"Additional FoG-N Observations. " Topic

Hi
I've added some additional observations in regards to Field of Glory – Napoleonic at my blog:
link
Cheers
trailape.blogspot.com.au

Thanks Trailape, great comments and a really useful Blog.

I have looked at FOGN briefly a couple of times but the poor reputation of FOG Ancients makes me wary. From your comments it would seem they are quite a different kettle of fish.

My only reservation now is that you and I share a love of AB figures but we seem very different in our approach to rules. You like LaSalle where I think they're a very disappointing set. I need a Command & Control system and a well developed Morale system and some differences between troops when firing (I dont believe Prussian Landwehr ever shot as well as the Old Guard) in my rules for any level of command.

Do these elements exist in FOGN in your opinion?

I do understand your statements about Corp level and that you cannot expect battalion level detail in Corp level set. Completely agree.

Nick

Hi Nick

My only reservation now is that you and I share a love of AB figures but we seem very different in our approach to rules. You like LaSalle where I think they're a very disappointing set. I need a Command & Control system and a well developed Morale system and some differences between troops when firing (I dont believe Prussian Landwehr ever shot as well as the Old Guard) in my rules for any level of command.

The C&C system in FoG-N is IMHO excellent. It's nothing like LASALLE in that regard (not that they should be).
Shooting. The big difference is between reformed (think French, later war Prussians, etc) and Un-Reformed (think 1806 Prussians). Troop quality has no bearing on shooting. How troops REACT to being shot however is another matter. OLD GUARD will endure hits better than Landwehr.
Remember we have entire REGIMENTS (Brigades) shooting at each other here, not a Battalion of OLD GUARD exchanging shots with Landwehr. Things like attachments of Skirmishers and Artillery will impact on your ability to shoot and be shot.

Do these elements exist in FOGN in your opinion?

In short, I believe so.
FOGN is NOT FOG-A.

Mate, thanks for your prompt response and clear answers. I might just investigate where I can buy a copy at the lowest price. Bit of a problem with the domestic Chief-of-Staff given I've just spent 70 bucks on BattleGroup Kursk Rules. FOGN goes on the list.

Thanks, Nick

First: Ditto on the FOG-AM point – FOGN is different enough and quicker to play IMHO.

Second: I don't have the RB to hand but don't "Superior" troops reroll 1's in shooting and "Poor" troops have to reroll 6's?

Lastly: You can pick up the main FOGN RB on Amazon for much less that BG Kursk!

Second: I don't have the RB to hand but don't "Superior" troops reroll 1's in shooting and "Poor" troops have to reroll 6's?

I stand corrected. I was thinking that re-rolls were only was for HtoH combat. I've been playing too many different sets of rules of late.
A downside to too much gaming :)

Thanks for the tip on Amazon.

You were kinda correct Nick.

In FoGN Superior and poor re-rolls apply to hand-to-hand.

However veterans re-roll 1's for shooting and conscripts re-roll 6's, so quality is built into shooting, to an extent.

The greatest ability of high quality troops in my view is that they recover from the blows faster – thereby maintaining reasonable cohesion for longer in the game.

Cheers
Brett

In FoGN Superior and poor re-rolls apply to hand-to-hand.

However veterans re-roll 1's for shooting and conscripts re-roll 6's, so quality is built into shooting, to an extent.

CORRECT!!!
:o)
Hence my confusion.
Sorry guys, I'm a tad tired.
Been helping with a sick relative. My brain is a bit like mash.
;o)

Ordered! Plus the Army Lists book for the period up to 1812. Thanks, Nick

I have looked at the battle reports on Trailape's blog and browsed the FoGN example along with several reviews and read the intro to the book itself. So I am definitely interested in this game and am trying to decide between FoGN and BP.

One of the things that looked odd to me was attaching artillery to Regiments and having them move around the table with the Regiment unit. I imagine this is to represent horse drawn artillery that would advance along with the unit and provide fire support? Can anyone comment on this?

Thanks.

BP is completely different from FoG:N.
The 'Regiments' in FoG:N are actually a collection of Battalions. Why the guys a Slitherine didn't simply call the units Brigades I'll never really understand.
So in short, the Artillery attachments in FoG:N represent an attached Battery (horse or foot).
In BP you maneuver Battalions (I suspect).
In FoG:N you maneuver Brigades.
That's my take.

Pretty much it.

The other important difference is you can make BP feel like Napoleonics (kind of) but with FoG:N the feel is built in and the command system is way better.

The gradual degradation of a force makes FoG:N superior. With BP the units, particularly artillery,are there and then there not, which is a big turn off for me.

Thanks for the answers, can you guys also comment on how long a typical game takes to play, say one of the size on trailape's blog.

For tournaments, we play 800 points with 4 hour rounds (including set-up). About 75% of tournament games have ended with one side breaking, the remainder being draws (although most of the draws are one side clinging on for dear life while looking at the clock!).

I would say that 50% of tournament games finish in 2.5 – 3.5 hours including set-up.

800 points gives you an army of between 8 (French Guard) and – say -18 (conscript horde) units. Most armies come in between 12 and 14 units.

Club games take 2-5 hours, depending on how much chatting/eating/drinking and smoko breaks are involved.

We did a Waterloo refight, 3 or 4 players a side from memory, which took about 6 hours to play (not including set-up).

The Austerlitz game we re-fought on the other hand – same numbers of players as Waterloo, was all over (for the allies) in 1.5 hours of gaming.

The fastest 800 point game I have had was 1 hour including set-up.

Cheers
Brett

Brett,

Thanks for that its always useful to get some idea how competent (or otherwise) players are, as assessed buy how long it takes others to finish a game.

Its a guide to if you are doing things correctly in terms of the rules. Not that speed is the absolute but I think most gamers wonder how long a game 'should' take.

Our games have been pretty random in terms of size but we are looking to run some of 800 points (although we are not that interested in tournament play) just to see what time they normally take, so this will act as a bench mark.

Hi
We played a refight of Mockern in 4 hours. This was a BIG battle.
See the AAR here:
link
Cheers
trailape.blogspot.com.au