There is no question in my mind that this is one fine "Napoleonic" game. I only wish I could play it multi-player more often. To get some experience I did join the BPA online tournament.
Great video and just in time! We ran two games of Nappy Wars over the holidays, once with four players and another with five. It's loads of fun. Couple of things you didn't mention in the video (and I realize you had time constraints) were 1. The Peace Roll. At the end of every turn, you roll a d6 and if it comes up a 6, game is immediately over and you count up the VPs. Incidentally, you *don't* win the game just by taking keys, it's technically VPs. Keys are VPs, yes, but so are Pact allies and unused resources. The Peace Roll is interesting because it's a game within a game. The individual player powers can choose to influence the die by sacrificing a card next turn to put a +1 or -1 DRM. Obviously the power that is ahead in VP wants the game to end while the others don't. Each power, in a predetermined order, declares whether or not they will sacrifice a card. It's a bit of a bluffing "will he or won't he" mechanic going there. It's fun. Both times we played, the peace roll ended the campaign game after only one turn. 2. Learning Nappy Wars system makes learning Wellington and Kutuzov (a game you said you would never play because of the ugly map) really easy since they use the same system with some modifications.
Hey John. As I mentioned in the video each aspect of the game could use a short video on each aspect. Political Track, Victory Conditions etc...We played the game correctly when we played last week, including the 'peace roll' etc...This is easily my favourite game covering the entire Napoleonic Wars.
@@XLEGION1 If you're ever here in the Philippines, let me know and I can whip the guys together for a nice 4 or 5 player game! :) We had fun. The Guards Reserve card of the French is a lot of fun. Save Napoleon from a disastrous defeat or turn a minor victory into a major one.
I've never played, but have had the next edition on P500 preorderfor years...I kind of put it in the back of my mind, since it would be hard to say when I could play it, being complicated and multiplayer. Enjoyed watching your vid, as always, Gilbert. Thank you.
Thanks for the review! I've been curious about this game for a bit. I just recently picked up Wellington, which is a game in the same series focusing on the Peninsular War.
Excellent video, as usual, clear and concise explanation of the game . I’ve bought the follow up to this , Wellington in the Peninsula , which uses the same game mechanics. Maybe you’ll do a report on it , if you have the game .
Gilbert, Thanks for making this short easily-digestible video. There a too few videos on this spectacular game. I can't seem to get tired of this game. When I go to WBC, I make sure to play in every heat of this game even though I like this game better with fewer players, even only two. When you were talking about getting a Proxy nation to Pact status on the Diplomatic Track, you said there's a grace period where the Pacted nation would not really join your Camp actively until one turn later. That is not correct. The Pacted nation immediately becomes controlled by the player controlling the Patron nation (8.2). Most likely the Pacted nation will at least have a Reserve available to do something with. You might have been thinking about the Grace Period that occurs after a nation is Conquered. And, it was inaccurate to say the winner of the game will be the player with the most Keys. Actually the winner will be whoever has the most Points (5.81) when the game ends, which is different than whoever has the most Keys --- but it's true that capturing Keys (especially from enemy Powers) is critical. You mentioned some of the issues with the rulebook, and I would like to elaborate: Another issue to try to keep in mind is there are rules buried in the Glossary --- and in the rulebook's examples --- that cannot be found anywhere else.
Hi Gilbert, Any chance you could post your 2-page game rules summary to BGG or CSW? Our local/weekly gaming group is proposing to play this in the new year ('24) and I'm sure any player aid devices you've created/updated would be a huge assist in our learning the game!
So, even though you said Russia had a kill with the die roll none of the French units ended up dying. They just left the area of control? Kind of confusing
jimmy dean every 6 rolled is a kill and you would remove 1 strength point. Every 5 rolled is a disrupt and those units would be unavailable for the second round of combat in the event of a tie.
It does look interesting. Not sure it would beat Napoleon against Europe or Age of Napoleon. On the other hand it may be interesting for me just because it has so many players. Gonna keep an eye on this one! The space part is troubling though.
Two different games entirely. Napoleonic Wars is better at the 'big picture' of the whole set of Napoleonic Wars. "War and Peace" is better at showing the individual campaigns.
@@XLEGION1 Thanks for the reply. I am getting into big wargames and decided to wait for the reprint of War and Peace (going to be kickstarted soon). I just love the way that game looks. Have you ever played a full campaign of War and Peace?
@@Heldermaior No, I have not played the entire campaign of 'War and Peace' My gut feeling is that is not the best use of this system. As I can see from all of the discussion on Consimworld, generally people are finding problems with the Campaign game. The original game (of which this is a reprint) was never designed to cover the whole gamut of the Napoleonic Wars.
@@XLEGION1 That is a pitty. One of the reasons to get this game was to do a full campaign. To reenact Napoleon's strategy and change some naval and political pieces around seeing if we could get a different result. Will need to see how it goes I guess.
While I agree that multiple players is nice, I think Prussia is not one of those powers. With experience of several 5p games, Prussia can swing the game too easily.
It’s a brilliant game, but I’ve never seen anyone play it correctly. Wargamers are boringly conservative. They want to build long term plans that will inexorably lead to victory while minimizing risk - meaning building up and maneuvering to only enter combat when they are relatively assured of prevailing. If the Coalition uses that approach they will ALWAYS lose to the French buildup. This is a game where the Coalition have to be aggressive and opportunistic. They have to make as many 1-1 attacks as quickly as possible - following up on the ones that are successful - in order to keep the French off balance while building a Russian force large enough to take on Napoleon.
I think that emphasis on "all or nothing" attacks comes from too many games making it counter productive (if not impossible) to wage a prolonged war of attrition, and it's a hard lesson to unlearn in games where that is not an issue. I've run into the same issue in other games where a player will let their home territories be overrun rather than committing any of their forces to the fight for fear that losing part of them will doom them in the long term.
HConstantine You’re throwing away many, MANY brilliant games if you don’t like these features. Wilderness War, Washington’s War, Here I Stand, Mr. Madison’s War, Paths of Glory, Sword of Rome, Shifting Sands....
I know a guy like HConstantine here in the Philippines. He looks askance at anything that isn't hex and counter....or heck, almost anything published after 2000 (so we say). Big ASL player, he is.
I prefer point to point over hex for grand strategy games honestly, and you don't have to clip circular counters. Hex is fine for a battlefield, but a large area point to point works fine.
Our group is a huge fan of this game - over a hundred plays - mostly 5 player. Tournament play is awesome.
There is no question in my mind that this is one fine "Napoleonic" game. I only wish I could play it multi-player more often. To get some experience I did join the BPA online tournament.
Love your videos, and you have a calming voice. I wish you could do them more frequently. Thank you
Great video and just in time! We ran two games of Nappy Wars over the holidays, once with four players and another with five. It's loads of fun. Couple of things you didn't mention in the video (and I realize you had time constraints) were
1. The Peace Roll. At the end of every turn, you roll a d6 and if it comes up a 6, game is immediately over and you count up the VPs. Incidentally, you *don't* win the game just by taking keys, it's technically VPs. Keys are VPs, yes, but so are Pact allies and unused resources. The Peace Roll is interesting because it's a game within a game. The individual player powers can choose to influence the die by sacrificing a card next turn to put a +1 or -1 DRM. Obviously the power that is ahead in VP wants the game to end while the others don't. Each power, in a predetermined order, declares whether or not they will sacrifice a card. It's a bit of a bluffing "will he or won't he" mechanic going there. It's fun. Both times we played, the peace roll ended the campaign game after only one turn.
2. Learning Nappy Wars system makes learning Wellington and Kutuzov (a game you said you would never play because of the ugly map) really easy since they use the same system with some modifications.
Hey John. As I mentioned in the video each aspect of the game could use a short video on each aspect. Political Track, Victory Conditions etc...We played the game correctly when we played last week, including the 'peace roll' etc...This is easily my favourite game covering the entire Napoleonic Wars.
@@XLEGION1 If you're ever here in the Philippines, let me know and I can whip the guys together for a nice 4 or 5 player game! :) We had fun. The Guards Reserve card of the French is a lot of fun. Save Napoleon from a disastrous defeat or turn a minor victory into a major one.
Excellent snapshot view, thanks so much.. for your information One Small Step games has pre-orders open for the 3rd Edition
Thank you for another great video Gilbert. Always an inspiration for our own movies.
I've never played, but have had the next edition on P500 preorderfor years...I kind of put it in the back of my mind, since it would be hard to say when I could play it, being complicated and multiplayer. Enjoyed watching your vid, as always, Gilbert. Thank you.
thank you for the show.
Thanks for the review! I've been curious about this game for a bit. I just recently picked up Wellington, which is a game in the same series focusing on the Peninsular War.
I'm going to make a board war game, your videos really helps me, thank you
Excellent video, as usual, clear and concise explanation of the game . I’ve bought the follow up to this , Wellington in the Peninsula , which uses the same game mechanics. Maybe you’ll do a report on it , if you have the game .
Thanks, I'm also surprised there isn't more on this game. Would you recommend it solo, despite the card aspect?
Gilbert,
Thanks for making this short easily-digestible video. There a too few videos on this spectacular game. I can't seem to get tired of this game. When I go to WBC, I make sure to play in every heat of this game even though I like this game better with fewer players, even only two. When you were talking about getting a Proxy nation to Pact status on the Diplomatic Track, you said there's a grace period where the Pacted nation would not really join your Camp actively until one turn later. That is not correct. The Pacted nation immediately becomes controlled by the player controlling the Patron nation (8.2). Most likely the Pacted nation will at least have a Reserve available to do something with. You might have been thinking about the Grace Period that occurs after a nation is Conquered. And, it was inaccurate to say the winner of the game will be the player with the most Keys. Actually the winner will be whoever has the most Points (5.81) when the game ends, which is different than whoever has the most Keys --- but it's true that capturing Keys (especially from enemy Powers) is critical.
You mentioned some of the issues with the rulebook, and I would like to elaborate: Another issue to try to keep in mind is there are rules buried in the Glossary --- and in the rulebook's examples --- that cannot be found anywhere else.
This was an AWESOME game. I played is so many times, first edition, back in early 2000s. Where did you get this copy and howmuch did you pay?
Hi Gilbert, Any chance you could post your 2-page game rules summary to BGG or CSW? Our local/weekly gaming group is proposing to play this in the new year ('24) and I'm sure any player aid devices you've created/updated would be a huge assist in our learning the game!
just send me an email and I can send it to you. The Geek doesn't always take player aids. my email: gilbertcollins7@gmail.com
So, even though you said Russia had a kill with the die roll none of the French units ended up dying. They just left the area of control? Kind of confusing
jimmy dean every 6 rolled is a kill and you would remove 1 strength point. Every 5 rolled is a disrupt and those units would be unavailable for the second round of combat in the event of a tie.
It does look interesting. Not sure it would beat Napoleon against Europe or Age of Napoleon. On the other hand it may be interesting for me just because it has so many players. Gonna keep an eye on this one! The space part is troubling though.
Which Mark McGlaughlin design do you prefer? This or War and Peace?
Two different games entirely. Napoleonic Wars is better at the 'big picture' of the whole set of Napoleonic Wars. "War and Peace" is better at showing the individual campaigns.
@@XLEGION1 Thanks for the reply. I am getting into big wargames and decided to wait for the reprint of War and Peace (going to be kickstarted soon). I just love the way that game looks. Have you ever played a full campaign of War and Peace?
@@Heldermaior No, I have not played the entire campaign of 'War and Peace' My gut feeling is that is not the best use of this system. As I can see from all of the discussion on Consimworld, generally people are finding problems with the Campaign game. The original game (of which this is a reprint) was never designed to cover the whole gamut of the Napoleonic Wars.
@@XLEGION1 That is a pitty. One of the reasons to get this game was to do a full campaign. To reenact Napoleon's strategy and change some naval and political pieces around seeing if we could get a different result. Will need to see how it goes I guess.
best Napoleonic game (4 players are best)
While I agree that multiple players is nice, I think Prussia is not one of those powers. With experience of several 5p games, Prussia can swing the game too easily.
In English, -gh- is usually pronounced as the letter -f-. Think how to you say -laugh-.
Not always.
Lennes is pronounced as Lenay
It’s a brilliant game, but I’ve never seen anyone play it correctly. Wargamers are boringly conservative. They want to build long term plans that will inexorably lead to victory while minimizing risk - meaning building up and maneuvering to only enter combat when they are relatively assured of prevailing. If the Coalition uses that approach they will ALWAYS lose to the French buildup. This is a game where the Coalition have to be aggressive and opportunistic. They have to make as many 1-1 attacks as quickly as possible - following up on the ones that are successful - in order to keep the French off balance while building a Russian force large enough to take on Napoleon.
I think that emphasis on "all or nothing" attacks comes from too many games making it counter productive (if not impossible) to wage a prolonged war of attrition, and it's a hard lesson to unlearn in games where that is not an issue. I've run into the same issue in other games where a player will let their home territories be overrun rather than committing any of their forces to the fight for fear that losing part of them will doom them in the long term.
Cards? Point-to-point moment? circular counters? Really?
HConstantine It’s a brilliant game.
HConstantine You’re throwing away many, MANY brilliant games if you don’t like these features. Wilderness War, Washington’s War, Here I Stand, Mr. Madison’s War, Paths of Glory, Sword of Rome, Shifting Sands....
I know a guy like HConstantine here in the Philippines. He looks askance at anything that isn't hex and counter....or heck, almost anything published after 2000 (so we say). Big ASL player, he is.
@@johnsy4306 ASL? Heaven Forefend! Europa.
I prefer point to point over hex for grand strategy games honestly, and you don't have to clip circular counters. Hex is fine for a battlefield, but a large area point to point works fine.