why so many figures
Hi all, I have just picked up a copy of gdb and just don,t understand why there is a need for so many figures per battalion, on the front page it states that by using a 1.20 scale the gamer gets a feel of how hard it was to move large units, yet on the further reading the rules allow grand batteries to be two bases deep due to lack of space, so much for having to overcome moving large units. I have read on this forum that smaller units can be used, I am building up a russian army, if I use 24 figure battalions, what size would cavalry units need to be and artillery units etc. sorry chaps, just don,t see the point in a 1.20 scale and 40 to 50 figure units. terry

I couldn't agree more. Up until GDB many rule sets were designed around units of approximately 24 figures. There were some that specified 12 or 16 but in the main 24 seemed to be a sensible compromise. As to the diffulties of providing enough room to play, not every game is played on large tables. Before anyone pipes up that GDB enourages games with small number of units, the whole essence and enjoyment of Napoleonic war gaming is derived from larger battles. Apart from this important issue the rules are pretty good and should not inhibit smaller units as long as everyone is on the same page. Schultz

Each to their own. You can use 24 fig units if you want, go for your life. Dave Brown and others liked the fewer, bigger battalions, so the rules and mechanics were designed with this in mind. Maybe they were a bit of a reaction to the NB 12 figure brigades. I know that I saw a games using NB where the whole Guard cavalry was contained in about 20 figures - that didnt grab me. " Before anyone pipes up that GDB enourages games with small number of units, the whole essence and enjoyment of Napoleonic war gaming is derived from larger battles " Shultz - Whats a small number of units in your view? Having played plenty of games where our ambition outweighed our time and player resources, I can say that these rules arent ideal for large games unless you have a) lots of players b) lots of time and c) umpires. The rules are probably best designed for a division a player - say 12-16 units. If you want to pay Aspern Essling in an afternoon with one player a side, I would look at Grande Armee or NB. cheers John

To be honest, the large battle while fun from the aspect of getting a feel for the spectacle is great, takes allot of time, and as jbaxter said to each their own. Personally I like equally if not more so the small engagements that lead up to the main event. There is daring and often at times more interesting options to explore, the small skirmishes that happened leading up to pultusk offer as much enjoyment as the main event. I like GDB for that reason, and when done well with the right number of people the big game can be a great event as well. I would also say that there is nothing stopping you adjusting rules to reflect your taste and style. More so in Napoleonic war gaming than any other genre in the hobby. So if you don't like the rule about the grand battery and how to place the units then scrap it and apply what you think is reasonable and equitable in terms of what you see the game should reflect.

interesting views
Hi, interesting view points, but I still don,t get the point of units of up to 60 figures, and in the lead up stating that this gives a feel of the period, and then deeper in the rules, telling the gamer to double up units due to their size and lack of table space. sorry something wrong some place, was the author linked to a figure manufacturer. :?: terry

Terry, Your last comment was rather uncalled for. The key reason for having large units is that they look great! On campaign Russian and French infantry battalions were often down to about 450-500 men, so 24 figures per battalion is about right. If you want to find unit strengths, look at, for example, some of George Nafziger's works which tend to contain copious OoB. As to grand batteries, the reason for doubling them up is that the guns in grand batteries were often deployed closer together than was normal, hence the need to reduce frontages to represent this. Grand batteries tended not to be moved once deployed.

Terry, Most rules sets these days seem to be pitched at the 1:20 ratio, so there is nothing new in this. Possibly the influence of Warhammer etc. The rationale behind this scale is to play games at a brigade or divisional level (I believe this is the case for other popular rules such as Shako and there are several new rules sets coming out also based on this ratio). As the introduction states, most commanders operated at this level and there were many more engagements at this level than there were full-scale battles (take a look at "Thunder on the Danube"). Really, with rules you have two options: play at the brigade level where one can micromanage units (ie decide on line, square, column); or play on the grand tactical scale where these things are beneath the concern of the army commander and are often abstracted in the rules. There is no point buying rules for one and expecting to be able to do the other. I would suggest, perhaps, that you base troops to fit two rules systems (GdB and a grand tactical game) so you can have the best of both worlds. Beware that grand tactical games require a pile of lead too. At 1:90 as some rules are, you still need over 1000 figures per side for many battles. Your other choice is to perhaps look at a different scale (6mm). I am fairly new to Napoleonic Wargaming and looked at all of these issues. I have settled on 15mm and have based for GdB but by tweeking things a little, this is also suitable for Age of Eagles. I am still to convince my gaming collegues to play the latter as they "don't like the look of little units" (a case of asthetics overcoming notions of megalomania). GdB rules are very satisfying in both game-play and feel for the period. If there are too many units it can start to get a bit slow, and there are possibly a few areas which are contentious (although what rules don't have this - it helps with lively debate). However, the 3rd edition is due out soon I'm sure your last comment was tongue in cheek. Foundry, who do manufacture 28mm figures are putting out rules. I'm sure these will encourage large units of the more expensive figures. Good luck either way. Ants

I think the below pictures show why some will like large battalions over the 12 figure jobs. They look great and for me personally allow more room to paint and delight in the other side of the hobby. That being said campaign vs paper strength is always a choice, most players take a middle ground and seek the re-create an OOB, or build generic forces with battalions of differing strengths to give them so you would hardly see 60 figs at any given point more like the average would be about 24-36, some occasional 40's and 48's buts that about it. At any rate sam mustafa is bringing out a set that has a smaller unit set and there a large range of rules that support the concept of smaller units shako comes to mind. As to the last comment tad unfortunate but all below figures are by AB available through Eureka Miniatures in Australia :P

Terry, I think your posting has generated a number of considered and well thought out responses. I come from an era where there was only one set of creditable rules and that was WRG. Interestingly, they were based on the 1:20 ratio. John, I wargamed for almost 12 years in Sydney before taking a prolonged break. Our group fought numerous smaller battles, Waterloo twice, Quatre Bras and full peninsula campaigns taking some weeks to complete. All of these were played using WRG rules at 1:20. Currently I am looking to regain that excitement if I get a chance to play a game or two. I think that rules can and should be adjusted to suit your inclinations and as has been said, if the rules don't suit you try another. For my part, I believe they are OK, but then again I have a number of sets. My biggest complaint is that I can't paint the little buggers fast enough (without them looking like they have been daubed by a drunk)! Cheers Schultz

Shultz, yes i think we all have that problem :) Most games we play involve units at 24-36 figures for infantry and 18-24 for cav. I suppose these represent campaign strengths. When we are playing a pick-up game which we want to get finished in 3-4 hours without a whole lot of planning before-hand, you want to make sure that there is some level of equality in the forces. But there is nothing better than seeing a full strength hussar regt on the table at 60 figures, or 6 x 48 Austrian line and a FAB comprising an Austrian brigade, or Guard cav regts at 40-50 figs each. It does take a lot of work, but I guess it depends upon ones view of the hobby and personal preferences (the painting/collecting versus gaming angle). I must admit that after 8-9 years work on my own collection and having between our little group, access to a pretty large combined collection, its easier to run this way. No-one has to sit down and punch out another French or Austrian line battalion if they dont want to. I can appreciate if people are sitting down and starting from scratch, with no-one else to help, that it looks like hard work. john john

hi
Hi, well yet again some interesting views. I will go with smaller units, and forget these 40, 50,60 figure units. i was having a bit of fun about the author being in with figure makers. I have been wargaming over 30 years and have seen rules come and go over the years. My take on these is to go with 20 to 24 figure battalions and smaller units of horse, use brigades made up of 3 battalions as a movement section and so on up to div level. This will allow i think for a faster game and at the same time allow a res to be used if needed. bring on that heavy cav div. terry

I use gmb scenarios but with english computer wargames rules, of hard pounding, you can put what strengths in you like but represent the unit on the table with as many figures as you want but i still use 1:20 as I like the look I have all Elite figures. Hard pounding is excellent for solo play as well

terry, I've returned to Naps from focussing on AWI for a long time (so much so that my previous Nap set up was 1:33 using those darned, new-fangled 1970s Quarrie/Airifx rules). Because AWI had relatively small (by European standards) units fighting relatively small (ditto) battles, I had become used to upping the figure:man ratio to 1:10, or even 1:5 - initially using Pete Berry's "Minuteman" rules, more recently using British Grenadier. Because I liked what this did in terms of replicating the look and problems of linear warfare, I decided that GdeB - as well as its familial link with British Grenadier - gave me the size of units I wanted. Clearly you want something different, and are more focussed on fast play than on visual impact; equally, you don't want to spend all your time painting just one unit. Chacun a son gout (or chacun a son goat, as those of us familiar with the AWI book "Fusiliers" say).

I found GdB specifically because I was looking for a set of 1:20 rules. My previous system (Napoleon's Battles) had used much smaller unit sizes and I came increasingly to dislike pushing 16 figures around the table and trying to think of them as a regiment or brigade. It's not just a matter of appearance, not entirely. The small units never seemed to develop a personality. In 1:20 and individual battalions and regiments, I can think, "The Krimskii! They've never let me down!" or push in the 4th Jagers and hope they have recovered their morale after the crummy die-rolling last game. Yours, James D. Gray

Terry, you asked the same question 3 years ago http://generaldebrigade.greatboard.com/viewtopic.php?t=1942&highlight=&sid=1b98c7824670f1e2027e4062024889e6 and got much the same answers.