In the beginning, (well, 1971) <PERSON> created Napoleon at Waterloo. And he saw that it was good. So he gave it away. All a gamer had to do was ask, “Me too, if you please, Sir” and he was instantly handed his very own copy of Napoleon at Waterloo. Hosannahs and Hallelujahs were shouted from the mountaintops (Okay, third story dorm rooms). And lo, before long, NaW began to beget. It didn’t matter if a game was Napoleonic, Civil War, WWII or even Modern, many could still trace their lineage back to <PERSON> at Waterloo.
But later there were lamentations over the mechanics of NaW and much wailing and gnashing of teeth. Once proud owners of NaW now sneered and spoke derisively of it and all of the games it had spawned.
Few games can claim the impact of Napoleon at Waterloo on the wargame hobby. Probably the most famous of NaW’s spin-offs was 1976’s Napoleon's Last Battles. Designed by SPI staffer <PERSON>, this quad game on the Waterloo campaign quickly became famous in its own right. Before long, it too was begetting. Mr. <PERSON> soon after left SPI and formed his own company, OSG. Today, 38 years after NLB first appeared, Mr. <PERSON> has embarked on the monumental task of designing 70 battle games using a chromed-up version of NLB.
How influential was Napoleon’s Last Battles? Looking at what I now own and have owned, I count 14 Napoleonic games derived from NLB. I doubt if that is all. A young man named <PERSON> once played the Wagram game in the Napoleon at War: Four Battlesquad and said he wanted something more. What he wanted was a NLB type game. So in 1992 he published Napoleon on the Danubewith his newly formed company, New England Simulations. A gorgeous game, it was all that any NLB enthusiast could want. <PERSON> wrote an excellent review:http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/768249/delightful-summer.... 92
Three years later in 1995, Mr. <PERSON> designed his second Napoleonic game, The Battle for Dresden, 1813.
Since 1975, my favorite and most studied historical periods have been Napoleonic and American Civil War. It’s no coincidence that it was also in 1975 that I discovered SPI and could actually buy games on these two periods. But even with the many games SPI offered, some battles still got short shrift and Dresden is one of those battles.
Not as famous as Austerlitz, Dresden was also a lop-sided affair not easy to simulate and have a balanced game. The situation: Just when the Allied leaders had wisely decided not to attack Dresden because they realized that <PERSON> was now present and in command, three cannons were fired; the signal to start the attack. So the unintended battle was inexorably set into motion. In the course of a two day battle, <PERSON> inflicted a major defeat on the lumbering Allied army and sent it reeling.
The 1813 campaign has always been a favorite but few games cover the four major battles. <PERSON> and <PERSON> are both under-simulated. Napoleon at Leipzig (Fifth Edition)is a NLB game now in its 5th edition. The first <PERSON> game was a NLB derivative from 1978 by <PERSON> titled Dresden 1813; published by Historical Games, a British company. That game is best known for its beautiful period-style map. The following year in 1979, S&T published Napoleon's Art of War: Eylau & Dresdenwhich contained a <PERSON> folio game. Today, we have a Victory Point game and Clash of Arms is working on a La Bataille Dresden game.
Of all the numerous iterations of the NLB system, NES's is my favorite. Why?
First, let’s examine what some gamers generally lament about the NLB system. Some of the reasons are locking ZOC’s, mandatory combat and the push-shove nature of the combat caused by the archaic CRT.
But with the two NES games I get my subject plus a game system I’m completely happy with. Now let’s examine why. Firstly, the locking ZOC’s. If moving into a ZOC a unit must stop. But a unit that begins its movement phase in an enemy ZOC may exit the hex by paying one movement point for every enemy unit exerting a ZOC. The exiting unit then checks for possible disruption.
Disruption? Yep, units now can disrupt. A disrupted unit has no ZOC and need not be attacked. 92