"Napoleon at War ruleset?" Topic

Anyone playing Napoleon at War by Men at War? It seemed to get some traction a few tears ago when it first appeared, but I have not heard much of anything since.

I am interested because it appears to be tailored for a 6x4 foot game table, each unit represents a battalion, regiment or battery, and it includes basic scenarios. From the information on the publishers website each nation has unique capabilities, so each nation has particular strengths and weaknesses.

My current preferred "not overly detailed Napoleonic ruleset where units represent a battalion, regiment and battery" is Shako. I like Shako because they are easy for the "non-Napoleonic gamer" to grasp and easy for the "guy who plays a lot of different periods" to remember. I can be away from the game for several months and come back and play a game without having to digest the rulebook again.

But I am always looking for another Napoleonic ruleset, especially one that might have a little more chrome.

What say you, learned TMPers?

Definitely not to my taste.

I played a number of games with them and although they do have some unique mechanisms they lead to more arguments than playing. The layout is very confusing and we ended up typing out the rules so as to put some sort of order in them.

Stick with Shako.

Just my opinion.

Never took off at all around here.

I did not like them at all. The skirmisher rules were too squirrely for my taste.

Your NaW is a good rock, paper, scissors game in a more tournament format. It will have more meat and potatoes than Shako II.
Shako II can be used for same size of play and is better suited to recreating a part of a historical event. Least from my experience.
Setting up a Historical event has looked daunting to do in NaW for me due to all the special points system made to achieve force size and quality for balance play- (so on the to do list).
All with all there is strengths and weaknesses in each.

I usually go to the Carnage and Glory these days for this size game since it is closest to simulation, which I prefer to play when given a choice.
I will play all three in order to "get to play with others" due to limited players locally and the rules they prefer. That is to say I have to go to the conventions to find the C&G players.

here's 2 cents

MG

My local group uses NaW as our preferred Napoleonics rules set. We have enjoyed our games using them. I have never tried "Shako" so I cannot offer any comparisons for you. We like them better than "Napoleon's Battles".

I've not played Napoleon at War. A cursory glance of the rule books appeared a bit gamey. The boxed figure sets incredibly overpriced. It was a slick packaging campaign they came out with but it seemed to slip away quickly.

I've played Shako on multiple occasions. What I like about Shako is the ability to play large games in a reasonable amount of time. ADC's and orders add good flavor and take some skill to get right. What I dislike about it are the deplorable ability of a defending unit to repulse multiple attackers through shooting. Unless you're up against lots of 2nd rate units, you're in for quite a mess. The small unit sizes are a bit of a visual turn off as you cannot get away from almost a boardgame appearance.

The one my group is playing is Lasalle. Larger units, but the game scale is smaller. It does have a number of advanced or optional rules to add to increase complexity. The turn sequence takes time getting used to as you don't get immediate gratification for charging. You wouldn't need to rebase your figures if you were to play it. Skirmishing is very simple and is basically a modifier.

I think the rules were aimed at 1 on 1 or 2 on 2 and work well at that level. Some of the same mechanics are used in Longstreet and Maurice so if you learn Lasalle, you could go use rules for the other periods and avoid the long learning curve to the mechanics.

I own both, like both, and play both. Different mechanics but same level of complexity. However Shako is entrenched here and played a lot more.

Be aware battalions are larger and basing is different for NaW. If you don't have figures based 2x2 then you may want to stick with Shako. Especially if your group is committed to Shako. Old guys don't like change. Otherwise NaW is worth a look.

Note however that NaW has had difficulty maintaining stock as an ongoing business. That my affect the future survival of these rules.

NaW are a good set of rules in my opinion. Some nice concepts that click in after a few turns. I ignore all the points stuff and concentrate on scenarios so the tournament aspect never bothers me. That said, I haven't played them for more than 18 months because it's hard to find players willing to give them a go.

NAW are a good set of rules, I had the rule book for a few years before giving it a go. Wish I had tried it earlier because its when you play, you realise what a great system it is. The basing system is its weak point, but you can get around this by using markers for casualties. Last year I wrote an article on my blog about using different bases see the link here link

The N@W people have recently got more lists out and say they they have another campaign book almost ready to print.

I think they want to get their ACW set published before they do a (much-needed) 2nd edition of N@W.

David F Brown