"Napoleonic Command rules 2nd edition Questions" Topic

Just recently acquired a copy of the rules, read through them, and hope to play test soon. I hope to play at the Division level so each player will play the Corps commander.

I t has brought up some questions…
1) has anyone played these and have or a link to any AARs that used these rules.

2) How well the play worked at division level VS the understood core of play… at brigades or large regiments for a more strategic level play?

3) Your thoughts on range artillery bombardment and how it becomes ineffective "sort of speak" after a short period… with the disorder of the target mounting to a level that doesn't allow increase with the current bombardment but only prevents it to be reduced ( IE unable to recover)?

thanks in advance,

MG

Hi, MG. Here's my take on number 3: The continuing bombardment starts to take it's toll on the gunners and the guns. Even if the stamina of the gunners could be kept up, there remains the problem of the heat build up to the point where is would be unsafe to to maintain the initial tempo. Also, that said, the loss of internal cohesion of the target presents a very difficult and immediate priority for the unit's leadership to rebuild cohesion. As long as the unit stands it's ground and does not successfully escape the fire of the guns, they unit's leadership have very little to no chance of regaining cohesion as long as they remain under fire.

I am sure the author will be along soon to debunk or agree with the above. It is for these reasons/results that I like his designs! Anyway, this result works for me as it seems to reflect what's going on with both engaged units in a simple mechanic that is based upon effects of each's ability at the time. You do NOT need to produce casualties to obtain results.

v/r
Tom

v/r

Hi MG,

Here is my take on the questions as one of the play-testers of the 2nd Edition.

1) The rules work very well at this level. This was the scale that the game was originally designed for and the only option under the published first edition. I have played them at this level and found that the game worked well.

2) Unfortunately we have no resent AARs on this scale. Our efforts have been aimed at perfecting the game through the Brigade Level game.

3) With regard to the artillery bombardment not increasing disorder this represents long range 'nuisance' fire, it does not cause huge numbers of casualties and after the initial shock troops become accustomed to the fire. The 'Treat Points' from the artillery keep the target from reorganising until they have moved out of threat rangeor the artillery have shifted their target and then being able to shed the 'Disorder.' Under the design philosophy of the rules 'Disorder' represents casualties, morale, and general breakdown of combat effectiveness of the formation.

I am please to say that unlike say 'Empire' you will not be able to cause 90% casualties to a unit from a single round of bombardment. (Three bounds with French 12pdrs seems to really seem to hurt).

Hope this helps,

Elliott

Thanks for providing the explanations, guys. I'd just like to add that the ceiling for maintaining disorder (as well as the total Threat Points) goes up with the number of guns that are firing, so, while a single battery at long range might just be a nuisance, a group of batteries will likely move a brigade off its ground.

Although the Brigade level is the understood basis for this edition, it was actually added later in the design process. The system was originally designed for play at the Divisional Level.

Great responses!
Thank you!
I plan to give the rules a try with a player per corps here soon. Hope to get to a point of a AAR, if a get some who will give some regular play. NAPs are bit tough in my neck of the woods. There seem to be big gravitation to skirmish or RPG.

MG

We played our first game of this on Wednesday night and i will be doing a Blog report tomorrow. Very promising rules.