Review: Napoleonic Wars by GMT games. This is my first shot at writing for Grognards but as I keep using it I thought I'd better contribute and what better than reviewing GMT's latest offering? As the title suggests the game seeks to simulate the Napoleonic Wars. Historians tend to agree the Revolutionary Wars ended and Napoleonic Wars began in 1802, after the Treaty of Amiens and Napoleon becoming Emperor. This game, however, sticks to the wargaming interpretation of things and begins in 1805, like similar games that include Empires in Arms and War & Peace. While this definition of the is perhaps political accurate it is an ideal starting point: Nelson's poised for a showdown with Villenueve at Trafalgar, Bonaparte is encamped in northern France ready to invade Britain and Austria and Russia are both in the coalition. What do you get for your money (£45 over here in Britain, about $55 across the pond)? There's a single 22" x 34" map depicting Europe, with only the southern tips of Norway and Denmark shown, and northern Turkey. There is little of the Mediterranean shown and southern Greece is off the map, which is at first surprising considering the potential importance of the region during the period. Spaces (circles for open, squares for VP locations (called keys) and stars for forts) are called duchies and are coloured to represent their owning power. There's no neutral spaces as even minor nations are played (see below). Associated duchies (such as allied principalities) are only half coloured. There are 4 sheets of counters but unlike many GMT games a lot of wasted card, in the form of counters that are not actually needed. Commanders are represented by two counters, a square, or a stand up one (as in Wilderness War) and this seems a bit of a waste. The idea is that an army group (several commanders and there forces) are placed on an army card off table and only the stand up army group commander is on map. A sound idea to avoid stacking but currently I have not found it a problem and the stand up counters remain in the box (although there is something satisfying about an inch and a half high counter of Napoleon stomping across Europe!). Armies are represented by round strength markers, in denominations of 1 (infantry illustration) 2 (cavalry man illustration) 4 (artillery) 6 and 8 (artillery piece and cavalry illustrations). There are confusing references to formations in the rules and a single counter may represent a formation or unit, regardless of its strength, while at other times one unit is simply one strength point. I interpret it as the latter although the rules are not entirely clear. The final counter are the naval squadrons. All the counters are double sided: officers show their command ratings and are flipped when not in command so they function as a 1 point unit, army counters have a disrupted side while naval units flip to show they are in port. The counters are well illustrated and those for squadrons in particular look the part. Central to the game, as in For the People, Thirty Years War, Paths to Glory and Wilderness War are the cards, 110 in all. For those unfamiliar with the basics of the system (although there are variations between the games) each card can be played either to represent the effect on the card - such as Rebellion in Ireland - or to give command points - in this case 4. CPs can be used to move military units, start naval battles, build units, by diplomatic influence or regroup units (units which have not been destroyed but are removed from play to return home - such as armies returning from overseas. The events are generally well thought out and allow a variety of options. As usual the higher value cards also have some of the better effects. Using the French Guerre de Course card as an example -do you play it as a 6 pointer to blitz the Austrians or raid British possessions in the Caribbean? In For the People there was some criticism of the events depicted and there will no doubt be further complaints. The naval mutiny at Spithead and the Irish Rebellion had both occurred by 1805, but a repeat of these events did remain a possibility. Further cards represent battlefield actions or tactics - such as a grand redoubt, infantry square or cuirassier charge. All these things featured in many battles but their use in game should be viewed as them being put into operation at a key moment - a decisive cavalry charge or an infantry brigade holding out long enough for reinforcements to arrive. As in real life, the fate of a major power in Napoleonic Wars could hinge on a single decisive act on the battlefield. Combat is the least thought through element of the system, which is quite important in a wargame, but is not bad and the proper application of strategy will generally win. Combat evolves around rolling handfuls of dice (one for each unit, one for each point of your commander's rating etc). Each 6 eliminates a unit while a 5 disorders - preventing a unit participating next round. The side rolling less 5s and 6s retreats, defeat by a margin of three or more equals a rout and half your disordered units are lost. Naval combat is similar and card play in both can be decisive. The 'Massed Batteries' event allows you to fire with four dice before any dice are rolled, while Napoleon can commit the Guard, adding 4 extra dice and undisordering a unit with each four rolled. Commanders are all generally rated one and command up to 4 armies. Napoleon comes in with a rating of 4 and command of 8. Other notables get a 3/6, 2/6 or even 2/4. No doubt many hours will be spent arguing over these, and the pro-Wellington camp have unfairly triumphed over John Moore again, but at the end of the day it is only the name on the counter - call him who you like! Neutrals are influenced by a diplomacy track, and move towards you for an increasing amount (it costs 2 to move a neutral from neutrality to associate but 5 from partner to ally). As a result it cost 13 CPs to get a nation on you side! Alliances with minors are often fragile - but ask Napoleon about his experiences in 1813. Neutral minors - Ottomans, Sweden, Denmark and possibly Spain have their hands played for them until allied and used CPs drawn for construction purposes, unless the card has a red dot and then it is played as an event. Red dot events may be played at the discretion of player powers if drawn into their hand and there is ample opportunity to screw up your allies plans. Austrians think Russia doing to well in Northern Europe? Then a little war with Turkey or Persia may be in order. Wellington going to steal a march and beat the Prussians to Paris - a rebellion in Ireland, War in America or conflicts in the Med should distract him. All of these foreign wars are represented by placing units on the cards, which remain until a 6 is rolled, and can be a considerable drain on resources. In the last game, over half the Royal Navy was engage fighting Algerian pirates, Turks and Americans! Victory is decided by the number of keys (objectives) relative to your starting position. Those of minor allies only count if above or below their original total. Keys also serve to determine hand size - one card being drawn for each pair. It would be wrong to say that the game is perfect. Each turn is 2 years and this can take some getting used to. This also causes some problems with powers surrendering – storm into Vienna with your opening card in 1805 and Austria does not test for surrender until the end of the turn (1807). I rectified this by making a rule that countries test for surrender after each round (i.e. one card play). Combat can also be a little too random, especially at sea, which often results in a mutual exchange of squadrons rather than decisive victory. Occasionally the outcome of an engagement will be unlikely, verging on the preposterous but that said, who in 1812 would have gave Russia a hope in hell’s chance? My major complaint is the rule book, which is not always clear or contradicts the rules summaries, which is unusual for a GMT product. I say if in doubt, use the interpretation that suits your view of the period. Napoleonic Wars therefore is not perfect, but has no serious flaws, and in my opinion is the best strategic game covering the period. Has anybody else played it yet?