I have played the rules for nearly 4 years now and thoroughly enjoy them. I notice in your video of a game you have played you showed that you use a paper system to record loss of casualties per unit (rather than small casualty dice next to the unit) as do I and I have added an extra dimension to this. I have -1 and -2 counters for placing next to units as and when they lose the appropriate strength points (eg 4 and 8 for standard line infantry). This really speeds up the game as players do not have to refer to their casualty sheets to see the current status when their unit is firing or has to take a discipline test etc. It works really well. Graham Holmes, Secretary Wessex Wargames Society, Southampton, UK.
That's an excellent idea for the counters. It would avoid checking the rosters, though we generally use rosters in most games to avoid "table clutter" or too many tokens floating around. And General d'Armee already has a fair amount of table clutter with all the various status tokens.
Poor Yanks, struggling to deal with authentic English. I’ll request the Lardies provide an ‘English Light’ (or should I say ‘lite’) version for remedial phonetic readers. 😉
Fine review. I concur that GdA captures the full complexity and flavor of Napoleonic warfare. I also agree the ADC system can rub one the wrong way but does work to account for the actuality of what happened on the battlefield. Not the simplest or easiest rule set for a beginner (like me). Well done LWTV.
Awesome review. I had already bought the rules which I have enjoyed reading very much. I have played multiple games of Black Powder already, I just need to beef the amount of skirmishers I have and I also need to finish up some ADC's and then I should be good to go for my first game. Thanks again for everything you guys do for the community!
Just played Pickett's charge which Iam told is very similar and thought it was a great set of rules although obviously set in different theatres of war. It seemed very fast playing, comprehensive and fun
Thanks for the review. Our group is mainly GdB Deluxe. I'd love your thoughts comparing them. We agree, the author nails the interactions between all 3 arms of a force and capture the feel & look of a napoleonic game better than most ( and i've played Shako I/II, AoE, NB, Lasalle & Homegrown). To my knowledge i've never read the "why" he took another shot at a napoleonic set or what he found lacking in GdB. Keep up the great work, its video's like this that make me happy to support what you are doing over on Patreon.
Great review and glad you liked it Miles & Tom, it’s been my favourite Napoleonic ruleset, since 2017. A great way to get into this cheaply, that I haven’t seen mentioned on Littlewars tv, is to buy Peter Dennis’s paper soldiers, Helion books & his website. There is a peninsular book that is very nice, soldiers, terrain etc included. Paper soldiers work well for linear warfare ( they only look bad from the sides) I’m also building a paper army from Peter’s American civil book, to do Altar of freedom & Pickets charge-scenarios, such as Gettysburg etc. It’s a cheap way to try a period or ruleset, if you like it you can then invest in the pewter, if you don’t you haven’t really lost anything.Keep up the good work.
Another great way to get into these games at less expense is to start smaller than a corps level game. Start with a small division and work your way up to larger games as you add units over time. That will give you time to learn the rules, be easier on your budget and give you some time to paint the new units. The game works perfectly well with a division on each side.
That very much depends on who you ask at this club! At least a couple guys here would say, “We love it.” I count myself among those here who would say, “not so much.”
Great review chaps! For those people who want to try this rule set but are put off by painting hundreds of figures, I can recommend Irregular Miniatures (uk). I created ACW armies in 2mm for Greg’s Altar of Freedom. The units are blocked, infantry, Cav, Art and generals etc. They have a Napoleonics range too. A splash of colour to denote which side. A wash/varnish and you’re done. The advantage also with a small scale is that the terrain is obviously smaller so can fit on a normal table. Regards to all! Chris
From quite a fan of these rules I'm so glad you showcased them. That said, after many plays there are 1-2 things I'd change. These are rules that make it difficult for the attacker, which I often see giving the defending player an advantage. When charging, attackers take penalties for both cumulative and just-taken casualties - but don't get a bonus for impetus. (Interesting this usually benefits the defensive firing lines of the British!) Along with this, attacking Brigades require more ADCs to attack with more than 1 battalion -while this is a clever historic nod to a Brigadier requiring orders from the commander to fully commit his brigade - it again makes things trickier for the attacker. Of course, groups can house rule issues like these if they choose. But otherwise, as you say, the ADC activation system is a very elegant mechanic that offers both friction and lots of command options for players - an of course now Mr. Brown has successfully transferred this command-and-control style to WW II with his O Group rules. Great review for a great set of rules.
Speaking of getting into Napoleonics, I think from a board game perspective, Commands and Colors Napoleonics is a great entry point for a hex based wargame with blocks. Many I know convert the wood blocks into painted figures and use it for its simplicity of rule set. I can see that being a good foundation as you build up a minatures army and find other players, then pickup General d'Armee as a tabletop jump.
The TFL Forum has a very active page for GdA, have a look lots of stuff on there. These are simply the best Nap rules ever written, the most frustrating command system in any game I’ve played but represents the true friction of Napoleonic battles that is written about in many accounts. It does this in a really simple and elegant way that’s easy to grasp and puts you in ‘charge’ of the decisions you but, then pulls the rug from under your feet straight away. Just because your elite Lancers are lined up to charge that disordered unit of recruit infantry in the flank don’t assume it will end well!! 😂😂
Thank you for another great review. Are you planning on reviewing Lasalle 2? They are great rules too, at the same level as GdA. Lasalle is more abstract while GdA has more detail. By the way, General d'Armee has two support forums: one on TFL and one on Tapatalk, in addition to a FB group.
Ooooooo…. I’ve been looking at this rule set for a while (and worked through half the video series to see if I want to get it) and now might be the time! Thanks for a great review, gents!
I have played many Napoleonic rules sets for 40+ years. I set up a test game months ago, and gave up after the first turn; I'll have to try playing at a convention game sometime. I just felt the game processes were unnecessarily complex; it seemed like EVERYTHING has multiple steps, procedures, and tables (on a legal sized, 4 page sides QRS) to get a result. That does give it flavor, but at the cost of a lot of steps to do anything. My other big gripe is the title itself - by the author's admission, a player is really ordinarily commanding a large Division; Corps commanders, if used, have very limited impact, and the Army commander in a large game, seems all but absent.
The rules do seem like a lot of steps and I struggled with the first play through - by the second game it clicked and really moves smoothly. We hardly use the QRS except for the combat resolution tables.
@@milesreidy7864 As I sai9d, deserves a try in person with an experienced player. I''ll have to see if there are any GdA games at Historicon that I can sandwich in between the five that I will be running there (pandemic fingers crossed!) The *eight hour* youtube play through seemed more than I'd ever want to tackle as well (and I have written quite a few playthroughs myself for my blog).
Very good review. I do think you guys went low on the support rating, as there is a very active blog on the TFL website. Also, Dave is exceptional at answering all the questions - better than I’ve ever seen with any other game! The one issue I have is with the hesitant roll. All brigades have the same chance of going hesitant, whether they are Landwehr or Old Guard. The only way of mitigating that is with an ADC. There should be a modifier based on troop quality. Otherwise, this is my go-to ruleset for playing Nappies!! 😄
The optional rules introduce Brigadier Quality. Excellent brigadiers can reroll a bad command roll, while poor brigadiers require an extra ADC for any tasking. Sounds like a solution to your hesitant roll issues.
@@EltjoVerweij I have read through those, and they might help some. Dave appears to have crafted the hesitant rule around the effectiveness of the brigade command structure, rather than the condition of the troops themselves. I understand it completely - it’s just frustrating when my French guard brigade keeps going hesitant, while the Dutch militia march circles around them!!!🤣😂
I agree with you. I cannot understand this notorious concept of “friction of war” when we roll a dice to activate fresh ready for battle units at the beginning of a battle. What a hell friction can it be?
@@levsharus5899 I think what game authors are tying to convey with “friction” rules is that commanders don’t have absolute control over their troops at all times. They may not move as far as you would like (or not at all), they may lose cohesion, and so on. Again , I have no problem with that, to a point. I agree with you, and would prefer “friction” to come into play after troops are in contact (or at least close proximity to) the enemy. Dave alludes in his rules to something about an ADC getting lost or stopping by the local tavern as part of the hesitant roll. But, I would submit that a runner from a crack brigade would be less likely to get waylaid than one from a disorganized mob of conscripts - hence the modified die roll. But, it’s hard to do much modification to a single d6, especially when a 3-6 is a success.
80 - 90 battalions in 6mm isn't a huge investment and look much better on the battlefield than larger figures. So much cheaper at around $5 a battalion.
I think the rules are more suited for 6mm as I've seen a number of 15mm and 28mm for playing two divisions and looks too much but with 6mm I've played corps level with so much room on flanks that I still feel I need more units.
This is my preferred set of Napoleonic rules (currently and I see no reason to look for another). As well as agreeing with all you said about the rules, I like the fact that it is hard to use gameplay quirks to attempt to win and I am sure we have all played opponents that do that. I also find them adaptable for any in-house rules gamers may want for a specific battle or campaign. I play the rules most often with one of Dave Brown's (the author) play-testers and so am fortunate to be told about any adaptions/improvements they may think are useful though I do not always agree with them. As an aside back in the days when I lived in London UK, I was at the same club as D. Brown but was not a fan of his General de Brigade rules. Anyway I'm a fan of this set of rules.
I’ve recently bought a copy of Pickett’s Charge myself as those are quite similar to these. Great review. And also, will we see some more ACW in the future? Perhaps with the use of the Pickett’s Charge rules used? Best regards 😁
We've played Pickett's Charge here in the club several times over the years (not as much as General d'Armee though) and YES, there will absolutely be more ACW in the future on the channel. It's one of our favorite periods to play!
@@LittleWarsTV Could’t agree more. The ACW is such a fun period to game. I personally have it as my favorite followed closely by the War of the Roses. I like the historical almost even odds. The CSA being outnumbered but have the superiority in fighting spirit and leaders early in the war.
I like Napoleonic tournaments, and it’s one thing I haven’t seen in Napoleonic games for some years I’ll have to try a Brit v. French game so paint brush out for some French 😊
They are extremely different. Blucher is a true "army level" game where a single base is an entire brigade. The mechanics are totally different, too, but the intended scale of the games is not the same. General d'Armee--despite the title--has the basic maneuver unit as a battalion, which makes it better suited for a corps-sized action. We had to rescale the game for Austerlitz to make it work.
TFL may make "theatrical/romantic historical" games but they nail flavor and consistently have some of best rule-sets, even when they are less than clear at times.
Thanks for the interesting review. When evaluating rules there is for me the question of validation. So do the rules recreate historic situations and outcomes. Not perse on a basis of certainty, but is it conceivable. For Napoleonics d’Erlon’s charge at Waterloo is an important benchmark, I think. How would you rate these rules work for that?
Yes, there’s a series of long, in depth play videos available with the author involved. They are very good, though a “quick start” guide under 30 minutes would be nice!
Great video. I've been interested in these rules for some time, this may have been the push to buy them. And I'm happy to hear of your opinion on Waterloo, I echo that sentiment. A lot of rules from British writers (which is most rules I know) only ever talk about Waterloo and the 2nd peninsular campaign, it's getting really tiring.
What is the difference between General d'Armee and General d'Brigade? Do both of them require written orders or do they use order markers? You said General d'Amee has an index. So it has an actual index in the back of the book or do you mean the table of contents. General d'Brigade does not have an index.
Too ponderous for a true newbie. Others in the club may disagree, but I'd consider this an excellent game for more experienced Napoleonic players and one that would bewilder a new player
Please, please, please - I've been playing Napoleonic miniatures games for well over 40 years now with a home grown rule set (basically battalion level; each stand represents 100 men). I've been searching for a couple of years now for a good book that would guide me through the development and running of a Napoleonic campaign. I have well balanced armies for all of the major and several minor powers, but my little group desperately needs the added engagement of working from campaign movement maps to tabletop battles that matter beyond just a particular day-game's bragging rights. Can anyone point me to a book or on-line site that would have the instruction I'm needing? The video on General d'Armee was very useful - I'll have to pick up a copy to see if my rule set can still be improved. Thanks!
Using words like "a wonderful read" in presentation, and "superb" and "great" and "a really fun rules set" when describing the game mechanics etc., and a saying it is "one of our favorites" and at the end of the video using the words "a fabulous rules set" to describe the game overall, you make me wonder what it takes for you guys to give out a 10? How you can be giving so many 7s and 8s is Bewildering. If a teacher told you that your child was doing "wonderful," "superb" and "great" and that he is "fabulous" and "one of our favorites" you then look at his report card filled and find it with 7s and 8s, you would certainly wonder what happened. Presentation: 7 & 8, Playability: 9 & 8, Mechanics: 8 & 9, Historical Flavor: 8, 9, Support: 7, 7, Total = 81, 84 (this is the equivalent to a B and a B+). One would think it would have earned an "A" (90 or more) with all the superlatives used in the video and especially for one of the reviewers favorite rules sets.
You may not be familiar with how our weighted scoring works out, but scores in the 80s are top marks for us. We have a 4 year history of scores at this point and you’ll find very few games with a score that high
@@LittleWarsTV Yes, but a superb, great, wonderful, fabulous, favorite game should be one of the very few with a score that high (meaning in the 90s). Either that, or the reviewers should use language to describe the game that matches the scores that they give; for instance if they give a 7 in presentation or support, you should say it is "average" in presentation or support; if they give it an 8 in mechanics and historical flavor, they should say it is good (and not great, superb, etc.). You don't get to the end of the review with an 81 (which should be a solid "good" score on a 1-10 scale), and then describe the game as "great" see: 13:47 (great should be a 90, and a 'great' rules set should receive an "A" grade). I am not going to "rush out today and get" a "good" rules set. see: 14:03. I am going to rush out today to get a "great" rules set. If you never give out 10s, then you should explain that and let us know that these games are really being rated on a 1-9 scale. That would make an 84 a much higher score than if rated on a 1-10 scale. I offer these suggestions to help your channel give a better service to the viewers and produce better reviews. If you chose not to take well intentioned advice to improve your channel, and instead continue to justify why what you are doing by pointing to your '4 year history' and why it makes sense, then, like many historians, you are doomed to repeat your mistakes of the past.
@@LittleWarsTV Also interesting to note that this beautifully presented, full color rulebook, gets a 7 and an 8 for presentation, and Altar of Freedom (produced by Greg of little wars TV) gets a 7 & 9 for a black and white "home-made" looking rules set. See: ruclips.net/video/x7hMYYwVTKs/видео.html at 1:55
As a newbie, great video thanks. What do you think of the Blucher rules? I'm tossing up between 15 or 6mm and have heard Blucher is good to use? Thanks again.
How does it compare with Napoleon’s Battles? NB 2.0 is the only rules I’ve used to play Napoleonic miniature games. It was the dominant rule set at the club in Colorado I used to belong to, but it’s been a number of years since I’ve played a game. I wouldn’t mind playing Napoleonics again but NB seems to out of fashion since version 3 came out.
NB 2.0 is still a very good game (maneuver elements are brigades in NB, and battalions in G D'A). Don't worry about what is in and out of fashion. If you like NB 2.0, then there is no reason not to play it. Also, you can use miniatures based for NB with General D' Armee; so there is no rebasing required in order for you to be able to use both sets of rules with your NB based figures!
Great review, I love these rules. The guy on the right always looks like he has something more important to do and this is the last place he wants to be!!!
Tom was likely disappointed in who he was stuck with as a review co-host (who wouldn't be). Tom has very high standards that few of us mortals can meet. I suspect Tom's agent received a very stern talking to after filming the episode.
It’s actually often pretty difficult to find a balanced expression when filming conversations like this. Personally I find the review great and hope to see more from Miles and Tom.
@@janm.johansen9806 Calling it a great review means you would score the review as an "81" (just like the "great" game [General D' Armee] that was given an 81 in the review).
I don't know why people need scenarios made for them by some company when you're playing a Historical game where you can find ALL KINDS of scenarios in actual history....?
@@paschalisantoniou974 here is just one example of how badly it's written. This is question that was asked about the rules. If a force enters a hex adjacent to one occupied by the enemy, the latter may fall back one hex, if desired by their CinC for no TP cost." but if my force enters a hex adjacent to two hex occupied by the enemy, all two enemy can fallback? AND if they doesn't fall back and a battle begin, the rules say that "The battle takes place in the hex occupied by the force which has been attacked and the war games table represents this square", but if there are two hex, which is hex selected and who decided the hex the attacker? This is the answer they got back. The attacker (the defender can reinforce the attacked force with the un-attacked force though) Confused?? I know I was.
Two Part Question: Have you guys taken a look at any of the Warlord Games Black Powder Epic Battles 15mm(ish) figures? Do you think this ruleset would work with those bases?
Yes, we have! The Warlord plastics are really nice, it's just a shame they made them in a new scale that doesn't match anything already existing. We have 10mm and 15mm armies (and 6mm and 28mm) but the new Warlords are about 13mm so I don't think we'll be collecting them. But for new players who don't already own other scales, the price is good for what you get. This game could certainly work with the Warlord bases, though you will need a fair number of them given the unit sizes in General d'Armee. A smaller GdA scenario would be totally viable.
Spelling mistakes : Général d’Armée, not General d’Armee. It is a bit weird to write it like that … Sad. I may give this rule a try anyway and once again, thanks for this review.
We consider ourselves charter members of the Free Range Spelling Movement and refuse to be subjugated by the dictatorship of spelling convention. Long Live Free Range Speling! Viva Phonetics!
Easy if you have a French AZERTY keyboard, or QUERTY keyboard adapted for the French language, but if you have a standard English language QUERTY keyboard, perhaps it is impossible to include accents when typing French words (I certainly don't know how to with my standard QUERTY keyboard).
@@DH.2016 I was talking about the title of the book. No big deal at all for a youtube video, of course. What is strange is that it is spelled correctly inside the book (I purchased the pdf after seeing this review) so why is it spelled incorrectly on the cover is a bit of a mystery …
We replied to same comment this on another video, but in short, we never received shipping info or which of the three medals you wanted in the spring when we put out the fulfillment call. Happy to fulfill it for you after the fact, though.
Thanks guys. I've been searching for years for a rule set to use with my complete collection of System 7 Napoleonic Wars counters. While the counters represent companies, batteries and squadrons, the command level is meant to be the battalion. These look perfect. I ordered the rule book, PDF, marker and Vitoria supplement this morning. Little War TV rocks. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_7_Napoleonics
Another who remembers System 7! Excellent. I have fond memories of running a giant 1812 campaign using those rules thirty-mumble years ago. Good to hear that the counters still see daylight from time to time : -)
@@captainnolan5062 I'm working on a modular terrain system for System 7 that is based on the Avalon Hill "Squad Leader" boards. How do you handle terrain? I'm in Northeastern Ohio. I don't suppose you're anywhere close. 🙂
Thanks for the great review! We are currently painting up our 6mm figures to play Quatre Bras in the near (ish) future. On the topic of a forum, there actually is an official one in which David is quite active: toofatlardies.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=14642&sid=54eff444b9a743a2ffbda46f5c623554 There's an ongoing discussion about what changes would be welcome in a version 2. Very happy if you added your thoughts into the mix!
I have played the rules for nearly 4 years now and thoroughly enjoy them.
I notice in your video of a game you have played you showed that you use a paper system to record loss of casualties per unit (rather than small casualty dice next to the unit) as do I and I have added an extra dimension to this. I have -1 and -2 counters for placing next to units as and when they lose the appropriate strength points (eg 4 and 8 for standard line infantry). This really speeds up the game as players do not have to refer to their casualty sheets to see the current status when their unit is firing or has to take a discipline test etc.
It works really well.
Graham Holmes, Secretary
Wessex Wargames Society, Southampton, UK.
That's an excellent idea for the counters. It would avoid checking the rosters, though we generally use rosters in most games to avoid "table clutter" or too many tokens floating around. And General d'Armee already has a fair amount of table clutter with all the various status tokens.
Poor Yanks, struggling to deal with authentic English. I’ll request the Lardies provide an ‘English Light’ (or should I say ‘lite’) version for remedial phonetic readers. 😉
Great video! I have to try General d'Armee now. I can recommend "Bataille empire" or "L'Art de la Guerre". The first is a great Napoleonic wargame
Very timely! Which Napoleonic rules to go with keeps me awake at night.
Fine review. I concur that GdA captures the full complexity and flavor of Napoleonic warfare. I also agree the ADC system can rub one the wrong way but does work to account for the actuality of what happened on the battlefield. Not the simplest or easiest rule set for a beginner (like me). Well done LWTV.
Awesome review. I had already bought the rules which I have enjoyed reading very much. I have played multiple games of Black Powder already, I just need to beef the amount of skirmishers I have and I also need to finish up some ADC's and then I should be good to go for my first game. Thanks again for everything you guys do for the community!
Oh Basement 1908! I'm a fan of yours! I love your d'Armee Videos! The Dropfleet and Infamy stuff is killer too.
Might I suggest you do a virtual tour of your gaming space? I hadn't realized until the Austerlitz video that there is a bar. I am truly jealous!
A most excellent (and popular) suggestion. We will make this happen!
I would still love to see Altar of Freedom developed as a Napoleonic set. It would be perfect for this.
Just played Pickett's charge which Iam told is very similar and thought it was a great set of rules although obviously set in different theatres of war. It seemed very fast playing, comprehensive and fun
would love a review/comparison of Napoleonic brigade level games.
Job well done gentlemen. Your evident liking of this rule set made the review fun but you still hit on the areas you thought were lacking. Thanks
Thanks for the review. Our group is mainly GdB Deluxe. I'd love your thoughts comparing them. We agree, the author nails the interactions between all 3 arms of a force and capture the feel & look of a napoleonic game better than most ( and i've played Shako I/II, AoE, NB, Lasalle & Homegrown). To my knowledge i've never read the "why" he took another shot at a napoleonic set or what he found lacking in GdB. Keep up the great work, its video's like this that make me happy to support what you are doing over on Patreon.
Great review and glad you liked it Miles & Tom, it’s been my favourite Napoleonic ruleset, since 2017.
A great way to get into this cheaply, that I haven’t seen mentioned on Littlewars tv, is to buy Peter Dennis’s paper soldiers, Helion books & his website. There is a peninsular book that is very nice, soldiers, terrain etc included. Paper soldiers work well for linear warfare ( they only look bad from the sides) I’m also building a paper army from Peter’s American civil book, to do Altar of freedom & Pickets charge-scenarios, such as Gettysburg etc. It’s a cheap way to try a period or ruleset, if you like it you can then invest in the pewter, if you don’t you haven’t really lost anything.Keep up the good work.
Another great way to get into these games at less expense is to start smaller than a corps level game. Start with a small division and work your way up to larger games as you add units over time. That will give you time to learn the rules, be easier on your budget and give you some time to paint the new units. The game works perfectly well with a division on each side.
Time for an update, boys. Would love to see GDA2 talk from you guys.
Is it the Holy Grail we have all been searching for all these years?
That very much depends on who you ask at this club! At least a couple guys here would say, “We love it.” I count myself among those here who would say, “not so much.”
@@LittleWarsTV too much chrome?
What would you play instead?
Great review chaps!
For those people who want to try this rule set but are put off by painting hundreds of figures, I can recommend Irregular Miniatures (uk). I created ACW armies in 2mm for Greg’s Altar of Freedom. The units are blocked, infantry, Cav, Art and generals etc. They have a Napoleonics range too. A splash of colour to denote which side. A wash/varnish and you’re done.
The advantage also with a small scale is that the terrain is obviously smaller so can fit on a normal table.
Regards to all!
Chris
From quite a fan of these rules I'm so glad you showcased them. That said, after many plays there are 1-2 things I'd change. These are rules that make it difficult for the attacker, which I often see giving the defending player an advantage. When charging, attackers take penalties for both cumulative and just-taken casualties - but don't get a bonus for impetus. (Interesting this usually benefits the defensive firing lines of the British!)
Along with this, attacking Brigades require more ADCs to attack with more than 1 battalion -while this is a clever historic nod to a Brigadier requiring orders from the commander to fully commit his brigade - it again makes things trickier for the attacker.
Of course, groups can house rule issues like these if they choose. But otherwise, as you say, the ADC activation system is a very elegant mechanic that offers both friction and lots of command options for players - an of course now Mr. Brown has successfully transferred this command-and-control style to WW II with his O Group rules.
Great review for a great set of rules.
Speaking of getting into Napoleonics, I think from a board game perspective, Commands and Colors Napoleonics is a great entry point for a hex based wargame with blocks. Many I know convert the wood blocks into painted figures and use it for its simplicity of rule set. I can see that being a good foundation as you build up a minatures army and find other players, then pickup General d'Armee as a tabletop jump.
Absolutely, totally agreed. Commands and Colors is a great gateway game!
The TFL Forum has a very active page for GdA, have a look lots of stuff on there. These are simply the best Nap rules ever written, the most frustrating command system in any game I’ve played but represents the true friction of Napoleonic battles that is written about in many accounts. It does this in a really simple and elegant way that’s easy to grasp and puts you in ‘charge’ of the decisions you but, then pulls the rug from under your feet straight away. Just because your elite Lancers are lined up to charge that disordered unit of recruit infantry in the flank don’t assume it will end well!! 😂😂
It is hard to believe that "the best Nap rules ever written" only scored an 81 and an 84 out of 100 possible points in this review.
Woohoo! Another 16 minutes of amazing entertainment 👌
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you for another great review. Are you planning on reviewing Lasalle 2? They are great rules too, at the same level as GdA. Lasalle is more abstract while GdA has more detail. By the way, General d'Armee has two support forums: one on TFL and one on Tapatalk, in addition to a FB group.
Thanks, guys! If only we had time for tabletop. . .
Ooooooo…. I’ve been looking at this rule set for a while (and worked through half the video series to see if I want to get it) and now might be the time!
Thanks for a great review, gents!
I have played many Napoleonic rules sets for 40+ years. I set up a test game months ago, and gave up after the first turn; I'll have to try playing at a convention game sometime. I just felt the game processes were unnecessarily complex; it seemed like EVERYTHING has multiple steps, procedures, and tables (on a legal sized, 4 page sides QRS) to get a result. That does give it flavor, but at the cost of a lot of steps to do anything. My other big gripe is the title itself - by the author's admission, a player is really ordinarily commanding a large Division; Corps commanders, if used, have very limited impact, and the Army commander in a large game, seems all but absent.
The rules do seem like a lot of steps and I struggled with the first play through - by the second game it clicked and really moves smoothly. We hardly use the QRS except for the combat resolution tables.
@@milesreidy7864 As I sai9d, deserves a try in person with an experienced player. I''ll have to see if there are any GdA games at Historicon that I can sandwich in between the five that I will be running there (pandemic fingers crossed!) The *eight hour* youtube play through seemed more than I'd ever want to tackle as well (and I have written quite a few playthroughs myself for my blog).
Take a look as the Lardie's videos teaching the game, it becomes clear when you see them in action.
Great review guy. I would love to see a review of Napoleon's Battles from Avalon Hill
Very interested to hear your thoughts on O'Group, Dave Brown's latest Reisswitz Press offering (WW2 at battalion level).
This is my Napoleonic Wars preferred rules. Absolutely love the game.
Very good review. I do think you guys went low on the support rating, as there is a very active blog on the TFL website. Also, Dave is exceptional at answering all the questions - better than I’ve ever seen with any other game! The one issue I have is with the hesitant roll. All brigades have the same chance of going hesitant, whether they are Landwehr or Old Guard. The only way of mitigating that is with an ADC. There should be a modifier based on troop quality. Otherwise, this is my go-to ruleset for playing Nappies!! 😄
The optional rules introduce Brigadier Quality. Excellent brigadiers can reroll a bad command roll, while poor brigadiers require an extra ADC for any tasking. Sounds like a solution to your hesitant roll issues.
@@EltjoVerweij no, it is not. Jim was talking about difference in troops quality and moral but not command quality.
@@EltjoVerweij I have read through those, and they might help some. Dave appears to have crafted the hesitant rule around the effectiveness of the brigade command structure, rather than the condition of the troops themselves. I understand it completely - it’s just frustrating when my French guard brigade keeps going hesitant, while the Dutch militia march circles around them!!!🤣😂
I agree with you. I cannot understand this notorious concept of “friction of war” when we roll a dice to activate fresh ready for battle units at the beginning of a battle. What a hell friction can it be?
@@levsharus5899 I think what game authors are tying to convey with “friction” rules is that commanders don’t have absolute control over their troops at all times. They may not move as far as you would like (or not at all), they may lose cohesion, and so on. Again , I have no problem with that, to a point. I agree with you, and would prefer “friction” to come into play after troops are in contact (or at least close proximity to) the enemy.
Dave alludes in his rules to something about an ADC getting lost or stopping by the local tavern as part of the hesitant roll. But, I would submit that a runner from a crack brigade would be less likely to get waylaid than one from a disorganized mob of conscripts - hence the modified die roll. But, it’s hard to do much modification to a single d6, especially when a 3-6 is a success.
Thanks you for another great review ! I hope you will review bataille empire one day ! Worth a try 😉
Second Edition is a major overhaul. Much simpler and faster but retaining the feel. It even plays faster than BP now.
80 - 90 battalions in 6mm isn't a huge investment and look much better on the battlefield than larger figures. So much cheaper at around $5 a battalion.
I think the rules are more suited for 6mm as I've seen a number of 15mm and 28mm for playing two divisions and looks too much but with 6mm I've played corps level with so much room on flanks that I still feel I need more units.
This is my preferred set of Napoleonic rules (currently and I see no reason to look for another). As well as agreeing with all you said about the rules, I like the fact that it is hard to use gameplay quirks to attempt to win and I am sure we have all played opponents that do that. I also find them adaptable for any in-house rules gamers may want for a specific battle or campaign. I play the rules most often with one of Dave Brown's (the author) play-testers and so am fortunate to be told about any adaptions/improvements they may think are useful though I do not always agree with them. As an aside back in the days when I lived in London UK, I was at the same club as D. Brown but was not a fan of his General de Brigade rules. Anyway I'm a fan of this set of rules.
Great review, Thanks
I’ve recently bought a copy of Pickett’s Charge myself as those are quite similar to these.
Great review.
And also, will we see some more ACW in the future? Perhaps with the use of the Pickett’s Charge rules used?
Best regards 😁
We've played Pickett's Charge here in the club several times over the years (not as much as General d'Armee though) and YES, there will absolutely be more ACW in the future on the channel. It's one of our favorite periods to play!
@@LittleWarsTV
Could’t agree more. The ACW is such a fun period to game. I personally have it as my favorite followed closely by the War of the Roses.
I like the historical almost even odds. The CSA being outnumbered but have the superiority in fighting spirit and leaders early in the war.
David's rules have dedicated forums on the Too Fat Lardies website.
I know it probably is not your type of game but I would love to see a spectre operations review one day
I like Napoleonic tournaments, and it’s one thing I haven’t seen in Napoleonic games for some years I’ll have to try a Brit v. French game so paint brush out for some French 😊
Great video, very informative over this rule set.
Looking forward to your video about Napoleonics.
Any plans to review sharp practice? I had been interested in starting Napoleonics at a skirmish level
I always love a Miles review!
Thank you so much for this. I wonder how these rules compare to the Blucher rules?
They are extremely different. Blucher is a true "army level" game where a single base is an entire brigade. The mechanics are totally different, too, but the intended scale of the games is not the same. General d'Armee--despite the title--has the basic maneuver unit as a battalion, which makes it better suited for a corps-sized action. We had to rescale the game for Austerlitz to make it work.
@@LittleWarsTV Thanks!
TFL may make "theatrical/romantic historical" games but they nail flavor and consistently have some of best rule-sets, even when they are less than clear at times.
Another great video,
Thanks, Bill!
I really like the period feel of GdA but the dicing for activation really puts me off.
Nice review and yes they are a decent set of rules 😁👍🏻
Cavalry was never used to chase off skirmishers. Cavalry was much too valuable. That’s why you had your own skirmishers
Thanks for the interesting review. When evaluating rules there is for me the question of validation. So do the rules recreate historic situations and outcomes. Not perse on a basis of certainty, but is it conceivable. For Napoleonics d’Erlon’s charge at Waterloo is an important benchmark, I think. How would you rate these rules work for that?
there is support for this set rules by the 2FL on RUclips. They have a set of rules played out i believe there is 8 videos
Yes, there’s a series of long, in depth play videos available with the author involved. They are very good, though a “quick start” guide under 30 minutes would be nice!
Thanks for the review. I still use “System 7 napoleonics” how do you compare them?
Great video. I've been interested in these rules for some time, this may have been the push to buy them. And I'm happy to hear of your opinion on Waterloo, I echo that sentiment. A lot of rules from British writers (which is most rules I know) only ever talk about Waterloo and the 2nd peninsular campaign, it's getting really tiring.
I love these rules!
They are popular in the club here, no question.
What is the difference between General d'Armee and General d'Brigade? Do both of them require written orders or do they use order markers? You said General d'Amee has an index. So it has an actual index in the back of the book or do you mean the table of contents. General d'Brigade does not have an index.
Nice review.
Think you should do a write up, that scale up.
Do you think new Wargamers to "Napoleonics" will find it playable or is it likely to be a bit too ponderous for Newbies?
Too ponderous for a true newbie. Others in the club may disagree, but I'd consider this an excellent game for more experienced Napoleonic players and one that would bewilder a new player
Please, please, please - I've been playing Napoleonic miniatures games for well over 40 years now with a home grown rule set (basically battalion level; each stand represents 100 men). I've been searching for a couple of years now for a good book that would guide me through the development and running of a Napoleonic campaign. I have well balanced armies for all of the major and several minor powers, but my little group desperately needs the added engagement of working from campaign movement maps to tabletop battles that matter beyond just a particular day-game's bragging rights. Can anyone point me to a book or on-line site that would have the instruction I'm needing? The video on General d'Armee was very useful - I'll have to pick up a copy to see if my rule set can still be improved. Thanks!
Try Empire Campaign System if you can find it. But its very detailed
Off topic. You guys once did a 28mm Rev War figure review from a variety of companies. Do the same for other wars? ACW?
The 28mm AWI figure review is the only one we've done so far, but there have been plenty of requests for more!
Review legacy of glory rules please.
Using words like "a wonderful read" in presentation, and "superb" and "great" and "a really fun rules set" when describing the game mechanics etc., and a saying it is "one of our favorites" and at the end of the video using the words "a fabulous rules set" to describe the game overall, you make me wonder what it takes for you guys to give out a 10? How you can be giving so many 7s and 8s is Bewildering. If a teacher told you that your child was doing "wonderful," "superb" and "great" and that he is "fabulous" and "one of our favorites" you then look at his report card filled and find it with 7s and 8s, you would certainly wonder what happened. Presentation: 7 & 8, Playability: 9 & 8, Mechanics: 8 & 9, Historical Flavor: 8, 9, Support: 7, 7, Total = 81, 84 (this is the equivalent to a B and a B+). One would think it would have earned an "A" (90 or more) with all the superlatives used in the video and especially for one of the reviewers favorite rules sets.
You may not be familiar with how our weighted scoring works out, but scores in the 80s are top marks for us. We have a 4 year history of scores at this point and you’ll find very few games with a score that high
@@LittleWarsTV Yes, but a superb, great, wonderful, fabulous, favorite game should be one of the very few with a score that high (meaning in the 90s). Either that, or the reviewers should use language to describe the game that matches the scores that they give; for instance if they give a 7 in presentation or support, you should say it is "average" in presentation or support; if they give it an 8 in mechanics and historical flavor, they should say it is good (and not great, superb, etc.). You don't get to the end of the review with an 81 (which should be a solid "good" score on a 1-10 scale), and then describe the game as "great" see: 13:47 (great should be a 90, and a 'great' rules set should receive an "A" grade). I am not going to "rush out today and get" a "good" rules set. see: 14:03. I am going to rush out today to get a "great" rules set. If you never give out 10s, then you should explain that and let us know that these games are really being rated on a 1-9 scale. That would make an 84 a much higher score than if rated on a 1-10 scale. I offer these suggestions to help your channel give a better service to the viewers and produce better reviews. If you chose not to take well intentioned advice to improve your channel, and instead continue to justify why what you are doing by pointing to your '4 year history' and why it makes sense, then, like many historians, you are doomed to repeat your mistakes of the past.
@@LittleWarsTV Also interesting to note that this beautifully presented, full color rulebook, gets a 7 and an 8 for presentation, and Altar of Freedom (produced by Greg of little wars TV) gets a 7 & 9 for a black and white "home-made" looking rules set. See: ruclips.net/video/x7hMYYwVTKs/видео.html at 1:55
As a newbie, great video thanks. What do you think of the Blucher rules? I'm tossing up between 15 or 6mm and have heard Blucher is good to use? Thanks again.
We have played a lot of Blucher and we like it!
What do think of Dave Browns Pickets Charge ?
Could you play using the bloucher peninsula army pack?
Another great video.... What do you mean "funny money"????
Haha whatever those English pounds are, you know? We talk in dollars on this side of the pond!
How does it compare with Napoleon’s Battles? NB 2.0 is the only rules I’ve used to play Napoleonic miniature games. It was the dominant rule set at the club in Colorado I used to belong to, but it’s been a number of years since I’ve played a game. I wouldn’t mind playing Napoleonics again but NB seems to out of fashion since version 3 came out.
NB 2.0 is still a very good game (maneuver elements are brigades in NB, and battalions in G D'A). Don't worry about what is in and out of fashion. If you like NB 2.0, then there is no reason not to play it. Also, you can use miniatures based for NB with General D' Armee; so there is no rebasing required in order for you to be able to use both sets of rules with your NB based figures!
Great review, I love these rules. The guy on the right always looks like he has something more important to do and this is the last place he wants to be!!!
Tom is a busy man, no doubt. He always has better places to be.
Tom was likely disappointed in who he was stuck with as a review co-host (who wouldn't be). Tom has very high standards that few of us mortals can meet. I suspect Tom's agent received a very stern talking to after filming the episode.
It’s actually often pretty difficult to find a balanced expression when filming conversations like this. Personally I find the review great and hope to see more from Miles and Tom.
@@janm.johansen9806 Calling it a great review means you would score the review as an "81" (just like the "great" game [General D' Armee] that was given an 81 in the review).
You did not mention figure scale (one cast is how many ) or ground scale.
From the rules: :The game does not use a distinct figure scale..." Ground scale "very approximately" 1mm = 1 yard.
I don't know why people need scenarios made for them by some company when you're playing a Historical game where you can find ALL KINDS of scenarios in actual history....?
Disappointed not to see the Napoleon hoodie.
It was at the cleaners!
Is there an American Civil War version of this rule set?
Yep, it’s called ‘Pickett’s Charge.’ It was published before GdA, very similar just a slight difference in the sequence of play.
@@samb2052 Pickett's Charge was actually published before GDA. And it is somewhat easier to play because it does not have the same skirmisher rules.
Can I use these rules with 1/72 scale figures? I have about 1200 of them.
Yes.
What do you guys think of the Polemos sets of rules?
Worst rule set ever
@@rickybell2190 ......worst?! Really??? How come?
@@paschalisantoniou974 here is just one example of how badly it's written. This is question that was asked about the rules.
If a force enters a hex adjacent to one occupied by the enemy, the latter may fall back one hex, if desired by their CinC for no TP cost." but if my force enters a hex adjacent to two hex occupied by the enemy, all two enemy can fallback? AND if they doesn't fall back and a battle begin, the rules say that "The battle takes place in the hex occupied by the force which has been attacked and the war games table represents this square", but if there are two hex, which is hex selected and who decided the hex the attacker?
This is the answer they got back.
The attacker (the defender can reinforce the attacked force with the un-attacked force though)
Confused?? I know I was.
Two Part Question: Have you guys taken a look at any of the Warlord Games Black Powder Epic Battles 15mm(ish) figures? Do you think this ruleset would work with those bases?
Yes, we have! The Warlord plastics are really nice, it's just a shame they made them in a new scale that doesn't match anything already existing. We have 10mm and 15mm armies (and 6mm and 28mm) but the new Warlords are about 13mm so I don't think we'll be collecting them. But for new players who don't already own other scales, the price is good for what you get. This game could certainly work with the Warlord bases, though you will need a fair number of them given the unit sizes in General d'Armee. A smaller GdA scenario would be totally viable.
Et Sans Résultats or Général d'Armée?
ANOTHER glossy paged, ALL color rule book....somehow (thank goodness) it's half the price of "black powder"...
Spelling mistakes : Général d’Armée, not General d’Armee. It is a bit weird to write it like that … Sad. I may give this rule a try anyway and once again, thanks for this review.
We consider ourselves charter members of the Free Range Spelling Movement and refuse to be subjugated by the dictatorship of spelling convention. Long Live Free Range Speling! Viva Phonetics!
@@milesreidy7864 ok … This means war ! Total war !
Easy if you have a French AZERTY keyboard, or QUERTY keyboard adapted for the French language, but if you have a standard English language QUERTY keyboard, perhaps it is impossible to include accents when typing French words (I certainly don't know how to with my standard QUERTY keyboard).
@@danielherbera7522 HA!
@@DH.2016 I was talking about the title of the book. No big deal at all for a youtube video, of course. What is strange is that it is spelled correctly inside the book (I purchased the pdf after seeing this review) so why is it spelled incorrectly on the cover is a bit of a mystery …
Where's my medal?
We replied to same comment this on another video, but in short, we never received shipping info or which of the three medals you wanted in the spring when we put out the fulfillment call. Happy to fulfill it for you after the fact, though.
A bit wordy, that's why the language is called English not American. And you spell funny!
Only kidding ♡😄
Helpful review but not really 'wordy' and 'ponderous' compared with Black Powder - those are the most awfully written I've ever seen.
English is too 'wordy'? How about "At this moment in time ..."?
D’armee is pronounced darmeh
Thanks guys. I've been searching for years for a rule set to use with my complete collection of System 7 Napoleonic Wars counters. While the counters represent companies, batteries and squadrons, the command level is meant to be the battalion. These look perfect. I ordered the rule book, PDF, marker and Vitoria supplement this morning. Little War TV rocks. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_7_Napoleonics
Thanks for sharing the System 7 link!
Another who remembers System 7! Excellent. I have fond memories of running a giant 1812 campaign using those rules thirty-mumble years ago. Good to hear that the counters still see daylight from time to time : -)
I still have my System 7 rules and counters as well.
@@AndrewBrew I don't know how I missed your comment. I'm in Northeastern Ohio. I don't suppose you're anywhere close. : )🙂
@@captainnolan5062 I'm working on a modular terrain system for System 7 that is based on the Avalon Hill "Squad Leader" boards. How do you handle terrain? I'm in Northeastern Ohio. I don't suppose you're anywhere close. 🙂
Thanks for the great review! We are currently painting up our 6mm figures to play Quatre Bras in the near (ish) future.
On the topic of a forum, there actually is an official one in which David is quite active: toofatlardies.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=14642&sid=54eff444b9a743a2ffbda46f5c623554
There's an ongoing discussion about what changes would be welcome in a version 2. Very happy if you added your thoughts into the mix!
Great review, thanks