Slitherine

I think the smaller force would still be at a major disadvantage because of availability of weapons. 200 points is a lot of extra stuff on the table, but try and see.

CutEmUp wrote:I think the smaller force would still be at a major disadvantage because of availability of weapons. 200 points is a lot of extra stuff on the table, but try and see.

I think 200 points is a big difference. I think you need to think through victory conditions. 800 v 900 seems a lot less so.

700 points you basically can't get both a powerful mounted wing and much above minimum foot if you have mounted. And artillery is restricted severely.
By 900 points you can have a combined arms force plus 3-5 units more. That is a big assymetric situation.

CutEmUp wrote: People will put as much heavy stuff as they can on the table and protect it with big tough infantry units. Not only will others be forced to do the same, but they will no longer bring a variety of different armies to tournaments. So you will basically see nothing but French and Russian armies at tournaments.

A battle would consist of an artillery duel, (determined by luck of the dice) the loser of wich would now be obliged to attack into a well laid, cohesive defense or stand there and get blown into smitherines. Either way, the loser gets slaughtered and that's that. It's the natural course of things and it is boring.

I don't see it happening. First there are several armies with better options than Russian.
Second, I don't ever want to see a french v french tournament. That is not napoleonics.
Third, Artillery isn't decisive enough in this game to do what you say.
Fourth you may want to look at the off table options (flank and own rear sector)

I think people will always strive for a great army. But napoleonics will still have its share of personal favorites.

If it and artillery it'll be something else and what you will see is lots of French v French

CutEmUp wrote:If it and artillery it'll be something else and what you will see is lots of French v French

Not in any tournament i'm in. That is total fantasy BS and you can put ORcs on the table then.

Once you give people 500 points to play with, you can't get away from blue on blue because they'll find the super armies and those will be what shows up like the 20 games of BAR on BAR early war FOW tourneys last year

And despite all this, the number 1 argument for small armies is still $....maybe jack it up to 1000 points on bigger tables once Obama is gone and things are back on the right track in 4 or five years

CutEmUp.

once Obama is gone and things are back on the right track in 4 or five years

Now we see the real reason for your negative posting.

Perhaps you should consider another platform for your observations.

Don

Whatever the arguments, at least we might do some test of a kind . As I already wrote, my gae with 75 % of my force away ( well more +/- 300 points out of 1000 ) against a furious assault of 1040 points was fun and interesting . I had to use my large hill ( yes he had those 40 points ) , hide behind it, trust some luck and pray ... I had to let him come and I feared I would loose but as in everygame strange tings happen . A wavering square di hold against a cavalry charge , my guard cavalry ( Italian guard no Big Brothers, grenadiers à cheavl ) won at the same time a crushing victory in a well led charge ...and the tide turned ...

200 points difference might be a lot but you also have to consider the terrain or the scenario possibility with imposed terrain ...If 200 is too big a difference, try 150, or 100 ...or 100 + a possible 40 due to die roll ...

Let's be positive .

donm wrote:CutEmUp.

once Obama is gone and things are back on the right track in 4 or five years

Now we see the real reason for your negative posting.

Perhaps you should consider another platform for your observations.

Don

Makes no sense

bahdahbum wrote:Whatever the arguments, at least we might do some test of a kind . As I already wrote, my gae with 75 % of my force away ( well more +/- 300 points out of 1000 ) against a furious assault of 1040 points was fun and interesting . I had to use my large hill ( yes he had those 40 points ) , hide behind it, trust some luck and pray ... I had to let him come and I feared I would loose but as in everygame strange tings happen . A wavering square di hold against a cavalry charge , my guard cavalry ( Italian guard no Big Brothers, grenadiers à cheavl ) won at the same time a crushing victory in a well led charge ...and the tide turned ...

200 points difference might be a lot but you also have to consider the terrain or the scenario possibility with imposed terrain ...If 200 is too big a difference, try 150, or 100 ...or 100 + a possible 40 due to die roll ...

Let's be positive .

While I'm sure it was a great time, tournaments should stick to 650 or 800, with my choice being 650, for reasons already stated.

hazelbark wrote:

CutEmUp wrote:If it and artillery it'll be something else and what you will see is lots of French v French

Not in any tournament i'm in. That is total fantasy BS and you can put ORcs on the table then.

It's certainly counter-factual but it could have happened at various points in the Wars: If Bernadotte hadn't fumbled the coup in the Camp of Boulogne the "Italian" and "German" army factions might have come to blows; if Napoleon had led the guard against Marmont; if any part of the army had stayed loyal to Louis XVIII in 1815. One man's fantasy is another's imagination.

CutEmUp wrote:Once you give people 500 points to play with, you can't get away from blue on blue because they'll find the super armies and those will be what shows up like the 20 games of BAR on BAR early war FOW tourneys last year

Why? Just refuse to allow it. Yesterday we had 5 people at a friends house for 2 games each. I simple said I refused to play a french on french and would rather drive home then do it. We had 4 great games austrian 09 vs french 09. French 12 vs russian 13, french 09 vs russian 12, french 12 vs austrian 09. Easy as pie.

in over 3 decades of napoleonic gaming I have yet to need a french on french game. No going to start now. And based on two dozen people at a recent convention I don't see a big hue and cry for it either.

A variety of observations having played a dozen plus 850 point games.

You still struggle to have your cake and eat it too with list design. Try to take a powerful reserve cavalry force and you end up having to sacrifice artillery, commanders or good/numerous infantry.

650 you have the abilty of a few smaller good units to have a bigger effect.

850 you can have a reserve to plug problems in your position. Yesterday. My Russian Dragoons ran past a french square and found them selves a turn away from the unguarded French LOC. The French had committed their reserve to chase some cossacks in rough to try to get onto the flank.

At 650 you have limited reserve options, which makes it a quicker game.

Some armies are very difficult to field at even 850 poinst.
Try an Anglo-Dutch force with a brunswick division. THe English have a mandatory cavlary division (not sure why mandatory, sure why not mixed) So you either have 1 large english/hanoverian foot division or you need to buy a 4th general.

Try an 1813 russian force with a prussian division. Against hard to structure a viable force at 800 points.

hazelbark wrote:

CutEmUp wrote:Once you give people 500 points to play with, you can't get away from blue on blue because they'll find the super armies and those will be what shows up like the 20 games of BAR on BAR early war FOW tourneys last year

Why? Just refuse to allow it. Yesterday we had 5 people at a friends house for 2 games each. I simple said I refused to play a french on french and would rather drive home then do it. We had 4 great games austrian 09 vs french 09. French 12 vs russian 13, french 09 vs russian 12, french 12 vs austrian 09. Easy as pie.

in over 3 decades of napoleonic gaming I have yet to need a french on french game. No going to start now. And based on two dozen people at a recent convention I don't see a big hue and cry for it either.

So you're just gonna tell people who want to play in a tournament "sorry bro, you either do this or you can't come"

hazelbark wrote:A variety of observations having played a dozen plus 850 point games.

You still struggle to have your cake and eat it too with list design. Try to take a powerful reserve cavalry force and you end up having to sacrifice artillery, commanders or good/numerous infantry.

650 you have the abilty of a few smaller good units to have a bigger effect.

850 you can have a reserve to plug problems in your position. Yesterday. My Russian Dragoons ran past a french square and found them selves a turn away from the unguarded French LOC. The French had committed their reserve to chase some cossacks in rough to try to get onto the flank.

At 650 you have limited reserve options, which makes it a quicker game.

Some armies are very difficult to field at even 850 poinst.
Try an Anglo-Dutch force with a brunswick division. THe English have a mandatory cavlary division (not sure why mandatory, sure why not mixed) So you either have 1 large english/hanoverian foot division or you need to buy a 4th general.

Try an 1813 russian force with a prussian division. Against hard to structure a viable force at 800 points.

Everything you just said is exactly why 650-800 is perfect, especially 650. 850 is too much. There is a reason the people who wrote the rules said 650-800 for tournaments. So what if you can't have the exact list you want. Make do.

In a tournament if you make a critical mistake, that's it,duly should more often than not be done. Games should be short because you either have to do round Robbin style and get 4-6 games in on one day or pool play on day one and brackets on day two. If you get into 3 hours and only get two or at the most three games a day, you won't get into what the essence of a tournament is. You should get to play lots of different people with lots of different armies.

Plus, how do you find out who is the winner?

There is a reason the people who wrote the rules said 650-800 for tournaments

For tournaments ....yes but for friendly games ! The problem for me is that at 800 points you lack something ( except in some unreformed armies ..what did I say Austrians )

But why not try 650 points ...

Our next try mill be "strange" : quatre-bras on a 3 X 3 table ( from Napoleon's battle ) to test how to go fromNap Battles scen to FOGN scen . We know the scale is not the same but it might be interesting to try and quatre bras is small enough .

CutEmUp wrote:

hazelbark wrote:So you're just gonna tell people who want to play in a tournament "sorry bro, you either do this or you can't come"

Well since I have run plenty of matched sides tournaments...yes. The way it is done is invisible to people. You ask the people you know to bring a pair of army and switch to fill in even numbers. Its really not hard done all the time. I suppose it is possible to have a problem, but haven't seen it yet in a decade.

But the reality is, you plan a solution and it is likely never to be a problem. I can think of dozens of clubs that when some one is thinking of a new army they are encouraged to fill a need. Yes that is a challenge to a first time player, but there are going to be a lot of people around with options.

CutEmUp wrote:Everything you just said is exactly why 650-800 is perfect, especially 650. 850 is too much. There is a reason the people who wrote the rules said 650-800 for tournaments. So what if you can't have the exact list you want. Make do.

they picked the number out of you know where. They used the same point range for ancients and renaissanec it defies the odds that they got it right. Then add int he authors of the others that have essentially admited they got that wrong.

I am not saying 650 is bad or 700 or 650 on a different size or 800. I am saying viva la difference and none are bad. They had different strengths and weaknesses. Enjoy them all.

Another idea that I think would well for these rules is pre-set terrain. It would speed up games and allow you to get the kind of games in per hour that you describe. Not saying all the time, just saying it would be a nice option.