"Blucher v Volley & Bayonet Road to Glory" Topic

I own and play V&B Road to Glory and they do the job but they are not my favourite set of rules by far. I am tempted by Blucher, all that eye candy and lovely shiney cards. But, are they much different, seem to be the same scale, bases are brigades, fast play, big battles etc. I'm very tempted, just need a push!

No pb. You don't need the cards at all. The system is very flexible. You might want to reduce the distances if your brigades are bigger than 2-3000 inf as the frontage would be silly to use as"bw" for firing ranges.

You will have to make up some un intrusive counters to show that one brigade has " included" guns.

So flexible it easily allows fiddling ( which I already did!). There are no sk bases, but nothing would get in the way of making use of some as house rules or especially markers to occupy Bua, small Bua ( one of my house rules). You know these little pieces of real estate, strangely world famous like La Haye sainte but which some rules despise or cannot cope with as "too small".

They're very, very similar in basic mechanics. I think Blucher's a bit less complicated in mechanics since you don't have to contend with RTG's reinforcing skirmishers which, in my opinion, slows RTG down. But Blucher's command and control system is more restrictive as you won't necessarily be able to do everything you'd like to do with your troops each turn. By contrast RTG simply limits you by command distance.

Since V&B doesn't really have a C&C system, I would love to hear a comparison of the combat and morale systems. We've been very happy with house-ruled V&B for the ACW, but it would be great to hear what Blucher brings to the table that might handle Napoleonics better.

Also, does Blucher have "grand scale" moves like V&B (infantry moving 1600 yards in one hour turns) or is it more incremental?

I liked Grande Armee but thought Fast Play GA actually hit a bit closer to the target, really liked Lasalle, but really didn't like Longstreet – if that gives reviewers any points of comparisons.

Cheers,

Christopher

What house rules have you added to cover command and control issues for V&B?

BLÜCHER does have grand tactical movement. I've been burned by them in play tests. Lol.

I bought Blucher within 5 minutes of receiving Sam's email that it had been released. Two days later, it was in my hands and an hour later, my friends and I were playing (using the cards).

We've played it 6 or 7 times, so far, and we're really liking it.

The command and control is excellent.

As far as grand tactical movement…yes. 12 BW movement, regardless of unit type.

I have used it to great success once…and to my detriment a second time. (my opponent rolled under 6 (on 2d6) five turns in a row… I needed just ONE MORE PIP the whole time.

Wonderful game, imo, and my mates are all chuffed about it.

Blucher is much more like FPGA than like GA. We recently received the rules and after the second game had the concepts of the rules down about 98% of the time.

We liked the slower wear down of units compared to FPGA. Fire and Combat are quick and efficient. Skirmish fire is better handled than in FPGA and There is a Fire combat phase right after movement. Best to go to the web site and down load for free the the basic elements of the game. However the depth of the rules can not be appreciated until you have played with all of the games elements. The game options for how to handle artillery are a great improvement of FPGA too.

I've been playing VnB for years. It's a great game, and I have loads of Adler armies which I Base on 2" bases. So Borodino fits on a 6x4.

I think Frank lost his way a bit with the second edition, which was tied up in a deal for four years with Foundry. Foundry subsequently launched Napoleon instead, shooting themselves in both feet and chopping off both arms too in what must have been the most expensive disaster since the Titanic. However, I digress….

With the dearth of VnB a certain young Mr Mustafa could clearly wait no more, and Grande Armée was born. Without doubt one of the best sets of rules ever produced. But simple it wasn't. Hence FPGA which were excellent but never finally finished.

The new edition of VnB, (Road to Glory) imho has put on rather a lot of weight compared to V1.0 from all the chrome rules and tie resolution stuff Frank has included. Yet still no C&C. He leaves officer abilities and command efficiency to the personal attributes of the player.

Blücher is now the better set imho. Not only is it better designed, laid out, finished, and produced but the rules themselves are very elegantly streamlined.

I think the tactical mechanics have more in common with VnB style than GA. So your VnB units can be used as is. You will have a number of fire or combat dice based on the strength and effectiveness of your units, looking for a similar roll "to hit" as you are used to in VnB. The number of dice reduces as a unit gets worn down, so you will be glad that you kept fresh Divisions in Reserve. There are bonus dice for having artillery attached to the brigade Base, for shock and firepower abilities, and for being "prepared" (similar to "stationary"). There extra range bands if you throw skirmishers forward.

You will move infantry units up to 12" (4 base widths) in good terrain, and will pivot brigade bases rather than wheel them. Not too dissimilar from the rules you know already. Don't expect to see units forming columns, lines or squares. These are assumed to have been handled within the brigade Base by local commanders and reflected in the game mechanics modifiers and die rolls. It's a high level game. A CinC will command at up to three levels down, not choose ball or roundabout for an artillery battery. You face the same decisions as a Corps, Wing or Army commander. Not a Lieutenant.

Command and control is present in Blücher. A commander has a chain of command and can only command troops in his own line and within his own command radius. Officers may also have one of several personal characteristics which affect the way they command or interact on the field.

An army commander has a finite (and unknown to him) number of "pips" to spend on moving his commands. These are generated by his opponent rolling a number of dice. His opponent holds these dice, concealed, and once the pips are spent a player is notified by his opponent and his turn ends.

Army morale is featured also.

The thing that has impressed me most about Blücher is the darned simplicity and sheer elegance of the game system. Simple enough to learn, yet with enough interactive subtlety to make it engaging for both sides, and just enough granularity to demonstrate it's true Napoleonic nature.

As a bonus there is a lot of information on how to build up an army from the major powers, there is a 20 minute mini campaign system to put your field battles in context, and enough freebie downloads from the Honour site to keep you going for some time.

You don't need to buy the cards to play Blücher if you already have figures. And free downloadable card blanks and roster sheets are available if you wish to use cards but make your own.

These are a top quality set of rules, beautifully produced and well laid out from someone who is clearly an expert educator (there is even an index!). If you are a VnB player you won't be disappointed with Blücher. Get a set while they are still in print. I thought twice about spending £28.00 GBP on yet another set of rules, but these arecworth it imho, and will actually get played. A lot. My VnB stuff is already relegated to a distant shelf, and my Adlers dusted off ready to conquer Europe once again!

Thanks for the comments – especially your in depth remarks 1815Guy. Since I play V&B for the ACW, and use house rules that nudge things more than a bit, I've not had any experience in how more complex Napoleonic warfare is handled. It sounds like Blucher reaches back to more of what I liked about the scale of GA with the more streamlined approach of Lasalle, which is great. I think that this will be a purchase.

@LeadJunkey – regarding our house rules for V&B, probably the biggest one does not have any impact on C&C: we use "linear" bases and simply allow one to move "in support" of another to provide "massed basing" combat advantages. A simple variant, but one that provides a significant increase in tactical choices without slowing play down. Specifically for C&C, I haven't introduced any real system, as we are lucky enough to usually have 2-4 players per side, and I use written orders and enforce the "no table talk" rules. That, combined with a degree of hidden deployment and movement, provides a great deal of friction! However, I have modified V&B's C&C system, such as it is.

1. The effects of being out of command are limited to only not being allowed to charge.
2. In combat, only Division Generals can attach for a morale bonus, and they can die – roll 1d6 per hit received on the attached unit, and any 6 kills them. They are replaced after one turn absence.
3. Rallies are not automatic with an attached leader. Instead, it is a morale roll, modified only by -1 for Disorganized (always), and +1 for being in command.
4. To provide some flexibility, each Division has a certain number of "Brigadiers" – the subordinate commanders that usually are invisible at this scale. Each one is a single-use resource that can either 1) place a brigade in command for the turn, so that it can charge, 2) place a brigade in command for rally purposes, or 3) replace a slain Division commander without the usual one turn delay.

Cheers,

Christopher

1815 Guy's summary had a number of errors regarding the details of Blucher.

You will move infantry units up to 12" (4 base widths) in good terrain,

Infantry move 2 base width in good terrain, 1 base width in difficult. It's cavalry that move 4 BW in good terrain.

Command and control is present in Blücher. A ccommander has a chain of command and can only command troops in his own line and within his own command radius.

This is not correct. There is no command radius in Blucher. (that's V&B). A group of units from the same corps and within 1 BW can form a "force" which can then be moved at a reduced PIP cost as compared to individually. But there is no requirement that the units in that "force" do the same things, move the same direction, or even stay within 1 BW of each other.

Sorry, StA your turn to be wrong!

There is one Command Radius although that term is not used.

In the rules there are three ways to activate units. By Corps, where units that are within one base width of each other and from the same Corps can be activated, for a point each. By Indvidual unit which costs two points each and finally, By Command where any number of units that are within two base widths of a command figure can activate for nothing but it ends the players movement phase.

Now this representative command figure does not have to be on the table permanently, as it doesn't stand in for particular indvidual but it is the centre point of a radius for that function while on the table – ergo the game does use Command Radius, all be it a maximum of once per player turn.

Sorry, StA your turn to be wrong!

No, sorry. I'm right. You're still incorrect.

Read the original post again:

Command and control is present in Blücher. A ccommander has a chain of command and can only command troops in his own line and within his own command radius.

The Command mechanism you're describing is for the CinC. That's clearly not what the op was referring to.

Thus, the statement about "chain of command" and only "command troops in his own line" is just wrong. The entire army is in the CinC's chain of command or "own line."

I don't know about wrong but I'm certainly confused. :o)

That passage you quote makes no sense – we need to ask 1815guy what he thinks he means by it because you are right, there is no chain of command in the classic manner, as Corps & Division and come to that Brigade commanders are not represented.

So by the same token there is no Command Radius for them, how could there be?

However, as I said, there is a de facto "Command Radius" for the command figure/marker that's placed on the table during the option for activation by Command. This is purely to establish which units are within two base widths of that point and therefore can be activated regardless of which formation they belong too.

I think this is maybe easier to understand if you have played Sam's other game "Longstreet" which has no commanders figures on the table either and no role for them in the game!

Command here is an abstraction of the activity of Generals, Staff Officers and Couriers not a line on the table drawn between miniatures.