"Chosen Men - msg for Osprey & rules author!" Topic

Having received these rules they look interesting…lots of ideas in there.

BUT

The army lists, whilst fullsome on some armies are obviously not able to cover the entire period of the Nap wars…that's fine.

So, as Osprey rule books are standalone titles, can the author PLEASE make available the points costings he has used for the troops stats and traits, attributes, etc so end-users can make their own list for the forces that are not in the book, and never will be.

This IMHO was a CRITICAL omission in the rules.

So no secret squirrel thanks – can we have the details so people who paid for the rules can use the game for the troops they have.

As it stands, if you don't do Peninsular or Waterloo you are stuffed…and the end user should not have to reverse engineer the points system to build his forces…nuh, give us the details thanks.

Let's have all the rules points costings – we've paid our money for rules we want to use.

If not, these rules will be DEAD ON ARRIVAL if people can't put their own forces together…

Stick them on this thread or as a download on Osprey – thank you.

HW

That's annoying – I just ordered these – was expecting to ignore the army lists anyway though. Can those provided serve as a guide for forces in other theatres though?

What a waste of £9.00 GBP

Point systems that work are as eusive as short lines at rush hour….

The only army lists I've ever referred to are historical orders of battle.

'The only army lists I've ever referred to are historical orders of battle' – That is what I was going to do anyway Cuirassier but I like to have a bench mark and the kind of scrap I am talking about is less likely to have details of the forces involved, though some clearly do…

"Can those provided serve as a guide for forces in other theatres though"

For troop types, yes, those listed provide guidance…but all the traits – no…and there are lots of them. The officer traits, mercifully, are points costed as they are a 'pick and choose menu' of what to use. The core troops however, have no guidance.

"Point systems that work are as elusive as short lines at rush hour"

These rules are geared around a pick up and play format – points are pretty much the tool to use to balance forces within the game. Not make the same, just balance…that's certainly why the traits are already given points..but not the troop traits.

"The only army lists I've ever referred to are historical orders of battle"

TOEs are not much use with 30 odd figures a side – and multiple variable unit attributes all providing different pluses and minuses in the game.

Essentially all we need are the core troop and trait costs and the rest is fine. This could easily have been done but still now can be made available to unlock the costings and enable people to put together any forces they wish easily and consistently…that's the request.

The rules look good – for those with different armies we just would like a consistent way to work up our own lists in line with those already provided in the game.

HW

Couldn't agree more. Not all of us gravitate towards the Peninsula, judging by the sales figures for Austrian and Russian figures there are a heap of people not playing Peninsula or Waterloo for every battle.

I also agree. Point costs are needed.

Rules just came out. We have to hope Osprey will post more lists on their site.

Sometimes Mark Latham posts additional lists, rules, errata, etc. on his blog: thelostvictorian.blogspot.com

Mark mentioned somewhere that there may be other volumes covering other theaters. If you were to only pick one (er … two) Peninsula and Waterloo are smart choices.

That said, you could easily make up the others with the data given. The points are there (don't have the book in front of me) but points are by groups – something like 4 voltigeurs for example are 30 points. 8 line are 36, or something to that effect. Just do the division and compare the results.

The only thing to really quibble about would deciding on a National Characteristic. Playtesting could tell you if your decision works.

I would like to see the 'historical orders of battle' for Napoleonic skirmish games please!

"you could easily make up the others with the data given"

No. It's not that easy and nor should the end user have to 'crack the code' for organising his forces or playtest a new rules set to see if he can use his forces!! The multiple unit traits vary by type so it's not an easy plug in and go system for all armies of the period. Different units have subtle but important changes to their stat line.

It's simple. Tell us how you derive the troop traits and unit costings – it's should not be any secret. If Osprey want you to buy army list books then I can see the logic but they don't. It's a one off publication and they cover two theatres, and even then, not in their entirety. If they want a model of support for their product line then look at how another author Dan Mersey supports his games on his blog. He also makes himself available for feedback on his rules release.

So, for now, Chosen Men sits on the desk until I can work up army lists for the War of 1812, 1809 on the Danube and other possible uses for other eras…

Like I said, it's dead on arrival whilst the game is geared toward the units the author has and not the ones the end user might have…come on Osprey, pull finger on this one and get it right….sheesh…not much gets my goat but this one was more than irritating….

HW

You could always play Sharp Practice.

It's whatever Mark could fit into Osprey's 64-page limit.

Why not just dump them and use "Smooth and Rifled" instead? Better rules, wider scope of game and all the theatre expansions are free downloads

Why not just dump them and use "Smooth and Rifled"

Because its both a cooler title, and grammatically correct.

"You could always play Sharp Practice".

I could, but I have Chosen Men in my hands (and also own SP) – TFL don't do extensive lists but they do provide you with the means to work up your own as they provide, openly, their points system – kudos to them and a recognition that the diverse group of people likely to use the game will have interests different to the author.

"Smooth and Rifled"
Got these to, but right now, it's Chosen Men I'd like to use. They look interesting and we want to try them, but in our CHOSEN period (no pun intended).

"It's whatever Mark could fit into Osprey's 64-page limit."

I'll happily drop the single picture on p63 which would've provided ample room for the points system to be supplied to the end user. No excuse on this account, there is plenty of room inside to detail the points costings.

There really is no discussion about it IMHO, Osprey, gives us the details so we can use the rules please…a not unreasonable request from the people buying your product!

From a marketing point of view, this simple step will increase your sales in what is a fairly tight market – no question…

Actually TFL do provide extensive lists, all free to download on their forum. They've just released lists for Napoleonic Bavarians so you now have full lists for Prussians, Austrians, Russians, French, British, Portuguese and Spanish for Nappies, plus lots more for other periods.

Well, quite right, but not in the initial release is what I was driving at.

Rich was quick to put up the points values so people could get their lists together. In time, they have been added to, but at no time did you feel cut out of the process as is the case, at present, with Chosen Men.

I'm sure (hope) that Mark Latham can put up his points costings and all will be fixed…it's pretty easy to do and means people are more likely to buy/play his authored rules…a desirable outcome I should think.

HW

As it stands, if you don't do Peninsular or Waterloo you are stuffed…and the end user should not have to reverse engineer the points system to build his forces…nuh, give us the details thanks.

Kids today. I swear. Want everything handed to them on a silver platter. Stainless steel isn't good enough for them.
However are you going to make up scenarios without an official printed book?
I'm sure if I was as conversant in Napoleonic warfare as I am in others I could throw together an 1805 listing on my own just by comparing.

If the rules are that good, do some heavy lifting on your own.
Bear in mind that Osprey is an actual business. They will commission what they think will make them money and a return on investment.
Don't give me any nonsense about "responsibility to the gamer@. Back in my day we did our own research.
Or is this a special pleading for someone to do all the work for equal points tournament gamers?

"Dead on arrival." Sheesh…
Talk about First World Problems.

Ah for the old days when the Stifle Count was published here. I could have seen mine jump at least 5 points.

Aye, the "responsibility to the gamer" theme was expressed on another thread I can't now find. And it strikes me as equally odious there as it does here.

I decide against buying a lot of things but it never occurs to me to start a thread on it.

The original post of this thread was to the publisher and author. A request for them to supply the force rating costings method for using their rule system, that for play balance and force construction, utilises its existing scenario suite included in the rules and gives fast rapid pick up play. This is how Chosen Men forces are constructed in the rules. If you own them you will see that.

It was not an invitation for fanboys to sermonize to the rest of us.

So, ignoring those posts, the request stands – can the author please supply the method by which he has used to construct his forces so people with armies other than central Napoleonic forces can follow his base methodology without reverse engineering the points system?

This will easily enable players to put together forces based on armies such as San Martin's forces in Chile, Bolivar's in Venezuela and the War of 1812 and so on to be quickly assembled for the pick up and play format that the Osprey series is supposed to be about…this is not the Emperor's Press Chef de Battalion here and a lifestyle choice. These quirky armies are different and understanding the points cost weightings helps immensely putting them together.

This will enable players to effectively build their force lists that others can use as well, in the knowledge that they are based off the original author's design. This is what TFL did so well with Sharp Practice, so that the community can contribute army lists and force construction ideas of the same methodology and build the success of the game as people bounce ideas of one another…fairly simple stuff.

Thank you.

Battlefront never released the algorithms to construct Flames of War lists, nor has Games Workshop. Why should they?
Why do you think Osprey should?
If the game sells, they will sell and market the supplements. That's why.
Let's face it. The only time I have ever seen a how-to to construct the points for a game was WRG and its copiers.

In any event, too many times I have seen points change from edition to edition, and often in between.
Often I think they're making it up as they go along. The algorithm is "Yeah. That looks right." You should do the same.

This is not a fanboy sermonizing. Quite the opposite from a fanboy actually.

WS wrote – "The only time I have ever seen a how-to to construct the points for a game was WRG and its copiers."

Fred Vietmeyer's "Column, Line and Square" also featured an extensive and detailed point valuation system. I do, however, share your expressed dismay at the lack of interest on the part of some to do their own independent historical research; it is part of what attracted me to the hobby

B

Well, I never played CLS. But it is indicative of how old and quaint the idea of giving the procedure for constructing points is.
"Modern" rules are intended to make you buy the supplements. Cough cough… Osprey rules.
Now, WRG rules usually came with about 4 booklets if lists, whose points are obvious, but the proportions of allowed troops are not. Maybe I'm making the point of the OP, but nobody who produces glossy professional rules does that any more. The OP should bear that in mind. If he wants to do 1805 Austrians, he can either wait for the book, the "official" one, or he can operate by analogy and make his own that "look about right". Maybe he can add his own special rules too.
But expecting a commercial enterprise to release their secret algorithms is… unrealistic.

If the game sells, they will sell and market the supplements. That's why.

I believe the assumption by the OP was that the rules would be a one-off. A sound assumption, as thusfar, only Frostgrave and Command Horizon (both deluxe format) has had any kind of supplements, and only FG any printed supplements.

Oops, forgot about "In her Majesty's Name" with two additions, so, that too!

An introduction by the author in one of the glossies (WI? WSS?) said there could be future expansions. He also mentioned the possibility in the book itself.

By the way, Osprey's Field of Glory: Napoleonics has multiple supplements to cover other theaters. I'm not bovvered.

Battlefront never released the algorithms to construct Flames of War lists, nor has Games Workshop. Why should they?
Why do you think Osprey should?

Both Sharp Practice (through the Sharpulator) and Smooth and Rifled have made the system for determining points freely available. So if Osprey wants to compete with these two other systems, both of which are good and fun systems, they might want to conform. With rules systems like these (CM, SP2, and S&R) that have the potential for a variety of periods and theaters, I think both a points calculator and downloadable lists are pretty much requirements.