A Closer Look at 2x2 Napoleonics
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 сен 2024
- It's long past time we took a deeper dive into the heart of Rod Humble's '2x2 Napoleonics'. It's been a fascinating learning experience to work through these rules and puzzle out how best to manage the two-tiered approach to miniature wargames. Much of what you've seen has been done on gut feeling and long years of experience, but it is worth stripping away all of the modifiers and complexities of this ruleset to look at how the turn sequence drives the action.
The rules we use: www.rodvik.com...
A battalion of foot, 500 and squadrons of 100 horse as I personally calculate the "how many" should be simply related to supplies needed IMO ( and it helps to simplify ). So a man and its horse might need five times more "supplies" than one foot soldier, weight wise ( consider sacks of grain, water, etc ). Good work on your campaign, really inspirational.
I think that shooting mechanic is one of the things I most dislike in that rule system. It works against the British tactics during the Napoleonic wars which was to unleash a volley of fire at really short range followed by a bayonet charge as was said in the movie Waterloo "they'll come on in the same old way so we'll meet them in the same old way". As to cavalry the biggest use by most armies I've noticed for light and medium is screening forces on the march and scouting. On the battlefield they seem to have been used with great care as they feared the squares but if they caught poorly trained troops who couldn't change formation quickly and smoothly they could easily crush them a good use for the heavies of which Napoleon's armies had plenty but once an army started to falter all the cavalry would be unleashed on mass to run down and crush retreating forces.
Lots of interesting questions thrown up by this. First up, the sequence of play looks like it’s designed to encourage the attacker to go straight in. Don’t forget the defender will get +1 for first volley which means a disruption on 5 or 6. Big difference in the coming melee. It also appears that you can stack several units against one. It doesn’t say whether they need to be alongside or in column but they are treated as a single target. I’d also be resolving multi unit melees as a single die roll. Looks to me like that’s the rules intent. You can’t put the HC in first as the enemy turn to face and might potentially be able to shoot them off.
As for the cavalry, I’m surprised that Heavy Cavalry aren’t more expensive in army points. My understanding is that Light Cavalry are more useful off the battlefield and the rules sort of reflect that with the reinforcement screening rule. It seems to me there’s a tension between your strategic movement using the Solo book, and the tactical battle fought with 2x2. Maybe you need strategic rules which reflect the scouting role of the LC, perhaps giving intelligence advantages on the battlefield or better reinforcement die rolls for flank marches.
My impression the roles of the different cavalry types is that Lt Cav does pre battle scouting and post battle screening or pursuit. Dragoons by Napoleonic times were basically cheaper heavies that no longer fought dismounted. Proper heavies were expensive to raise and maintain and only suited to shock combat in full scale battles.
There’s also some fundamental issues in the way you fight your battles. I’ve noticed you don’t often concentrate force and effort and often have single units fighting each other. This might explain some of the results which turn on a die roll. I’m a little surprised the rules don’t encourage the use of cover or ground other than hills in the fire and melee modifiers.
You make a really good point about the return on investment these rules offer. Not only are you getting bang for your buck, but I am too and presumably a bunch of others around the globe.
Lots to consider and all good stuff.
Perfect timing for me. I am planning on playing my first game of 2x2 this weekend. Thanks again for your posts.
Have fun!
You inspired me to buy ton of Irregular miniatures Napoleonic's. Great vid as always.
Do it. But... word to the wise... don’t take the minis out of the bag until you want to prep them end to end, or you will end up with a pile of ‘other’ in a Tupperware container. Give them a good scrub, some people like stick painting, I wanna try that with double sided tape...use the same old bases you always use and make movement trays so a strip becomes a cluster of hit points. They love sketch style, with a monochrome or sepia wash and a drybrush over bone or grey... but the flatness means charge your brush less, maybe even add a drop of paint to your ink or contrast or a drop of Matt medium and water to your paint... because the flat profile means the paint will flow. I have never tried that whole drybrush white, ink, drybrush white, ink thing that the 28 kids do but I wonder how that sort of approach would go with just two colours on these. Also, to boil water, take these steps...
Also soon I’m going to try metallic sharpies for those hard to reach places... I want a Vox pop here, I feel like life would be easier working with a model on the base, textured pre priming, even if two blocks are close ordered... how can I do this and achieve undercoat glory etc ?
Maybe I'm just being obsessive, but when I paint my 2mm infantry blocks, I try to manually dot every head with flesh color on the front, then with black on the top and back.
@@jamesl3214 Hmm... Just last night I was pulling painted 2mm blocks off the popsicle sticks, and noting the blue tack left an oily residue that I had to scrape off before mounting, causing me to worry about damaging the paint job. Fortunately the dullcoat did its job of protecting. But maybe mounting before painting would've been good. I haven't decided yet if I'm flocking the bases, given how small they are.
@@jamesl3214 seconded. I have had to buy a second selection of IM renaissance cavalry because I lost track of what I had originally bought. Needed to compare In Baggy with No Longer in Baggy!
me too , l am planning lots of those 2mm figurines, as l think this has great potential. Thank you so much once again for explaining and showing us all these things. You're the best!
You'll never look back. It's a great scale on a number of levels.
Personally for my solo games I've taken the simplest set of rules I could find, irregulars Napoleonic rules box, and then modified and added to them to create something relatively easy but they continue to change as my reading expands. Still enjoying your campaigns by the way will have to go back to my Napoleonic's soon but am deep into WW2 in 2mm at the moment, then there's my ECW and I've even got several ancient armies in the pile of opportunity somewhere all 2mm and that's before getting back to my 15mm mini's, old school necromunda, 1/3000 WW1 and 2 naval and my full thrust space fleets so many games and so little time to enjoy them but we plod on regardless.😀
I have just started using like "The Men who would be King" rules and the 15mm Mini's idea (normally a naval and/or Aviation gamer of all eras, but fav is pre-dreadnought/WWI & WWII using Seekreig 5 rule set). I have been following this channel around the solo gaming and really appreciate the thoughts & walk thru of building a land / naval campaign to drive battle scenarios, which will then be focused on smaller 15mm skirmishes. 1st Campaign I am building is Anglo/Egyptian v Mahdists (Sudan) ~1885 -1898 with straight Army or even a chance to use gunboat support around Nile battles😃. Don't know army unit strengths / tactics either so really appreciate the education.
Thank you for this. It makes my heart sing to see a fellow wargamer enjoy the different interlocking mechanics :) I really wanted the evolving battle to be part of the game. From my reading of Napoleonic's the pre battle build up seemed a fun starting points so I worked my way in to from there, the other thing I wanted was the units to feel like Napoleonic accounts where units once committed were difficult to get moving doing something else. Anyways thanks so much for playing and your videos playing with them have given me a lot of enjoyment! As you said, the wargames community is a beautiful thing!
Thank you for your wonderful contribution to the hobby. It has been very enlightening to me. This game is what hooked me into Napolepnics.
This level of strategic thinking is beyond me. Good luck!
Great analysis of the rules mechanics. BTW, if you have the Napoleon's Battles rules from AH, the army nationality list can be useful to figure out the CAV to INF ratio.
This reminds me of an old cartoon of racers, and one team was a couple of cavemen who took turns at hitting each other with a club. Easy fix: at the start of a turn, roll to see who gets the initiative.
The Slag Brothers! A bad decade for telly, the 1960s, IMHO.
@@johnscarr70 Those were the guys! LOL
It is a little dated... but, the book, "Campaigns Of Napoleon", by David Chandler is a classic, in-depth look at how Bonaparte operated in the Strategic, Grand Tactical, and Tactical levels in his career. Mr. Chandler also authored, "The Dictionary Of The Napoleonic Wars", that you might find useful as well. It covers a lot of topics with short articles, without having to wade through page after page of context. (And you never know when one of them might inspire a wargame scenario!) Both are available from Amazon for a reasonable price. (So you can save the offer of selling a kidney for another day... and a more important purchase!) Even more dated, but a fascinating read, is Sir Charles Oman's multi-volume set of, "The Peninsular War". The first volume in particular, is very useful. You might be able to get it from your local Library. It they don't have it. available... they should be able to get it for you through an Inter-Library loan, so you can see for yourself. I am greatly enjoying your channel, and I am having a great time watching... and commenting!
Already have the first couple volumes of Oman - you can get digital copies cheap. Great series. I will pick up the dictionary fo sho.
@@TheJoyofWargaming Digital Copies?!!!! What a brave, new World that has such wonders in it! Ha, ha, ha, ha! I'm going back to browsing through the card catalog now! Oh! And I FINALLY BEAT Barbarian Prince... it only took me 25+ years... but I DID it!
@@martinmeltzer2696 now I feel I didn't get my money's worth for barbarian prince, I beat it quite quickly (just good luck, of course). See you on the field general Meltzer.
@@lacky9320 Back in my college days, my future wife severely beat me in the Avalon Hill game about the "War Of The Roses"... Kingmaker... in NINE turns. Ever since then, she has refused a re-match... saying that there would be no challenge AND her record remains perfect! SIGH! Over the years, I have come ever so close to winning Barbarian Prince (Or as I have come to subtitle it, "The Many Interesting Deaths Of Prince Cal Arath!)... but close only counts in horseshoes, hand grenades, and nuclear weapons. I look forward to our next encounter on the Field Of Honor, my dear General! (Should I be concerned that my own troops have started calling you, "Tough Nut" Lacky? It wouldn't be so bad, but I have heard rumors, that the same soldiers whisper about, "Mud Fence" Meltzer?!)
2x2 nap looks very good. Im planning on using it, with maybe a few mods, on perry miniatures travel battle..
About the number of infantry vs cavalry ... while the infantry move shoulder to shoulder, the cavalry are forced to ride with gaps between them. Besides, a single cavalry soldier occupies an area that would be filled by 3 or 4 footmen. So, if an infantry unit has 750 men, I would say that a cavalry unit is a minimum of a third that number, though a fourth is probably closer to the truth. Make each cavalry regiment 250 or even 200.
I'm looking at the historically-based obats in Volley & Bayonet, and they seem to suggest a ratio of about 2:1 or 3:1. Very roughly speaking, a 2-3K-man regiment of 4-6 x 500-man battalions, and a 1K horse strong regiment of 4 x 250-man squadrons. But yeah, reality is messy, and these are all vague abstrctions.
Within the game, what difference does the number of soldiers in each unit make?
@@lacky9320 If he’s trying to keep track of casualties and unit effectiveness, then the numbers matter somewhat
@@dartmart9263 yes, but if everything is counted as a percent of original number of troops (e.g. disrupted lose 10%) then as long as you're over 100 or so troops, it seems arbitrary anyway, as rounding errors stop effecting the armies much.
Light Cavalry (e.g. Hussars) aren't really that useful in direct combat on the battlefield. They were more useful off the battlefield as advanced scouts, convoy escorts, raiders, patrols, in pursuit of fleeing troops, and to prevent desertion of one's own troops. Said Frederick the Great: "[Hussars] are never brave but when animated by the hope of plunder, or when they can annoy others without exposing themselves. The first species of their bravery they exercise against convoys and baggage, and the other against troops who are obliged to retire, whom they endeavor to teaze in their retreat."
I played a solo SYW game recently (using Volley & Bayonet) where the Prussians stationed some Hussars in rough terrain on the flank. The Austrian Heavy Cav couldn't enter that terrain without becoming disordered, but they couldn't just leave them there either, so they spent a number of turns sitting outside the rough terrain "babysitting" the Hussars. Once those Heavy Cav were dealt with (by other means), the Hussars had a nice command of the flank, and later, when the Austrians brought some reserve infantry across a stream and wheeled to flank the main Prussian body, the Hussars saw their chance. In crossing the stream, the Austrians had become disordered, and in wheeling, they presented their rear to the Hussars - a major tactical blunder! Charging disordered infantry in the rear was too juicy of a target to pass up, and with a bit of lucky dice rolling, the Hussars routed the infantry which caused another infantry unit in front of them to become disordered and begin fleeing as well. The Hussars had the ability to do a follow up charge, which outright eliminated the first unit, and routed the one ahead of it. It's not often that Hussars can effectively remove two infantry units (in one turn, no less!) but It sure felt satisfying (for the Prussians).
Guess what arrived today? A big box of twos, so cheap almost every period for Neil Thomas is represented from Ancients up to Horse and musket. I’m actually going to base them on round bases, because I had this brainwave that I only really want to use 20 and 30 round for most things across 2 and 15 and 40 square for 6mm troop blocks and the odd monster or war machine. The really beautiful, marble statue weeping moment was seeing the Italian Wars and Dark Ages figures at the top of the pile. I swear, if they ever do more fantasy in 2mm, she’s over, I mean what are elves (subterranean, sylvan or sea) but Norman style Milites with cloaks and pointed helms? Dwarves, I would like to see a more Assyrians with blunderbusses take. ..but... The distinction would be in the colour...
The problem solving/"converting" is a big part of the fun.
Using Egyptian figs for my undead block troops, myself.
@@TheJoyofWargaming for what it’s worth I have my weight in fantasy and ancient sixes but I get you. The Dark Ages guys can be a Normans, Franks, Anglo Danes etc... the Renaissance Italian or French...There’s also a danger in being exposed to a period that becomes an obsession (pretty much anything from Ramses to Frederick the Great for me, with a few goblins and aliens thrown in), I never cared for pike and shot until 2mm... same with SYW. Also good to paint ‘b’ units in alternating colour schemes so they can be swapped around. I really like what Neil Thomas did to extend OHW with his Ancient and Medieval Wargaming, by the way. It doesn’t change a lot but there are more units and troop types, very basic morale, a couple of unique weapon distinctions and formation distinctions... Saracen fire pots, a bunch of extra do nothing Persians to make up the numbers who are kind of like fear terrain, war wagons, Swiss halberds. But it still manages to avoid the complexity and lawyering of some of the other rules sets. Just ordered Featherstones pike and shot book, these classic wargames writers include good background that the modern glossies can’t touch, and insights to bring to them.
@@TheJoyofWargaming cruel irony, there: Egyptians - great undead - but no mummies. Always like to have mummies.
Dwarves are tricky in 2mm. I've added a washer to a giant's base to give him a little more stature but it's harder to reduce.
I've got nothing that doesn't involve removing legs or filing bases wafer thin. No I've got nothing.
Bridge players have been the biggest reason I never continued learning Bridge
if your infantry stand is about 750, then the horse aught to be 2 squadrons, roughly 240 horsies and guys with sabers, flags, musical instruments and fancy hats of some sort.
By the way where did you get those miniatures? I don't do 3D printing but I'd happily pay for some!
Horse and musket cavalry regiment is approximately 400 men/horse.
But still called a regiment? Or do they call them squadrons or something?
@@TheJoyofWargaming instead of battalions of regiment, its squadrons. Its close enough
@@adamfox1669 Thanks, man. I really do appreciate you taking the time.
@@TheJoyofWargaming no worries. Ive done a reasonable amount of research into Napoleonic armies....osprey books are easy to find & great explanation/drawings if you want more or specific information (guard cavalry /french allies/etc)
If you have the time to read up on Napoleonic Warfare you can do no better than Brent Nosworthy's "Battle Tactics of Napoleon and his Enemies" note his ACW book Bloody Crucible of Courage is also highly recommended.
As to your question 750 horse at ful strength is reasonable but then infantry should be at 1000. This of course is paper strengths so infantry would more likely to be down to 600 after the opening stages of a campaign with cavalry about two thirds of that . Of course it varied but this seems about right.
As for the mix, I would probably say it averaged out to half heavies and half light. The rules for all their simplicity really highlight the difference, Light cavalry is best used to get around flanks or pick off retreating isolated units. Heavies can charge right in, but woe betide the general who does so without preparing the way with infantry and artillery - remember ney at Waterloo?
Your cavalry units should be 2/3 the size of the infantry units, so 600 infantry (battalion) and 400 horse (regiment).
Thank you, Cap! Very helpful. Will keep it in mind moving forward.
To clarify, drag-goons are really trans-heavy cav. Hope this helps.
You made me L out L, bro!