"Napoleonic Quickie brief look" Topic

We will soon make Napoleonic Quickie available via Paypal. Currently we sell it only at conventions and by mail. Here is a quick look at the rules layout.

link

Ummm… I really out to complain about false advertising. "Quickie" has another meaning entirelyf or me and I thought it had something to do with the Napoleonic pin-ups.

Oh, and girls, girls, girls! Chicks dig a dude who plays quickie. Just look at the proof! 4 out of 5 female wargamers prefer to end Napoleonic games quicker.

Seriously, it is just fast and fun…like a quickie!

Always open minded and interested in how others recreate battles of the period. Any reviews, after action reports, sample turn play throughs or overviews of what it is thats different about these rules that we could find somewhere on the web?

Change the name!
Best stick with Fast, Furious and Fun Tactical Napoleonics or something like that!

Agree with nsolomon99….what have you in AAR etc?

MG

I just wrote a long synopsis for you, but tmp drops text if you go to another tab to upload a pic. :(

but tmp drops text if you go to another tab to upload a pic. :(

Strange. I often flip to another tab to pick up a link or image to paste into TMP. Never drops text for me. Perhaps you are using a different browser? I am using Mozilla FF. Also, you can sometimes find your text by clicking the "Back" button in your browser.

iPad…

Quickly then. A turn is divided into four phases, movement, shooting, charge/combat, and consolidation. All phases are simultaneous. Brigades move and act on orders, combat matrix is asymmetric combining casualties and morale into a single linear progression, and all the Napoleonic goodies one expects to find are there: square vs cavalry, massed gunnery, skirmishers screens for columns, line outshooting columns, and rewards for nationality tactics and combined arms tactics. I will edit this time to link to pic of a brigade vs brigade battle. The battles take on average 1 to 1.5 hours to complete these small events of from 4 to 10 regiments per side.

link

This is our group play testing a mini tournament we bring to cons. Four players, three rounds in four hours.

We also play portions of larger historic battles and small battles as well. So Rolica, hougomont, quatre bras Oporto have all been played numerous times.

Since the game is regimental units of maneuver, the larger battles must be broken into sections to play. So you won't usually have enough figs to play all of Austerlitz for example.

iPad…

Strange, I surf TMP on an iPad from time to time and don't have that posting issue…

Regardless, what kind of ground scale is at play in these?

Cheers,

The Bandit

NQ uses a relative scale to simulate time rather than distances. Since movement is simultaneous, it is more important that things happen In time to make the mechanics work.

This isn't your same old Igougo or other system rehashed. Number of troops per yard, number of steps at the trot, etc. are all considered as happening below your, brigade command, level. Musket range is 6", canister 12", effective round shot is 24". Movement rates are, naturally, dependent upon the. Nature of the ground and the formation of the troops.

I like the look of these -spiral bound too, excellent.
Roll on the Paypal availability.
How much to ship to the UK???

Testiculies,

I've always thought rules that ignored ground scale in leu of time relationships were a neat way to go but have never understood how ranges get established in that sort of ecosystem.

Cheers,

The Bandit

I second mashrewba's comments and question re shipping to UK.
As someone who enjoys 'Snappy Nappy', I have no problem with your catchy title – makes a refreshing change from all that 'Glory', 'Eagles' &c. &c.

I will look at uk shipping tomorrow. And perhaps I can speed up my lethargy to get the paypal moving sooner… :)

Ground scale is IMO the inherent limitation of the old style of game. Napoleon knew the range of his cannon, as did other commanders of this era. Battles where set piece based upon it actually. So how far something moves or shoots is relative to the time used . Napoleon built his empire on time taken from the enemy, not the ground. Prime example is Ulm. With simul phases, we find that players concentrate on coordinated actions, but fate can limit desire in such situations. With igougo, my plan for my turn is expertly executed. When the enemy interferes, it become problematic. Thus forethought is required to get troops in combined operations to the point of decision while thwarting the enemies design at the same time. It is intense, trust me.

I like the ideas here. May pick it up just for inspiration. Got a non-fb link though? And any plans for a pdf release?

Looks like UK shipping is $5 USD or $6 USD depending.i will attempt to create a paypal event sell it buy today. Sorry, no non FB outlet as of yet.

Happy to buy a copy on-line if its straightforward. I'm in Australia for postage purposes.

Oops

excited :)
I wouldn't worry about the name in the UK -every single word here can be used as a euphemism for sexual congress (ooer ), genitalia or an advanced state of inebriation -it's just something we have to live with.

Try this

link

Internationals please wait until I have another button with correct postage. Today I promise…

Ok, horrible as my HTML skills are, I have a site with links for sales in and outside of the U.S for NQ. Thanks for the interest"

link

I'm an International and I have just bought a Napoleonic Quickie book!!!!

Just bought from the UK – turned out to be $26 USD incl postage – £15.67 GBP at today's exchange rates. Would be worth putting your dollar prices for the two options on the page.

Any idea how long that will take to get here? Thanks :)

Just purchased my copy from UK, too.

Looking forward to reading the rules and trying them out.

I wouldnt worry about the name.

Two Fat Lardies sell Troops Weapons and Tactics, and Chain of Command.

You can form your own acronyms…..

Ok, just ordered and paid via PayPal. (Also US$26.00 including postage to Australia) Didn't get a chance to enter any postage or address details. I'm assuming it will be sent to my address in Paypal? And it will come via US Post? Or something else?

Ive given it a whirl too.

Just ordered and paid via Paypal

Delivery to PayPal address in Uk please.

Cheers!

All shipped today. Thanks for your support. Remember to like us on FB and follow our progress. We also upload free scenarios for time to time.

Mine arrived in this morning's post, thanks.

Would anyone like a quick review?

Please do.

Yes please -or even a long one (matron).
Should get mine soon.

Still excited…won't be much longer -1815 has already got his!!!

I sent them all out the same day…don't know why everyone wouldn't have theirs yet…

Thanks Testy -I'll keep looking for Postie.

Just purchased.

Incidentally what happened to spock's right ball?

Mine arrived yesterday afternoon in outer metropolitan Sydney, Australia.

Have started to read through BUT not yet played.

POSITIVES so far:

- Only 26 pages of rules all up so yes, Napoleonic Quickie.
- Very nicely laid out, lots of useful diagrams and photos to explain and illustrate
- 2 page Quick Reference Sheet (appropriate for Napoleonic Quickie)
- Looks to contain some innovative thinking and some clever, original mechanisms

CONCERNS so far:

- In the very first paragraph of the introduction on Page 1 are two statements I find a trifle odd to say the least " … squadrons rarely worked alone …" and " … most regiments of infantry had but one battalion in the field …" The designer and I must be reading different histories!? There is no qualifying statement that the author is only referring to British Infantry Regiments. It's in the basic introduction and overview to the General Rules for any newbie or beginner to the Napoleonic Period!? It also raises the issue about which Theatres the rules have been designed for which leads to another concern …

- There are a few hints scattered through the rules, in addition to the above comment about regiments only fielding single battalions, that they have been principally based on The Peninsula War flavour of Napoleonic warfare. Thats ok, of course, if you only intend to use them for Peninsula War re-fights. However, IMHO, the Peninsula was not mainstream or representative of the bulk of the Napoleonic period of warfare. Personally, I prefer rules to model the major Campaigns fought out in Central and Eastern Europe with some special rules options to model the peculiarities of the Peninsula conflict.

That being said they look good, are well explained and I'll be giving them a run with the kids.

Nick

Nick, glad you are finding things within the rules to discuss. I can see your concern, and frankly the problem with writing for this period is, as it also states in the rules it is impossible to generalize about army composition.

Squadrons, in general battles of any size, operated with their parent regiment, or were brigades with other squadrons. Of course in smaller battles and scouting & screening often the squadron worked alone. So while the sentence isn't properly exhaustive, it hold to reason that large units of cavalry other than in the peninsula were used in most battles.

Single battalion is referring to operational numbers rather than battalions as units. In the campaign in Poland and other campaigns numbers of troops are only ever given in generalized terms, for example Ney had X number of men on the Bug. More often the terms used are in battalions. So Ney had X battalions on the Bug. Rarely are regiments spoken of for two reasons: regiments with multiple battalions were often broken up between brigades as battlefield expedient dictated, and when operating in the field the regiment was subordinated to operational command--i.e. The brigade commander. Napoleon himself counted battalions, not regiments, as the measure of tactical units. However, often regiments are descriptors of enemy formations encountered.

The choice to use regiments in the game is simply a way to brigade numbers and battalions into a cohesive system whereby players, for example me, can take historical records and approximate units, which I am calling regiments, for game uniformity purposes; this allows me to generate scenarios that give a good historical account and feel.

Most of my research comes from the general reading available to all, but the main regimental concept came from reading primary and secondary sources from the 1806 campaign.

Question. When recreating a historical scenario, which is the criteria to assign a specific Elan value to the officers?
Robert

It is subjective to the gamer and relational to the opposing commanders. Since you are talking brigade commanders, one must do a little reading--as we all have--and make those determinations for the command at the particular battle.

My rule of thumb is to assign a pip per unit and then adjust depending on which of the opposing commander demonstrated greater coordination and rapidity of maneuver. his élan will be greater than his opposition.

The neat thing about the élan system is that it can be unpredictable. One can bleed the enemy of élan, yet never gain more élan himself. Conversely, one might gain much élan at the detriment of the opposition and roll over him. One can never tell. Most games seesaw back and forth, so this helps emulate the fortunes of war.

Now about the range. Probably only the best would rate a five and only the extraordinary would start with a six. All that being said, a good commander would be a four, an adequate commander a three, a drunk a two, and a dolt a one. Of course a drunk might be U.S. Grant, so who knows :)

Okay, having read the rules over a couple of times, and at the probably risk of appearing dense, I have some questions:

1. Elan: The rules state on page 3 that a commander can only spend Elan points 'once per turn'.

Does that permanently reduce the commander's number, say 6 to 5? Or are reductions only caused by a loss of a unit?

2. Sequence: On page 3 it says:

"In determining which side will go first, at the beginning of each turn both sides count up the total elan. THe side with the lower elan will move first. All actions in each phase will proceed from left to right across the table ffrom the perspective of the person with the higher elan…"

The next sentence is:

"It must always be remembered that each phase is simultaneous for both sides,…"

How does one side go first if all phases are simultaneous and always proceeding fromt he samy side of the table?

On page 2, the Sequence on page 2 says:

"All phases are simultaneous in that both sides conduct all movement, all shooting, all charging and all combat together. As noted in the elan section, there is a sequence of play that strictly allows for all things to happen in an orderly fashion, but one side is never disadvantaged in shooting or combat because the other went first."

Page 3 is the only place I can see that could be considered an 'elan section' in the rules which only states which side to the table to start on, not what it means for one side to 'go first.' Does that mean that one side moves all it's units before the other?

I can't seem to clarify either of these questions from what I've read.

Mc. Have you played a game yet?

1. A player can "choose" to expend élan. This can be done only once per turn and only for those ways listed.

Élan is reduced in two ways: 1. The commander expends an élan point as indicated above, or two, the commander looses a unit and either cannot or fails to save the colors. Élan moves up and down as the battle progresses.

The sequence is to keep both players involved fairly during the phase. As indicated, a base lost to shooting, for example, is still counted as shooting until the end df the phase.

Example: red team must go first in the shooting phase as they had lower élan. However, blue team has a unit to the left of the first red unit, so it will shoot first. The blue units shoots a red unit and causes 2 casualties. The red unit will remove a base and become halted as a result. However, these results take place at the end of the phase. Now the red unit shoots and causes 1 casualty. The phase continues until all units the can shoot do so. Then at the end of the shooting phase, the red unit removes a base and steps back a second base to indicate "halted". The blue unit removes a base. In the next phase, blue is free to charge if desired since it only lost combat effectiveness. Red is halted and cannot charge.

The person with the higher élan often changes, and this is another twist that forces players to think about consequences. You may be chugging along thinking that you have the initiative in hand, then the opponent gains an élan and changes the order of battle. Now you are reacting where before you were acting.

On pages 2 you will note the sequence is to insure "no one is disadvantaged by who goes first." This, explained above, is simply that unit A cannot kill off a part of unit B without B participating and returning the favor if the dice Gods so choose. There are instances where a unit can be whipped out: artillery destroyed by cavalry, infantry not in square beaten by cavalry, etc. I those instances, the result is assessed in élan, not turn order.

This game system is far different than anything you have played. I promise you that. One must sit down with figures and walk through the learning scenarios to gain understanding. But once you see it on the table, you will never need the reference card except for things that are exceptions to good generalship like what penalties for attacking uphill or cavalry vs square sort do factors.

Mc. Have you played a game yet?

Nope. Mostly because I was stumbling over my two questions.

1. A player can "choose" to expend élan. This can be done only once per turn and only for those ways listed.

Yep. Got that.

Élan is reduced in two ways: 1. The commander expends an élan point as indicated above, or two, the commander looses a unit and either cannot or fails to save the colors. Élan moves up and down as the battle progresses.

So, if Élan is not lost or gained by unit losses, a commander with a '4' rating can use it only 3 times, once in three different turns, then the leader is down to one Élan point which he can't voluntarily use according to the rules. Is that correct?

Example: red team must go first in the shooting phase as they had lower élan. However, blue team has a unit to the left of the first red unit, so it will shoot first. The blue units shoots a red unit and causes 2 casualties. The red unit will remove a base and become halted as a result. However, these results take place at the end of the phase. Now the red unit shoots and causes 1 casualty. The phase continues until all units the can shoot do so. Then at the end of the shooting phase, the red unit removes a base and steps back a second base to indicate "halted". The blue unit removes a base. In the next phase, blue is free to charge if desired since it only lost combat effectiveness. Red is halted and cannot charge.

Okay. So, movement and combat is *considered to be simultaneous*, but mechanically the first player moves his units on his far left, when the opposing player has units left of the next first player units, he moves them etc.

Correct? An example of the phase progression in the rules would have helped.

The person with the higher élan often changes, and this is another twist that forces players to think about consequences. You may be chugging along thinking that you have the initiative in hand, then the opponent gains an élan and changes the order of battle. Now you are reacting where before you were acting.

Yes, establishing initiative and where the phase starts was clear.

On pages 2 you will note the sequence is to insure "no one is disadvantaged by who goes first." This, explained above, is simply that unit A cannot kill off a part of unit B without B participating and returning the favor if the dice Gods so choose.

Yes, that meaning of simultaneous, I got.

There are instances where a unit can be whipped out: artillery destroyed by cavalry, infantry not in square beaten by cavalry, etc. I[n] those instances, the result is assessed in élan, not turn order.

Turn order will be affected by that lost élan in the next turn, right?

This game system is far different than anything you have played. I promise you that.

There are few mechanics that I haven't seen before, particularly since you have explained the sequence to me. The leader locked in a direct line to the objective is new.

One must sit down with figures and walk through the learning scenarios to gain understanding. But once you see it on the table, you will never need the reference card except for things that are exceptions to good generalship like what penalties for attacking uphill or cavalry vs square sort do factors.

I had gotten to that point, which led me to my questions.
Thank you for the explanations.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You will find yourself not expending your own élan very often since things swing back and forth often. ..sometimes quickly.

In most games, once down to two élan, most players start reassessing their tactics, but it cost élan to change orders. Another dilemma: stop the attack and regroup to defend at the cost of élan, or focus on a weak point in the enemy lines and go for broke. Tactical decisions like this are common. Forethought is central to every turn, because élan is fickle.

Poor generalship like sending cavalry unsupported into infantry squares, having artillery unsupported by infantry, attacking strongpoints rather than weak areas of the enemy line--each of these will eat your élan quickly.

If you are lucky enough to lose units and not élan, then yes a leader with 4 élan can expend three of them in three turns.

The person with the lower élan moves first. The order of movement, for ease of players tracking what is happening, is from left to right from the perspective of the higher élan player.

I used shooting in the example above because the order of events trumps the need of the lower élan to go first. Regardless, however, of which unit rolls dice first both are considered to have shoot simultaneously. No casualties are removed until all shooting effecting those units has transpired.

Order of progression depends on who has the higher élan. If you lose élan it will only effect turn order if it reduces your élan below the enemies.

Locking the leader into a direction is the method by which I note he is executing orders from the division commander. Brigades commanders rarely decided to change direction when working as part of a division attack, for example. He would move his units as ordered to the objective noted. How effectively he does it is reflected in his élan rather than the old rating system whereby he would roll a d6 to interpret orders or some such.

Always glad to help

Thanks for the clarifications. Just to check:

Order of progression depends on who has the higher élan. If you lose élan it will only effect turn order if it reduces your élan below the enemies.

Is this assessed once per turn, at the beginning with initiative, or are you saying that as soon as élan counts change which player has the higher élan in a phase, the turn order for the rest of the phases is changed?

At the beginning of a turn, not in the middle.