Commands & Colors: Napoleonics

[PanzersEast]

This has been on my to buy list for a long while, however I was wanting to know who has played it and any feedback on the comparison to the other interactions in the series.


PE

[GJK]

I'd be interested to hear some opinions from guys here as well.  I have CC:A with the Spartan's expansion because I thought that my son might get in to it but every time that we talk about setting it up, we just don't get around to it.

I did sit in for a few turns of a CC:N game played between a couple of guys from my local gaming group.  Seemed to be a simple game- it operates just like Memoir '44 from what I could tell.  The difference was with the units....every class or type has their own capabilities so they roll different dice or hit on different dice results or some can move and attack while others can only do either/or.  Basically, until you become comfortable with the different unit types (which also vary depending on nationality) then you'll be constantly looking at the chart to see who can do what but I think that the game would be a great "lite" wargame once you were comfortable with what all it has to offer.

[Jack Nastyface]

One of the other differences, IIRC, is that as a formation gets reduced, so does its number of attacked dice.  This is considerably different than in CC:A where a reduced unit continues to attack at full strength.
There are a couple of things I don't like about CC.  One is scenario balance.  I have played a few games of CC:A which were very heavily weighted in favor of one side (perhaps historically so) and the battle collapse into a one-side beat-down.  Perhaps this would've been acceptable if the rules allowed for variable victory counter conditions (side A must win 12, side b must win 8, etc).  Another thing I am not crazy about is the double "chance-iness" of both card draws and dice rolls.  I am happy to deal with ONE set of random battle determiners (dice OR cards) but it can be a little bit too much when both come into play.  Last game of CC:A I played, one side was severely ham-strung by poor card draws; compound this with some crappy dice rolls, and the game was pretty much "over" in 4 turns.  Of course, if you are looking for a good beer-and-pretzels (both gluten free for me, please) it still is a fun game with moderately more complexity than Memoir or Battlecry.

One thing I think CC:N does better than CC:A is that the scenario maps are more varied.  Perhaps it is just fate/luck, but most of the games of CC:A I have played are open space affairs.  CC:N scenarios provide more terrain features, which can certainly influence tactical decisions.

[Nefaro]

I'd be interested to hear some opinions from guys here as well.  I have CC:A with the Spartan's expansion because I thought that my son might get in to it but every time that we talk about setting it up, we just don't get around to it.

If I magicked up all the extra time & inclination to do them, I'd be tempted to buy some Roman and Carthaginian minis for Command & Colors: Ancients.   Maybe 15mm?

I think it's biggest problem is the unit artwork and the blocks it's on.  The artwork just plain sucks and I don't like wood blocks as game pieces.  Would be much more enticing with painted minis. 

[ArizonaTank]

I have the entire set of CC:N and CC:A.  Needless to say I like the series.  The rules are pretty easily grasped, and the games play pretty fast.  So a great game when you don't have much time, your brain is fried after a long day at work, or you want to teach a wargaming newbie.  CC:N are not the most realistic Nappy games out there, but they certainly do have somewhat of the feel of the era IMHO.  Plenty of scenarios, and a flexible terrain system mean you can play almost any battle.  The games also introduce some national characteristics such as the Austrians having very large infantry units, as they did historically.  The only guy I know who really doesn't like the system, is an MMP OCS jedi, who won't usually touch a game that has less than a 40 page rule book; he hates that CC:N moves are constrained by cards.  CC:N is kind of like a card driven version of Hold the Line..the better general historically has more cards, and therefore more options.  If you like CDGs, the game system works very well.

[Cyrano]

I've got every game in the CC series except that set in Japan...this includes Westeros (a cousin of sorts), a whole lot of Battlelore, and Battle Cry...not to mention almost enough Memoir '44 to do a three-map D-Day Landings battle.

So, with that in mind, CC:N's appeal to you will depend entirely on what you want from it.  I'm into Napoleonics (and that in a big way)  for the sweep of it.  Huge battlefields, covered in, at a minimum, nicely-done chits, that evoke the era of shakos, sabers, and hussar curls.  On this level, I've always felt CC:N fails.  Here particularly the scale fudges that Richard Borg makes bite him and make the small battlefields feel nearly claustrophobic at times.  The epic version will help a bit, but, absent a deeper board -- a la Breakthrough -- I don't know as the problem will truly be solved...and it's my understanding that the board will not be deeper.

Despite this, I really do enjoy the game for what it is -- a simple, introductory wargame with Napoleonicish pieces.  There are nice little bits of chrome that differentiate it from the other games in the series -- forming square costs command cards, fire effectiveness is reduced as blocks are removed, and those who are nationality fetishists are given full fan service but in relatively unobtrusive ways.  Moreover, like its cousins, both sides of a battle are playable in an evening which is something to recommend just about any decent boardgame.

Then, play it like Glenn Drover does: http://glennstropicalgames.blogspot.com/2014/07/leipzig-at-historicon.html and we are talking a game.  Played in the Historicon Leipzig game and, like it says on the tin, we finished a BIG, BIG, BIG battle in less than four hours, to a conclusion that made sense to the participants.  Speaks volumes of the system.

Best,

Jim
"Cyrano"
:/7)

[Nefaro]

I've got every game in the CC series except that set in Japan...this includes Westeros (a cousin of sorts), a whole lot of Battlelore, and Battle Cry...not to mention almost enough Memoir '44 to do a three-map D-Day Landings battle.

I have really considered getting the Sengoku one from Zvezda.  The Samurai and Ashigaru minis would look great.  For the same reason, they would sit around for a long time until I finished assembling and painting them.  :-\

[GroggyGrognard]

I echo the previous posts' feedback about C&C:N. I have the core game and all of the expansions with the exception of #1: The Spanish Armies. The game is a good resemblance to Napoleonic warfare on an abstracted wargame design level. Once you learn the system you can easily play a few scenarios in one evening. A friend of mine and I played the 'Waterloo' scenario 6 times in one evening, splitting the wins 3 each for the French and British. A lot of fun. Highly recommended!

Groggy