Publisher: Avalon Hill

Game Mechanics

Time Scale: 1 Turn = 30 minutes
Figure Scale: Infantry 1:120 - Cavalry 1:80 - Batteries = 4 - 8 guns
Ground Scale: 1 inch equals 100 yards (15mm) / 1 cm equals 100 yards (5mm)
Dice: D10
Move Sequence: Alternate

As a Napoleonic figure gamer for a good many more years than I care to remember, there are three things I look for in a good set of wargames rules, a general feel for the period and historical accuracy, simplicity, and above all FUN! Nearly three years ago a wargaming friend of mine introduced me to Avalon Hill's new Napoleonic Rules Napoleon's Battles.

With a figure scale of 120 men per figure, I had to admit that I was pretty sceptical. After all, Empire Napoleonics were the gamer's dream. To appease my long suffering friend I agreed to try an experimental game. From that moment onwards I was hooked on the game. Napoleon's Battles currently retails for around 27.00 pounds, which is a princely sum by anyone's standard. There are also two expansion booklets, available for 13.00 pounds each, containing additional rules, scenarios and a campaign system. The rules are sold in a sturdy Bookcase Game box which is a classic feature of many Avalon Hill games. You could be deceived into thinking you were purchasing a board game.

Inside the Box

So what do you get for your money? The boxed set of Napoleon's Battles contains three booklets of rules, scenarios, information and historical games notes; 186 information counters, 14 information cards, 2 template cards and two ten sided dice. The game components are very professional and are of a standard you would expect from a company like Avalon Hill. A nice touch is that the number of infantry, cavalry and artillery counters are provided in the box which allows the player to sample game straight after reading the rules. No need to re-base any figures even terrain cards provided. The booklets themselves are well laid out and very readable. There is an 'Introduction to miniature wargaming' booklet aimed primarily at the beginner and includes information on some of the major battles between 1792-1815, the nature of revolutionary and Napoleonic Warfare, a brief outline of armies of the period. This is finally rounded off with information on recreating a Napoleonic army. All fairly standard stuff but presented in a very digestible way.

Of more interest to the veteran gamer is a revealing section on designers psyche regarding the main body of the rules. It is my opinion that the wargamer should read this section first before venturing into the rules booklet itself.

Also of interest are the player's tips on the strengths and weaknesses of various armies using the rules. There is a thirty four page rule booklet which divides up nicely into four sections:

1. basic game terms and definitions
2. the basic game itself
3. additional advanced game rules
4. and a further optional rules section.

For the most part the rules are clearly written with a large number of clear diagrams giving information on formations, movement, firing and combat. However with having basic, advanced and optional rules pertaining to the same thing, you can find yourself on occasions flicking through the booklet, looking for the relevant section. The basic game rules take you from page 11 through to 23 but these pages do contain a number of diagrams and examples. At this point you are encouraged to try several games to familiarise yourself with the basic game concepts. Pages 24 to 27 introduce a number of advanced rules and consequently add greater complexity to play. Pages 27-34 then apply a number of additional rules.

To complete the trio of booklets is one of scenarios to be used with Napoleon's Battles. Scenarios one and two are two fictional scenarios designed primarily as a proving ground for grasping the basic rule concepts. The first is set in 1794 and sees a French Army take on the Prussians. The second is a meeting engagement between the French and Austrian's from the 1809 campaign. The historical scenarios are the real meat of the booklet and the battles covered are: Marengo, Auerstadt, Eylau, Talavera, Borodino and Waterloo. There is also information on designing your own scenarios. Each scenario details an order of the battle game set-up, special rules, victory points and an information chart dealing the troop types present and special capabilities. Each scenario also includes special labels to identify each general, brigade and battery present in the game. These cam be photocopied, cut-out and included with the tabletop unit.

Expansion Booklets

The two expansion booklets have greatly increased The range of scenarios to include: Valmy, Austerlitz, Friedland, Vimerio, Corunna, Aspern Essling, Wagram, Ocano, Albuera, Salamanca, Lutzen, Leipzig and Craonne. To round off the components are 14 information cards. Two of these are double sided quick reminder cards of game sequence, artillery ranges, modifiers, etc. The remaining twelve are game information cards for a wide range of nationalities and troop types twenty-seven nationalities are covered between 1792-1815 and characteristics are given for over 350 different troop types.

So, for example, the French army is given 41 different troop types between 1792-1815. The same troop type can be repeated several times to account for changing troop quality throughout the course of the wars. Even the Ottoman States are represented by 19 different troop types. As with any kind of national characteristic, interpretation can vary. Troops are rated for movement capabilities, combat modifiers according to formation, firing responsiveness on the battlefield and morale.

The smallest unit in the game is a brigade, usually made up of multiples of four figure bases. The largest infantry brigade has 28 figures and for Cavalry it is 20 figures. Artillery batteries represent reserve and horse units, divisional artillery is already factored into the infantry brigades. The game designer points out in the design notes that deployed brigades are considered to occupy it's given area, although not all that area need necessarily contain deployed troops. Brigade deployment on the wargames table does give that "Napoleonic look".

Grand Tactics

The game system is intended to make the player a corps or army commander and to recreate the grand tactics of the battle field. If you are re-fighting divisional level actions these may not be the rules for you. The command control is built in from the top down. Players usually find themselves playing the army/wing or corps commander. These generals are usually intended to manoeuvre larger formations and they do this by being given a command span and an initiative score. Army commanders are always given an initiative score of "10" which means they automatically issue orders to any corps/divisional commanders within the command span.

Wing commanders and corps commanders not within an army commander's command span are not so fortunate and need to relay upon an initiative die roll to move or act. So for example at Austerlitz, Napoleon has a command radius of 28 inches compared to Kutusov's 22 inches (in this particular battle scenario the allied player is further handicapped by the possibility that the Tsar Alexander will interfere and reduce Kutusov's command span to only 16 inches). Consider also that the front line dispositions are 108 inches in this scenario, you can start to appreciate that even Napoleon cannot be everywhere at once.

At Austerlitz the Allies must rely on two wing commanders, Buxhowden with a command span of 9 inches and an initiative of only 5 : and Lichtenstein with a command span of 9 inches and an initiative of 7. Very rapidly within a game poor and mediocre corps/wing commanders acting on their own initiative start to cause major headaches as even the best laid plans start to fall apart. The effects of more able commanders can truly be felt. The next stage of the command chain sees corps commanders issuing commands to divisional commanders. The average corps commander has a command span of 7 to 8 inches, poor commanders will fall below this and more exceptional commanders will have this increased.

Take, for example, Victor in the Talavera scenario he must co-ordinate five divisional commanders with a command span of only 8 inches. Finally we arrive at the divisional command level where divisional commanders try to co-ordinate the activities of there attached brigades and batteries. Any brigade not within the command span of it's divisional commander cannot move.

Again the qualities of such commanders will range from the poor to the excellent and it does not pay to overload your divisional commanders with too much responsibility. For example at Austerlitz the Russian divisional commander, Ourousov, must co-ordinate 6 infantry brigades and 2 reserve batteries with a command span of only 3 inches. Having played Ourousov, I can only describe this experience as a nightmare in command control. Compare this to the French commander Suchet who has a command span of 5 inches and only 3 infantry brigades to command. Armies with good commanders at all levels can rapidly out manoeuvre armies commanded by mediocrity or worse. Better commanders are far more responsive in countering enemy moves and co-ordinating attacks and defences.

Commander Ratings

With the advent of the second expansion module nearly 1,400 Napoleonic commanders from 27 countries are now listed. Of the 1400 commanders listed : 560 are French, 91 are British, 120 Spanish and 12 Westphalian. This list is being continually expanded and updated. As is always the case of awarding ratings to commanders they are open to reinterpretation. An order system is not used in Napoleon's Battles as in other rules, partly to keep the game clean and simple and partly because it is reflected in the command system. It is no easy thing to stop a grand manoeuvre and change a battle plan especially with an army full of low command spans and poor initiatives. Failure to pay due attention to the problems of the command structure will lead to lost opportunities and eventually to disaster on any battlefield.

The player is locked out of command decisions below brigade level. It is assumed that regiments and battalions are making the key tactical decisions within the brigade deployment area. As a player you merely determine formation and movement. For example, imagine you have a brigade in column formation suddenly attacked by enemy cavalry; will the brigade be able to form square? This is carried out by rolling a D 10 and looking up the brigade's response number. Generally the better trained and organised and led a unit the greater the chance of it reacting.

For example, a French Old Guard Brigade can form a square on a basic 8 or less (other factors can be added or subtracted to this). A Spanish Line Infantry unit would only manage on a 4 or loss. Response numbers do vary depending on the troop type and year to reflect the change in quality in certain armies. A more realistic approach since army/corps commanders rarely involved themselves in low level tactical decisions.

Combat

Combat is also handled in a similarly simple way with no combat results tables. Basically there is "Firing" and "close combat". Firing is considered to be a combination of corps level artillery and infantry brigades. Each infantry brigade is awarded a positive or negative fire factor which is meant to represent skirmish capability and attached divisional artillery. When fire combat is resolved both sides roll a D10. The firer adds or subtracts the fire modifier and any other prevailing factors (these are few in number but include formation and cover). The firer then compares his adjusted die score to the defender. If it is greater then one figure casualty has been inflicted on the defending unit, it is twice as much then two figure causalities have been inflicting. A negative result is no effect. Similarly corps artillery units fire individually and adjust the die score for range. The system is simple but effective.

A British Light Infantry brigade with a '+2' modifier can exact a heavy price from opposition (especially as they also have a longer range than the opposition) whereas Russian Line Infantry have a '-1' modifier which generally restricts the effectiveness of their fire.

The same can also be said of the artillery. French artillery units have a '+2' modifier and are very effective; such units should be feared. The Russians with a zero artillery modifier do not perform as well as the French, although Russian armies usually field more guns. Given my reading of the period, all this seems fairly historical.

The game sequence always allows the defender to fire first followed by the attacker. Poorly co-ordinated and unsupported attacks can quite literally be shot to pieces. Should the attacker survive and make base contact with the defender a second type of combat takes place. In most games this might be termed a "melee," although in Napoleon's Battles it is not actually intended to be the physical contact which the term suggests. Basically it's the bulk of the brigade now coming into effective fire range of the enemy, and the combat is intended to reflect the protracted fire-fight which ensues.

The combat is resolved in a manner similar to fire combat but instead of using fire modifiers, formation modifiers are used instead. Your brigade formation now becomes crucial. A French brigade in column would have a modifier of -1, British infantry in line would have a modifier of + 3. Minor tactical modifiers are also considered, then both sides roll a D10 adding of subtracting the various modifiers.

The final scores are then compared and the side of the lower die score looses the difference in figures between that score and the enemy score. This carries on until one side or the other looses a number of figures equal to their rout number (4 in the case of the French and 5 in the case of the British). Once a units rout number is reached, that side routs and the combat is finished. This can be very bloody and attacks need to be carefully managed as success is not always beyond doubt. Cavalry combats are handled in the same way but only one round of combat is allowed before contact must end.

Does it Work?

Does the close combat system work? As simplified as it may seem, it does produce some very historical results. In a recent re-fighting of Salamanca I commanded two French brigades deployed in column that got the better of a British brigade deployed in line during the long range fire-fight. Fairly confident of victory, I hurled my two 16-figure French brigades (about 4,000 men) at the British line which was 8 figures strong (about 1,000 men). In the subsequent close combat, not only were my jubilant Frenchmen stopped in their tracks, but they were forced into a disordered retreat. Against less well trained professionals a victory might have been assured. The combat system is quick and very exciting, with complacent and uncoordinated attacks leading to disaster.

Morale

Morale is also handled in a rather novel way with no more long and tedious reaction tests so reminiscent of my WRG rules. Basically at the start of the game brigades are awarded disorder and rote numbers. These numbers are a reflection of unit training morale and motivation. The numbers represent the number of casualties a brigade can sustain in a single fire of combat phase before the effects are felt by the units.

For example a brigade of French line infantry will become disordered after receiving two figure casualties and rout after receiving four. Figure casualties cannot be sustained indefinitely and when a predetermined number of casualties is suffered by the unit it suffers from dispersal. This effectively means that the unit is considered burnt out and considered unfit to play a further part in the battle. The dispersal number depends on its morale class and strength on the outset of the battle.

As the number of dispersed and routed units rises so the effectiveness at a corps and indeed your army starts to suffer. Once enough units are routed/dispersed a corps becomes fatigued and can no longer attack. Once the army morale level is reached your army has lost its will to continue and for all intents and purposes the battle is over. Generally speaking army morale is equal to half the total number of infantry or cavalry brigades in the army. Certain elite, guard and grenadier units have a much bigger impact on army morale. For example a French Old Guard unit is worth 5 army morale points.

Heavy combat will generally see brigades used up at an alarming rate and generally whole corps will be put out of action. Battles tend to see periods of lull as shattered divisions and corps are reorganised. In this situation reserves are essential to hold the line or sustain attacks. Elite or stubborn units committed to action generally tend to take heavier losses. For example a Russian infantry unit with a rout number or '5' leave more casualties behind then for example a Spanish infantry unit with a rout number of '3'. Large units can take even more punishment.

The game turns depicts half an hour of real time. It starts with the command phase and rallying. You can then opt for an all out attack with your guard infantry. Units are then manoeuvred. A nice rule allows cavalry units who do not move to be placed on "react". This basically means that you are reserving the movement of your cavalry until after the close combat segment which allows cavalry to exploit the results of your assaults. Or cavalry are allowed to move after the enemy movement to respond to enemy actions. After friendly movement comes the enemies chance to move reacting cavalry units. Defensive fire is followed by offensive fire, followed by close combat. Friendly cavalry units on react can then be moved if desired to exploit a breakthrough. The turn then passes over to the enemy.

Movement

Movement is alternative which may not be to everyone's liking. However, it does not mean that opposing players sit around bored, there is plenty of interaction via the dice throwing. For short game it may be possible to complete an entire turn in 15-20 minutes. Larger games do take longer, possibly up to 30-40 minutes. In a recent two player game of Austerlitz we managed to play the 18 turns in about 15 hours. Obviously, team play will speed things up considerably. The game system also allows for several nice touches which add to the interest and excitement.

Many decisions in the game are decided by a dice roll and each player is allocated some free roll markers. Basically this allows a player to demand a re-roll of both players dice if the result has gone badly - only one re-roll is allowed per situation and the result stands (even if you are worse off). Scenarios decide how many free roll markers are allocated, but generally it is 6-8 each. They do tend to be used up very rapidly early on in the game and in many a battle situation have you cursed yourself for not showing more self-discipline.

During each battle one side is awarded initiative at the start. This is a distinct advantage and can allow a player to carry out a number of interesting options to the sequence or play. You could ignore the effects of fatigue for a turn. You can shorten or lengthen the game by a turn, the All Cut Attack could be played before or after the pursuit phase., trade it in for some more free roll markers. However, once this option has been played the initiative marker then passes over to your opponent who can then decide how to play it.

All Out Attack

Finally, the All Out Attack option is worth mentioning. Basically this option allows a player to move all elite Guard or Grenadier infantry units in an all out attack against the enemy. The normal sequence of play is suspended as one side hurls its guard units into the fray. This type of attack if played at the right moment and properly planned could have a devastating impact on the enemy. However, an enemy army not sufficiently pounded can exact a terrible revenge. Playing this rule puts you in the position of commanding the Old Guard as it marches through the smoke towards the enemy centre at the height of the battle.

Four Reasons for Excellence

I have tried to give the reader/prospective buyer a fair insight into the rules. From my own personal point of view I believe the rules are excellent. Why? I would say for four very distinct reasons:

a) Firstly, the rules have a terrific sense of realism about them. I feel that I am a Napoleonic field commander. Some of my subordinates will let me down and ruin my best laid plans. However, I have also seen the success of combined arms attacks with infantry and cavalry, supported by artillery fire.

b) The rules allow me to re-fight the majority of Napoleonic battles on a 6' x 4' table.

c) The basic rule mechanics are easy to learn but challenging to master. The rules allow novices to join in very quickly.

d) Above all playing Napoleon's Battles is FUN, something which is all too often forgotten in wargaming. The excitement level is very high, very often battles are not decided until the very last combat. Most of the scenarios are very balanced, in particular I can recommend Corunna and Talavera. Maybe I do show a degree of bias towards these particular rules but if you have found a good thing then shout about it!

The rules do have some slight imperfections and the designers admit this. But I believe the positive side to the rules far outweigh the negative. To increase further interest in Napoleon's Battles, the second expansion module, just recently released, adds an exciting new dimension. The rules can now be used in conjunction with Avalon Hill's board game Empires in Arms. The board game provides the campaign framework and battles can be translated into a tabletop engagement using Napoleon's Battles rules. Perhaps this could be the theme of a future article.

This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com