Wargaming at the
Turn of the Century

21st

by David Comerford

Sorry to disappoint the H.G. Wells fans out there but this article will have little to do with playing large games in the garden with 54mm figures. It is in fact the up and coming event I am referring to and the title is just a thinly veiled excuse for yet another millennium article. Well, I thought everyone else has had one, so why shouldn't we! Some time ago in First Empire 25 I wrote an article call Thirty Years On, in which I attempted to summarise some of the developments in Napoleonic Wargaming since the Sixties. This current article is intended to bring events up to date and to pose a few questions about current trends and directions for the future as we boldly march into the next century Figures There seems little doubt that as far a figure manufactures are concerned Napoleonics is still a period worth getting into. One only has to look at the expanding range of 25mm Old Glory have introduced along side their 15mm figures to indicate that they still see sales in this arena. They are not the only ones who are pushing the boat out on 25mm either, to name but a few, 1st Corps, Redoubt Enterprises, Elite Miniatures, Front Rank and of course Wargames Foundry, when they are not distracting themselves with their latest flight of fancy, they are all at it. To think, not long ago people were predicting 25mm was a thing of the past! There has been expansion in 15mm as well with several new, or new to Napoleonics manufactures coming along. The last year or so has seen some producers reach back to the start of the era with the introduction of figures for the Revolution and Republican period and broaden the geographical horizons to include Wellington in India. 6mm appears to be holding its ground but 2mm and 10mm have not made it and neither, in spite of some valiant attempts, has the staged comeback of 20mm. The later must be doomed to failure given the physical size of some 15mm ranges and the near total availability of troop types in already established ranges. All in all standards are higher and choice wider than ever before. Whether or not all this wonderful stuff is being sold or not is an entirely different matter you can't help but think that there are a lot of hounds after the same fox these days. Visually I still tend to favour 15mm as the scale of choice. It's interesting to compare the different sizes at shows (where you can actually find some Nap Games that is). 6mm are in the main very well done but the worth of their presentation tends to dissolve into a "Hay, your eyes are younger than mine" appearance as you truly cannot tell the French Blue from the Prussian Black and even the British Red, once you take a pace back from the table. 25mm can look glorious, unit for unit, but they tend to overwhelm their surroundings and people cannot resist putting on more figures than the aspect of the table will allow. Rules So then, what's changed since I last wrote? Well to start with Legacy of Glory have gone out of production, Napoleons Battles seem to have faded into the background and Empire while still having its die hard supporters on both sides of the Atlantic has to still failed to gain wide spread adherence outside the USA. One thing is sure, no one set of rules have come to pre-eminence in the way Fire and Fury have in the American Civil War period. I have wondered what this indicates. Is it that our period has yet to find its common denominator? Are we harder to please, better informed, or just plain self opinionated? Whatever the reason we continue to proliferate and then add "House Rules" as fast as sets are published. It's a genuine phenomenon that stalks no other period in the same manner and will no doubt follow us into the coming century unabated. In commercial terms, Shako, Napoleonic Principals of War, From Valmy To Waterloo, General de Brigade, Chief de Battalion and Piquet have all pressed for our attention in recent times. The one common trend has been the process of specialisation in rule production, whereby writers have ceased to try and write rules that would be all things to all players and offer instead a distinct choice as to command levels and complexity of use. Shako, offers simple mechanics, more akin to the early years of gaming, with an added ingredient of National Characteristics. Napoleonic Principals of War also takes a fairly traditional approach but allows for more modern thinking by tying the combatants to styles of leadership and performance through rules governing French and Linear (Prussian) tactics. It could be argued this is a bit of a simplification but the rules together with their army lists have gleaned a following and in the UK at any rate they now appear to have eclipsed To the Sound of the Guns, in competition play, at any rate. From Valmy to Waterloo also examines the differences in training and tactical doctrine between the opposing nation's armies. This set has its bedrock of support in the US and although it has it's own rules and combat mechanics, it draws heavily on Empire for inspiration, particularly in its Command and Control. Where it differs is that in order to simulate the historical performance of the various forces, the order system used in Empire is expanded upon and then overlaid with national restrictions. So that while in Empire all armies can respond in the same way to operational demands, through the range of permitted orders, in V to W this strictly controlled. Thus in any given circumstance the French player has more options open to him than his/her opponent, for example their attacking options are more flexible and can be stopped, where as the Allies tend toward an all or nothing approach which is not easily called off. Two ways of skinning the same cat are also demonstrated by General de Brigade and Chief de Battalion. Both seek to emulate the command problems at the sharp end of the Napoleonic battlefield by giving a game which represents small unit tactics. Although it has to be said that GdB is at a slightly higher command level and figure ratio than CdB. Oh! There is also the small matter that, the former works and the latter does not. These two sets provide an interesting conundrum. In that the simple set (GdB), through the use of battalion size units, which at 1:20 scale can prove realistically hard to manoeuvre, gives a far better game. It succeeds where other fails, by allowing the player space to add in their own embellishments, rather than the amazing CdB approach that has more charts per column inch than any rules ever produced and mega units in a scale of 1:5! Something these two do have in common is that combined arms tactics are a bit of a fraud. In terms that are dictated by the numbers of figures required to play at full scale, few gamers have enough figures available for the size of action where a proper allocation of cavalry would be available. Even then, command structures would have often isolated this arm from the level of officer the player is supposed to portray. However, if players are willing to abandon the more traditional even sides, one off game, in favour of the creation of a problem solving, scenario approach, then GdB in particular, can give a pleasing idea of the basic command difficulties that permeated all battle fields but are lost in the broad sweep of higher command level rules. Piquet, I have deliberately left till last, mainly because they are unique. They have been previously little known outside the USA but are now being imported to the UK. It is difficult to really capture what they are about in the confines of this article and such is the unusual nature of there construction, in comparison with more conventional rules, that I will attempt only a brief outline before commending readers to Andy Finkle's review in First Empire 41. In short, Piquet is a modular system, in a similar manner to the Avalon Hill, Squad Leader board games. In that there is a basic set which has the core control functions and then a series of addons. However, whereas in Squad Leader the modules add different national armies and theatres of war to the same period in history, Piquet additions are the periods of history themselves. So to play our period, you buy the basic set and the Napoleonic set. Then in keeping with the command level trend, you can now also buy sets to make your Napoleonic game Grand Tactical or Battalion Level as well. Unfortunately, you also have to own the basic set and the original Napoleonic set for either of these to work. Although in comparison to other rules this tends to add up on the pocket and could therefore put buyers off, the cost pales into insignificance alongside the original Squad Leader concept which is/was absolutely ruinous by comparison. In terms of game play the rules work on the basis that the true nature of war/generalship is the ability to make the best of chaotic circumstances and limited opportunity. As such they put aside complex orders, charts and multiple rules to restrict players knowledge of environment and activity, in favour of controlling the opportunities for action and initiative. As one might expect of such a radical concept they appear to have both their share of devotees and detractors but one thing's for sure, they have staked out their territory in innovation and cannot be touched at the present time, in this regard, if no other. Coming up in the not too distant future (hopefully) will be a Grand Tactical level Valmy to Waterloo (i.e. Brigade as the smallest unit) and a new version of Empire. I should clarify the last point, in that it won't be called Empire, as Scott Bowden still owns the name but it will be an extensive reworking of Empire V by Todd Fisher and Co. With a lot of work done on it to speed game play, plus some new innovations. Working title is From Revolution to Empire as its intended to encompass both periods. Before leaving the written word behind, I was reminded by several people (well two actually) after my previous effort that I neglected the activities of those hardy souls who risk all to bob up and down on the cardboard briney. Otherwise referred to as Navel, no sorry, Naval Wargamers. I understand there have been some interesting developments in these quarters as well. Certainly many more games are now seen at shows and conventions and jolly good most of them look to! However, if it's all the same to you nautical types I'll leave this bit to those who know what they are talking about. All this "running close hauled on the larboard tack" stuff goes right over my head. Besides which, to tell the truth all I do when confronted by the Langton Miniatures stand at shows is inwardly laugh my head off. The reason being, contemplation of the chances of my ever being able to muster the skill required to produce anything remotely like the fully rigged wonders that inhabit the display cases! One thing I have noted is that there appears to be one or two good computer moderated rules for Naval games which by way of a cheap link leads me to the next section. Computers Frankly people, I am disappointed. Here we are five months away from the 21st Century and still the best Wargames related use for a PC is to write about them! Ok, so we have had Talonsoft but for now at any rate, that's over. Also, let's be frank, although they were good, in fact brilliant, compared to what existed before them. At the end of the day, any game that runs an AI that allows me to turn the Hugomont end of the line at Waterloo, kill three and disable two more Allied Divisional commanders and then capture Wellington needs a bit of work! Particularly when it still had no clue that the game should have been over at that point in the way a human player would. Then again where are the table rules? The esteemed Mr. Watkins has done his bit by getting things toward the modern era with the Windows version of his rules but I don't see the hot breath of the competition on his neck. Are the development costs always going to out way the potential returns, or is just a question of practicalities. For example, in relative terms it's more straight forward to write Naval rules that will work. Have you ever seen a "74" slip round the back of a wood or appear from behind a hill? No, neither have I and to some extent this is why I wonder if computer land rules will ever make it big until a better interface exists between the table top and the software, than the players themselves. Also there is the matter of humping the kit around. Few of us, in Europe at any rate, are lucky enough to have a permanent wargames venue and just as few of us have access to a lap top as an alternative to our PC. I think this may be a major factor, or is it, just plain, unspecified, lack of demand. To paraphrase what some people say about visitors from other worlds "if they were coming the Americans would be selling them by now" One additional area of computer based worth is the Internet. Napoleonic sites abound. From the general to the specific, there is a large amount to interest the enthusiastic "surfer" with discussion groups and information and even rules to download (in case you didn't have enough). While I'm fairly guarded in my enthusiasm for this media, most of the time, it is a mine of information if you have a specific interest and you know where to look and our period is no exception. Typing in Napoleon or Napoleonic to your search engine is the gateway to yards of the stuff and yet another way to prevent yourself from painting figures! Indeed, just on the subject of computer rules, people are already discussing a future where a table grid monitors the movements of chipped or bar coded units, informing the game machine, which allows for pre coded terrain, line of sight, moral and fire loss. While the players make their moves unfettered by such considerations! Sort of a 3D Talonsoft, if you will. Believe me I expect this to happen. All it requires is the will and for technology costs to keep falling. It could be the perfect match between better games, those who love to research and paint figures and not miss out on face to face contact. Fresh Blood So what else do we need as we start our new century? Well it's almost become fashionable to say that wargaming is dying on it's feet and full of increasingly older gits (I should know I'm one of them!) However, there's a worrying element of truth in some of these predictions of gloom. There's a Games Workshop (yes I know, them again, Blah, Blah, Blah) a few doors down from my office and although not one of their biggest it's like a school annex. The staff and their acolytes are not playing Napoleonics! Nor, are they ever likely too. Well not on the firm's time anyway. Now some of these may find their way over the boarder as they get older but few will. History hurts the brain folks and the element of patronising, know all's, that inhabit our period, revelling in the intellectual snobbery that pervades it, are a guarantee that they won't. What we need more than anything if we are not all to grow old together is not dumming down but a more populist approach. More Sharp and Hornblower on the box, a more accessible range of computer games. How about a first person combat strategy game like Delta Force, based on Sharp! Swap your M16 for a Baker Rifle and off you go. Finally, who's going to write the Napoleonic version of Warhammer Ancient battles? You know what they say, if you ain't got an idea, steal one! Back to Table of Contents -- First Empire #48 Back to First Empire List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1999 by First Empire. 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