"Neil Thomas Introduction or Napoleonic Rules?" Topic

I am about to try Neil Thomas's rules for the Napoleonic Wars for the first time. I have both Wargaming An Introduction and the Napoleonic Wargaming books. While I assume that the rules and army lists in the Napoleonic Wargaming book are a more recent distillation of Mr. Thomas's theories, I prefer the army lists in the earlier book because they allow for more units on the table and because they include one general per army to aid in morale rolls, which is missing from the Napoleonic Wargaming book. Are there any recommendations out there or preferences? I will be using the Quatre Bras scenario from Thomas's One Hour Wargames.

there is a yahoo groups page for the whole of NT's rules. Give it a look.

We use his Wargaming An Introduction with a couple of ideas from his Napoleonic Wargaming book.

The NW artillery rules are a stroke of genius if you buy the premise of the force being a representation of a whole army; if you are thinking of the units of toy soldiers as representing real units, the artillery rules in W:AI make more sense.

IIRC it isn't clear whether interpenetration is allowed in W:AI – it is specifically forbidden in NW. If forbidding it, then consider letting light troops in W:AI use the 2-base wide formation as in NW, since otherwise they are very unwieldy. NW clarifies that no more than a single unit can attack a given "facing" of a target unit – it might be worth adopting this in W:AI.

Infantry in NW stands a better chance against cavalry than W:AI, and the rules for the various formations are more complete.

The NW rules will still work if you use the W:AI army lists. As Big Red was saying, you can cross-fertilize one set with rules from the other, no problem.

AMW (Ancient & Medieval Wargaming) is the name of the Yahoo Group.

coopman, thank you! I just signed up.