That's an excellent idea for the counters. It would avoid checking the rosters, though we generally use rosters in most games to avoid "table clutter" or too many tokens floating around. And General d'Armee already has a fair amount of table clutter with all the various status tokens.

Oh Basement 1908! I'm a fan of yours! I love your d'Armee Videos! The Dropfleet and Infamy stuff is killer too.

A most excellent (and popular) suggestion. We will make this happen!

Another great way to get into these games at less expense is to start smaller than a corps level game. Start with a small division and work your way up to larger games as you add units over time. That will give you time to learn the rules, be easier on your budget and give you some time to paint the new units. The game works perfectly well with a division on each side.

Glad you enjoyed it!

Absolutely, totally agreed. Commands and Colors is a great gateway game!

It is hard to believe that "the best Nap rules ever written" only scored an 81 and an 84 out of 100 possible points in this review.

They are popular in the club here, no question.

We have played a lot of Blucher and we like it!

Thanks, Bill!

We've played Pickett's Charge here in the club several times over the years (not as much as General d'Armee though) and YES, there will absolutely be more ACW in the future on the channel. It's one of our favorite periods to play!

@@LittleWarsTV Could’t agree more. The ACW is such a fun period to game. I personally have it as my favorite followed closely by the War of the Roses. I like the historical almost even odds. The CSA being outnumbered but have the superiority in fighting spirit and leaders early in the war.

The 28mm AWI figure review is the only one we've done so far, but there have been plenty of requests for more!

They are extremely different. Blucher is a true "army level" game where a single base is an entire brigade. The mechanics are totally different, too, but the intended scale of the games is not the same. General d'Armee--despite the title--has the basic maneuver unit as a battalion, which makes it better suited for a corps-sized action. We had to rescale the game for Austerlitz to make it work.

@@LittleWarsTV Thanks!

Yes, there’s a series of long, in depth play videos available with the author involved. They are very good, though a “quick start” guide under 30 minutes would be nice!

Try Empire Campaign System if you can find it. But its very detailed

The rules do seem like a lot of steps and I struggled with the first play through - by the second game it clicked and really moves smoothly. We hardly use the QRS except for the combat resolution tables.

@@milesreidy7864 As I sai9d, deserves a try in person with an experienced player. I''ll have to see if there are any GdA games at Historicon that I can sandwich in between the five that I will be running there (pandemic fingers crossed!) The *eight hour* youtube play through seemed more than I'd ever want to tackle as well (and I have written quite a few playthroughs myself for my blog).

Take a look as the Lardie's videos teaching the game, it becomes clear when you see them in action.

I think the rules are more suited for 6mm as I've seen a number of 15mm and 28mm for playing two divisions and looks too much but with 6mm I've played corps level with so much room on flanks that I still feel I need more units.

Worst rule set ever

@@rickybell2190 ......worst?! Really??? How come?

@@paschalisantoniou974 here is just one example of how badly it's written. This is question that was asked about the rules. If a force enters a hex adjacent to one occupied by the enemy, the latter may fall back one hex, if desired by their CinC for no TP cost." but if my force enters a hex adjacent to two hex occupied by the enemy, all two enemy can fallback? AND if they doesn't fall back and a battle begin, the rules say that "The battle takes place in the hex occupied by the force which has been attacked and the war games table represents this square", but if there are two hex, which is hex selected and who decided the hex the attacker? This is the answer they got back. The attacker (the defender can reinforce the attacked force with the un-attacked force though) Confused?? I know I was.

The optional rules introduce Brigadier Quality. Excellent brigadiers can reroll a bad command roll, while poor brigadiers require an extra ADC for any tasking. Sounds like a solution to your hesitant roll issues.

@@EltjoVerweij no, it is not. Jim was talking about difference in troops quality and moral but not command quality.

@@EltjoVerweij I have read through those, and they might help some. Dave appears to have crafted the hesitant rule around the effectiveness of the brigade command structure, rather than the condition of the troops themselves. I understand it completely - it’s just frustrating when my French guard brigade keeps going hesitant, while the Dutch militia march circles around them!!!🤣😂

I agree with you. I cannot understand this notorious concept of “friction of war” when we roll a dice to activate fresh ready for battle units at the beginning of a battle. What a hell friction can it be?

@@levsharus5899 I think what game authors are tying to convey with “friction” rules is that commanders don’t have absolute control over their troops at all times. They may not move as far as you would like (or not at all), they may lose cohesion, and so on. Again , I have no problem with that, to a point. I agree with you, and would prefer “friction” to come into play after troops are in contact (or at least close proximity to) the enemy. Dave alludes in his rules to something about an ADC getting lost or stopping by the local tavern as part of the hesitant roll. But, I would submit that a runner from a crack brigade would be less likely to get waylaid than one from a disorganized mob of conscripts - hence the modified die roll. But, it’s hard to do much modification to a single d6, especially when a 3-6 is a success.

NB 2.0 is still a very good game (maneuver elements are brigades in NB, and battalions in G D'A). Don't worry about what is in and out of fashion. If you like NB 2.0, then there is no reason not to play it. Also, you can use miniatures based for NB with General D' Armee; so there is no rebasing required in order for you to be able to use both sets of rules with your NB based figures!

Yes.

Too ponderous for a true newbie. Others in the club may disagree, but I'd consider this an excellent game for more experienced Napoleonic players and one that would bewilder a new player

From the rules: :The game does not use a distinct figure scale..." Ground scale "very approximately" 1mm = 1 yard.

Haha whatever those English pounds are, you know? We talk in dollars on this side of the pond!

Yep, it’s called ‘Pickett’s Charge.’ It was published before GdA, very similar just a slight difference in the sequence of play.

@@samb2052 Pickett's Charge was actually published before GDA. And it is somewhat easier to play because it does not have the same skirmisher rules.

Yes, we have! The Warlord plastics are really nice, it's just a shame they made them in a new scale that doesn't match anything already existing. We have 10mm and 15mm armies (and 6mm and 28mm) but the new Warlords are about 13mm so I don't think we'll be collecting them. But for new players who don't already own other scales, the price is good for what you get. This game could certainly work with the Warlord bases, though you will need a fair number of them given the unit sizes in General d'Armee. A smaller GdA scenario would be totally viable.

Tom is a busy man, no doubt. He always has better places to be.

Tom was likely disappointed in who he was stuck with as a review co-host (who wouldn't be). Tom has very high standards that few of us mortals can meet. I suspect Tom's agent received a very stern talking to after filming the episode.

It’s actually often pretty difficult to find a balanced expression when filming conversations like this. Personally I find the review great and hope to see more from Miles and Tom.

@@janm.johansen9806 Calling it a great review means you would score the review as an "81" (just like the "great" game [General D' Armee] that was given an 81 in the review).

It was at the cleaners!

You may not be familiar with how our weighted scoring works out, but scores in the 80s are top marks for us. We have a 4 year history of scores at this point and you’ll find very few games with a score that high

@@LittleWarsTV Yes, but a superb, great, wonderful, fabulous, favorite game should be one of the very few with a score that high (meaning in the 90s). Either that, or the reviewers should use language to describe the game that matches the scores that they give; for instance if they give a 7 in presentation or support, you should say it is "average" in presentation or support; if they give it an 8 in mechanics and historical flavor, they should say it is good (and not great, superb, etc.). You don't get to the end of the review with an 81 (which should be a solid "good" score on a 1-10 scale), and then describe the game as "great" see: 13:47 (great should be a 90, and a 'great' rules set should receive an "A" grade). I am not going to "rush out today and get" a "good" rules set. see: 14:03. I am going to rush out today to get a "great" rules set. If you never give out 10s, then you should explain that and let us know that these games are really being rated on a 1-9 scale. That would make an 84 a much higher score than if rated on a 1-10 scale. I offer these suggestions to help your channel give a better service to the viewers and produce better reviews. If you chose not to take well intentioned advice to improve your channel, and instead continue to justify why what you are doing by pointing to your '4 year history' and why it makes sense, then, like many historians, you are doomed to repeat your mistakes of the past.

@@LittleWarsTV Also interesting to note that this beautifully presented, full color rulebook, gets a 7 and an 8 for presentation, and Altar of Freedom (produced by Greg of little wars TV) gets a 7 & 9 for a black and white "home-made" looking rules set. See: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/rp2YgLyK3Ly4e6c.html at 1:55

We consider ourselves charter members of the Free Range Spelling Movement and refuse to be subjugated by the dictatorship of spelling convention. Long Live Free Range Speling! Viva Phonetics!

@@milesreidy7864 ok … This means war ! Total war !

Easy if you have a French AZERTY keyboard, or QUERTY keyboard adapted for the French language, but if you have a standard English language QUERTY keyboard, perhaps it is impossible to include accents when typing French words (I certainly don't know how to with my standard QUERTY keyboard).

@@danielherbera7522 HA!

@@DH.2016 I was talking about the title of the book. No big deal at all for a youtube video, of course. What is strange is that it is spelled correctly inside the book (I purchased the pdf after seeing this review) so why is it spelled incorrectly on the cover is a bit of a mystery …

We replied to same comment this on another video, but in short, we never received shipping info or which of the three medals you wanted in the spring when we put out the fulfillment call. Happy to fulfill it for you after the fact, though.

Thanks for sharing the System 7 link!

Another who remembers System 7! Excellent. I have fond memories of running a giant 1812 campaign using those rules thirty-mumble years ago. Good to hear that the counters still see daylight from time to time : -)

I still have my System 7 rules and counters as well.

@@AndrewBrew I don't know how I missed your comment. I'm in Northeastern Ohio. I don't suppose you're anywhere close. : )🙂

@@captainnolan5062 I'm working on a modular terrain system for System 7 that is based on the Avalon Hill "Squad Leader" boards. How do you handle terrain? I'm in Northeastern Ohio. I don't suppose you're anywhere close. 🙂