Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

Bonaparte at Marengo» Forums » Rules

Subject: Applying Napoleon's Triumph rules to Marengo rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Brendan Clark
United Kingdom
Chelmsford
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

I recently acquired Napoleon's Triumph and am currently playing it every week with a local opponent. It has much to enjoy with ample scope for various tactical plans and game play. NT has really whetted my appetite for Rachel Simmon's system and now I'm intrigued by Marengo. I am aware that at one point the designer was going to develop it some more, based partly - I think - on how well the system was further developed in Napoleon's Triumph.

From what I've seen, though, the aim to develop and publish a 2nd edition of Marengo has fallen by the wayside - but I'd be delighted to be corrected on this assumption if I'm wrong.

However, if I am right and Marengo isn't to receive further refinement of its combat system, I'm wondering whether it's feasible to apply NT's core rules to Marengo and it's game components. Is such a proposition feasible? Has anyone tried it?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff K
United States
Garner
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It is an interesting idea, but I think that the forces on the ground are not enough to support NTs mechanics. There are simply not enough units to successfully prosecute the type of feints that you see in NT. Plus, there are only 2 or 3 lines of advance, so it is pretty well known in advance where your opponent will be pushing forward. You can't very well feint if there is only avenue to pursue.

I think the main problem is scale. B@M is much more granular than NT. The feints-and-thrusts you see in NT are actually physically represented by the block-and-maneuver style of B@M. Think of all that activity that occurs in B@M going on in NT, but much farther zoomed out, and I think that explains it. For instance, all of the Austrian units on the board for B@M would likely comprise only two formations from NT. Maybe only one large one, actually.

Still, I'd like to see hear about someone's experience trying it out, so give it a shot and let us know what happens!! Cheers!
4 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rod Bauer
United States
Larned
Kansas
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Brengun wrote:

I recently acquired Napoleon's Triumph and am currently playing it every week with a local opponent. It has much to enjoy with ample scope for various tactical plans and game play. NT has really whetted my appetite for Rachel Simmon's system and now I'm intrigued by Marengo. I am aware that at one point the designer was going to develop it some more, based partly - I think - on how well the system was further developed in Napoleon's Triumph.

From what I've seen, though, the aim to develop and publish a 2nd edition of Marengo has fallen by the wayside - but I'd be delighted to be corrected on this assumption if I'm wrong.

However, if I am right and Marengo isn't to receive further refinement of its combat system, I'm wondering whether it's feasible to apply NT's core rules to Marengo and it's game components. Is such a proposition feasible? Has anyone tried it?

Although they are from the same designer, and the components look similar, these are really two different creatures as far as a game system. They are such different games, that when NT came out, I found myself having to forget everything I learned about the BaM system so as not to confuse the two games. I don't believe trying to apply NT's core rules to BaM is workable at all.
5 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brendan Clark
United Kingdom
Chelmsford
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Thanks.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Was George Orwell an Optimist?
United States
Corvallis
Oregon
flag msg tools
Jackie McLean - Let Freedom Ring
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Brengun wrote:

I recently acquired Napoleon's Triumph and am currently playing it every week with a local opponent. It has much to enjoy with ample scope for various tactical plans and game play. NT has really whetted my appetite for Rachel Simmon's system and now I'm intrigued by Marengo. I am aware that at one point the designer was going to develop it some more, based partly - I think - on how well the system was further developed in Napoleon's Triumph.

From what I've seen, though, the aim to develop and publish a 2nd edition of Marengo has fallen by the wayside - but I'd be delighted to be corrected on this assumption if I'm wrong.

However, if I am right and Marengo isn't to receive further refinement of its combat system, I'm wondering whether it's feasible to apply NT's core rules to Marengo and it's game components. Is such a proposition feasible? Has anyone tried it?

I wouldn't recommend it. I think the odds are extremely good that Rachel's revision of BaM will be released eventually, and it's a very fine game. It was developed post-NT, and her approach was absolutely not an attempt to re-apply NT's core rules.

Austerlitz and Marengo were very different situations which she felt could best be evoked with unique rule sets reflecting the character of that specific battle. It's often assumed that she developed a 'system' for Napoleonic games, but that isn't the way I see it. She very much wanted to model specific situations, not build a system with scenarios. I'm not going to go look it up, but I think she addressed this in Design Diary for NT, saying it was not an extension of BaM and giving specifics as to why.

I'm sure she wouldn't mind if others tried to apply her concepts to make their own games about Marengo, but it would be a lot of work and I think the odds are strongly against the result being anywhere near as good as the BaM2 I had the pleasure of playtesting.

There were similar threads to this one prior to Mercury's release of The Guns of Gettysburg, which also went a very long time before becoming available. I counseled patience then, and I counsel patience now. Rachel's own BaM2 is too good to never see the light of day.

[edit] I see that Jeff and Rod beat me to the punch while I was dithering over my reply. Their replies are more concise, and all the better for being so.
13 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brendan Clark
United Kingdom
Chelmsford
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Jeff, Rod and Sphere: thanks for your fair and sensible points. I think I'll follow Sphere's sage advice and just be patient. It's reassuring to read BaM2 has been playtested. From what I've experienced with NT and GoG, BaM2 has got to be worth waiting for. Cheers.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max Sewell
United States
Morganton
North Carolina
flag msg tools
Avatar
mb
Sphere wrote:
I counseled patience then, and I counsel patience now. Rachel's own BaM2 is too good to never see the light of day.


Can you talk about BaM2? I've examined the map, but I'm curious as to why it's better if it's better. Or why it's different if it's different --Other than the obvious map differences one can see here:

http://www.simmonsgames.com/tools/mapviewer/Frames.html#http...

Thanks for any input you can share.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Leonardo Martino
Italy
Milano
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MaxSewell wrote:
Sphere wrote:
I counseled patience then, and I counsel patience now. Rachel's own BaM2 is too good to never see the light of day.


Can you talk about BaM2? I've examined the map, but I'm curious as to why it's better if it's better. Or why it's different if it's different --Other than the obvious map differences one can see here:

http://www.simmonsgames.com/tools/mapviewer/Frames.html#http...

Thanks for any input you can share.


I think he can't... but if he will then he'll surely have my attention arrrh!
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.