"What would it take to recruit you?" Topic

Specifically, if you don't play Napoleonics, what would it take you get you to a table?
Better players?--and what's wrong with the existing ones?
Better rules?--and please define "better."
Different figures?
Games set at a different level? What level?
Shorter games?
Longer games?
Other? (Please specify.)

If you would be so kind, please add whether you've never felt the Napoleonic impulse, or you used to play and dropped out.

I don't care for Napoleonics, or really anything black powder. I did play Nepoleon's Battles (bought the rules second hand for $5 USD) in 15mm because the local group was playing it, and I had hopes that if I went along that they may reciprocate and play some of the games I prefer. That didn't work out, so I stopped playing. Later the group changed to 28mm, so I was particularly glad I didn't invest in miniatures.

So I suppose that I could be convinced to play, but only if the group that I was playing with was rotating periods/rules and would be open to playing some games I prefer upon occasion.

Someone else owning and painting all the figures, plus running the game. Then I'll play. Rules are irrelevant, since I'll just be dropping by. I've heard the arguments between those familiar with the rules being used, and that's not my circus, not my monkeys.
Twice I bought full British 15mm armies. Twice I sold out due to lack of interest.

Ironic thing is that when I first got entangled in The Hobby™️, the only "real wargamers" were considered 30mm CLS players. Even 15mm was looked down upon. Which the 15mm players ignored and went on their merry way.
My interests became AWI and Colonial. In fact, when I told the 15mm Napoleonic guru that I was starting up with 25mm AWI, he was actually puzzled. "Why?" he asked me. "Because!" I answered.

Someone else owning and painting all the figures, plus running the game. Then I'll play.
Twice I bought full British 15mm armies. Twice I sold out due to lack of interest.

Ironic thing is that when I first got entangled in The Hobby™️, the only "real wargamers" were considered 30mm CLS players. Even 15mm was looked down upon. Which the 15mm players ignored and went on their merry way.
My interests became AWI and Colonial. In fact, when I told the 15mm Napoleonic guru that I was starting up with 25mm AWI, he was actually puzzled. "Why?" he asked me. "Because!" I answered.

"Better players?--and what's wrong with the existing ones?"

Go to the Napoleonics Board here on TMP and you will find the answer to that question right there in front of your face….

Love Napoleonics.
However , I am not a good recruit. Since I have designed rules in the past, I would be comparing them to reality. Such as scale relationships, ground, time, troop. Also available unit actions.

Wow! That is definite.

I find Napoleonic miniatures dull as dirt, so likely nothing. Make it a higher level game with real maneuver choices and strategy beyond line them up and roll dice until one person's line fails and I might get interested, but I'd still have to play with the guys who bicker over button placement and color or some other bit of minutiae, so I doubt it even then.

That's how it looks to me as an outsider looking in. I have tried it a couple of times and nothing changed these opinions.

Finding a good set of battalion level rules that doesn't take a Rhodes Scholar to figure out.

I started with "Napoleon's Battles" but I like battalions and I like to play British so Napoleon's Battles didn't work for me. Then I get in with a group that play AOE. I have the same problems with AOE.

I played the latest version of Empire (whatever he calls it now) and if someone else runs the game I can get by but I would never buy and base figures to it.

I have stayed away from "General de Brigade" because I assumed it was the same system as "British Grenadier" which I dislike. But maybe it's not. But how does those rules work with 15mm?

We play battalions with our own club rules which isn't bad. So I am starting to put some armies together for it.

Beside the rules question. I think a lot of people don't want to do Napoleonics because of having to deal with skirmishers. In a regimental ACW or FPW game, every regiment can skirmish. But it is a lot more complicated with Napoleonics. That is one advantage to brigade play, the skirmishers are built in.

I dropped out, tried to restart and found that the reasons I left were mostly complexity and group preferred to play variety of periods and rules rather than different battles with the Nap rules. Now I play Age of Hannibal and enjoy myself. I still love reading on Nap period best.

I would love to play in a Napoleonics group. That to me is Classic Toy Soldiers, all the brilliant uniforms, the three standard groups of arms, black powder weaponry, generals waving swords -- and that's what I saw being played by organized groups when I was getting started in the hobby. But nothing going on around me in decades. Where has all the love gone?

Sign me up -- if the rules are fun and not too fiddly, and the scale is right, I'm all in. En avant, mes braves!

I'm not all that interested in Napoleoncs, and have always had other things I'd rather spend my time and money on. However, I do like to contribute to the group's games, so I have looked for small forces that would add some color to the games. When they were doing only 25mm, I tried to find some Reuss soldiers, but nobody made them back then. They decided to go for 15mm armies, others quickly jumped on doing British, Austrians, Russians, and French. After a while, I got a good deal on a big bag of Saxons, and went with Saxony, hoping to add a different color, and make a contribution without too much trouble and expense.

Grelber

Been there, done that, gave away the figures. I enjoy the history (some authors excepted), but apart from some skirmish games, using 30-odd 28mm figures I was given (Prussians) and bought on impulse, unlikely to play the period again.

Not going to happen.

Wolfhag

Smaller armies (less making one decision and moving 6+ things).
Larger variety of arms.
More variety in objectives.
Less simulation/more action (fewer steps between making a decision and implementing it on the board)
Greater player interaction density.
Increased terrain variety.
Better uniforms.

… if you picked even two of these, is it still Napoleonics?

"Go to the Napoleonics Board here on TMP and you will find the answer to that question"

Thank you Murphy. Do you always adjust fire by telling the gunner "You Missed!"?

tgerritson, you might start from "Napoleon's Battles." Not high on my list, but it might get you where you want to go.

eto, "smaller, larger, less greater increased and better" don't get me far without knowing what you think of as the norm--or, in some places, what you regard as better. (Is the uniform of Prussian landwehr or Russian Opolchenie better or worse than a Chasseur a Cheval of the Imperial Guard in full dress?)

No idea what "Greater player interaction density" is.

Better players?--and what's wrong with the existing ones?

Go to the Napoleonics Board here on TMP and you will find the answer to that question right there in front of your face….

Is that a current opinion or from the past? A lot of the olden previous contributors don't seem to be around any more.

Yes. The Napoleonics Boards' more … emphatic members seem to have become ex-members.
The ones who remain who used to be "part of the problem" no longer have anyone to fight with. 😄

Oh. And it's "Napoleonics" as long as it represents historical or possible military engagements of the Napoleonic period. My personal sweet spot is commanding a brigade, division or corps, but that doesn't make Sharp Practice or Napoleon's Battles unNapoleonic.

I do draw the line at zombies, dragons and vampires even if some of the castings are still painted in Napoleonic uniforms.

I've occasionally played Napoleonic naval, and expect to do so again.

As for Napoleonic land warfare, to get me into it would primarly require two things: I'd have to have enough hobby time that getting into a new period seemed defensible, and there'd had to be at least a few local people to play it with.

Yes. The Napoleonics Boards' more … emphatic members seem to have become ex-members.
The ones who remain who used to be "part of the problem" no longer have anyone to fight with. 😄

There's still a few warrior acolytes hanging around, John, ready to spring into action if they feel their chosen saint has been besmirched, even at the fifth remove. Don't forget that there are specific words that shall never be typed, lest they resurrect the ultra-warriors- the 'b' and 'M' words, or the 'G', 'B', 'W' and 'other B' names.

Is "bricoles" one of those words? That word just makes a ghostly, Lovecraftian miasma when I go to that Board. But I have no need to go there.
I'm clueless about the others. Happily.

This is a bit like asking me what it would ta ke to get me to eat shrimp voluntarily.

OK, maybe that's extreme.

I have played and enjoyed Napoleonic naval games. I rather like them, actually. I don't like them enough to make, paint, and store ships, but I'll play with other gamers' stuff.

Napoleonic land warfare just isn't interesting or enjoyable enough for me to play.

I have to admit, though, that I did many years ago buy enough small rhinoceroses to provide mounts for my entire box of Airfix 1/72 French Cuirassiers.

I play Napoleonics so not much

Now, zombie gaming – that is a horse of a different colour!

Is "XXXXXXXX" one of those words?

Shut up, you fool! They may awaken……

Thank you all. Believe it or not, this helps.

"smaller, larger, less greater increased and better" don't get me far without knowing what you think of as the norm

Well, those are the comparisons you started the OP with. I assumed you meant with respect Napoleonics games. That's the standard I used.

Admittely, "better uniforms" is highly subjective and a bit tongue-in-cheek. So, by way of clarification, I could not think of any uniforms worse than Napoleonic uniforms. Even the abysmal late 20th Century US Navy uniforms I had to wear (choker whites being the exception).

I play Napoleonics so not much

Now, zombie gaming – that is a horse of a different colour!

Well I just got started playing The Silver Bayonet which combines Napoleonic's with Zombies!

Kim

Napoleonic land warfare just isn't interesting or enjoyable enough for me to play.

What is the closest period in time which is interesting or enjoyable enough to play?

We've had some success getting new players with 'Blucher', easy to learn and fun to play. My group plays it in 28mm and 15mm.

I played Napoleon's Battles (with Uncle Duke no less) and still didn't enjoy it. I do love Naval games, however, so will amend my answer to Napoleonic Naval Warfare is fun to play.

I do enjoy Horatio Hornblower and Sharpes, so perhaps I could play a skirmish game, though I wouldn't collect or paint the minis. I would rather play a good old hex and counter strategic board game of the strategic situation than a full scale Napoleonic Battle in miniature.

Analysis paralysis on my part.

I have acquired a large amount of naps but need to organise them so they make a coherent army. Step 1 involves identifying who is who which can be a bit of a challenge for me when it comes to cavalry. Then decide on basing which ties into the ruleset which I haven't decided upon yet.

I have a similar issue with the SYW forces I have also acquired.

I like the period and the flavor but just can't pull the trigger on sorting out what I have.

I think I'd enjoy smaller games as part of a campaign.

eto, my problem is that I still don't know what you regard as a typical Napoleonics miniatures game. Does "smaller" mean you want smaller than Borodino? Or Smaller than Oelper or Chippewa? Does "greater variety of arms" mean you want something completely outside infantry, cavalry and artillery, or will 20+ varieties within that suffice?

Tgerritsen, you have my sympathies. I would only play Napoleon's Battles again for cash in advance. But there are people who love it.

kiltboy, a suggestion: pick what size battles you'd like a campaign to handle, count your troops, and then base them for rules which will let them be enough. For myself, outside of my old CLS armies, my rule is that 20mm and up are based individually, and only rules which can work with that are considered. In smaller scales, troops are based to a constant frontage, or some fraction thereof--think V&B with 3" infantry and cavalry and 1.5" guns and skirmishers--and only rules which can work with that are considered. That still leaves a lot of rules, but it solves the basing.

Does "smaller" mean

Smaller means what I wrote in my post.

(less making one decision and moving 6+ things)

outside infantry, cavalry and artillery, or will 20+ varieties within that suffice

Greater in either dimension. That's why I said greater and didn't constrain it.