Slitherine

If doing points (like a historically based campaign and not a historical battle, how many points do you think you can add to one army and how much do the army match ups matter?

Let's saying you have
1809 Austrians v 1809 French. How many points advantage can you give to the Austrians and still have an intersting fight? 10% more, 15% ?
Pennisula French v Pennisula Anglo-Ports?

Other examples that yo think coudl work?

Any modifications to victory rules?

We're running an 1813 campaign at the moment, where every battle is assymetrical to a small or large extent. I don't think it makes the games less interesting, often the the smaller force is simply trying to hold on until reinforcements/nightfall arrive.

An 800 points v 900 points probably isn't going to make the forces look different enough on tabletop to be worth the effort - but maybe 700 v 900, or 800 v 1000? - with the higher points chap being the attacker?
These types of battles could play to a certain number of turns (or start rolling on a certain turn for the game to end), with victory going to the smaller points army if they haven't been broken.

I've also always thought the flames of war withdrawal scenario is worth a look to inspire rear-guard game options for Napoleonics.

Cheers
Brett

So 150-200 point spread I can see that.

The withdrawal scenario. I don't know FOW. Roughly how would you set up on a board?

Just brain storming here. Defender deploys 70% between 28 MU and 18 MU in. Remaining 30% can be deployed 6-29 MU in.
Defender can't cross 18 MU line until attacker crosses 24 MU line?

Then some sort of clock starts when attacker crosses into defender zone?

The FoW scenario is (over) simplified as follows:

1. The game runs for a set number of turns
2. The defender has objective markers on their side of the table, the attacker has to take one of them to win, otherwise it's a victory to the defender.
2. Every few turns the defender is allowed to take an objective marker off the table, denying it to the attacker
3. Every few turns the defender has to remove a unit from the table.

Maybe Kit or Mike can comment further on this (they are involved with Battlefront) but my guess is the design philosophy behind this is that the removed objectives represent the fall-back positions of the rear-guard, while the removed units repesents troops 'breaking free' and joining the retreat.

I have always found the scenario create tense and interesting games. The attacker trying to rush and capture the closest objective before the defender can remove it, the defenders army gradually diminishing as the game progresses, but also the number of objectives that need defedning reducing.

Not sure how you might translate something like this to FoGN, but it might be worth someone having a try. It would certainly be an interesting change from the "attack defence - I rolled 3 higher so get an extra unit" scenario we currently have.

A few months ago Andrew and I were chatting about using the battle chits from the Empire In Arms board game to create scenarios where the deployment was a bit different to a normal game.

Some of the potential chit matchups would result in getting extra points for one side.

We should nut that out one day because we had the nucleus for a set of FoW like scenarios which will make FOGN even more fun.

Might also look at the Road to Glory system in Volley & Bayonet (2nd Edn). All troops are deployed and then, according to the cards drawn, some are taken away to enter later.

Here's an asymmetrical game I did using FoG:AM v1 adapted from one of the Charles Grant scenario books:

viewtopic.php?f=47&t=14473

Although FoG:AM, the scenarios are meant for a variety of periods. The above scenario is a 600 vs 900 pts battle, but the smaller force is deployed while the larger force, with a dubious ally, has to march on, deploy and defeat the defender within fixed time period. I'm sure it could easily be adapted to FoG: Napoleonic. Generally anything from a 15-50% points advantage can be very interesting provided the smaller force has some advantage of terrain, time, etc. to compensate.

KendallB wrote:A few months ago Andrew and I were chatting about using the battle chits from the Empire In Arms board game to create scenarios where the deployment was a bit different to a normal game.

What is interesting in our local group is several players are quite skilled with employing reserve divisions and flank marches.