"1st Polotsk, 1812 w/ scenario" Topic

for Field of Battle by Brent Oman; the battle report has a detailed explanation of how the mechanics of these rules work in the context of the game, that may be of particular interest if you've never played them.

link

Hope you enjoy it!

Peter

Nice touch with the quotes in French and Cyrillic alphabets.

Since my French is minimal and my Russian non existent, Joe,hopefully Babelfish didn't butcher the translations too outrageously, LOL!

Peter

Interesting report of one of the often over looked actions of the 1812 campaign.

The only think that surprised me was that you rated St Cyr at the same level of skill as Oudinot, when everthing I've ever read indicates that 'The Owl' was the far better general.

Great report and lovely looking game Peter. Looks an interesting rule set too.

138Sqn:

Don't know if I'd agree that St Cyr was a "far better" general (although St Cyr himself certainly would have, generally having a high opinion of himself). A better general, I think so. He was not well liked by his fellow officers, while Oudinot generally was. not that that is necessarily a major criterion.

For Field of battle, the rating takes in both the overall quality of staff/comand, and the officer in question. Thus 1812 French have a statndard rating of "Skilled", with some Excellent and some Average. 1812 Russians have a standard rating of "Average", with some poor and some skilled. Even then, the Leadership Die type still undergoes some variation based on a D20 roll fpor each officer (good day, bad day, Chief of staff ill, etc).

So, I could go with Oudinot Average and St Cyr Skilled much more than Oudinot Skilled and St. Cyr Excellent – IMHO he certainly wasn't at the level of Davout, Lannes, Massena, or even Suchet or Eugene, maybe not Ney pre 1813 (and loss of Jomini as Chief of Staff). Overall, for the purposes of the game, I'll probably leave it as is.