|
Post by Matt on Jun 20, 2008 20:26:52 GMT
I thought I'd start a new thread rather than hi-jack Terry and Martyns thread. So what did AoE do well and what didn't you like? Martyn how do you think it would compare to Grand Armee? Martyn would you like to try Grand Armee on an all dayer or one weekend at mine?
|
|
|
Post by sapper on Jun 20, 2008 22:13:05 GMT
Matt
I came to AoE from the point of view of having played lots and lots of Fire and Fury in the past. I like it (F&F), it gives a good game and is relatively simple to pick up. I was always a bit wary of the disproportionate impact of the random element in F&F - a d10 gives a big swing and makes melee vey dicey (if you'll forgive the pun!).
AoE retains the basic mechanisms and playability of F&F, but is somewhat more sophisticated. There's the extra dimension provided by a credible cavalry presence for one thing. There is also more differentiation between types of firearm, tactical doctrine for movement and shooting, and types and effectiveness of artillery.
I went with AoE because I want eventually to re-fight Waterloo, so I want a broad brush rule-set. The more units you have on table the less impact there is from wild swings from the random dice roll element. Despite being brigade based, though, you still have different formations open to you and woe betide you if you let cavalry get within 5" of infantry not in square.
Not sure how it compares with Grand Armee, as I've only read through the latter and haven't actually had a game.
More than happy to have a crack at Grand Armee. I have suggested in another thread that Terry might like to try AoE again at the july all-day Sunday. If he's up for that then I'm quite happy to come round yours one weekend as convenient - if he isn't, we could do July all-day Sunday. That''ll give me time to paint up a few more units and perhaps knock up some 3" x 3" bases.
Martyn
|
|
|
Post by sapper on Jun 22, 2008 19:30:02 GMT
Terry
I've found the answer to the 2-rank / 3-rank question. Page 7 of the rule book, stand basing. 2-rank infantry is an exception to the general rule and is allowed to all British/KGL, British-allied Portuguese after 1809 and all British allied in 1815. 2-rank infantry get slightly wider bases; 1 1/8" as oppposed to 3/4" for 3-rank infantry.
Just finished another (5-stand) brigade.
Martyn
Martyn
|
|
|
Post by sapper on Jul 28, 2008 12:51:54 GMT
Terry
Have now got my copy of the Age of Eagles scenario book. looks like I'd have to invest quite heavily in Portuguese for me to be able to do any of the scenarios which include the British.
Martyn
|
|
|
Post by sapper on Jul 28, 2008 12:54:56 GMT
Matt
Do you still want to give Grand Armee a crack ? I'm off on holiday for a week from 9th August (might be back for the club curry at a pinch), but could arrange a weekend day _ Sunday at yours or Saturday at mine... subject to the approval of she who must be obeyed, of course. Late August might be convenient ? What do you reckon ?
Martyn
|
|
|
Post by sapper on Aug 7, 2009 16:01:47 GMT
Alll that talk about 28mm Napoleonics got me thinking...which is rarely a good thing...
Terry, do you fancy pencilling in another Age of Eagles game ? Its months since we last had a bash and I've forgotten almost everthing I learned from that game !
Martyn
|
|
|
Post by terrywarden on Aug 7, 2009 21:40:28 GMT
I was just think the same thing when I read the various messages re Naps so yes I would like to give them another go. Plus I have just finished cleaning up the rest of my WSS 6mm's. I think we are all fairly happy to go with the base sizes as per Baccus its just the thickness that seems to be an issue. I think Graham got a load of plastic card bases cut which looked good.
|
|
|
Post by graham on Aug 9, 2009 9:12:05 GMT
. I think Graham got a load of plastic card bases cut which looked good. Yes I did they are thinner and cheaper than the official ones (which I have some going cheep). The chap works with Martyn (He sell on ebay) and does all my bases AoR, F&F and FOG. also unlike the bases I cut myself these are all the right size and shape.
|
|