moopere
Posts: 46
Joined: 1/26/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: hmgs1
My experience is that most miniature players are too much into historical detail to support that type of environment,
Which is probably right and why I think I'm struggling with the idea myself. After decades of pushing lead around the table I'm focused on minute detail. Nevertheless, you raise some good points:
quote:
ORIGINAL: hmgs1
though I really don't think its an issue. If an 1806 Prussian "corps" has 15 factors of infantry (30,000 men), then the players will likely field four infantry divisions each of two brigades, each of two musketeer regiments and a single grenadier battalion with a 12 lb foot battery attached, because that was the way the Prussians did it in 1806.
I guess thats fine, particularly in the early stages of a campaign. But what strikes me immediately as a problem when we abstract the soldiers in this way is what happens when I boldy use my elite units, like the grenadiers mentioned above, and get them killed in the process....next battle they can magically appear again, and again, and again.
The above shows my baggage as a tactical commander with miniatures, but even if we accept that, would it not skew the battles over time when the best performing troop types are continually fielded -and- used up only to keep reappearing? I don't know that I'm being completely clear in what I mean here. I'm probably focusing on too much detail that really ultimately doesn't matter at the strategic/political level which EiA is played at..
quote:
ORIGINAL: hmgs1
If there are light infantry factors present then each division gets a fusilier regiment, and if their are cavalry factors present, then each division gets half a hussar regiment with any left over factors going into brigades of dragoons and kurassiers, each with a horse battery. There wouldn't be a corps commander because the Prussians didn't use corps ion 1806, regardless of what the counter might be designated. And if a strength point does equal 2000 men, that's pretty easy to translate into the number of miniatures or stands of miniatures one would field.
To me, at least, I don't see an issue for a reasonably knowledgeable set of players, and it does seem like a simpler way to go than the NB campaign system.
Mmmm, you are probably right. Seems sensible at the level we are playing at. I do wonder about special formations...like Grenadier brigades (or divisions) in say...the Russian Army, but I guess similarly to above you could account for say a single Grenadier brigade every few regular line divisions?
quote:
ORIGINAL: hmgs1
The rub comes in the period 1805 - 1807 when most miniature rules very, VERY heavily favor the French, to the extent human skill may not make enough of a difference.
Yes, this is a big problem which is why I usually advocate some sort of prowess based points system. I don't mind French line being 'twice as good' but I need to have twice as many Russians to face you on an even field. (not quite true of course, but you get the idea).
quote:
ORIGINAL: hmgs1
And many of the differences are subtle. Consider 1806 French and Prussian infantry. In my own published rules they fire the same, but the French move 50% faster and all French infantry are designated light infantry and can deploy skirmishers regardless of title. Conversely, no Prussian infantry is defined as light, even those who are so titled.
Yes, and the subtlety is really hard to measure in a way that makes sense for a points system - this is the oldest argument in miniatures wargaming...perhaps your conclusion (below) is as good a solution as any.
quote:
ORIGINAL: hmgs1
Now there are some differences between armies in EIA that lean towards the French, but I'm just curious if what seems to be a bigger advantage with lead is actually present, and will it skew the EIA game system in ways unanticipated.
Hmm, I'd say this is quite likely, however will just as likely be compensated for by the players themselves forming coalitions against france.
quote:
ORIGINAL: hmgs1
Personally, I wouldn't want to redefine strength points (each French SP = 1500 men, for example) just to re-balance the game, as that moves the contest too far from history to me. If 60,000 Prussians tackle 60,000 French in 1806 with all their advantages thereof, well, that's life.
Its a reasonable argument which I've seen before in NTW2 (Napoleonic Total War 2) where all battles are more or less 'one-offs'. However, eventually no-one wants to play Prussia if there is almost no chance of winning a field encounter (regardless of skill). Luckily, in a campaign situation you can try to always present on the field with larger numbers of troops thus countering your french enemies inherent advantages with numbers. In EiA this is probably hard however as the French are able to produce and maintain relatively huge armies whereas the smaller major powers will have a struggle to always present at a battle with greater numbers of troops.
Its an interesting topic. I wonder if anyone reading this has or is going to transfer battles to the miniatures table (or use a 3rd party napoleonics computer gaming system)?
Cheers,
Moopere
|
Printable Version
Third Party Combat and Miniatures - 
So I going to give another try at solving your problem. 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread