Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
11 Posts

Age of Napoleon» Forums » General

Subject: Possible error in the sample game? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
In first battle of the sample game provided by the scenario booklet (1805 3rd campaign round), the Coalition Army has a total battle score of 4. But the Player Aid states that armies receive a +1 modifier "per corps fighting at home". Since both Ferdinand and Mack are Austrian, shouldn't the total battle score be 6 (4+1+1) instead? Or am I missing something here?

Thank You,
Walter lai
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John O'Haver PhoDOGrapher
United States
Louisville
Kentucky
flag msg tools
badge
Pet photographer, that's me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re:Possible error in the sample game?
WalterLai (#38414),

There are errors in the scenario replay and the stock rules were vague to me and my opponent. Get the latest version of the Living Rules. There should be a link from the game page entry. This currently my favorite game but I did almost give up on it after slopping through the first three games wrong. It is a gem of a design when played correctly. The decision to make it a two player game is historically supportable yet the fact that your Allies one year can become neutral the next year and change sides the year after that kind of gives it a multi-player feel without you or a friend having to actually play a weak country.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Re:Possible error in the sample game?
scribidinus (#38435),

Actually that sample game was taken from the latest update from this website. I believe there is an error with the example. Oh well...

I have yet to play the game. Just bought this game from the local dealer on hearing the wonderful things about it on this website. The guy in the store who is a friend of mine gave me a 20% discount in exchange for the promise to translate the rules into Chinese and to play the game with him.

I actually believe a 2 player game is better suited to portray the diplomatic situation of that era.

A multiplayer game would need a lot of additional rules (national aspirations) to make the nations act with resemblences to history. At the same time, it must be careful not to straitjacket the players' decisions, being a game after all.

A 2 player game, on the other hand, could limit the non-player nation's freedom while giving the main powers total freedom. Let's fact it, there are only 2 powers in Europe at that time, the rest should act as they did historically.

I remember you mentioning the book Napoleon by Felix Markham. I have that book and am re-reading it right now. Another book I would recommend is Age of Napoleon by Christopher Herold, though he is a bit too anti-Napoleon for my liking

I have got Empire in Arm and Napoleonic Wars. Haven't been able to play with any of them. Age of Napoleon might just be it!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Edwards
United States
Shoreline
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re:Possible error in the sample game?
WalterLai,

That is the heart of the matter when it comes to AoN, at least to me: It is genuinely playable in a reasonable amount of time, quite remarkable for a game that simulates a ten year stretch of war and diplomatic double dealing on such a vast scale.

I think it is an outstanding game, and am very impressed that it is a first effort from the designer. It is not perfect, and the living rules go a long way to clarifying some of the errors and gray areas that the published rules include. The erratum and clarifications are certainly nothing that is unexpected with any wargame, and a small list indeed for a first effort.`

Renaud Verlaque is very responsive to any questions. I know he keeps tabs on posts here, and in the ConsimWorld forum, where AoN has a folder.

Several geeks have commented on the luck factor in AoN, and are dismayed by the way a few diplomatic cards can undo a long on board campaign. There are optional rules to limit this, yet I for one find the standard rules to be a good simulation of the "way it must have been".

Make sure your living rules are version 1.22, and enjoy the game!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John O'Haver PhoDOGrapher
United States
Louisville
Kentucky
flag msg tools
badge
Pet photographer, that's me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re:Possible error in the sample game?
WalterLai (#38414),

The European powers were not as unified against Napoleon as they were against Hitler a 125 years later. I have been digging into the book, The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers also.

In one of my early games, my primary opponent once became a little perturbed when the Russians dropped out of the Coalition after my French had been pounded and were vulnerable. "Why would they do that?" he asked.

In Markhams' book, he states that Russian General Kutusov argued against the complete destruction of Napoleon since global dominance would not fall to any other continetal power but to Britain and that would be intolerable. In essence, he was advocating a policy of containment. In game terms, he would be happy with a Coalition minor victory but opposed to a major one. Is that an interesting take on things or what? My sense of the big picture is the other continental powers had more limited ambitions outside survival and much less capabilities than either Britain or France. (I never was a Nappyonic history buff until AoN, so feel free to correct me.) I do not have another strategic games on this era but I have read some comments that in one or more of the multi-player games the other powers either have little to do or just aren't fun to play. So I again I applaud the designers decision to make this a 2 player game.

The Diplomacy card mix favors the Coalition. Although it is possible for the British player to go without a playable Diplo card for a long time it would be rare. I've played one game where my Coaltion collapsed early. There is a killer card combo for the French that causes a domino effect of Coalition defections. I spent a year holed up in Britain twiddling my thumbs while Nappy prepared to invade a neutral Russia. As soon as he crossed the border, the fun started again.

Unfortunately I did not get my 9th game in over the holiday.


Sorry this got so long.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Re:Possible error in the sample game?
For me Napoleonic history goes like this:

To the bigot European powers, Napoleon was the bastard upstart who displaced the rightful heir to the French throne.

The monarch of a nation must the right gene, that was the established political moral of that era. Just like today's political moral that only democratic governments are legitimate, or else any nation with guns big enough can topple them. The only problem was, France happened to be the strongest land power of that time, and won't go down without a fight. With power, you can redefine what's right and what's wrong. Hence the Napoleonic Wars. It was an ideological war, a war over how the legitimacy of a regime is determined.

Napoleon lost, but Europe would never be the same again. The ancien regime is doomed to pass away into the dusts, but that would take another 100 year.

Suppose a strong nation comes up with a new political moral today: only the man with loudest voice can lead a nation. Image what an outrage that would casue. Then perhaps, after a series of nation-breaking wars and 100 years, that moral becomes the establish universal rule. THAT was how weird Napoleon was to the bigots of Europe.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John O'Haver PhoDOGrapher
United States
Louisville
Kentucky
flag msg tools
badge
Pet photographer, that's me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re:Possible error in the sample game?
WalterLai (#38551),


Good point. In fact, I read that Nappy commented that every other leader could lose every battle and still keep the throne but he had to win every one to do the same.

Other continental powers were reluctant initially to raise and equipment a large armed miltia for internal security reasons. Thus the Stein and Radezky reforms that usually kick in after Austria and Prussia get beat once or twice.

Rise and Fall of the Great Powers emphasizes the economic disparity of every one else versus the British Isles, too.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Renaud Verlaque
United States
Shelter Island Heights
New York
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmb
Re:Possible error in the sample game?
WalterLai (#38414),

The Austrian corps are in Bavaria, not in an Austrian region, so they are not fighting at home, therefore their combined strength is 4.

By the way, do note that the +1 modifier for fighting at home is for each corps.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Re:Possible error in the sample game?
Renaud Verlaque (#38607),

My mistake. Thanks for the clarification.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stewart Clements
United Kingdom
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Re:Possible error in the sample game?
scribidinus (#38514),
The European Powers of the time were very suspicious of each other ,not totally united in the need to defeat Napoleon
decisively.
The Russian establishment were willing to allow Nap to
continue (clergy and peasants saw him as anti-christ) to help maintain the balance of power,the Austrians feared a strong Prussia and tried to reign in Blucher,for example in the 1814 campaign,the British wanted a balance of power in Europe and a return to normal trade from which they were the main beneficiaries.The only nation that totally hated the French and insisted on removing Nap were the Prussians
after 1813,as they had probably suffered the most from humiliation and exploitation by French
Stewart
Only just got this game but it looks good.
One question (probably missed answer). In the sample game
Wellington is defeated in Naples,returned to Britain spent,
then goes to Portugal (Britannia),no card discarded first move,then fights a battle unspent.Shouldn't a card have been discarded somewhere to unspend him?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John O'Haver PhoDOGrapher
United States
Louisville
Kentucky
flag msg tools
badge
Pet photographer, that's me.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Re:Possible error in the sample game?
stewartc (#43815),

"The only nation that totally hated the French and insisted on removing Nap were the Prussians"

Good info. I think in 1806 the Prussians unwisley declared war on France and were forced to surrender in about 30 days.

French nationalism enabled Nappy to mobilize and arm the common Frenchman safely. This was something that the Prussian and Austrian monarchs were very reluctant to do. As I understand it most Europeon armies heretofore being smaller and made up of expensive to equip and train professional soldiers or professional mercenaries were almost too expensive to risk in battle unless absolutley necessary

Having an armed population larger than one's regular army was somewhat uncomfortable for the other continental powers, especially the Austrians. Generously speaking, less than 25% of the citizens of that empire were Germans like the Emporer. The rest, mostly Slavs of all flavors and millions more were of dubious (in the emporer's mind anyway) allegience. Give guns to the people?! Are you mad!

TIP OR OPINION YOU BE THE JUDGE: When I play the Coalition I would rather make Spain neutral before activating Prussia if the Stein card hasn't been played. The loss of Spain as a French ally costs them 2 cards per year but the Coalition is usually still at its maximum of 10 so Prussia doesn't add that much. By bringing Prussia on board early all I would be doing is setting them up for disaster.

I read this over the weekend. After the war Blucher's Chief of Staff, Gneisenau(?) commented wryly to the effect that without the ruffian Napoleon, Britain would not have achieved near dominance. This echoes Russia's Kutusov's prediction, after the French retreat from Russia of course, that France with Napoleon in check was better for continental Europe than his, Nappy's, complete removal.

As a shameless plug for the game...these kinds of historical dynamics don't always happen in AoN but seldom happen in multi-player games on this subject, in my limited experience with the era.

QUESTION: "Wellington is defeated in Naples,returned to Britain spent, then goes to Portugal (Britannia),no card discarded first move,then fights a battle unspent.Shouldn't a card have been discarded somewhere to unspend him?"

The sample game has multiple errors in it but I don't think this is one.

ANSWER: Wellington is defeated in Naples, as such he cannot unspend and returns home. He goes to Portugal still spent and wins a battle. Immediately after THIS victory a card may be discarded to unspend him and all other spent Corps in his stack. There was no opportunity to unspend him prior to his victory...unless there was a Reinforcement Phase before he fought in Portugal and from your wording there was not.

Ignore the sample game and the FAQ. Get Living Rules 1.22 and the one page Turn Summary from the game entry page here at BGG.

This help?



 
 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.