Alex Testo has developed a set of rules inspired by the DBx stable of rules, specifically covering the Napoleonic period.
They are well written and presented, with some nice detail. At its heart, the basic game engine is delightfully smooth and so play runs easily off a simple Quick Reference Sheet.
Having read the rules twice, I am left with an impression that most game queries are going to be likely answered in the rules.
One of the important elements that Alex has brought is the concept of attrition. Combat is by opposed die rolls plus modifiers. If you score higher than the enemy then a hit is applied, score double or more and you inflict 2 hits or something more serious!
The first hit is just a hit, two hits make the unit shaken and on the third hit, a unit is removed from play. Units do not get a chance to recover from hits.
I am presently collecting two napoleonic armies, my 28mm French / Austrian and my new project of Epic scale French / Prussian. The former are well established on 80mm bases, the later are on 55mm bases, but the project is so new that now would be the time to change basing without any real disruption.
In wanting to get these rules to the table as soon as possible, I face three initial possibilities on scale and basing;
The rule set prescribes base sizes of 40mm frontage for 15mm and smaller and 60mm for 25 / 28mm. A single musket base is representing something like a brigade.
Firstly I could re-base specifically to the measurements prescribed in the rules.
OR
My Epic can be placed on 55mm frontages. I’m not a big fan of the 55mm infantry strips sitting on the supplied 60mm bases, because you end up with a small gap at the end of the line, that can look a bit odd when placed next to a similar base, so I snip the rounded ends of the strips and attach them to a 55mm base, a nice tight fit.
![]() |
| Click on me! |
For my new Pocket Army project, I have the infantry currently on 35mm deep bases, which allows for 3 ranks. That makes for a musket unit with 3 ranks of 10 men, so 30 heads to the base, which has a nice density to it.
I will refit the cavalry to the same frontage (4 mounted for my dragoons shown above), but wanting 2 ranks (8 mounted) to make them look right next to the infantry, with a little bit of mass about them, they need to go on a 55 x 60 bases.
The artillery can happily could have a frontage of 2 guns with crew on a 55 x 40, though looking at conversions in the rules setting them at 60 deep would be fine.
If I went with this, then in moving from a 40mm to 55mm frontage per unit, I should increase all measurements by a factor of 1.375, so on the measuring ruler, 100 Paces should be raised from 25mm to 35mm. So for example, muskets fire at 200 Paces, so with this change, would fire at 70mm instead of 50mm.
I have asked Alex for a bit of advice on the subject of base size and he has said that the infantry and cavalry should really be on the same depth of base, so I may need to visually enjoy them as per above, but if forced to recoil etc, I might need to ‘imagine’ that the infantry have the same base depth as the cavalry. He also suggested that the 28mm artillery should have a 80 x 80 base placed underneath it, to keep everything true.
OR
If using my 28's, then they could stay on their 80mm bases and a similar process would see a doubling of the basic measurement, with 100 Paces being represented by 50mm instead of 25mm (exactly doubled), so my home made ruler would be marked up in 50mm (2") increments with musket bases as an example, firing at 200 Paces (100mm).
For the basic 12 element game, which in the rulebook uses a 2’ x 2’ battlefield in 15mm on 40mm frontages, I would need to grow the table to a 3’ x 3’ or just slightly less for the Epic and to 4’ x 4’ for the 28’s. In each case, you are really looking at the concept of a Pocket Army playing in a small space, which I like.
Alex describes the 12 element army as a corps sized formation and the rules have scope to increase the number of ‘corps’ used per side to give a bigger game, much like ‘big army DBA’ does.
In this case, the battlefield would widen by 1 foot (300mm) per additional formation (corps). These bigger armies also accommodate multi-player games and can reflect some of the bigger historical multi corps battles. There are videos on Alex’s YouTube channel that have AAR’s on Eylau, Leipzig, Borodino, Ligny and Waterloo as examples.
Anyway, for now, I will do some knock-about games with my 28’s as that gives me fully painted forces, but as a project, I will chip away at the Epic scale as I need something that gets me away from the table where I stand, to the table where I can sit.
Every now and then, something comes along to re-enthuse and I am seeing DBN in that light. There will be more to come on this here, while over at over at the Commanders site I may set up a specific DBN page and put updates there.
Edit - I have made my ruler at 40mm per 100 paces and will try that with both the Epic and the 28's and see whether it works and if not why.
Resources;
My Commanders site is just some extra webspace that I use to do the more snippet based type of posts and project discussion. It is paid for and advert free. LINK
https://commanders.simdif.com/dear_diary.html
The DBN site (for a copy of the rules, go to DOWNLOAD or if you want a hard copy, go to MORE and click on the CONTACT page to make your request) LINK
https://dbnwargaming.weebly.com/
For a video AAR of Quatre Bras LINK




Crikey Norm - that takes me back - I was playing that (v2.1) back in 2020.. gave up after several months as the game just didn't feel right - too many mechanics that didn't seem right.. be good to see your thoughts on them...
ReplyDeleteHi Steve, that's interesting, I plan to use my 28's initially so should get a full game and a full feel, before I do any serious re-basing. I do like the look of things and will post on that journey.
DeleteGood to see these have given you some renewed impetus for your Nappies forces, even though it comes with the seemingly inevitable (these days) basing conundrums. I tried DBA et al, but they just never grabbed me, probably due to the dreadful 'Barkerese' that they were written in!
ReplyDeleteBTW, as you probably know, Blogger is not showing updates on Blog Rolls, Feeds etc, so found this via your Commanders site. I've recieved and email which states the issue has been flagged and is being worked upon...
Hi Steve, thanks, I didn't know that about Blogger, I just thought it had gone very quiet and that it might pick up over the weekend. Blogger seems to choose to collapse whenever there is something I am excited about! At least it seems this particular Blogger problem is being worked on in the background.
ReplyDeleteOn the positive side, it is encouraging me to do shorter posts :-)
I have travelled the DBA route some years ago (I always thought the Barkers was okay ..... but perhaps I didn't read / play them properly ... all very likely :-) ), but I think these are decidedly different with the attrition thing going on, rather than just recoils and elims.
I hope to push the Epic basing in a direction that I can use here and also use see elsewhere if needed.
I've just tried Jon's Feedburner fix which seems to have partially worked, as this post has shown up as being published about 15 minutes ago! A few others too, but still early days and still not sorted by Google by a long stretch.
DeleteHi Steve, thanks for the shout. I have no idea how, because I tried Feedburner and all I got was error stuff (I have explained a process over on Jonathan's comments section). Anyway, I have just relaunched my post using the calendar and followed my own blog and Hey Presto, somewhere in that mix the magic was done! ..... but wait ..... it has not pulled through on some blogs, where the old post is being shown! I am slowly moving towards giving up on Blogger!
DeleteBoth of your latest posts are appearing in my blogroll. Looks like two successes to me.
DeleteHi Jon, a small and confusing success, why does it only show on yours and my blogroll? I am seeing Ben's post in my Blogroll.
DeleteI have just put the 28's up on the table for a first go at DBA and it all looks rather nice, but I am left with no enthusiasm to blog about it or at least spend the time on a post that I usually do. I may do the superficial thing of a few pictures and a bit of text in the spirit of it doesn't matter!
Check to confirm that Steve and Martin's urls are correct in your blogroll gadget. On both, I had to switch from referencing "http" to "https" and that did the trick.
DeleteJon, thanks for taking the time to follow this up. I have gone to 'that place' and a whole load of entries had to be changed to secure, in fact only 5 of the entries were secure. I was really surprised by this because I was certain that I did this job last year on the advice of another blogger when dealing with another of Blogger's problems! anyway, all done now and I have hit the Feedburner again ... so we shall see :-)
DeleteDecisions, decisions, decisions. Wherever you land, you will enjoy seeing your newly based armies out on the table.
ReplyDeleteHi Jon, yes quite right, I have a good feeling about this.
DeleteThis is very interesting Norm, I have looked at DBN in the past but never bought the rules or did anything more than a wee bit of research but I will look forward to seeing how you get on with it. Like the idea of snipping of the rounded edges of the epic and rebasing, they look great.
ReplyDeleteHi Donnie, I'm also surprised how different things look with going to three infantry strips per base. I would not to that with the British, but elsewhere as a visual in a small space, it does shout density.
ReplyDeleteThat looks very interesting, I will see how you get on. My favourite DBA horse and musket variant was the original Horse Foot and Guns (with one base to 6000 men) which suffered a lot less microgeometry than DBx and it's clones. Tbh I don't worry too much about base sizes these days, it is easy enough to scale up/down. Since the blogger feed completely stopped working four days ago I navigated to this directly.
ReplyDeleteHi Martin, thanks for taking the time to track down the post, I hadn't realised that Blogger feed had stopped and just thought it had gone quiet!
ReplyDeleteIt is a long time since I have gamed at these sort of abstract levels, so I am quite taken by something that feels new to explore. I think you will be easier with it than I am, as you frequently game at the higher organisational levels with figures.
LOL yes. I sometimes think I start at army vs army and then see how few manouvre units and figures I can get away with to represent that.
DeleteIt looks interesting Norm. Especially as a way to play larger battles. Although that defeats the pocket army idea 😁
ReplyDeleteThe epic stands look great. Could you just use the 28mm rules and substitute the epic units on the 28mm base sizes? As there is not a lot of difference between 55mm and 60mm base width. Anyway, good luck with it all.
Hi Ben, yep, that is what I have decided to do. I have made a generic ruler based on 40mm per 100 Paces and I will just see how that goes.
ReplyDeleteThe important thing seems to be uniform frontages and for cav and inf to have equal depths.
Hey Norm great looking figures both 1/56 and Epic, tried DBN and they didn’t feel right for me, too much like chess with positioning angles, then realignments and a vanilla combat system GOOD to see they work for you! We are all such different creatures 😁!
ReplyDeleteHi, I haven't rolled dice in anger yet ..... but soon :-)
DeleteIf your doing both sides, as long as your consistent thats all that matters I think and even if this ruleset doesnt work out it sounds like it will make your epic figures look better, so a win anyway! Just did a great Italian wars post you might like?
ReplyDeleteBest Iain
Hi Iain, yes, overlaid on top of everything else, I think it will present the Epic in a way that I want to see them.
ReplyDeleteWill head over to 'Italian Wars Post' - at the moment nothing is showing in my reader, so I will go via your name here.
I am sticking to rule sets I know now and resisting the temptation. I have invested in No Easy Ground as it is an updated Iron Cross that I own and am acquainted with. I have sold on Soldiers of Napoleon along with my Peninsula figures and very tempted to sell CoC2 I just can't be bothered to learn all the new bits.
ReplyDeleteHi Phil, a sentiment that I fully accord with and I am constantly trying to streamline both figure rules and boardgame rules. For napoleonics, I also sold SoN and really have just been pushing my own rules around. I am hoping that DBA, with its 'everything in one book' approach and easy play will be a good resting place for me, rules wise ...... if not, then I will default back to my own set.
ReplyDeleteI was watching a YouTube video about these rules last week. It will be interesting to see how you go with them.
ReplyDeleteHi Peter, I am just working my way through a 2 hour plus video on an 1809 battle, it all helps to embed the rules. If Blogger lets me, I will do a post soon :-)
DeleteIt is funny how DBx seems to be having a revival of interest. I, too, have been looking at DBM and DBA recently. I had forgotten about DBN, but have Volley and Bayonet for the big battles.
ReplyDeleteI look forward with a lot of interest what your conclusions are about the way the rules work.
Hi Richard, one of the things that has been uppermost in my mind when watching the videos is thinking as to how the actual results would be different to other systems that perhaps have more traction. Perhaps, for all the complexity of some rules and the ease of others, results are broadly similar and it is the level of engagement that the player gets from the rules that actually makes the difference.
ReplyDeleteAnd I’ll add that it’s nice to see your new post on the blogroll!
ReplyDeleteHi Michal, thank you and likewise your blog. It has given us a glimpse into a future where Blogger might not always be there for us!
ReplyDeleteGreat stuff Norm - good to see you re enthused! I saw someone else commenting on these rules on another blog recently - maybe they are "The next Big Thing"?!
ReplyDeleteHi Keith, I have just played a game and enjoyed them. They will certainly attract the attention of anyone downsizing playing space and looking for something that has everything in one book.
ReplyDeleteGreat to see this post pop through, Norm! Those Epic strips look cracking ranked up three deep—they really have a great sense of mass on the table.
ReplyDeleteAll the best, Andy
Hi Andy, it certainly allows them visually to operate as a single base without raising the eyebrows too much! I have a delivery of bases due, which will be enough for two armies.
ReplyDeleteHope the assembly and basing go smoothly—looking forward to seeing the forces ranked up on the table!
ReplyDeleteAll the best, Andy
Hi Andy. post has just pushed the bases through the door, so I will get one unit of Dragoons based up today ..... the project moves forwards in little steps :-)
ReplyDeleteBrilliant stuff, Norm! Glad the bases landed in time for the weekend.
ReplyDeleteAll the best, Andy
Even better, I drove up to the Warlord Games shop today and picked up a couple more boxes of Epic and a French limber, I now have enough 'stuff' to get a couple of basic Epic armies to the table ..... mostly unpainted for now.
DeleteSounds like a very successful road trip, Norm! There's absolutely no shame in getting unpainted or partially painted armies onto the table—it's often the best motivation to get the brushes moving on the rest of them.
DeleteGetting them onto the table for a game will definitely give you a great sense of how they look and play, and you can paint them up as you go.
All the best, Andy
Agreed and it helps embed rules or even discover whether you have the right rules.
Delete