Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
2 Posts

Age of Napoleon» Forums » Variants

Subject: Owl's House Rules ver.1.4 rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Pierre Philippe Goyer
Canada
Verdun Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Looking for a Publisher for a Grand Strategic all fronts WW2 card game
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Age of Napoleon
Owl’s House Rules ver.1.4
Dec 13 2005

This game is outstanding. Attractive and strategic. The optional rules in the living rules ver. 1.23 are really a good step toward that goal, thanks to the Designer himself. But our group’s play testing is trying hard to figure that one out. Historically, the Designer R.Verlaque made a good historical game but from a gamer standpoint, diplomacy and lucky draws of the BLUE cards takes the campaigns and the combat away from the gamer. Historically according to Mr.R.Verlaque himself, France should not have been invading Russia, and he may be right. But as a war game, we wanted to be able to choose our path and not let the cards dictate our game. This is personal and we think the game is outstanding. France cannot win a decisive victory by getting more blue cards than the Coalition anymore. Hopefully these few rule changes will make it for you. We know it did it for us.

What we want to change and our goal is:
1- Too much diplomacy luck of the cards and too little to gain with war. Bring the need to do some campaign. Reduce diplomacy strength.
2- Too many cards in hand. Rare are the occasions that our campaigns were halted by to few cards. Also, to come back is very difficult if you have very few cards.
3- Insurrections are hard if not impossible to control in certain country. We will make them easier to handle and the tactic of going out and come back is no more the way out. How do you do that in Russia?
4- Enjoy a possible Russian invasion. Right now, this is not an option. Napoleon can’t win a decisive victory by Diplomacy alone anymore.

To give you an example: at the beginning, if Russia is allowed to help Austria and France can’t turn Russia into a neutral, Austria will mostly escape surrender and depending on what cards France picks at the start, not withstanding a bad roll of the die at Austerlitz, the game will be totally different. To make things worse, Prussia goes into the Coalition on the next turn because there are 2 more cards that benefit the Coalition then the French. OK, so after 10 minutes and all the set-up time, we know where the game is heading…we saw many games that one side had 2 Diplomacy cards during the first 2 turns as the other side had none. Guess who won? There must be a solution to this…to keep that wonderful game on my shelf. We want to keep the possibility to recreate History but also to rewrite it.
You want to put your efforts in Diplomacy instead of your war machine. Ok, but you can’t have everything…your situation is helpless and battle on the field will not be the solution, invest in Diplomacy. But nothing is sure; battle rolls maybe bad and Diplomacy cards may not be the right move for you.

The Rules:

This concerns only the 1805 Scenario, as this is the real Game for us. Other scenarios were not play tested.
---- Living Rules ver. 1.23.
---- Some optional rules of the 1805 scenario are mandatory:
a) 17.3 (5): Each player can only play one diplomatic card against any ONE major country per Diplomacy phase.
b) 17.4: Losses
c) 17.5: Major French Allies
d) 17.6: Russian Invasion Corps
---- Some optional rules of the 1805 scenario should not be used:
a) 17.3 (6): Player in the lead.
b) 17.2: Yield or Fight.
c) 17.7: Insurrection (instead use our rule no.3 below)
---- All other optional rules in the 1805 scenario files can be added or not.

Plus these simple new rules:

1- Playing cards:
a) In the initial set-up: There will be 2 decks of cards; Separate the 7 blue Diplomacy cards from the regular deck. This will be the Diplomacy deck, (English gold is still out at the start and will be added to this Diplomacy deck) and the rest of the cards constitute the Strategic Deck (the second insurrection card will be added to this Strategic deck).

b) Reshuffle when there are less than 18 cards in the Strategic deck. You reshuffle the Diplomacy deck at the beginning of every Strategy phase.

c) Players now calculate their allowable number of cards that they can draw. Maximum is 9 cards.
France picks is 4, Britain is 3. The rest is unchanged.

d) Their FIRST pick may be drawn from EITHER deck. Don’t look at this card.

e) However, if a player wants another Diplomacy card, he can draw only ONE other:
-Reducing by 3 his number of cards he can pick from the Strategic deck IF he is the leader.
-Reducing by 2 his number of cards he can pick from the Strategic deck IF he is not the leader.

f) Players complete their hand with picks from the Strategic deck ONLY.

g) The leader is the player who was entitled to draw the most cards during this strategic phase NOT considering the maximum allowable. If tied, the cost is 3 picks for both players.

h) You may only APPLY ONE card to any ONE Major country during the Diplomacy phase. (Already in the living rules). In effect, you can use a second card for Minor countries or to nullify a card from the other player that targets a major country. So, if you have 2 cards that target a Major country, you can nullify a card from the other player and apply your second card to that major or any another major country, as finally, you just APPLIED ONE card. You could not apply your two cards even to two different major countries.

i) You can only use your Napoleonica cards on the Strategic discard deck.

j) When you discard a Diplomacy card, and you may use it like any other card if not used during the Diplomacy phase, you discard it in the Diplomacy discard.

k) Starting hands are 6 Strategic cards and 1 Diplomacy card.


2- Russia cannot diplomatically become a French Ally without being first an occupied neutral country after surrender. Thus, to win a decisive victory by having a controlled Russia, France has to accomplish a Russian campaign and force it to surrender. He may then use diplomacy to bring it as an Ally or can be a victim of an insurrection, which he will need to deal with it to declare Russia a Dominion and regain control. A successful insurrection will leave Russia immune to French diplomacy. A marginal victory is still possible without a Russian campaign.

3- Any insurgent country reverts to French dominion alignment if the French player occupies the Capital and has eliminated all insurrection (not friendly) forces in that country at the beginning of the insurrection phase (no home corps left in its areas). Once a country has been an insurgent country, the French player can force it to surrender in the surrender phase only by these requirements. You do not need to occupy all areas.

4- An army that withdraws before battle is now subject to a forced march every time it does so. Being spent, it would then lose some movement point and may not be able or be limited to withdraw on the next round of battle.

These rules are also in the File section.
Please comments are welcome…

Owll
goyerf@sympatico.ca








 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Towerwood
Belgium
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
----
A comment for those among you that are browsing through the AoN pages of BGG just to get an idea of the game. You may get the feeling from all those posts commenting on the diplomacy aspect of AoN, that the original game is somehow terribly flawed, and needs to be amended in order to be enjoyable. No so! I would like to emphasize, as Owl also already did, that the game as it comes out of the box is an excellent game. If we disliked it, we wouldn't play it so much and we wouldn't give it so much attention to make it even better...
----


owll wrote:

2- Too many cards in hand. Rare are the occasions that our campaigns were halted by to few cards.


Really? I have quite the opposite feeling...


owll wrote:

d) Their FIRST pick may be drawn from EITHER deck. Don’t look at this card.
e) However, if a player wants another Diplomacy card, he can draw only ONE other:
-Reducing by 3 his number of cards he can pick from the Strategic deck IF he is the leader.
-Reducing by 2 his number of cards he can pick from the Strategic deck IF he is not the leader.
f) Players complete their hand with picks from the Strategic deck ONLY.


I like the fact that every year you have to face a dilemma: either military actions or diplomatic actions. I have 4 comments/questions though:

1. To what extend is diplomatic luck really reduced? After all, it still depends on what you draw from the Diplomatic deck. In fact, couldn't the example you mentioned above still happen with this system?

2. Aren't diplo-actions becoming more boring because they're now so predictable? If your opponent draws two diplocards, you know what he'll try in the diplomacy phase...

3. Won't there be the tendency of players to always draw the same number of diplocards as their opponent, in the hope that they can counter-act any diplo-attempt of the opponent?

4. Aren't there typically more diplomatic realignments in a game than with the original rules? With the original rules, I have rather often the feeling that some countries swing between sides, an aspect which I'm not fond of. Does it improve with your house rules?




owll wrote:

2- Thus, to win a decisive victory by having a controlled Russia, France has to accomplish a Russian campaign and force it to surrender.


Something I've always wanted to ask: how often do you reach a decisive victory with and without this rule? I am curious because I have to admit that I find obtaining a decisive victory very challenging. I'm usually already happy when I obtain a marginal victory. So, personally I don't see any reason to make it even more difficult...


owll wrote:

3- Any insurgent country reverts to French dominion alignment if the French player occupies the Capital and has eliminated all insurrection (not friendly) forces in that country


What do you think about the suggestion of Renaud? That is: insurrection fails if half of the areas are occupied by enemy corps, including the capital area. I think Renaud's rule promotes being offensive. E.g. coalition forces must attack to prevent France holding half of the Austrian areas. With your suggestion I could imagine a situation where the last surviving Austrian corps flees to the most remote area of Austria, and is there defended by allied Russian forces. This single remaining Austrian corps would then prevent that France succesfully beats down an insurrection.


owll wrote:

4- An army that withdraws before battle is now subject to a forced march every time it does so. Being spent, it would then lose some movement point and may not be able or be limited to withdraw on the next round of battle.



Doesn't this benefit more the leading player than the player behind?
Well, I guess it shortens the game quite a bit


Thanks for sharing your AoN variant!
Z.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.