Miniature interface (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Campaigns on the Danube 1805 - 1809


MarkT -> Miniature interface (3/10/2004 3:52:51 PM)

How does the miniature interface work? Can some smaller battles be computer solved?
I have over 10,000 minis. waiting to go...

Le Tondu -> RE: Miniature interface (3/10/2004 4:19:53 PM)

I believe that the interface favors "Napoleon's Battles" and other such rule sets that are at the Brigade level. My hope is that someday, it handles both the Brigade level and Battalion or Tactical level.

MarkT -> RE: Miniature interface (3/10/2004 5:39:22 PM)

When I referred to small battles, I did not mean Battalion level. I meant small engaements. a meeting cavalry engagement, for example. Do ALL contacts go to table top.

I do appreciate the need for battalion based system, but isn't that just a conversion issue?
1 Brigade = X batallions?

EricLarsen -> RE: Miniature interface (3/10/2004 5:43:52 PM)

Le Tondu,
If CLGA 1805-1809 were to be dumbed down to reflect the brigade or battalion level it would just be another grand tactical battle game, ho hum. Tiller has flooded the market with Nappy grand tactical games and they don't compare in the slightest to the CLGA divisional scale that allows us to manuever before battle, which was the hallmark of Napoleonic warfare. This game is so much more fun to play than Tiller's Abensberg-Eckmuhl monstrosity. I never tried the "miniature" interface but I would imagine it would allow players to fight some battle outside of the game and then apportion losses according to that battle model. Personally I like the way combat is handled in the game and I don't want to slow down the action of the campaign by spending a lot of time on any particular battle as battles are merely the climax of manuevers by both sides.

MarkT -> RE: Miniature interface (3/10/2004 5:56:47 PM)

I too would enjoy the combat system. It sounds great.
But I have a HUNGRY miniatures crowd that are dieing for the strategic system that this would offer. And I agree about your point of manuveur (sp) being paramount. This would add millions of possibilities to our miniature expierience. After all, how many times do we play Waterloo or Austerlitz in mini and not get board...


Le Tondu -> RE: Miniature interface (3/10/2004 6:51:29 PM)

I think that it all depends from what perspective one looks at things. Using CGLA as a campaign tool to have a miniatures battle from is far from ho-hum. If CGLA also expressed Battalion strengths, then the tactical level miniature rule sets that I have used (Carnage & Glory II, Battles for Empire, and Follow the Eagle VI) would be a perfect fit. I wouldn't call that dumbing down of CGLA. Not at all. I would call it a pleasant enhancement of CGLA.

It is for scenario generation for miniatures that I was thinking about. I too have found CGLA to be very exciting as well. I love the different levels of FOW, expeically Full FOW.

As for Tiller's games, they are great on their humongous maps until the fighting takes place, IMO. They do a REAL good job modelling maneuver. With them I found too many opportunities to do things unhistorically. If I remember correctly, the call for an engine upgrade is universal in that communtiy.

IMO, it should be the other way around. Adding up each of the Battalion strengths gives the Brigade strength. Dividing the Brigade strength by the number of Battalions gives Battalion strengths that would seem be too uniform. After all, some Battalions suffered more casualties than others during a campaign.


MarkT -> RE: Miniature interface (3/10/2004 10:32:21 PM)

Le Tondu,
Ah..., yes I was thinking of pure conversion, from the computer to the table. AFTER the battle is fought, there would be a problem converting back. (or at least extra paperwork to keep track of the various disproportioned loses).
I stand my Napoleonics as per Naps battles, but use a variation of Fire vand Fury for the system. It really is almost home grown. In discussions with the designer of Fire and Fury, we bottled down on the discussion of square formations. (battalions handle that so much better). But, discusion was rather breif, he was a heavily marketing his WWII thing.

I am familiar with Tillers Talonsoft work. (I did some research, tactical Civil War Maps) indirectly for him - unfortunately the project, (expansion of the Bull Run map) was stopped when Tiller left. Or at least they never responded to my inquiries, regarding my maps. or research. But I am not familiar with his new work.

I am very excited about this game, I have been waiting to have a computer controled campaign for a long time.

MarkT -> RE: Miniature interface (3/10/2004 10:39:22 PM)

Where is this sight located? the time of posting says 8:32 its 3:45 (NY)

Le Tondu -> RE: Miniature interface (3/15/2004 2:54:44 AM)

Try this one:

MarkT -> RE: Miniature interface (3/15/2004 9:08:11 PM)

uuuh, no I mean what time zone is the Matrix site in...

I already know about Adanac.



mbatch729 -> RE: Miniature interface (3/15/2004 10:15:49 PM)

I think the time that shows up is based on your user profile. You can set it based on +/- GMT time, based on the time zone you live in. That allows users in different parts of the world to see all the posts in their local time.

Page: [1]

Valid CSS!

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI