Review: Napoleon 1807

 

The French commander contemplates his next action.

Charles S. Roberts Best Napoleonic Era Board Wargame 2020 Nominee

Last year I reviewed Denis Sauvage’s Napoléon 1806: La Campagne de Prusse (Shakos, 2017), French wargame publisher Shakos’ first entry in their Conquerors series (you can read what I had to say about that one here). Two more additions to the series have been published so far – Napoléon 1807: La Campagne de Pologne (Shakos, 2020), and Napoléon 1815: Waterloo (Shakos, 2022), with persistent rumours of a new addition in the wings which I won’t mention here by name for fear of jinxing it and delaying the release even more. 

I enjoyed Napoleon 1806 so much I went out and bought 1807 without too much thought. While this could have gone badly, it didn’t. Napoleon 1807 not only lives up the promise of its predecessor, but manages to deliver, to my mind, an even better play experience just a little extra complication in a couple of ways, which I will recount through the course of this review; for now, I’ll say cryptically that there is not only more game, but more play, and deeper strategic concerns.

The twelve-inch square box can be a little awkward for storage, but height-wise it's
comparable to foolscap-sized games from Hexasim or Nuts! Publications. 

I bought the last copy of Napoléon 1815 that Hexasim had in stock when Shakos posted it was out of print. (Yes, Hexasim is a game publisher, but they also run a virtual store-front from their website for dozens of European and many North American publishers, as well as their own games.) I believe – at time of writing – game is happily back in print. I haven’t spent enough time with that one yet for a review, but maybe this time next year.

Note: if you’ve read my review of Napoléon 1806, there will inevitably be some redundancy between that and this post – they’re equally please games to look at and to play. Check out the pictures and scoot ahead to the Play and Appraisal of the game.

Appearance

Napoléon 1806 set a high bar for presentation – it was certainly one of the big selling points for me engaging with a new, untried system. The mounted gameboard was artfully rendered to have the appearance of an unfolded ordinance map from the period (this conceit has been kept with the two subsequent Conquerors releases), beautifully illustrated with cities and towns, roads, and bridges. The cards were printed on good quality cardstock, as were the army boards and shields, and the wooden cubes and little drums were remarkably uniform. The whole package worked well together.

Napoléon 1807 is very much cut from the same cloth; it retains all of the solid aspects of the first game’s design and presentation but increases the scope and depth of play. The 1807 mounted board is two whole panels larger than the 1806 board, putting it at 24” by 36”, so slightly larger than a standard poster-sized map-sheet.

Elbing, having been retaken by L'Estocq, falls again to Soult corps. Will Hielsburg
be next? The red pawn marks the turns, while the white block indicates
the scenario length; in this case a battle of just four turns.

The other increase in Napoléon 1807 is the number of army boards. There’s one more board included, but these are now double-sided. This means a slightly different army composition; each scenario dictates whether the two armies use the Friedland, Pultusk, or Eylau boards.

Each side’s army board – with its accompanying shield – allows the player to keep track of each unit’s strength and exhaustion levels without revealing this information to his opponent. depending on which scenario you are playing. The strength and composition of each corps is represented by cubes in two colours, one representing the infantry and the other the attached cavalry (if available – some formations are all infantry).

The Winter Quarters cards are a new innovation. If the rule is in effect, the first troop
losses (cubes) on each are placed on the side's Winter Quarters card. When it holds
five cubes the card is put into the discard pile. When drawn again, the Winter Quarters
card is placed again on the board. When the second card has been drawn from that
player's deck and returned to the board, the game is over at the end of that turn.

From the map-board to the illustrations on the cards, everything in Napoléon 1807 works to immerse the player in the era of the conflict. Of course, this is true of all the Conquerors series games. The series artist, Nicolas Treill manages to create a coherent look and sensibility through this game and the other titles. M. Treil has lent his pen to the upcoming Napoléon 1870 (Shakos, ~2026), covering the Franco-Prussian War of that year. The early glimpses of this game, which should be coming to crowdfunding before the end of the year, indicate an adherence to the style of presentation consistent with its predecessors.

Play

Like its predecessor, Napoléon 1807 is a block game, and each block represents a corps of troops made up of infantry, cavalry, or more often a mix of the two, under the command the general or marshal who appears in name and effigy on the counter, The corps is represented only by its commander, rather than by its numbered designation. This may rankle with some hard-core (hard-corps?) Napoleonic enthusiasts, leaving out a measure of historical detail, but at this scale it would be an extra information that isn’t pivotal to play. Personally, I don’t have a problem with it.

Like its predecessor, Napoleon 1807 is a block game, and each block represents a corps of troops made up of infantry, cavalry, or more often a mix of the two, under the command the general or marshal who appears in name and portrait on the counter, the corps is represented only by its commander, rather than by its numbered designation. This may rankle with some hard-core (hard-corps?) Napoleonic enthusiasts for leaving out a measure of historical detail, but at this scale it isn’t pivotal to play. Personally, I don’t have a problem with it. At the corps level there is always going to be some measure of abstraction, and I think in this regard the nuances of strength and command quality within the two armies are handled well here.

Some blocks will also incorporate icons that serve as a reminder of a particular leader’s special qualities (such as gaining an extra movement point or drawing an additional card in battle). The identity of the general is hidden from the opponent; the reverse of every block (once stickered) shows the French or Russian eagle crest. Unlike other block games, where the block is rotated to represent depleting strength from engagements, the strength of each corps is tracked on a separate board listing each of the corps commanders in a column with two tracks running off each. The top row marks out the corps strength (one colour for infantry, another for cavalry), while the lower row – empty at the start – tracks the corps’ the accrued fatigue. A corps can be removed from the game in two ways, either having their strength reduced to zero or by letting their fatigue run to the maximum. There are ways to reduce a unit’s fatigue, which I’ll come back to, but it’s not always possible.

The Eylau campaign board for the French forces. Blue block represent infantry, yellow
for cavalry. Not everyone gets cavalry, which can be a problem if forced to retreat.
The overall number of blocks dictate how many cards are drawn in combat; two for
five or more blocks, but just one for for or less. The heavy dotted line down the
centre of the display is a helpful reminder.

Unlike other block games, where the block is rotated to represent depleting strength from engagements, the strength of each corps is tracked on a separate board listing each of the corps commanders in a column with two tracks running off each. The top row marks out the corps strength (one colour for infantry, another for cavalry), while the lower row – empty at the start – tracks the corps’ the accrued fatigue. A corps can be removed from the game in two ways, either having their strength reduced to zero or by letting their fatigue run to the maximum. There are ways to reduce a unit’s fatigue, which I’ll come back to, but it’s not always possible. The off-board tracking adds a further element of fog of war; you can never be absolutely sure of an opponent’s unit’s strength until they are finally taken out of the game, either by receiving enough hits to destroy their cohesion, or simply garnering maximum exhaustion from repeated movement, combat and retreats.

The game systems of Napoléon 1807 are a duplicate of those found in Napoléon 1806 and should be essentially the same through further additions to the series (the little time I have spent with Napoléon 1815: Waterloo, would seem to bear this out). Napoléon 1807 is an operational game set in a more challenging operational situation than its predecessor. With the larger board, there is sometimes more terrain to cover, more options for approach or retreat. One of the added complexities is that depending on the scenario, some cities may begin under siege, represented by a yellow explosion marker. The fortress or oppidum markers are also newly introduced to the game. These represent the garrisoned towns under siege. The familiar wooden Flags from Napoléon 1806 mark the target citadels. Like in 1806, the key to victory is gaining Victory Points enough to reach your side’s end of the pendulum score track (handily located on the map board) for a sudden death victory, or to finish the last turn with the marker further toward your end than the opponent’s. Napoléon 1807 also introduces a small set of white discs that, depending on the scenario, will be placed roughly in the middle of the VP track. If the game ends with the score token upon one of these spaces, neither side can claim victory.

Sample cards. This actually happened to be a particularly bad battle draw for Marshal Soult 
in one game. The box at the bottom left indicates the cost to the opponent's forces in a fight
(in this case, no blows landed). If the Rain card was drawn in the player's Draw phase, it
would be placed on the board as a reminder that all movement cost one extra point for
that turn, and that card would not be replenished. If the Care card was in the player's
hand at the Recovery phase, he would be able to use it to either replenish one Infantry
cube loss (maybe stragglers catching up to the main force) as per the card's Action, or
to remove two Fatigue markers from a formation of his choice (but not both things).

This is an unashamedly card-driven game (CGD), even more than many others that fall under that heading. Each side has its own card deck, tuned to that side’s strengths and weaknesses, and in a turn these are used to determine Initiative, adjust the weather and other random effects during the draw phase, dictate the available movement points to a formation after movement intent is declared, apply a positive function to one’s units, or a negative effect to an opposing force, as set out in the terms of the card’s event, to resolve the effects of combat between the belligerents, or to relieve the exhaustion of a failing unit in the at the end of a turn.

Each card has an Operation Points value at the top right, a coloured title banner which dictates when a card can (or must) be played, a paragraph of text conveying the card’s Event, and two sections at the bottom of the card, the left indicating the damage dealt if it is drawn as a Combat card (the coloured squares indicating Strength hits, the orange circles the number of Fatigue points applied among the enemy units, and the right, the number of Fatigue points  removed form a chosen unit if the card is played from the player’s hand in the Recovery phase at the end of a turn.

Each turn (roughly a fortnight in game terms) runs through four phases; Draw, initiative, Operations and Recovery. In the Draw phase, the players each draw three cards into their hand. If a Red bannered card, such as Rain or Snow, is drawn, its effects are immediately applied (this will usually affect the weather, but can have other adverse effects as well). If multiple weather cards are drawn, only the first is applied.

The Flag or Pennant markers represent each side's Citadels (key, victory point-yielding
cities) for the given scenario. Player's earn points by hitting their opponents forces and
taking their Citadels away from them. Points are accrued on the tally as earned, so it's
possible to achieve a points victory (reaching your end of the pendulum track)
mid-game, though I've never seen it happen.

To establish Initiative for the turn, the players simultaneously reveal the next card from their deck. The higher Operations value wins the draw; with ties, the Initiative goes to the French.

In the Operations phase, the players take turns – starting with the player holding the initiative – attempting to move their forces on the board. These can be moved individually, or in groups, so long as they originate from the same location and are kept together (no shedding units in transit). Moving units must stop if they reach a location with another unit present, friend or foe. If a unit moves more than three locations in a single turn, it will take a fatigue point for each location above the third. If two corps move together, the first point is spent on coordinating the advance, then the units may move as many points as are left. Three units moving in unison will cost the first two movement points before anyone actually get going. You get the idea.

Movement will sometimes lead to combat. Combat is not initiated simply by moving into an enemy-held location. If it is declared on arrival, the defender get’s an extra card drawn in their defence (defenders also draw an extra card when defending a Citadel or in Woods terrain). The winner of a battle is whoever commits the greater carnage on the other, and the loser is forced to retreat. If the victor still retains any cavalry, they may attempt to pursue the retreating force.

Some people apparently don’t like using the card-deck for combat, presumably because it offers a sense of more control over one’s destiny. Special dice are included in the game, that can be used in preference to the card draw. The faces feature Hit and Fatigue symbols in the same proportions as appear in the deck, so the French have a slightly better chance of hitting on a given roll. Where you would draw a given number of cards, you instead roll that number of dice and accept that fate. Personally, I prefer to use the cards in the way the maker intended.

After movement or combat, the unit or units involved are meant to be inverted. In play, I’ve found it easier to lay the blocks face down to indicate their activated status, but that can get hairy with three or four corps present in the same location. When all movement and combat has been executed for the turn, or when the players have consecutively passed on their turn, the Operations phase is over. In the Recovery phase, any formations that weren’t activated may clear all of their Fatigue, and cards may be played on the activated corps to remove however many points of Fatigue the card indicates. After this, if a unit still holds more than four Fatigue points, it loses a Strength point. While it’s a relatively simple game and very playable, Napoléon 1807 captures all the brutality and attritional cost to armies campaigning in a Polish winter.

"You should have seen the other guy." The parlous state of the Prussian forces after a
close-run victory against Napoleon's best.

The emphasis in both games is on manoeuvre and lines of supply, and it’s in the simplicity of the rules governing these areas are where the Conquerors system excels.  Napoléon 1806 is a cat-and-mouse game, where Prussians are doing their best to delay the French progress with inferior numbers, and protecting his citadels, all the while running down the clock. Meanwhile the French commander is doing his best to get his troops moving forward, force his opponent into costly engagements, and keep his supply corridor open. It’s a fine game and quite replayable, but it does turn to variations on a theme. I would maintain it’s still the best game for learning the system, and I still enjoy playing it; 1806 is my go-to when time is a factor.

In Napoléon 1807 you’re simultaneously playing against your opponent, the turn track, and the intemperate conditions of a Polish winter. Weather conditions will often take a harsher toll on your troops that contact with the enemy, if the rain or snow, or worse, a muddy thaw, allow you to make that contact. It’s this triple-threat a player’s well-laid plans that makes Napoléon 1807 so compelling a situation, whether a short, four-turn battle scenario or the entire historical campaign. Everything outside of clear or overcast will bring more fatigue on your troops. As in the earlier game, spending a turn doing nothing will clear all of a unit’s accrued exhaustion, but it comes at the expense of a turn it could have otherwise been pursuing the enemy or seizing a prize location. These decisions are even more crucial in a shorter game. The tighter duration rewards bold actions but punishes foolish ones.

To share the burden, the French also have real estate to protect in the Polish campaign. It’s difficult to cut a formation’s supply paths, but not impossible.

An early push to bottle up Napoleon's forces around Warsaw, his logistical hub. The
Cavalry unit visible in the top left of the picture is a Vedette unit. These units have no
value in combat and they cannot stop opposing units in their progress, as Cavalry
units can in Worthington's Blue and Gray series. They simply add to the fog of
war, making weak formations look stronger. Scenario instructions will dictate
how many each side has at the start of a game.

Appraisal

Napoléon 1807 is a worthy successor to Napoléon 1806. I’ve really enjoyed 1806. I’ve played over a dozen times and nearly all the games came to tense, nail-biting conclusions. Success in combat won’t necessarily guarantee overall victory, and the game rewards good overall strategy.

The Conquerors system elegantly captures many of the factors to be considered at the operational level in an overland campaign like adverse weather, distance, limited communications and the fog and friction of the battlefield, without getting bogged down with mechanical miniate, and all conveyed in a two- or three-hour timeframe.

This was the Prussian response to Soult's lacklustre attack pictured earlier. One unit
block casualty (the blue square with a cross through it) and three fatigue points. 

While the system remains unchanged, Napoléon 1807 offers a broader experience with even greater replayability. The board is roughly 40% larger in its play or manoeuvre area, though this can be a curse as much as a blessing, sometimes increasing the distances formations need to travel just to remain relevant to the game. It comes with a dozen scenarios, compared to the three (if you count the variation of the short three-turn scenario featured in the quick-start rules brochure), plus a campaign game to incorporate the first game into the second. There are more adverse weather conditions potentially at play, as well as a swarth of new playable events for both sides.

With the placement of the formation cubes and the Leader blocks on the board, the set-up time in any game in the Conquerors series is unavoidably on the long side; I started off allowing a full half hour from removing the lid, just to be on the safe side, but with practice I’ve managed to get it down closer to about fifteen minutes. To be fair, I have thick, clumsy fingers and struggle sometimes with the little wooden components in their rows on the Order of Battle boards, which probably add a little to the set-up time generally. I’ve started using tweezers for placing the Fatigue drums between the rows of Strength cubes during play.

For some people, the fact of being a block game will be enough to put some off. These are not games that can easily be played solitaire, so I can appreciate the apprehension from that quarter; this series will not translate well to solo play. I would encourage anyone with a buddy who is willing to try something new to take a run at Napoléon 1807,or any of the Conquerors series. For me, it ticks a lot of boxes for playability, teachability, the pace of play, and the buckets of tense, frustrating fun it brings to the table.