Has anyone ever put on a battalion level game of Leipzig?

[jazbo]

I remember playing the early versions of ebb and Flow of battle at Peter heaths club in Norwich, god back in the late eighties in guessing.

Looked awesome, rules didn't work really, predictable outcomes made it more an exercise is simulation.

[Jemima Fawr]

Looked awesome, rules didn't work really, predictable outcomes made it more an exercise is simulation.

Yes, that was my experience as well. 

[Forwardmarchstudio]

For you who actually played Ebb and Flow of Battle, was command at all randomized?  Or was the entire game dice-less? I'm guessing that this game doesn't exist in print?

[Jemima Fawr]

It was entirely diceless.  I've still got my copies somewhere, so I'll try to find them.  There were several editions, with each being a self-contained campaign, including all the orbats.

[wrgmr1]

Our group has put on Wagram below, Borodino, Eylau, Austerlitz, Ligny and Waterloo using Shako 2 rules. Wagram was on a 36' table with just under 7000 25/28mm miniatures.
We have talked about Leipzig, but would have to do it by each day. Probably also in sections.

[Forwardmarchstudio]

Is Shako 2 the one that lets you use divisions or battalions at the maneuver element?   Or was that Shako 1?

[SteveBurt]

Shako I had a 'large battle' variant where the units were divisions (and your skirmish rating depended on your frontage).
It gave a pretty good game, but for some reason they took it out of the v2 rules (along with the Seven Years War variant which was also part of v1).
They also made it easier to rally, which I don't think improved the game either. I think the only thing which was better was the divisional/army morale.
The Quatre Bras scenario is also good.
Shako is one set of rules where I think version 1 is better than version 2.

[wrgmr1]

In our large games we use divisions as a maneuver element. We included every battalion and cavalry regiment in our games. Artillery batteries are reduced by 3 to 1, for game purposes.

Actually I prefer Shako 2 as the rules were cleaned up and some rules changed for better flow.

[Forwardmarchstudio]

To be clear, I'm going to show all the battalions, regiments and batteries in my big battle games.  In three rather short sittings I've completed almost 230 French battalions already, and I only need another 100 for all the battalions at Leipzig.  I have about 50 or so regiments of cavalry, and 50 batteries- I  need about 24 or 25 batteries.  Then on to the Allies.  But I digress.

This project is really about the visual appeal; the game needs to be fast and sort of simple to run well (since there will be upwards of a thousand units on the maps, and a lot of players pushing them around with croupier's sticks).  So, although the units might be moved around individually, the combat resolution is going to have to be abstract. 

I have an idea for quickly resolving large level division combats in a game of the scale I'm thinking about.  The first idea is that the turn is one hour.  Each division represents a "power pool," from which each turn (an hour) the player can deploy a certain number of "power points" for an attack.  Each battalion model represents a certain number of power points.  The division commander can choose what percentage of his unit to attack with and risk each turn (alternatively, he may be constrained by a dice roll of the maximum amount of units he may risk, as determined by conditions and psychological factors of the commander).  Attacking is done by scooting the chosen battalions forward towards the enemy position to be attacked.  The combat is resolved, and either the position is taken, the attackers route back to their parent division, or the combat bogs down into a stalemate (that can be easily broken by whichever side is quickest at hurrying in reserves).  This is all designed to be rather loose on the table, and t require no exact measuring, which won't be feasible in a game this big if anything is going to be accomplished.