Game Opening Variation

[hazelbark]

One of the comments I have heard is the certain predictability of the game.

Meaning terrain and Defender movement restrictions.

I am not sure I full agree, but there is a little something to these points.

How about this to change it and add value for buying better commanders.

1st Terrain choosing.
The Defender can roll 1 die per Command value. If any die scores a 5+ then the defender can select first one (1) either mandatory or optional terrain piece). Result defender could pick river or road that we find are often attacker picks.

2nd Defender move restrictions
At the command allocation phase of the defenders turn, the defender can choose to roll by division commander and/or brigade commander to "seize the initiative". This is a number of dice equal to CP of commander needing a 5+ on any. And Corps CPs allocated can be spent to add 1 per CP spent to the commander being tested. If the commander passes the division is freed from the defender movement restrictions.

Creates some minor and not predictable ability of the defender to try and shift the battle initiative.

Neither seem to upset the play balance to me.

[Blathergut]

I agree. Set-up with terrain tends to go the same way every time, esp. with the French outperforming the Austrians here with initiative rolls.

#1 sounds fine...we'll try it next time we have at each other

#2...likewise...adds some unpredictability which is always interesting...how about...if the defender chooses to roll, he uses up those command points and won't have them back until his reset phase at the end of his turn???...just to put some risk in for him as well???...that way, might be some incentive to save the corps commander's points for movements!

[BrettPT]

1st Terrain choosing.
The Defender can roll 1 die per Command value. If any die scores a 5+ then the defender can select first one (1) either mandatory or optional terrain piece). Result defender could pick river or road that we find are often attacker picks.

In our just-finished 1813 campaign, we reversed the terrain choices so that the defender picks first. I'm not sure why the rules allow the attacker the first choice in terrain - seems counter-intuitive to me.
Allowing the defender first choice helps balance up the initiative roll, and represents a 'defender' choosing to accept battle ground of his chosing.
In practical game terms, it also prevents an attacker effectively denying a river to a defender by picking it (and then placing it in a way that provides no assistance to the opponent).

2nd Defender move restrictions
At the command allocation phase of the defenders turn, the defender can choose to roll by division commander and/or brigade commander to "seize the initiative". This is a number of dice equal to CP of commander needing a 5+ on any. And Corps CPs allocated can be spent to add 1 per CP spent to the commander being tested. If the commander passes the division is freed from the defender movement restrictions.

At first glance, I like this. Perhaps limit it to DCs and require they use CP(s) to make this roll (so they would not be available that turn for double moves). I'll kick this idea around at the club next meeting for views.

In our 1813 campaign we said that, if your opponent's Corps Commander has a higher rating than you, you must deploy 4 units at a time rather than 3. This applied whether you are attacker or defender.
It gave a small grand-tactical advantage to better CCs, and meant that a high quality and well led army (ie small) was less vulnerable to being out-deployed by a large poorly led army (who would otherwise lay down the last units).

Cheers
Brett

[hazelbark]

At first glance, I like this. Perhaps limit it to DCs and require they use CP(s) to make this roll (so they would not be available that turn for double moves). I'll kick this idea around at the club next meeting for views.

Curious do your defenders make that many double moves? We find not so much unless the something extreme occurred at deployment. Obvious flank march, skirmishers leaving deployment zone. But not much re-deployment on a large scale. But I am for, having to spend the CP, although the problem is that sort of removes their ability to take advantage of the release of restrictions.

[hazelbark]

I agree. Set-up with terrain tends to go the same way every time, esp. with the French outperforming the Austrians here with initiative rolls.

Ironically this Saturday I had two games with Austrians where I attacked in both. Very disconcerting for both sides.
Being the attacker largely luck impacted.

[vsolfronk]

What if players (attacker first) alternately pick terrain pieces?

Also, what is the effect if you allow the same deployment rules as FoGAM or (more likely) FoGR?

[deadtorius]

We tried the pick terrain and cp's for cmt's and roll to get early activation this weekend. Austria was both surprised and somewhat confused as we managed to win initiative. France managed to activate 3 out of 4 divisions so that made for an interesting twist.
Neither side made much use of the extra cmt for cp, but I did use it towards the end to get a second move out of a Grenzer unit trying to take back our LOC, but ended one move short before both sides broke.
These proposals made for an interesting game and we shall try them again our next time out.

[terrys]

1st Terrain choosing.
The Defender can roll 1 die per Command value. If any die scores a 5+ then the defender can select first one (1) either mandatory or optional terrain piece). Result defender could pick river or road that we find are often attacker picks.

We are quite wary of additional dice rolling for terrain setup - and also alternate terrain picking.
These can prolong the terrain deployment time, and impact on actual "game" time.
The issue of the defender picking a stream/river to deny it to the defender isn't that important, since the poisitioning of the river is largely decided by the dice roll. In fact it doesn't really help the attacker much at all, since the defender gets an additional terrain choice if he can't choose the river, and the river may still end up leaving his rear edge.

2nd Defender move restrictions
At the command allocation phase of the defenders turn, the defender can choose to roll by division commander and/or brigade commander to "seize the initiative". This is a number of dice equal to CP of commander needing a 5+ on any. And Corps CPs allocated can be spent to add 1 per CP spent to the commander being tested. If the commander passes the division is freed from the defender movement restrictions.

I'd prefer not to allow the defender to "seize the initiative" because one of the objectives of the design is to create an attacked/defender situation which was a factor in most Napoleonic battles.
However, if players wish to use it I'd recommend something a little more restrictive than this. Perhaps making it a CP to attempt to "seize the initiative" with one dice per CP spent after that. It would reward those armies with better generals, and reduce the number of double moves on the turn that the initiative is seized. The current proposal permits all commanders to make the attempt.

[terrys]

1st Terrain choosing.
The Defender can roll 1 die per Command value. If any die scores a 5+ then the defender can select first one (1) either mandatory or optional terrain piece). Result defender could pick river or road that we find are often attacker picks.

We are quite wary of additional dice rolling for terrain setup - and also alternate terrain picking.
These can prolong the terrain deployment time, and impact on actual "game" time.
The issue of the defender picking a stream/river to deny it to the defender isn't that important, since the poisitioning of the river is largely decided by the dice roll. In fact it doesn't really help the attacker much at all, since the defender gets an additional terrain choice if he can't choose the river, and the river may still end up leaving his rear edge.

2nd Defender move restrictions
At the command allocation phase of the defenders turn, the defender can choose to roll by division commander and/or brigade commander to "seize the initiative". This is a number of dice equal to CP of commander needing a 5+ on any. And Corps CPs allocated can be spent to add 1 per CP spent to the commander being tested. If the commander passes the division is freed from the defender movement restrictions.

I'd prefer not to allow the defender to "seize the initiative" because one of the objectives of the design is to create an attacked/defender situation which was a factor in most Napoleonic battles.
However, if players wish to use it I'd recommend something a little more restrictive than this. Perhaps making it a CP to attempt to "seize the initiative" with one dice per CP spent after that. It would reward those armies with better generals, and reduce the number of double moves on the turn that the initiative is seized. The current proposal permits all commanders to make the attempt.

[hazelbark]

We are quite wary of additional dice rolling for terrain setup - and also alternate terrain picking.
These can prolong the terrain deployment time, and impact on actual "game" time.
The issue of the defender picking a stream/river to deny it to the defender isn't that important, since the poisitioning of the river is largely decided by the dice roll. In fact it doesn't really help the attacker much at all, since the defender gets an additional terrain choice if he can't choose the river, and the river may still end up leaving his rear edge.

I agree that we don't want anything to slow down terrain placement.

The issue of streams and road picks. Is to break the commonality.

Attackers often pick rivers and roads. River to deny to opponent. As they can likely minimized its intrusion regardless of side.
Roads as currently mean the defender can often be denied having a 2nd place to place the LOC. And attackers have road net coming in from all directions that maximize avenue of attacks. I get that has so historical feel to it, but creates the risk of sameness of battlefield. I presume you did this intentionally.

This would be a needless complication but... just thinking as I type, allow the defender to take a road but prohibit it from leaving their own board edge, unless it passes through a building also touching their own board edge, but not within 12 MU of another road exiting the board. That create a low order of possible second location for the LOC but may give the defender something useful to so with road.

[Blathergut]

The French seized all the roads in the last battle.

[Blathergut]

1. We've tried the terrain choice idea. It didn't seem to slow things down. It did add a bit of variation.

2. I agree that it doesn't make much difference with a river.

3. I like the idea of it costing CP to try and also to seize. There should be a cost/gain "decisioning" in there.