geek
Rules | Subscriptions | Bookmarks | Search | Account | Moderators
Recommend
33
13 Posts
Subject: The Triumph!
New Thread | Printer Friendly | Subscribe  | Bookmark
Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Napoleon's Triumph » Forums » Reviews
The Triumph!
NOTE: This is my first review, so if it's crap, forgive me...

For as long as I can remember I've been fascinated by war. Not the death and destruction part, or even the fame and glory part. I'm fascinated by the science of war. The step-by-step procedures used in the application of military force. Strategy and Tactics. I believe Napoleon's Triumph is masterful in its ability to portray these aspects of war. This is truly a game of grand strategy and cunning tactics!

Command and Control
Units are typically deployed in a corps, a form of tactical column. Orders are issued mainly to each corps, but can be issued to individual units if the need arises. To simulate the difficulties of commanding large numbers of men in formation each corps may only be issued a single order each turn (hour). Each side is also restricted to a small number of independent orders per turn to simulate the even greater difficulty of commanding units out of formation. A corps may be issued one of three different commands; individual units are restricted to a single command. This disparity in the command structure perfectly simulates the increased tactical flexibility of units in formation. As the battle progresses and formations break down the scarcity of orders helps simulate the loss of force cohesion. Napoleon's Triumph's command and control system is unique and subtle in its ability to portray the complexity of commanding tens of thousands of men.

Logistics
Communication and supplies, two of the most important aspects of war. For the most part communication in Napoleon's Triumph is handled very well by the command system. The only non-command aspect of communication is the "line of communication" that must be maintained if an army is trying to achieve a territorial victory. Supplies in the form of ammunition and the like are not officially mentioned, but I like to think of it as a "line of communication and supply" instead. Supplies in the form of manpower are modeled by the individual unit blocks. Each block has symbols representing unit type and combat effectiveness (strength) printed on them. As units engage in combat they are reduced in strength making them less effective. Elite units are thus more likely to see multiple engagements and are able to last longer in a fight. When units are rendered combat ineffective they are removed from the field, leaving you with less and less little blocks. The abstract nature of the unit strength system is a fabulous way to model the differences in combat effectiveness between elite guard infantry and conscripts, or fresh units and those that have seen heavy combat.

Tactics
Every good general knows the use of proper tactics is the key to victory. Flanking maneuvers, artillery bombardments, and prepared positions are the name of this game. While the combat resolution system seems daunting at first, it becomes intuitive after a few plays. The system's ability to represent tactical maneuvering by battalion-sized forces is flawless. The various locals and approaches are laid out in an incredibly logical fashion. So much so, that after only a few plays you can accurately "guess" as to what penalties an approach will have with little more than a glance. Use of proper forces when maneuvering and attacking takes some time to learn, but it's worth it. Believe me, Napoleon's Triumph rewards the use of shrewd and cunning tactics!

Strategy
The strategic options available to either side are almost limitless. A corps can be assigned almost any combination of units, allowing for greater strategic flexibility. The inclusion of multiple and variable victory conditions opens up the possibility for more strategic options. The inclusion of the two-day scenario allows for even more options. Deciding on a plan of action is a daunting task in Napoleon's Triumph, deciding how to execute that plan even more so. However, this is what makes this game shine. The sheer magnitude of possibilities boggles my mind. Of course, no good plan survives first contact with the enemy, so ability and willingness to modify one's strategy is a must. Napoleon's Triumph is truly and superbly a game of grand strategy!

For anyone as interested in the science of warfare as I am, you can't beat this game. It's beautiful to look at and stunning to watch as the battle unfolds. I really feel like a general deciding the fate of thousands when I play. I can imagine sitting in front of a map (that looks exactly like the board) across from Napoleon. Trying different strategies in preparation for the battle to come...
Barry Kendall
flag
Game Designer
Well said. I believe Bowen Simmons' system marks a quantum shift in wargame design. I'm frankly surprised that it has yet to be directly imitated as I believe it has tremendous potential to depict musket-and-mass-era battles far beyond the Napoleonic Wars.

The system would be outstanding for modeling Chancellorsville, for example, without artificial mechanics.

I am eagerly looking forward to Bowen's next announced subject/title while exploring the depths of NT and still enjoying Bonaparte at Marengo. My hopes, in order: Waterloo; Ligny; Eylau; Friedland.
Andrew Carlstrom
flag
Avatar
06070809
I too hope that Simmons takes the next games into the American Civil War.
I agree. I think Bowen's system has unlimited potential. Once you get over the initial learning hump it becomes quick and intuitive. I can imagine my shelves FULL of famous battles by Simmon's Games. Can't wait for the next one!

PS - Thanks for all the thumbs!!!
greg myers
flag
Game Designer
Game Publisher
NT is truely a fascinating game; the shear physical beauty of it is worth the purchase. Throw on top of that the clever game mechanics and design and, in my opinion, this one is a masterpiece. That being said though, I'm not sure I would agree with the system representing a "quantum" leap in game design. Whether the design is a step forward, oblique, or sideways has yet to be seen. I for one hope that it is forward and more games are produced following this concept. Like most new game designs, the evolution becomes a little muddy, as one concept is expanded, improved, and applied to a different situation, battle or scenario. The combat system of NT (and BaM) is strikingly similar to that of "Squares - The Civil War Battle Game" (Deer Valley Game Company), which has been around for over 12 years, albeit "Squares" represents an abstract Civil War battle. That doesn't take anything away from NT/BaM, nor imply any question on it's lineage. Simply an observation that game design evolves from many different sources; sometimes independently arriving at similar ideas, sometimes borrowing and improving.
Was George Orwell an optimist?
flag
Avatar
0506070809
greg60 wrote:
The combat system of NT (and BaM) is strikingly similar to that of "Squares - The Civil War Battle Game" (Deer Valley Game Company), which has been around for over 12 years, albeit "Squares" represents an abstract Civil War battle.


I don't know anything about Squares, but I wouldn't say that the combat systems of NT and BaM are "strikingly similar". What struck me, as an experienced BaM player learning NT, was how different the combat systems are in games that at first glance seem so similar.
Quote:
What struck me, as an experienced BaM player learning NT, was how different the combat systems are in games that at first glance seem so similar.


Yea, me too, and I never played BaM. I was all excited to read the BaM strategy articles thinking they would give me insights on how to play NT. Um, not so much. Maneuver Attack or Assault Attack? Can't be on the approach if something... All approaches have an infantry penalty???

NT and BaM might look real similar, but they definately don't use the same system. The system specifically used in NT seems to me, to be a perfect symbiosis of abstraction and simple mechanics. I think NT's system is wonderfully suited to being adapted for different battles.
Was George Orwell an optimist?
flag
Avatar
0506070809
greg60 wrote:
The combat system of NT (and BaM) is strikingly similar to that of "Squares - The Civil War Battle Game" (Deer Valley Game Company), which has been around for over 12 years, albeit "Squares" represents an abstract Civil War battle.


I said earlier that I didn't know anything about Squares: The Civil War Battle Game. After looking it up I see it was designed by G. Myers, and published by Deer Valley Games, who are in Mesa, Arizona.

Your profile says you are Greg Myers, from Mesa Arizona. That's what my old mentor Curly would call a coinkydink. You are the designer, right?
greg myers
flag
Game Designer
Game Publisher
a coinkydink! Sounds scary. Yes, I am the designer. Wasn't trying to hide that fact. I was struck by the combat system involved in both games (BaM and NT) being non-random, and being a give and take battle of wills between attacker and defender. Attacker announces attack, defender exercises option to retreat or stand, standing results in casualties to both sides. Obviously, Simmons games take things a few steps further and deeper and apply the system to an actual historical situation (BRAVO!).
John Riddles
flag
Great review, especially for a first-timer! thumbsup

Okay, I'm convinced. I have to get this game.
Jason Hayes
flag
Me too. Ordered my copy today, should be here on Thursday. :)
Rob Rob
flag
Avatar
040506070809
greg60 wrote:
NT is truely a fascinating game; the shear physical beauty of it is worth the purchase.


Impressive I'm sure but judging by the pictures posted here on BGG the board is awfully washed out. Is that just glare or is there a reason (expense?) the publishers didn't use a more interesting palette? The homemade user boards posted on the BGG for the earlier game (BaM) are much nicer, I can't imagine the cost would have been that much greater. Perhaps there will be a reprint?
Last edited on 2008-11-27 13:43:41 CST (Total Number of Edits: 1)
Bowen Simmons
flag
Game Designer
Avatar
05060708
Robrob wrote:
greg60 wrote:
NT is truely a fascinating game; the shear physical beauty of it is worth the purchase.


Impressive I'm sure but judging by the pictures posted here on BGG the board is awfully washed out. Is that just glare or is there a reason (expense?) the publishers didn't use a more interesting palette? The homemade user boards posted on the BGG for the earlier game (BaM) are much nicer, I can't imagine the cost would have been that much greater. Perhaps there will be a reprint?


Photographs in general are iffy in reproducing color; photographs reproduced on computer displays are even more iffy. If you are particular about color tones, you should try to see the board in person. In general for the board I intentionally use a light palette. Doing so gives the strong red and blue of the game pieces visual pop, which I think makes for a nice effect. I can of course make no guarantee as to how well it will appeal to your own taste in these things.
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
BoardGameGeek and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.