunch of colour pictures of miniatures to get off on, then … well … what has the world come to!

IMO they should make this available as a PDF download a la the recent 'March attack' rules – price them up at £6/$10 and there you go – at that price they are not likely to get to much grief.

Honestly, they would have probably been better off making a fantasy Napoleonics game. I bet it would get more respect and sell a lot more.

Warhammer Historical is an outlet for the GW rule designers to publish things they want to see in print… a sort of "vanity press." Waterloo looks like an adaptation of War of the Ring, so it's a system that's been tested. I'm not sure "revolutionary rule mechanisms" = great fun. Foundry's Napoleon had some unique features, but the game itself was pretty much unplayable.

BTW, I "get off" on color pictures of miniatures. Indeed, what has the world come to?

Game aside, the eye candy is delicious!:D Wish we had some bigger pictures of the Perry's room so we could get a good eyeful of the uniforms!

Hope the Perry's charged plenty for all the photo's of their figures and box tops.

It is not like this release will reduce their sales…

So…. from what I've been told elsewhere, the British get 3 companies and can purchase another 5, 2 or which can be upgraded to flank companies.

Can't really see why I'd pay £36.00 GBP for a rules set that won't allow the British to be fielded in historical units – you know with 10 companies.

Okay, to be honest… What systems actually account for all ten companies? I know Black Powder doesn't really, and neither does LaSalle…

Honestly it feels like people are getting unnecessarily worked up over the smaller things without a firm idea about the bigger things in the system.

Well While BP and Lasalle dosn't take into acount 10 companies, they don't say that british infantry had 3 companies, they both simply say companies don't enter into it in the rules.

All this talk of orks and elves makes want to dig out my slaughterloo armies and have a proper fantasy Napoleonic game

Lord Ashram – well General de Brigade for one….

I'm intrigued by the idea that not being able to field a historically organised unit is 'the smaller things'.

I'm aware I sound like a FoW hater, but at least in that system historical OOBs are actually possible.

Hasn't this gone through yet? They call each base/stand of minis a company, this has little to do with how many companies the battalion had historically. It just lets ju field 18 to 48 fig battalions. The choice of calling it a company I suspect has to do more with calling it something with "period feel" then modelling historically correct formations. I'm sure that in the "fluff" section it is clearly explained that a British battalion had ten companies and the 3 to 8 business is just a game function.
Can we all just let this go now?

@Bangordtu. In GdB (my preferred system) most British battalions are five stands, so your point is sort of invalid.

Yes and no… because it lets you field a battalion at 1:20 and those five stands have ten companies on them.

As I said, £36.00 GBP is a lot for rules that don't allow for historical formations to be modelled, and indeed for rules that regard correct terminology as 'fluff'.

If five stands in GbB allow for historical formations to be modelled why cant five stands in this system allow for historical formations to be modelled?

Adding or subtracting stands lets you model full or understrength battalions, this is not the first rules to do that.
I wonder, did you think the same way with Lasalle where all units are either four or six stands?
I wonder, is it worse with this rules system because they chose to call a stand a company? If so, I feel sort of sorry for you.

Well I've never seen Lasalle so can't comment…

But if a stand is supposed to be a company – and is treated as a company in the rules – then a British battalion needs ten of them.

If a stand is an abstraction of 'some blokes' then yes, maybe you can fudge it.

Though in the '8 stand' unit, it will have 25% of its force as flank companies where a historical one would be 20%.

I'm also somewhat concerned by reports that you can have Elite and Raw 'companies' in the same unit.

Call me anal if you want….

Haha well I'll think I'll call you a bit anal then, just a bit =P
I understand where you are coming from though. Good luck finding rules that do that handle that, GbB comes close I suppose.

"I'm also somewhat concerned by reports that you can have Elite and Raw 'companies' in the same unit."

This was a misunderstanding, it is not so.

(PS. I think the stands are 6 figs)

was Paget really a Field Marshal at Waterloo as the book suggests?

Not unless Waterloo was fought on 18th June 1847 !

Paget was made a Field Marshal on 9th November 1846.

I agree with what Decebalus said:

4" movement of infantry – 18" shooting range of musket.

I know, hoow the game plays.

This is another red flag here. Swap the numbers and then it is closer to being on track.

I can answer the movement part. You spend "tactical points" to get your units to do stuff. Most units have three Tac's, so if you spend all three on movement you get 12" at least. The 18" range bit is worrying thou, that and guess-range artillery.

sounds familiar.

so you can 'up' your basic move and effectively 'run' through only one round of firing (12 " gets inside 18 " )
or you can 'advance, fire, advance, fire' and take three or four rounds fire in return – and presumably, you can expend two or three of these 'tacs' to fire repeatedly in a turn too.

or some other combination – maybe they require a turn reloading too, It would fit with the semi-skirmish scale described so far.

Would it be a wild guess to enquire whether on average die rolls, any average french unit in column will be broken after 6 shots from an average british unit in line?

6 was the number Sharpe reconed on when he got his eagle, wasn't it?

I think Midpoint may have been spot on when he initially titled this thread 'Foundry new Napoleonic rules' – its deja vu all over again – what does it say about facing highlanders in kilts?

"Yes. We definitely need new blood who are as ignorant as a box of rocks."
I agree with John the OFM comment and his later assessments on the 'new blood'.
If new bloods are not willing to do thier own research on uniforms painting and organization ( in order to learn tacics) then I am not sure if that would strengthen the historical side of the hobby.
For a rules set which some would regard as a major set by a major company to offer such a cumbersome and historically inaccurate unit construction system if in the nicest terms…perplexing.

I got the Waterloo Scenario Book from Partizan Press by Steve Maughn which cost 25GBP(Nothing wrong with the book it is a great book with scenarios and pictures and army lists. well worth the price.) The GW book seems to have scenarios and rules so it is probably worth 36 GBP.

Rudy

You can't expect everybody that approaches to wargaming to be a scholar.

These books are starting points. They can be used to educate, even if just through pointing the newbies the nuances of Napoleonic warfare. But that is up to us. We can stand aloof in our collective ivory tower of 'proper' wargaming, or we can be humble enough to recognise that anything that might attract new blood into our hobby is an advance.

A kid that starts with this GW book -just because he's comfortable with a system which is familiar to him- can be bitten by the bug of knowledge, and try to expand his horizons. But if he is never exposed to historicals in the first place, how will he ever interested in the subject?

I remember that the first time I was interested in Napoleonics -I was about 14 y.o.- I didn't know even that a hobby called wargaming existed. I bought a couple of boxes of Airfix minis and played in the floor of my bedroom, with the soldiers spread up in what now I would call 'skirmish'. I didn't use dices to solve the combats. The minis I fancied most won everytime until only the two I liked most were standing and then duel between them. A lot of 'bangs' and 'woosh' were involved. I can't imagine more 'ahistorical' rules than those I invented in my imagination. Although, I doubt I ever had more fun gaming Napoleonics that I had back then!

My point is that judging will not help to bring new people into our hobby. These kind of books are opportunities. Don't let them be wasted for being too picky about what is and whatisnot 'proper' historical wargaming.

Best regards

This Book is aimed at the historical crowd very few 40K playes and WFB players even like history. When I played 40K and Fantasy at a few clubs, all of the time my oponents were grown men and did not have any intrest in historicals or even heard of this site.Maybe in Great Britain it is different.

Histroy sucks, it's can't mesure up to a guy in a oversized blue armor with a chainsaw,

I mean it's not like histroy ever did anythingt that cool, it's not like we have B52s or Nukes, or huge armies of troops in colofull uniforms that fight bloody yet epic fights

Actually people do think history is uncool unless its World War II or some Modern call of Duty type game or Samurais and Ninja, seems that people do get into Oriental stuff like that maybe too many jujitsu or karate movies.

Hi,

So, if these rules are really that bad, even for someone new to the period, what are the best rules out there? I'd kind of like to skip the "chaff", if you get what I mean.

FMB

If you turn on the History Channel its either stupid reality shows like Ice Road Truckers or Axemen or Pawn Stars(actually sometimes on pawn stars they have some intresting items). the only history they like is the bible(either old testament or the book of revalations.) Knight Templar Consprisies. Nostradumas, the mayan end of the world or UFOs that built the pyramids and genetically modified human DNA.

FMB,

People are whining over this game but pretty much none of them have actually seen it. If you like GW's other products, like the skirmish games LotHS or LotOW, or their Lord of the Rings gamje, go get it.

Otherwise, I'd say Black Powder is the best overall, though Sharp Practice and the Aforementioned LOTOW are great for Smaller fights…