"Getting off the Napoleonic Game Merry go Round"

[@markayres8014]

One of your earlier videos inspired me to get the PC version on Steam. This video makes me want a copy of the physical game. Always enjoy your informative videos.

[@XLEGION1]

I purchased the 'Steam' version too and love it. It's making me a better player with the physical game.

[@josephcade6425]

Ahhh, Empires in Arms, I agree with you - it needs to be a multiplayer game. Luckily our group managed to get the right amount of players so all powers were human played. It took us once a week sessions for close to a year - 9 months to play it. What a blast though! Sadly we could never do it again.....

[@66morningview]

"They used a lot of European names...... which I found disturbing" That for providing me with some laughs, that's my favourite quote I have heard for a while. Informative video as always, thanks.

[@XLEGION1]

Perhaps it would have been more correct to say that many of the place names were in a foreign language. That is, NOT English.

[@Nick_R_]

I don't understand what is disturbing about European places having European names...​@@XLEGION1

[@virtualpender]

Gilbert, it is always a treat anytime you post. Always insightful and entertaining. Thanks for taking time to produce these videos. They are appreciated. Stay warm!

[@Scout1134]

Inspiration for me to get the game to the table and learn the rules! I am a WWII and Cold War gamer, but I live in Portugal and have studied the Peninsular War and have walked a few of the battlefields. Time is my challenge!

[@jeffreymiller9438]

The White Dog Games Solitaire design: N: The Napoleonic Wars looks intriguing.

[@kencusick6311]

EIA was my favorite game. Was in a gaming club that played it every year. But absorbs ungodly amounts of time. Always wanted to like War and Peace (only tried the original) but just couldn’t get into it.

[@XLEGION1]

I hear ya, but I was almost the exact opposite. Many people that played and reviewed "Empires in Arms" said that 'it was a great gaming experience' and yet, many also said, 'that they would never do it again'. We once played a 'Terrible Swift Sword' game on a Labour Day weekend back in 1976. I loved it too, but I don't I would ever do it again.

[@kencusick6311]

@@XLEGION1 I remember back in High School when you visited SPI Publications (you stepped out of an old freight elevator right into the office) they had the map of TSS taped to the wall. It seemed so enormous and intimidating, with so many pieces, no one dared buy it.

[@johnsakelaris7]

Note my comment on this video from two days ago. With playing time being an obvious issue with the campaign game of Empires in Arms, why not enjoy its far more realistic scenarios? And only two players are needed for those scenarios!

[@kencusick6311]

@@johnsakelaris7 The scenarios helped learn the tactical nuances but the real fun was in the diplomacy and grand strategy. For that you really needed 6 or 7. Maybe 5.

[@XLEGION1]

@@johnsakelaris7 Hey John, I no longer own 'Empires in Arms'. I didn't care for the board and counters anyway. One of the best covers that I have ever seen for a Napoleonic game though. It would be worth it to keep it for the artwork, but I never did. "War and Peace" - new edition seems to be my favourite of late.

[@e-4airman124]

thank you again for your thoughts!

[@williamstewart4620]

Thank you for the great overview of some of the milestones in strategic games about the Napoleonic Wars. War and Pieces! I had copies of the original Avalon Hill War and Peace but didn't appreciate the game at the time. As you mentioned, the 2020 version is very expensive and difficult to obtain. Hopefully a reprint is in the not too distant future.

[@XLEGION1]

Well, as I said I kept buying and selling the original from Avalon Hill. It's just that the production values were so bad on that edition. It was nightmare to sort the counters, especially the you were looking for say a 'swiss' counter that looked exactly like the hundreds of French counters that you had. To get all of the pieces into the box they had to be in bags and it was still stuffed. This version is much better, I just wish they had published more copies of it. It is one of the most 'rare' but practically new games around.

[@nathanlandrum8629]

When I first got into wargaming a few years ago, I was introduced to War and Peace by a Napoleonic historian and fell in love with the game. I have tried Pitt's War and do like it for what it does, particularly the big picture view of the entire period 1792-1815. Just wish it was in a boxed version rather than the magazine format.

[@XLEGION1]

I tried "Pitt's War" and "Coalition" and passed on both of them. Too too simple and abstract. I think Coalition had maybe 3 or 4 French counters on the board. Army level, just wasn't enough there.

[@richardklug822]

Thanks for sharing your assessment of the titles from your collection. While I collect and play age of sail naval games, the only land-based Napoleonic boardgame I've owned is AH's ancient "Waterloo". I much enjoyed Talonsoft's animated computer simulations of the Borodino and Waterloo campaigns, but sadly haven't played those since my Windows 95 computer died.

[@allenatkins2263]

Some games get better as I have grown older. It's not nostalgia as much as new appreciation.

[@strelnikoff1632]

I recently picked up nations in arms and looking forward to playing. I'll take a look at your review (maybe after playing so doesn't influence my view😊) Good video Gil

[@XLEGION1]

I loved the look of that game and in many ways it is similar to 'War and Peace'. I think if you stick with it, you will probably like it.

[@strelnikoff1632]

@@XLEGION1 thanks!

[@HulaViking]

Campaign of Nations? Wanted to mention I just got War and Peace on Steam. I am getting too lazy to sort counters and deal with bookkeeping in a cardboard game. But hopefully the computer version is faithful to the board version.

[@biffstrong1079]

Empires in Arms was the last Napoleonic Game I bought. There were just two of us and we couldn't make it work. Still have it. But hugely frustrating.

[@glenndrover5914]

Check out Victory & Glory: Napoleon. The entire Napoleonic Wars in 90 minutes. Card Driven. Very fun with a great feel for the period.

[@ardwulfslair]

I have (or did have) a bunch of these and feel like I'm on a similar journey. Now that the game table is in place, getting Nations in Arms played is a goal for 2024. It's gonna be a project, but the rules rewrite will help a lot. War and Peace is, of course, a classic, but in my judgment the grand campaign doesn't hold together. But the scenarios are great.

[@XLEGION1]

I agree with you there. I think the campaign for W&P is a bit shaky. Maybe the alternative of stringing the scenarios is the way to go, but I haven't tried that either. The only thing that bothers me about "Nations in Arms" is the physical size and the thinness of the counters. Why they would design a board that doesn't even fit 'width wise' on an Ikea table is beyond me. The other thing is, that this particular designer has done the Napoleonic Strategic game 4 different times and have tried the all. I don't own any of them now. What does that tell you? I'm assuming you mean 'Nations in Arms' and not "Empires in Arms"?

[@VoyagesIntoImagination]

@@XLEGION1I do, but Empires in Arms is also not exactly a standard size. I feel like every one of the Stanislas Thomas designs has some of the ingredients of a masterpiece, and none of them quite stick the landing. One wonders whether this is still something he's working on.

[@thebiglagovski139]

Thank you 👏🏼❤️

[@2000spqr]

Mr, Collins what about "The thin red line?" I have that game that represents the Waterloo battle however I am having a hard time finding any comments or ratings on this game.,

[@XLEGION1]

Well, quite frankly I thought "Thin Red Line" was a terrible game. They made one using a similar system for 'Gettysburg' and it was just crap. This video survey was about strategic games covering the entire war, not battles or campaigns.

[@2000spqr]

ty for your comment I myself have not tried to learn or play TRL but it is good to have opinion for it. ty! @@XLEGION1

[@prebeles]

could you provide a link to the parts boxes you are using?

[@XLEGION1]

I wish I could because I cannot find these trays again. I purchased them at a local store called 'Solutions'. They import all kinds of products but you are never guaranteed of seeing them again. There is nothing on the packaging that indicates the manufacturer.

[@prebeles]

Thanks. I will keep looking!

[@kennethnied5242]

Gilbert, where did you get your half-size counter trays?

[@warrenbruhn5888]

Looked at both "Nations in Arms" and "War and Peace" (newer version) and just don't want to pay collector prices for these out of print wargames. Have 3 copies of "Empires in Arms" and 1 copy of the old "War and Peace" (intending to use for the parts). The multi-player experience is what I like, and I'm not interested in solo wargaming or even two-player wargaming. So "Empires in Arms" is more of a draw for me. But if there was a new less expensive printing of "War and Peace" I would buy a copy.

[@johnsakelaris7]

Must say you are wrong about Empires in Arms. It actually CAN be played with two players using the two-player scenarios that are in the rulebook. There are five scenarios there and they are really good as historical simulations and as exciting games. Sadly, most players of Empires in Arms have instead focused on the strange campaign game, something that requires seven reliable players (good luck on that), a playing time that is untenable for almost everyone, and, based on what I have read on BGG, a fanbase that revels in outcomes that are laughable in historical terms.

[@XLEGION1]

I am wrong on that point, since I don’t own the game anymore. I has no way of verifying that fact. However, in the end we both arrived at similar conclusions. Who plays it anymore? I don’t see any traffic on the game anymore, (that’s no surprise given its age). But even if I owned a copy today, I wouldn’t be keeping it.

[@johnsakelaris7]

@@XLEGION1 Ah yes, it indeed is a little sad to like a game that much pf the hobby does not play much these days. Still, my playing of Empires in Arms scenarios and outguessing my opponent in some battle chit decisions have given me some of the happiest moments of my gaming life. I hope to get back to some of those scenarios after my current playing of GMT's The US Civil War.

[@hankczinaski915]

Why is it always the French that insist to keep the french names in their export titles? ;) Like they can't accept the fact that their language is not the "international standard".

[@flaviusbelisarius3240]

I wish you. had spent more time discussing the individual games, showing what they looked like, rather than just the covers and telling us you didn't like it. I know it is a short video and I'm not expecting deep discussion but simple things like this game was area movement or point to point, etc.

[@holysmoke8439]

I guess its cause im American but Napoleonics n 100 yrs war seem very boring.. unlike the crusades. .romans 'revolutionary n civil wars