Thursday, 22 August 2013

Vimeiro Scenarios for Napoleon at War

So you're sat on a beautiful palm clad island in the Indian Ocean sipping your "Pinacolada, well actually a "Virgincolada" since I packed in the alcohol, with no access to a painting table and some figures. Well what does any self respecting war gamer do. Get the computer out and start designing campaigns and scenarios ready to be tried out when back from paradise.

So now I'm back I can post a variation on a theme by adapting my previous Vimeiro Lite scenarios for use with Napoleon at War. The set ups and order of battles are the same but with victory conditions, timings and objectives set up for NaW. The two  scenarios are for Vimeiro Hill and Ventosa.

French attack en masses Vimiero Hill
The scenario design is based on historical positions and orders of battle so unlike a throw together Napoleon at War scenario the forces are not balanced with points, just what Junot and Wellesley had to deal with. So you will just have to see if you can do any better than them!

British defence at Ventosa Farm
The scenarios can be downloaded from "My Scenarios" section. As always constructive feedback welcome.


  1. Good to see you made it back safe.

  2. Hi Paul,
    Your very kind sir, thank you. Nice to go away, with lots of fantastic memories, but very nice to be back home. It so good to be able to go out without having to smother yourself in DEET!!

  3. Hi JJ,

    I'm looking forward to testing the British and the Guese to a taste of Frenchy Bayonet!!!!


    Glad to see you back after your Asian tour taking over from Mr.Steve are you??? Love you long time...

    1. Cheers mate, nice to be home. I could never compete with Mr Steve in the former colonies, he's like the man from Delmonte, a living legend!

  4. Another lovely looking game Jonathan.

    I'm interested that you have chosen to use Napoleon at War. We looked them over and decided not to bother (at least for now) as we are not keen on fast play rules and they had a few things that were too stylised (such as movement based around a command base). In the end it's the usual reason that we accept or reject a set of rules "horse for courses". I'm not keen on making a final assessment of a set of rules without play-testing them, so we may give them a go once we have finished our 'commitments' with big bicentennial games of 1813 battles.

    I'd be interested in your comments either as a post on your blog or another comment on the preliminary review on ours (

    1. Hi James, and welcome to the blog. Thank you for you kind comments.

      Yes I saw your thoughts on Napoleon at War(NaW), about the time I started to dabble in them, and found them very interesting.

      I should say, first off, that they are not my turn to set of rules as Carnage and Glory II would lay claim to that title and you will see that the majority of the games featured have been using them. I think they are excellent and I find more to like about them each time we play.

      That being said, I think NaW have some very clever mechanisms that refute the "Flames of War for Napoleon" tag that others have attributed to them.

      We all know that as Napoleonic players there is a level of compromise we have to accept to enable us to fit our models and terrain on the table but give us an acceptable model of what it is we are trying to capture. I like to game in the "grand manner" and 12 and 24 figure units tick that box. I think a brigade of three or four 24 figure battalions looks like a brigade. I don't have a problem with the compromises on unit size and command base manoeuvring, and I think the "chrome" that helps model the national characteristics encourages players to fight the different forces using their preferred doctrine to get the best from them, boxes ticked, ticked and ticked.

      As you will see most of my games featured have been played using C&GII on NaW basing, which indicates another of my criteria, in that I wanted a paper based set that I could use seamlessly along side C&GII. I am very pleased with the results.

      The other nice thing about them is that Napoleonics is often seen as a difficult era to get into as a newbie. Personally having played them for 30 plus years I don't get that, but perhaps in the age of fast food new players want the period served up ready to go without having to much basic research into the period they want to play. NaW certainly make getting into Napoleonics easy for the new player and I totally support that approach to our hobby.

      Ok there are some minor problems with NaW too date. I think the translation from Spanish to English was not as good as it could have been and a second edition of the rules need to be easier to follow and correct a few grammatical errors. The fast play sheet supplied with the rules is almost useless and I often turn to other peoples home made alternatives to guide me through the sections of play. The second edition will need to incorporate the significant contributions from the forum that have produced a large Questions and Answers list, that indicates the problems I allude to.

      I hope it doesn't become a competition game rule set. There are enough Power Game rules in the world for all the tournament players to enjoy without adding NaW to them. I fear though that this might be the case, and some of the list designs and questions about the rules would indicate this style of playing has a significant following. Indeed, perhaps that is where the NaW guys want to head to, as it is a well understood business model. I don't have a problem with that if "it's what gets you through the night",to quote the late great John Lennon, but it's not for me.

      I'm pleased to see you are keeping your options open with these rules and I would encourage you to take another look at them some time. I am looking forward to their forthcoming Campaign books. I really liked the format of the Waterloo book and I posted a review here. I think the next one out will be for the 1813 Campaign.

      Keep up the great blog you guys have down there, I like the format you have created, good stuff. Oh and I won't mention the cricket!


    2. Thanks for the long and considered response to my question Jonathan. You definitely give me/us more confidence to give Napoleon at War a go.

      While we are open to trying sets of rules, we are not on the hunt for a new set. We have found that the compromise with our amended version of Shako works well enough for games from division-size to multi-corps. Importantly our familiarity with them allows us to focus on the game and not the rules.

      I wanted to check that you had not already posted a full review of the rules, so saw the post of your review of their Waterloo booklet. It does look excellent and a lot better than many 'extras' that rule producers try to flog with their rules (they gotta eat too though, as you point out!)

      We'll look forward to your further post with great interest.


      p.s. It's footy season here and we don't wargame cricket... :)

      p.p.s. Perhaps we'll re-visit it in the re-match series here this coming summer!)