From: "W. Keith Beason"
To: "Kevin Zucker"
Subject: Just got NAB

Napoleon at Bay has always been a favorite of mine. I remember playing it often back in the early 80's. Bought the original OSG and Avalon Hill versions. Good to see you bring it up to date with your other stuff. I've just setup my first scenario, haven't finished reading the rules yet, and wanted to share a couple of things with you:

1. Regarding Karpov, Tettenborn, and Wasichew...their counters read Bohemian. Is this correct?
2. Same for Ataman and Pahlen...are they really Silesian?

   A) You may want to use a different Major General of the appropriate army to represent these forces; simply move the combat unit to the appropriate Major General track.. I hope this doesn't cause too much trouble.

3. I'm sure someone else has pointed this out by now but two hexes on the West map are incorrectly numbered. They are: 3744 (reads 3745 on map) and 3745 (reads as 3726 on map).

If you have a EMail list for errata and other comments (other than grognard.com) please put me on it. I would enjoy sharing ideas about OSG reincarnate with others. Thanks and Good Luck!

To: "W. Keith Beason"
From: kzucker@charm.net (Kevin Zucker)
Subject: Re: Just got NAB

Thanks for your feedback. I'm guessing you bought your copy via Monarch Avalon's 800-number? Was your game delivered promptly? Did you get Wargame Design Magazine?

I'm glad to hear you started setting up right away. I especially appreciate your offer to spread the word about NAB. That word is so important.

Thanks and I hope you enjoy it!

From: "W. Keith Beason"
To: "Kevin Zucker"
Subject: More about NAB
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 22:55:50 -0400

Thanks for responding to my note two nights back. I know you must be busy. You had some questions in your reply. Yes, I did order NAB via Monarch Avalon's 800 number. Delivery was prompt (3 days). I heard about the game through your Wargame Design magazine. Looking forward to future issues there.

A) I'm doing a bit of correspondence, but thats what I'm here for.

I must tell you the more I get into the game, the more it feels like an old tennis shoe I suddenly found in the back of the closet. Very comfortable. But with a lot of new meat. Should be fun when I start it up. I'm still cutting the dog ears off the pieces and finishing up reading the rules (I'm in the middle of Thunder at the Crossroads at the moment).

A) I hope they don't bite you.

1) The Leader of a multi-hex force can setup outside EZOC as long as adjacent to Subordinate. Yet, we learn that the only way a force can exit EZOCs is via initiative. Does this mean that a Leader of a multi-hex force (himself not in EZOC) cannot issue movement commands to adjacent Subordinates that are in EZOC? In other words, if any portion of a multi-hex force is in an EZOC that force must technically break-up in order to move under a command while a portion remains stuck and is required to use initative to break free. Right?

A) No, the whole force can still move under the main guy. Please give me the chapter & verse where the problem is.

What about resistance modifiers in such cases?

A) Use the main guy.

2) Can the Old Guard be "staked" as part of a counterattack?

A) Yes.

3) Artillery "may never Pursue." Does this mean they cannot even "tag along" with a pursuing force?

A) No. Make sure you have them under a Major General, and not the leader you want to lead the pursuit, before the battle.

Page 14: MOVEMENT OF A MULTI-HEX FORCE (2nd Para):
A Subordinate Leader in a Multi-Hex Force may move into an enemy ZOC while the Force Leader remains outside the ZOC, but the Force Leader must still be adjacent to the Subordinate Leader.

Page 14: EXITING AND ENTERING ZOC's: Initiative for Exiting ZOC's
A Force in an enemy controlled hex at the beginning of the Command Phase may attempt to move out, but may only move by Inititative. The Initiative Rating of the Force Leader is modified by the Resistance Modifier.

In the light of this... Is a Multi-Hex Force required to exit EZOC only by initiative if the Force Leader himself is not in an EZOC?

A) Yes

Or, to put it another way, if any portion of a Multi-Hex Force is in an EZOC is the entire Force considered in EZOC for exit purposes even if the Force Leader himself s not in EZOC?

A) Yes

This question is conceptual in nature. I'm struggling with the exact relationship between EZOC's and Multi-Hex Forces as a whole.

A) It is a very good question, and goes deep into the heart of the game. You will discover more about this subject if you examine the Optional Battle Rules.

I just want to say again how much I appreciate you taking time to go back and forth with via EMail. Its rare to find a designer willing to go the extra mile like this. I plan to actually setup NAB and start pushing counters around this weekend. Hope to hear from you regarding the above questions.

Hope this helps! I hope you can find an opponent!!! If not, let me know and I will see if I know of any gamers near you.

From: "W. Keith Beason"
To: "Kevin Zucker"
Subject: Finished a few NAB Battle Scenarios
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997

I've had a chance to play a couple of battle scenarios from NAB. The Reserve rules are really a must! They give the game a terrific historical feel. I'm very pleased. Anyone who has the attitude of "What? Not THAT game again!" is cheating themself of a great gaming experience. Sure, it's a "classic" game, but there's enough new meat to make the purchase more than a worthwhile. Only the basic shell is at all like the first release.

On the negative side, for a game that will cost $48 (I paid $38 for mine), the counters are inferior. The graphics themselves are OK, given the mistakes with the switched-labeling of certain Bohemian and Silesian Cavalry leaders, but the typical Avalon Hill paper stock and scoring are substandard today.

To: "W. Keith Beason"
From: kzucker@charm.net (Kevin Zucker)
Subject: Re: Finished a few NAB Battle Scenarios

page 4: Exclusive Rules - Garrisons:
Place the appropriate quality Garrison Marker in each town...

Huh? My Garrison Markers have no such distinctions. Or am I missing something?

A) Ignore the reference to troop quality for garrisons.

page 12: Standard Rules
"For purposes of calculating Attrition, a Reinforcement Force traces LOC from its Center of Operations or the nearest Friendly Supply Source to its entry hex.

Does "its" refer to the Force itself or the army's Center?

A) The Army's Center of Operations

Does Friendly mean "active" Supply Source only?

A) Any possible Supply Source, according to date

page 5: Exclusive Rules:
The Silesian Army may switch freely from one Supply Source hex to another...

Still costs 1AP right?

A) Yes

Are Campaign Supply Source change rules in addition to the Battle Scenario rules?

A) Yes (see top of p. 10)

page 7: Exclusive Rules:
The friendly unit may continue moving around, but not through, the hex containing the Vedette, ignoring its Zone of Control.

Does it also ignore the extra MP's to exit ZOC's as well?

A) Yes.

page 12: Exclusive Rules:
Units in Dispatch Distance still get benefit of Accumulated AP Total when determining Attrition; they are not automatically considered out of Dispatch Distance simply because the Center of Ops has moved.

Is Dispatch Distance always measured from wherever the Center Ops is actually located? That is, if it moves, is Dispatch Distance immediately traced when necessary from the new location?

A) See first paragraph on p.12

page 13: Exclusive Rules - Old Guard Movement Bonus:
It may thus move up to 7 MP's in one Phase, without resorting to Extended March procedure (which would allow the Old Guard to expend another 4 MP's; i.e., up to 11).

Does this mean that the Old Guard can always move 11 MP's without suffering attrition?

A) Yes, if it pays the EXTRA AP.

page 13: Exclusive Rules:
...a Force which expends MP's relative to a bridge structure may not make an Extended March that phase.

Does this mean just damaging/repairing bridges and deploying pontoons?

A) Yes

Does it include actually moving across a bridge as well?

A) No.

page 14: Exclusive Rules - Bridge Trains:
...their Movement Allowance is 5.

As infantry or cavalry?

A) As infantry

More Napoleon at Bay Product Support

Napoleon at Bay Q&A
Map Errata
Errata and Clarifications