Napoleonic Rules Review

Miniature Warfare

Empire 3rd Edition

by Bruce Weeks

By Jim Getz and Scotty Bowden these rules fill approximately 160 pages in a special binder 8" x 81/4 " size with thick card reminder sheets all enclosed in a multicolored covered box. $19.95 post paid.

Major Playing Concepts - Despite the claims of the authors E-3 does not appear to contain any new or tremendously exciting innovations in rules writing. What it does try to do is to strike a level of play that would force the player to act as a corps commander, directing major subordinate units into the overall battle picture. This becomes quite clear when we read that the Infantry Division, The Cavalry Brigade and The Grand Battery are the basic maneuver elements which the player commits to combat using the grand tactical order system in the rules. This is modified somewhat for elite formations which can maneuver on an Infantry Brigade level, but this is a small point.

The major features of this game system in our view is the command and control structure, the grand tactical order writing system and multi-phased simultaneous movement into tactical combat areas followed by the move/counter move or "impulses" of tactical combat. In discussing each of these we can only touch on our immediate impressions since the newness of the rules has precluded any major testing by us.

Command and Control - Great stress is placed on the ability of leaders - represented on the table top at divisional and corps level - to influence the course of the game. Certain of these figures represent the actual players themselves, while others are used as pivotal figures for the units under their command. This in and of itself has always been a problem. If a person is going to command a corps the rules should be structured to let him do so without relying on the artifacts of other leader figures in a chain of command. All this does is slow down the game and add confusion. On top of this is the fact that the copious pages devoted to catagorizing the various leaders can only be viewed as subjective at best. While historical research can be cited as precedent and one can argue at long length over the relative incapacity shown by the various figures over the years (or days) of active campaining that one chooses to distill out is not representative of the wide range of abilities a combat leader can show. Which of us for example will want to play the part constantly of the Archduke Charles in his charismatic mediocrity?? After all even Charles had one splendid afternoon. The authors will naturally argue that these ratings are, on the whole, as close as we can get to the historical truth, but the underlying assumption is that wargamers want to be Charles, or Morat, or Suvarov while in reality we feel that most wargamers want to be themselves and play a game that allows them to be a corps or army commander.

To continue on though, the major manner in which E-3 limits the ability of units to act is through its operational orders. These turn out on inspection to be several pages in length with differences being made between corps level grand tactic maneuver element grand tactical orders. The sheer bulk of these orders, with several exceptions to each one, depending on the situation, tends to make this system seem unworkable. The experiences of the WRG Ancient rules in this respect spring to mind as one reads through the legalistic prose of these orders.

Even if you assume all players to be interested and concerned that they are in fact playing by the spirit of "The book", and even if you are able to keep maneuver elements and corps sorted out on the table (which is much more difficult than it sounds) people simply loose tract of who was ordered to do what when. Also, unless you have a good umpire present and on his toes, the possibility of people taking liberties with the situation is always there. There is one interesting concept noted in this section, however, and that is the "Sauve qui peut" order which allows the player to voluntarily rout maneuver elements off table to escape from a hopless predicament. These units naturally become totally disorganized and are useless for the next several turns.

Coming at last through the confusing portions of the order issuing and command and control phases of the turn we arrive at the other major playing concept, the multiphased movement and combat portions of the turn, This basically is an attempt to allow large maneuver elements to move simultaneously until they become engaged in a combat zone at which time they halt and await the combat resolution phase. Once all simultaneous movement is done on the grand scale the game then turns into a move-countermove, or impulse move method with a player being able to gain an advantage by maintaining the initiative of combat. This process continues until all tactical combat is over. The concept is certainly interesting and should be explored more fully.

However, our feeling is that the addition of numerous sub-steps in any game turn only serves to prolong the turn through the mechanics of 'whose impulse is it? ' not to mention the all too real possibility of players simply forgetting who changed face when and who attacked whom with what results. The authors seem to have over-looked that not everyone wants a game that requires one to track explicitly the actions of 40-50 Bns/Sqds in each turn.

In addition, the definition section to the tactical combat section is enough to delight the staunchest rules lawyer and to dismay the most ardent player. All in all the major concepts discussed in E-3 are the authors' attempts to recreate the committment through leadership ability ratings of major subordinate units into the cauldron of battle. How successful they have been is an open question at this time.

Playability - Enough comments have been voiced above concerning the intricate sequencing and voluminous definitions, exceptions, and subjective valuations that have gone into the make up of the major components of E-3 to give the rating that E-3 would be a difficult game to consider easily playable. One would need to devote many hours and much play testing to the concepts to become familiar and at ease with it. Unfortunately, even this would not be enough. At the scale of game envisioned in the rules, several players and thousands of troops are required. Who amongst us has this capability? What club can boast the intense interest level of even 6 participants to learn a completely new system through several difficult games to reach a familiarity level where everyone is happy with any set of rules AS WRITTEN?

Mechanisms - E-3 is essentially a fairly standard game on the tactical level. The movement, firing and casualty inflicting mechanisms are not difficult to grasp. As indicated above, however, the superimposing of the grand tactical level of concern over these mechanisms, and in particular the convoluted movement to combat and impulse combat sequences tends to disrupt the simple flow of the game. To this end many other mechanisms have been neglected or oversimplified such as the terrain effects, weather, and the interrelationships between on table and off table action.

Organization - The physical layout of E-3 is to be highly commended, the rules are layed out directly in the order in which the game plays - thereby eliminating the need to constantly refer backwards and forwards throughout the body of the rules. Also the reminder cards can be used to track what part of the turn the players have reached. The actual layout of the reminder cards struck as somewhat less than they could be, being thrice folded and printed lightly with small sized type, but that is a minor concern.

The tables needed to play the game are all included in the body of the rules and in addition, the authors have gone to the immense trouble to catagorize in their appendices the morale class, troop type, and other esoteric modifiers for all the troops who ever raised a musket of sabre throughout the period. We have already mentioned their highly detailed notations on all the miserable and mediocre commanders found throughout the various armies. Such legislative detail would be best left to the gamers themselves to workout. It is, in effect, a loosing battle since no one will ever agree with all the ratings assigned. Perhaps a general idea of the philosophy one should use to rate these factors would be better.

Completeness - As in the other sets of rules received E-3 is above all else a battle-table set of rules. No major committment is make to tie the game system rules into a larger campaign set. Siege warfare or combined operations are not developed at all. The special character of sappeurs and train units is included, but not exhaustively. Such concerns as terrain, weather and the off table movement of units are only touched on in passing and these are areas that to our minds can have an immense impact on the course of any game.

Compatability - Since there is no strict requirement to base troops to any set order except in so far as the actual frontage per figure is concerned, these units could be used equally in a number of the grand tactical games mentioned in the earlier reviews. The only exception to this might possibly be the artillery stands which are quite a bit narrower than normal. Since there is no requirement to manufacture special rulers or sticks, patterns, etc... The player risks no investment outside of the cost of the rules themselves.

Cost vs. Content - E-3 proves to be the most difficult of the 4 sets of rules reviewed to make the determination. This is a direct result of the costs involved. At $20.00 one has every right to expect an excellent set of rules that can be played and enjoyed for years to come. We frankly wonder haw much of the price tag the purchaser is devoting to a 3 color cardboard box which will only serve to hold casualty figures during a game.

There is certainly a lot within the body of E-3. Much you may disagree with as we have done, but it is an admirable effort to portray a particular view of what a Napoleonic battle was all about. If you can survive the playability problems and thrive on complexity it is worth the price. If on the other hand you don't have the resources for a game of this scale or if you prefer to draw your own conclusions about what a Napoleonic battle was all about -- it is not.

More Napoleonic Rules Review

Back to Table of Contents -- Courier Vol. III #2
To Courier List of Issues
To MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1981 by The Courier Publishing Company.
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