We could really use this game!

[3munds]

First Post,

I know this game may be a long way off, but I've been waiting for years! Other then Struggle for Nations and an out of print Omega Game, there are no 1813 campaign games out there. I have been waiting for a good playable version of this campaign forever. IMHO the campaign is very interesting with all that's going on both sides. It could even be a decent multiplayer game (French, Russians, Prussians, Austrian, Swedes) where each player has there own objectives.

I guess I'm really just putting a plug for the game! :D

3munds

[kzucker]

Thanks for posting.

This game is a little closer than it appears. One grognard has pledged a Contribution of $1,000 toward production of the game!

[Brian Laursen]

Will this game(and Struggle of Nations 2) have multiplayer rules like Napoleon at Bay?

Have you considered making a combined ruleset for 5x as you did for 1x? Those rules makes it so much easier to learn the rules as they are not split in 2 rulebooks.

Brian

[kzucker]

Brian,

Multi-player rules like in NAB are not a bad idea... The combined rules booklet has some advantages and some disadvantages. It won't be a part of the game package but may come along later at this website.

[kzucker]

We're going to try changing the scale on this one and see how things work at 2X. The geography works well - the whole 1813 campaign from Magdeburg to Schweidnitz on one 22x 34" map. 4 miles per hex / 4 day turns. 2,000 men per SP.

Highway to Berlin we'll keep at 5X (that map will extend into Poland and up to the Hwy to Kremlin map-to give a playing area stretching from Saxony to Moscow at 5X).

[Nico[PL]]

2X - rules like 1X except supply & dispatch distance divided by 2 and scale x2 :) ?

[Wallenstein]

Maybe try not to change game scale - leave 5x, so it fit to others map (Berlin, Kremlin)

[kzucker]

At 10 miles per hex, the whole campaign fits on one A4.

[Wallenstein]

A4? :eek:
Is it not too small?

[kzucker]

We are working on a new map at 6.4km (4 miles) per hex, with 3 day turns. The whole campaign fits nicely on one standard size 22" x 34" map. Leipzig is near the western edge, Posen is just off the eastern edge. Berlin is at the top and Aussig on the Elbe (in Bohemia) is at the bottom.

[Nico[PL]]

2x will be with normal ZOCs or with those from 5x?

[kzucker]

Nico-
Very astute question. The EZOCs are similar to the regular ZOCs of the 1x Series, only looser. I call them "sluggish" but there is probably a better term.

You can jog into an EZOC and then back out freely. If you move directly from one EZOC into a 2nd EZOC you must stop.

In the diagram, several 2-mile hexes at the center are floating within 4-mile hexes. The radius of action of the ZOC does not increase at the 4-mile scale.

[kzucker]

17 Aug
20
23 ... (Grossbeeren)
26 ... (Dresden & Katzbach)
29 ... (Kulm)
1 Sep
4 ... (Dennewitz)
7
10
13
16
19
22
25
28
1 Oct ...(Wartenburg)
4
7
10
13 ...(Liebertwolkwitz)
16 ...(Leipzig)
19
22

[Nico[PL]]

I`ve liked those 1X ZOCs more...they were obvious - You have entered ZOC, end of move :).

Only from 17th August? What about Spring campaign :confused: some would like to crush those Russians and Prussian traitors once at for all at Bautzen and end campaign at bank of Vistula and Niemen at Summer ;-).

[kzucker]

Nico-

Including the spring is too much, creates too many problems to tackle at one time.

Regarding the ZOCs, it is not very complicated. And the same rule applies to forces retreating after combat; they can retreat into one enemy ZOC, but not too.

The 1x ZOC rule cannot be used at this scale, it would extend too widely. If it could be used, then I would of course. You want to study the diagram that is attached to the message above...

[Nico[PL]]

No spring :( , problem with armistice? Struggle of Nations worked fine, so why not upgrade rules, change scale and "that`s all" ;) .

[kzucker]

Nico-

How easy you make it sound. Probably would only take about 5 minutes...

Some of the issues involved in adding the spring are the following:

• Strategically unbalanced situation against the Coalition.
• Extra playtesting of the spring scenarii
• Possibly extra units, leaders and map
• Campaign rules, armistice rules, quarters, diplomacy
• Depots and other rules that only apply during the fall

With all that extra material, the game becomes a monster, both to design, to develop properly, and to play.

Finally, it is my preference and it is my choice to limit the design to the fall.

[kzucker]

The map scale is 1:375,000. Each 16 mm hex is 6.0 km across (3.75 mi).
Each Game-Turn is 3 days. Strength Points are 2,000 men.

Infantry Movement Allowance is 4 MPs per turn (not including Forced March), yielding 8 hexes on primary roads.

Normal march is 3.75 x 8 = 30 miles in 3 days.
Forced March is up to 60 miles / 3 days.

[Nico[PL]]

Would there be an optional Davout counter ;-) if Napoleon wanted him instead this useless Ney :mad: ?

[kzucker]

Hi Nico-

In my opinion, Davout was not good for command in the field anymore. The fact that any of the generals were still capable of fighting, after Russia, is wonderfully amazing.

Regarding the change in scope of this game, just to clarify, this is an outcome of the change in scale (from 5X to 2X). Always when we start developing a project, there are changes such as this; it is part of the process of realizing a game.

Regarding the change in title, I apologise to M. Franck Cartel who proposed the title we are using in regard to a future "Days" Series game. When we come to that project in the future we will think of a better title fot the game in the Days Series.

[kzucker]

Proposed (needs testing)-
Attack is not mandatory for units in EZOCs unless they move into the 2nd EZOC (see diagram above). However, a Counterattack would be possible against units that were adjacent but did not attack.

Dispatch Distance in 2X Series (3.75 mi per hex)
Based on rider travelling 12 hours in one day (at 5.6 mph average pace):
5.6 mph x 12 hrs = 67.2 miles or 18 hexes

[Nico[PL]]

Kevin,

You are not saying that Ney, Qudinot, McDonald were better then "Iron Marshall" in 1813? I think he has shown enough energy in reorganizing his corps in early 1813 and in defence/siege of Hamburg that it can be believed that he was still the best marshall that Napoleon had at this time (plus Suchet & Soult far far away).

2x sounds good :), is this game going to be published as next OSG game?

[kzucker]

Nico-

I know you are a big fan of Davout, only stop and think. If he was so valuable, why did Napoleon keep him in command of fixed places throughout the last three years, 1813-15. Are you saying that your understanding of the man is superior to Napoleon's?

Try to imagine what the Russian campaign did to people. Kutusov collapsed and died after driving the French out of Russia. Even Napoleon was not the same. None of the 6,000 French troops to survive were good for anything but fortress duty.

Admittedly, there has been virtually nothing written about this phase of Davout's career. Napoleon himself never commented about why he did not employ Davout in the field. I think he was being tactful.

Will this be the next game published by OSG? That remains to be seen...

[Nico[PL]]

Kevin,

Some says that Napoleon was angry at Davout for leaving Ney during retreat from Smolensk, when Ney`s corps was almost destroyed. Many dislike Davout like Besseries, Murat and were supporting this slander. That is why Davout hasnt got any field command in 1813. Also in spring campaign Napoleon had 200,000 soldiers that he could command (or he believed he could) alone with any marshalls that would carry his orders. Qudinot, Ney, McDonald had shown him that he was wrong. With such big theater of war he has needed marshalls that could operate independent like Massena, Davout, Suchet or Soult.

Also Davout was good in administration stuff like organizing new corps. When he had reorganized his 1st corps, Napoleon took it from him and gave it to Vandamme and Davout was ordered to organize another.

1812 Campaign hasnt changed skills (of course eagerness to fight was already low before 1812) of any Napoleon`s marshall. Ney, Qudinot were stupid as always without any initiative, Murat was making same cavalry charges at Dresden as at Eylau six years before, Berthier was still sending few couriers with orders to every marshall ;). So why Davout would have changed? I believe Napoleon made mistake.

The very same mistake Napoleon had made in 1815, Davout was sitting and administrating and Napoleon was believing that he could win alone. At Bautzen Ney had chance to turn this battle into greater victory then Austerlitz. He has failed. At Dennewitz and Grosberen Ney and Qudinto have failed. At Quatre Brass Ney ordered d`Erlon to turn back although he had got orders from Napoleon & Soult to sent everything to Ligny. Blucher was saved. It was Napoleon who deprived himself from his best marshall and he paid the highest cause he has believed he could win with any marshall that would execute his orders. But situation on field sometimes change and instead orders You need a marshall with brain not the one who will blindly follow orders.

[kzucker]

Hico-

I understand you, then. You ARE saying that your understanding is greater than Napoleon's.

You raised a lot of interesting issues. Why did Napoleon's system work so well in 1806, but no longer work in 1813 with the same officers in command? This is a topic that could consume an entire book; it is unlikely that it can be answered in a few hundred words.

I think "stupid as always" is a bit harsh. Marshal Ney had a lot of the skills necessary to command a corps. None of the Marshals was competent to command an army of 3 or 4 corps. As St. Cyr says, "In my opinion there was not then in the whole of the belligerent armies a single man capable of commanding a greater number (than 50,000 men)." We have talked about some of the qualitites required, our games are about one aspect of this job- understanding strategy by looking at a map. But that is just one of a host of qualities an army commander must possess. He must be quick, intelligent, forceful, untiring, diplomatic, inspiring, and a very demon.

[Nico[PL]]

Kevin,

My understanding is greater cause I have read few books 200 years later ;).

But if we use only information available at this time we had:
- at Austerlitz Davout fought well
- at Auerstadt Davout won alone a great victory, at the same time Ney failed at Jena to attack properly
- at Eylau Davout arrived in time was fighting well at right flank, at the same time Ney failed to guard L`Estocq
- in early 1809 campaign Davout 'saved the day', Ney at that time was arguing with Massena which ended that he was relieved from Spain
- in 1812 Ney fought great in rearguard action

We have 1813, we will be attacking not defending and we need great victory. We need Ney who had problems with some L`Estocq or we need Davout who alone won a battle at Auerstadt with odds almost 1:3 ? Answer is only one.

Davout was not the same person? There is no real proof for that - has he deserted his corps like Murat did? If Napoleon doubt about him what can we say about Qudinot who has done nothing great and yet he was given command at Grosberen just to loss a important battle.

Marshal Ney had the skills necessary to command a corps, but had no skills to command independtly or to make any proper decisions in heat of battle what was shown at Bautzen, Eylau or Quatre Brass.

[kzucker]

Nico-

I guess you are joking about your first answer

Which books have you read that caused you to reach the conclusions above? At Austerlitz Davout commanded only one division, at Jena a single corps, at Ratisbon a large Corps of almost 60,000, in Russia an even larger Corps but it was split in two at the outset of the campaign.

Have you read anything about the Russian campaign, what it was like during the retreat? A living hell. No one came out of there unscathed. Davout was held to have deserted Ney on 17 November at Krasnoe.

The great problem we have in providing a Davout counter is that there is no experience to base his ratings on. He fought with Walmoden around Hamburg but showed no initiative when he was supposed to advance on Berlin.

In all the games in the series, Leaders' ratings change from one campaign to the next, and they are based upon their performance during that campaign, not something they have done seven or eight years earlier. Remember that Davout's corps in 1805 and 1806 was full of veterans who had trained for many years. In 1813 there were hardly any veterans left. The quality of the troops he had to lead was a large part of his success in 1806 and 1807.

War-weariness had set-in throughout the French Army. The higher generals all hated the war by then, and it would be remarkable if Davout was an exception. He could be relied upon to enforce his commands without Napoleon's actual presence, unlike Macdonald for example.

[Nico[PL]]

Kevin,

I was joking ;).

Yes I have read about retreat. About engineers sitting in freezing water at Berzyna river, building bridges just to die very next day. (That is why I would like to server in sunny Spain under Marshall Suchet ;) rather then be a hero at Berezyna)

Davout was held to have deserted Ney on 17 November at Krasnoe, however Davout was never confirmed to have had abandoned Ney. Davout has left Ney Ricard`s division and has done what he should have done - rejoin as fast as possible with Napoleon. What was better? LOSE two corps or MAYBE only one?
If Davout was held to have deserted Ney what can we say about Napoleon? That he has deserted both Ney and Davout!

Of course veterans were important, but still there is an old saying.
"It is better to have an army of sheeps lead by lion, then army of lions lead by sheep." To beat Prussians in 1814 conscripts were enough - 6 Days of Glory ;).

War-weariness had set-in throughout the French Army that can be seen in 1814 - almost everyone were deserting, leaving Napoleon, even Berthier. But who was fighting to the last and even longer? Only one Marshall.

You could lose eagerness to fight after 1812, but it is hard to lose skills. Maybe Davout would not win another Auerstadt, but probably or rather VERY probably his tactical instinct and skills would say him to strike rear of allied army at Bautzen, to behave different then Marshall McDonald at Katsbach or Marshall Qudinot at Grossberen.

[kzucker]

Good point. If you can, figure out what part of that phenomenon we call "Marshal Davout" is skill, and what part is "eagerness to fight." He is your hero, look inside his head and figure out which skills would remain after you remove "eagerness to fight." Then you have contributed something to history...

[Michel]

Kevin,


May I help for this strategic new opus of yours ? Is it already started ?

As I told you, I would be glad to help with my maps and work on the rules ...


Michel

PS : Nico : I do agree Davoût was a very great general ! still in 1813 ... ;)

[kzucker]

Hi michel,

Yes, it is well under way. I would love to have your help, starting with the map of course (your expertise is great in that area). So I propose to email to you some .jpgs of the map in a few days.

[kzucker]

Michel-

I sent the jpegs to your email address on Sunday. Did you receive them? There were nine rather large files.

[Nico[PL]]

Kevin,

Show us the map too :) !!

[Michel]

Kevin,

I got your JPEG map. Thanks. I am going to take a picture of the same place on my 1812 map. I also got new maps (Jomini's) at a Paris' auction these days, and I have to check if there is Silesia and Saxony in them. (It is mostly on the revolution campaigns, so I suppose not ?)

I will send you these pictures with comments as soon it will be done ...

Michel

[kzucker]

Nico-

We don't publicise our sketch maps. If you want I will send the files to you by email but there are 8 of them and they are about 500K each.

Michel-

Thanks for what you are doing and I look foward to seeing what you have. Hopefully those maps are accurate!

[cdt luppo]

hello Kevin,

i just come to see the front cover of the box for N at the C...

may be you can find a better subtitle than "napoleon a carrefours" !

; )

one possible suggestion would be : "napoleon a la croisée des chemins"

a more expressive and dramatic translation of NatC that suits better the situation !!!

a least for french readers !

ps : by the way, "carrefour" is a big & well known chain of supermarkets !!!

best regards , eric.

[kzucker]

I always thought that Napoleon would be impressed with the delivery systems that allow tens of thousands of items to be arranged and organized at each grocery "depot."

Anyway- To all our French readers: Sorry for my mistake! We will fix it soon. :eek:

A completely revised box cover (total makeover) will appear on the homepage this weekend.