"Field of Glory: Napoleonic Coming in March 2012" Topic

FOG Napoleonic: Bringing overly technical, wooden, chess like rules to Napoleonic wargaming.

Because why should Ancients players have all the tedium?

And your preferred rules are…?

104 stifles – that's amazing :-)

LOL!!!

Well, if their Nappy Rules are like their Ancients set, they will have picked out all the best rules from several sets, and " Frankensteined " them together.
So, your preferred set will, in all probability, be represented.

I like FoG ancients. Many in the player base are trying to hack them apart into the same dead meat as prior sets, but for a little while they were a breath of fresh air.

I expect these will do well. My litmus test would be whether they did a good job of the early period.

I too like FoG Ancients. I'm interested to see how FoGN works, and I intend to buy a copy and try them out.

I looked into this, but the scale (one 8-figure infantry stand = @ 450 men, 4-6 stands per unit) just doesn't work for my tastes.

"Well, if their Nappy Rules are like their Ancients set, they will have picked out all the best rules from several sets"

Are you sure about that? ;-)

I suppose this was inevitable.

At this rate, I wonder when they'll come out with WWII rules…

Damon.

@David Toone:

What's amazing is that those stifles are the result of my having had the nerve to tell John the OFM to just shut up. John has lots of fans. I don't.

Anyway, my comment about FOG Napoleonic is just a bit of good-natured kidding. It's not like I insulted your mother (unless perhaps your mother wrote FOG Napoleonic).

105 now, and no, it wasn't me.

:-)

Ill be keeping an eye on this i think, although i didnt like FOG Ancients. It will be interesting to see a few reviews.

Steve.

FOG never took off around here, so I don't have any idea what to expect. I think I'd have to see a few games being played before I dropped the money on the books.

FoG-A was OK, FoG-R much better, though neither was based my beloved simultaneous movement and figure removal system. I'll look at someone's copy of FoG-N first, based on the scuttlebutt.

FOG A is my ancients game of choice, but I don't have high hopes for FOGN.

Tried FOGR and it was OK, but long and our group couldn't get into. I think any set of rules is in trouble when the example of combat for one melee goes almost five pages!

To me FOG was just another variant of DBX which I have never been a fan of. I know that there are plenty of folks that like DBX but it was just not what I was looking for in a miniature war game. FOG, of course, has great production products as their books are part of Osprey.

Many game systems that are overall sound, easy to comprehend, and gather a devoted following eventually find their engine adapted to many periods other than the one it was originally written for. See The Sword and the Flame, Warhammer Ancients, Warmaster, Hail Ceasar!, Johnny Reb III, Brother Against Brother, Gaslight, Fire and Fury, and Lord of the Rings just to name some you may have heard of.

The End is Nigh!

Sort of sad that the first two army books feature the army of a second rate land power. I figured they at least could have featured the French or Austrians centerstage since they were the two that fought the longest and hardest. After all these were the Napoleonic Wars not the Wellington Wars. Or is this just another British centric rules where the Brits get all sorts of pluses for just standing there.

4 to 6 stands per unit is portable. Any idea on basing size

Blech. Another tedious chart-fest, if FoG is anything to go by.

"Sort of sad that the first two army books feature the army of a second rate land power. "

I guess they based their initial releases on what they thought would sell better.

I'll wait and see!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well at least it is not FOW Napoleonics.

Because that would have been a very interesting thread.

"I looked into this, but the scale (one 8-figure infantry stand = @ 450 men, 4-6 stands per unit) just doesn't work for my tastes."

Really? So it looks like they will at brigade level. So now lines, columns and squares? To me thats like taking machine guns out of WWI or Tanks out of WWII.

"Sort of sad that the first two army books feature the army of a second rate land power."

Glad to see I was not the only one to spot a disconnect between the cover art and the titles.

Still it should get more new players in Naps which can only be a good thing.

There is another thread on this from yesterday. Best thing to do is go to the forums. There will not be a lot of detail on playing due to non-disclosure agreements with the Beta testers.

Basing is flexible. You can go with 40mm wide or you can use the Napoleon's Battles scheme as well. They have been playtested with various basing schemes.

While very large bases might be problematic, the aforementioned standards as well as 30mm or Empire standards will work.

The goal was to allow people to play without having to rebase in general.

If you are looking for a battalion level game, this isn't it. It will have more in common with Napoleon's battles regarding scale. I have not played the rules but I did bother to look at the forums to read what people have said and asked.

Played FOG once, felt like somebody had accidentally wrapped the dustcover from a wargame rulebook around a geometry textbook.

The world is all excited for FOGN. I assume FOG SYW will be next? Any idea when FOG WWII and FOG Moderns will be available?

I am a big fan of both current FoG games, and am interested in how this works out. Likewise, most players in my local club are likewise players of one or the other systems. So we'll probably give this a shot.

My biggest fear is that it will not play well with my current basing system. Our group recently started playing Napoleon at War in a big way and I just got done re-basing more 15mm figures than I care to count for that game. I'm not wedded to NaW by any means, but I would hate to have to rebase my armies yet again if this takes off.
Ah well…rebasing is quicker than painting new figures I suppose!

Martin

Once comment I do have to address….

>>>Blech. Another tedious chart-fest, if FoG is anything to go by.

Charts on which the most common modifiers are qenerally memorized by the average player after a few games you mean. I rarely have to consult the QRF at all any more.

Yes, it's a thick book full of examples to clarify concepts (that's a good thing, right?) but the mechanics are not really all that complex in my opinion.

Martin

I have not played FoG:N but I am led to believe that it is significantly different to FoG:AM and FoG:R.

As for FoG being a chart-fest I find that an amazing comment. Compared to almost every other ancients game I have ever played FoG is perhaps the one I look at the charts the least to play.

Anyway, as ever with anything to do with a 'mainstream' set on this forum there will be plenty of people who openly dislike the game.

Personally I will probably not play it simply because I am not a big fan of Napoleonics and have no Napoleonic toys (other than the start of a hair roller army I did about 30 years ago).

I've made it available for pre-order, matching the on-line book sellers prices.

link

Merry Christmas
Nick Eyre
North Star

Hmmm…

Designed for balanced army and competition games…

£50 for two books of army lists…

Any chance of the fluff including pictures of 6mm, 10mm or 15mm figures rather than the usual 28mm…probably not

I don't think I'll bother.

Bonjour,

Good to see more choice but…..

I've played FOG and it's OK but I'm reluctant to spend time reading or money buying another rule set unless it offers more than General de Brigade.

So I reckon I'll continue to stick to the latter, particularly as the De Luxe Edition is so nice to use, unless rave reviews persuade me that FOG (N) is a "must have"!

Paul

hmmmmm

Sounds good for evening games at the club

£50 pretty average nowadays

Not fussed about pictures as long as the rules are clear, no probs with FOG(A or R and both contain photos in most scales)

North Star stand by stand by,

Tally Ho!

With Shako and Black Powder around, why would anyone want to play another version of the yawnsome FoG?

Jaz
6sided.net

Having played FoG and finding it okay but not great, I can not envision how their venture into Napoleonics will be anywhere close to as good as a number of other rules out there. I will say that my only surprise is that they beat Flames of War – Napoleonic to print.

Bought FOG R – based up 2 armies and then used AB1's Father Tilley and King of the Battlefield with suitable modifications( A set of Emperor of the Battlefield is promised and if I went into Napoleonics this is probably what I would use). Sold the FOG R books.
Have not used the Ancients – will probably never do so – an expensive DBSomething set

Interesting that years ago rules were produced on typewriters and duplicators and sold for a few pounds – now we all have Quality printers and DTP on our PCs we don't see any homemade rules but expensive, colourful hardback sets.
Sure there are plenty of picture and there's information from Osprey if you like that sort of thing – strikes me most of the text is examples to make certain that gamers cant cheat or misapply the rules
Not for me

Hey Nick … got any gaming dates coming up?

Looking for an excuse to come to Sum-set.

Perkunos wrote:

"Interesting that years ago rules were produced on typewriters and duplicators and sold for a few pounds – now we all have Quality printers and DTP on our PCs we don't see any homemade rules but expensive, colourful hardback sets."

The authors of homemade rules nowadays either try to get them published in a magazine, sell them as PDF's on the internet or make them freely available on their blogs.

Commercially-published rulebooks seem these days to want to be guides to the historical period, advice on painting figures and how to construct terrain and scenery in addition to simply presenting the actual rules. A tendency I personally don't like, but it may be appropriate for newcomers to the hobby.

I'm kind of stuck-in with Black Powder, so I don't see any room for this on the shelf.

However, I hope those who are looking forward to the release get what they want!

Just enjoy the game!
GregS

"The Austrians fought the longest and hardest"

umm did they?
Austria 1793-1801, 1805, 1809, 1813.
Britain 1793-1802, 1803-1815.

not disputing the Austrians put a lot of men into the field, but try not to let your anti brit bias colour the facts (thats hollywood's job).

Dave, the table is up, 21-23 free, 27-29 free so far most of Jan is free, let me know.

Pre-order gone in, I will save comments until I have the rules in my grubby mits, something some of the chaps here might like to do,

Tally Ho!

Hi Doug Redshirt.
you sound a bit like me with WWII rules. They seem to start at a part of the war that includes yanks. I seem to have to wait ages for early war supplements, FoW rules are a case in point, had to wait years for their early war books.

"England will fight bravely against Napoleon to the last drop of Prussian, Austrian and Russian blood"

madrig,
at least use the correct years for austrians:
1792-1801, 1805, 1809, 1813-1815.
Secondly, mostly hiding behind a big pool of water and only sending out small detachments of troops (but of course fighting naval battles) is a lot different then campaigning with big armies as Austria did.
So indeed, the Austrians fought the hardes and longest by far

Dear Editor,
We are still using CLS @ 1:20.
Thank you Fred V.

No dog in this fight. Ya'll enjoy.