I have just picked up a post from Mike Whitaker on his blog "Trouble at T'Mill" about an announcement from Man at War.
http://troubleatthemill.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/napoleon-at-war-announcement.html?showComment=1425546317872#c7801717008579355926
http://www.manatwar.es/
I got into Napoleon at War, the rule set, from its concept and was really taken with the clever ideas that underpinned the rules. My figures are based appropriately for their rules. I really thought they would make the whole era of the Napoleonic Wars more appealing to the new generation of players brought up with Games Workshop and Flames of War; in that they simplified the whole thing about putting these armies together and the abilities that made the armies different without being simple and meaningless.
Bringing Napoleonic wargaming down to divisional level with ready to paint units that look like units (very FOW) was a great concept to attract these newer players. Personally, I could have done without the list building, points collating, how do I win in one move, aspects (very FOW) and I was disappointed that the range of figures were not compatible with other large 15mm/18mm ranges. For us players with collections already established that was not a great move. However, the FOW principles made commercial sense, and I have a feeling that once a lot of players have grown tired of the competitive scene, they are still left with a love for the period and move on to more scenario based games.
In the last 18 months it was clear that the founders of the business had lost their way; with numerous requests from forum contributors for updates on next product release plans and the continual requests for rule clarity explanations (a must have if you intend to compete!). This in turn led to frustrated followers to turn to developing their own lists in an attempt to take the initiative and move the game on.
Anyway, to use an old business cliche "we are where we are" and it seems that Man at War are going to move into American Civil War with new input into the company and plans to use this to support on going work with the Napoleon at War rule set. I really do sincerely wish them well and hope this will salvage, what I still consider to be a good, possibly great, with a rewrite and better use of English, set of rules.
I will watch the situation with interest and fingers tightly crossed.
I've looked hard at NaW several times but have always felt daunted by the Napoleonic period. However, if they can get a ACW game, especially 18mm plastic figures up and running, I'd be willing to back it. I wish them all the luck and look forward to what they eventually produce.
ReplyDeleteHi Jonas, I am always surprised when I hear people say that Napoleonics is daunting, but I know you are not alone.
DeleteOnce you get past all the fancy language describing the different troop types and drills, you find that you have a horse and musket era where no arm (infantry, cavalry or artillery) is predominant and for success you need to build all arms forces. Unlike the earlier periods you have two very different ways of manoeuvre, that produce different pros and cons for the nations that use them. Add to that a fantastic array of uniforms, and you have to ask, why wouldn't you get into Napoleonics?
Perhaps with Man at War's decision lies an opportunity for someone else to pick up the gauntlet to produce an easy to understand entry game into Napoleonic battles.
I think the ACW route offers them an opportunity for faster growth and a better supply of cash flow to get their plans back on track. Like you, I hope so.
To be honest this system has never appealed to me or us! I would happier seeing them finish what they started and retain some credibility than start another rule set and do the same again, ie fizzle out half way through having made some cash before clearing off to pastures new. Stick with Carnage and Glory or GdeB or whatever rather than this lot. Rant over. Best wishes as usual, warpaintjj
ReplyDeleteHi Jeremy, I love reading opinions about various rule sets. It reminds me of the recent news headline of a picture of a dress that went on line, which had half the population declaring it was one colour and the rest declaring it was something completely different.
DeleteAs you know I have got into C&G and am very happy with the game I am able to produce with them, but I am conscious that computer moderation isn't for everyone, so I like the idea of turn to alternatives that produce an equally interesting model of this era of warfare, GdB included.
I think the opportunity that Napoleon at War offered was a package, similar to Flames of War, in that it could have provided an easy entry into the period for new players. The key difference, as I saw it, was the rules were markedly better than the latter (that's me looking at that dress!).
I am in full support of systems that gets more people interested in the period, even when it has aspects that don't appeal to me (points systems and list building) because we who love Napoleonics get the benefit of more manufacturers making more great figures and products to choose from, using them with the rules we love.
I guess I am also venting a certain frustration on the inability to get the product right and letting down all the guys who have been trying to get the company to get its act together. Personally, I moved on with C&G and haven't looked back.
Thanks for sharing the rant.
Cheers
JJ
I hope the Napoleonics side of things doesn't just fade away. They had some great ideas. I would have crossed over to these rules if they had had skirmishers rules that appealed to me more.
ReplyDeleteMe to David, as I said, I sincerely hope they do not lose the Napoleonic side to their business. I still think the rule set, given a thorough re-write could make an excellent set of rules and the concept of those and a figure range that is compatible and as good as current 18mm ranges would improve on what they originally came to market with. In the end, I want to see more people introduced to, and playing Napoleonics, because we who already do so will benefit from the increased interest in the period.
DeleteCheers
JJ