Battle Academy: napoleonics

[johntindall]

Hi everyone, Pip has suggested I post this to see what interest there might be in having Slitherine consider a Napoleonics version of BA.

Given that the basic fundamentals of inf, cav, arty, defenses, direct & ranged fire, LOS & terrain, etc are already in place and could probably be adapted, what do you think about having a Napoleonics version developed?

[captainurban]

I for one would be totally excited by this. Would buy it in a second.
Please create this.
captainurban

[alex0809]

I like Battle Academy. I like interesting game concepts. I am interested in Napoleonic age. Hell yes!
Though what scale do you have in mind? Because I don't think a scale of 5 men per unit would make a lot of sense?

[GottaLove88s]

Worth involving Old_Warrior if you're looking into Napoleonic era modpack... He's authored several impressive games from that period, so will have the historical accuracy and unit mechanics down to a fine art...

[MrsWargamer]

I'd be happy to enjoy Nappy in the BA design. I think going back in time would be easier, as going forward past 1950 is when all the military hardware and communications make games at the tactical level trying on the designer.

To me Nappy would be various forms of infantry and formations, artillery, calvary, and defensive works. I might be wrong, but it would likely just be a matter of getting the art done, and tweaking a few units something I think our mod crowd would be up for.

[pipfromslitherine]

Just some technical notes - you can have up to 8 men in a unit, but the men do not have to be 'one to one' - so you could give each squad some health and show it, only killing the 'men' in the squad as its strength fell (that is - you kill men when you want to, you could easily script attacks which altered the health of the unit, only killing men as needed). Not entirely sure how you could do a health bar - perhaps using text overlays with very short lives?

Just off the top of my head - I've not really thought about it, and it's pretty early in the morning for me

Cheers

Pip

[Old_Warrior]

I am up for it. In a heartbeat. Even if the scale is much smaller than what I am used to working with the level would be fun to play around with. I would prefer that we use platoon sized units in formations. WW2 was a much more dispersed format. 20 man unit would be best. That way six of them would be a French company and so on.

But there are plenty of "Skirmish" level rules out there. As long as folks know this going on then the concept is great. As long as they do not expect "Waterloo" or "Austerlitz" then you are safe.

Just bill it as a skirmish level Nap. computer game and it should do well. The graphics would have to be good to appease the very picky audience that goes with this set of customers.

[captainurban]

I second the old warriors statement. March to the sound of the guns!!

[Old_Warrior]

One comment: as much I am for a Napoleonics game I would prefer to see this game be adapted for modern combat first. Or for the rest of WW2 to be finished first. It really is a modern game engine and I am not sure how well skirmish type Napoleonics would work for it. Some of the issues that would have to be addressed:

1. Cavalry charge. Would be similar to an overrun with armor vs. infantry I suppose.

2. Square formation - not really an option in a skirmish scale - so maybe a non-issue.

3. Artillery - it needed to limber up before it could move. Maybe for the scale of the engagements just have it static.

But I am for whatever Iain and co. would work best. Modern makes more sense (or WW1). Trying to adapt a modern title to 19th century warfare does not always work.

After having put together six Napoleonic titles and with a further two more on the way I honestly believe that it is almost impossible to do a true Napoleonics game for the PC unless you use the We Plot/We Go format. And then the program has to be VERY good at interpreting the orders.

Les Grognards Hist War has an interesting format. Their interface is murky which is one of the reasons why I have not laid out the pound sterling for it. For any game these days to get my money it must have warm colors that are easy on the eyes. Which BA has!

[johntindall]

1. Cavalry charge. Would be similar to an overrun with armor vs. infantry I suppose.

2. Square formation - not really an option in a skirmish scale - so maybe a non-issue.

3. Artillery - it needed to limber up before it could move. Maybe for the scale of the engagements just have it static.

1. Overrun makes sense
2. Would one possibility be that when inf forms square, it's converted into inf inside the exisitng squarish-looking fortification? Similar look, has defensive bonus, resistant to cav attacks?
3. As per mortars?

[MrsWargamer]

Hmm ya unit sizes in the past would be a problem like unit communications and air support would be a problem in post war period.

Jut shows how much WW2 hit the sweet spot for some levels of wargaming.

[Old_Warrior]

I was not thinking last night when I read Pip's post: the units would represent brigades. Similar to Napoleon's Battles. With that in mind each figure would not represent men but the unit itself. A graphical representation in other words. This would be a stand alone game of course. And Pip's idea of the script mandating more morale loss than figure loss works. We could even have "Blown" status for cavalry if done right.

Question: could you guys abide by one uniform type to represent a brigade? Would help keep the artwork cost down. For the Austrians - the mixed brigades that they had would be portrayed by two units. Jagers/Grenzers in one brigade and the cavalry in the other. My thought would be to have a command group in front (3 images + 1 image being the typical image for the unit) with the back rank being 4 images of the typical image for the unit.

I would think that Slith would put out the British/Portuguese and French in the initial game, include three campaigns from the Peninsular with a Tutorial campaign for new players. If the Spanish would not be a huge cost we could add them in for battles like Talavera.

Then expansion modules would include the Russians, Prussians and Austrians with other minor nationalities added in as needed. 1809 for instance involved a lot of German allies so it would be its own expansion. You get the idea. Waterloo for 2015 of course!

Thought would have to be given as to whether we need formations or not. My guess is that square may be the only one we would need as columns really were often about half the frontage of a line (French) or 1/3 the frontage of a line (Prussians, Austrians) but see below. There is already a bonus for firing if you do not move a unit so maybe that would cover it.

The cavalry charge would be tricky. Do we use the existing Overrun ability by armor? That might work as there is a chance it could be repulsed. That would model the concept that the formation did form square. We would have to look over the percentages. Square pretty much stopped charges. It was whether the unit had properly formed square that was the question. Very few squares were ever broken. 1814 had a couple of examples of this as well as in the French Rev Wars.

Lots to think over on this one before it could happen. The images would have to be in a formation, though, and not in some loose formation. And skirmishers under this level of unit scale would not work either. I think that it would just muddy the waters. Excited about this? Sure thing!

[GottaLove88s]

Hehe, I knew you were the right man for the job, OW. This sounds really promising...

[morge4]

Excited about this? Sure thing!

I know I am!!

[johntindall]

I believe it would open a new market for Slitherine. More $s for them to spend making BA even better (the same way they were able to fund BA from other games' success).

[tmoj2000]

Frankly speaking I dont see this working

Napoleonics is a totally different scale (BA is squads and individual vehicles, Napoleonics would be at least regiment size) and logic......

I would much rather see more variety on the fronts (eastern front, japanese) and perhaps the timeframe could be extended to cover the 30s and the 50s.....

[johntindall]

Napoleonics is a totally different scale (BA is squads and individual vehicles, Napoleonics would be at least regiment size) and logic......

I would much rather see more variety on the fronts (eastern front, japanese) and perhaps the timeframe could be extended to cover the 30s and the 50s.....

Re the different scale, yes, that's a fair point but I believe a solution could be found. Old_Warrior's thoughts above demonstrate this. Also, the BBC's original Battle Academy games covered Ancient Rome, Medieval, Napoleonics and WW2 themes: http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/interactiv ... ld_academy

Part of the idea here is to leverage an already-existing and proven program to take BA into a new market. As far as I can see, there are no iPad games (of comparable quality) for Napoleonics, so Slitherine could extend BA to a whole new gaming audience.

[gortwillsaveus]

Frankly speaking I dont see this working

Napoleonics is a totally different scale (BA is squads and individual vehicles, Napoleonics would be at least regiment size) and logic......

I would much rather see more variety on the fronts (eastern front, japanese) and perhaps the timeframe could be extended to cover the 30s and the 50s.....

While I love BA,..I'm having a tough time seeing this ported to the 1800's style of Warfare.
Even the Cabrai (WW1) scenarios are not to my taste. Too slow for me,..and my infantry get easily decimated (I suppose, just like real life, right?)

I've played US Civil War games and had the same dislike,..so I guess this is just a personal thing.

[Old_Warrior]

For now: better to concentrate on WW2, do up future titles on the East Front & the Pacific and expansions for all three games (the original BA of course) and then later on down the line consider this and any other time period for a title. If Slith ever goes to do Nap. period it would have to be abstracted anyway. Either they would have to preserve the unit scale or use a brigade/regiment scale. No use in possibly causing PR damage by putting out a title NOW that is less popular than WW2. "Stick with the horse that done brought ya," is what the old Westerners used to say.

I would like to see a BA:WW1 but trenches will not work in the series. Graphically they only partially work (the men do not fit into the graphic) and also Iain mentioned that so far there is no way to create an enfilade bonus for firing down the trench line. Until something can be done to overcome this code barrier WW1 is out. What is WW1 without trenches?