Le Feu Sacre by Too Fat Lardies - Reviewer Robert Adams
A few months ago in 2009 I had the opportunity to play the Napolenic game by Too Fat Lardies, Le Feu Sacre. This is a game in which the tables remind me of the old Avalon Hill CRTs in that the game does not assume that the attacker will not take casualties during a fight and bad results can be found on both the high and low end of the chart for the attacker. The game was a replay of a portion of the battle of Aspern-Essling. The game uses PIPS for command points which are required by each general to give orders to their battalions. Each player can easily play a Division including Battalion commanders and Division commanders.
The game uses a card driven system similar to The Sword in the Flame for Initiative. Each general is assigned a specific card and the cards are then shuffled together and drawn. When that general's turn comes up they roll for PIPS (depending on their score as a general) and then they assign the PIPs to move, change formation or fire artillery. In this game there is a skirmish shooting phase but there is no specific firing phase as that is all included in the close combat tables. I personally would have liked to have seen a shooting table and had the weapons given ranges as well like the artillery but this was not included in the game. Since this game we have actually allowed each unit a skirmish shooting phase and it appears to have made the game much more bloody which is how I like it but to each their own.
The game that day was played by the book and included dad, Andy, JJohn, Ben and myself. Dad was the referee and played on behalf of both sides giving each of us hints as to what we could do in the game. Pop had done a marvelous job of setting up the terrain and we were all very excited to begin the game as we looked over the table of Woodland Scenics trees with a mixture of Terrain Guy and Battlefield Scenics terrain. We used a combination of manufacturers 15mm figures. Andy and I played the British and we were defending a large expanse of unfinished wall. I had Wellington and some Scots Guards and Gordon's Highlanders with Uxbridge. He had a Portuguese Division and the Calvary. His job was to sit with his Portuguese backed up by the KGL Battalions and wait for the French to attack. My job was to sit on the other side of the fence and plug the gap. His cavalry were to move into position and help close the gap between the church and my wall sections.
Ben and John played the French with Masseno. They had a massive army. Their job was simple. Take their two 12 lb guns and sit them far enough away from our 10 lbers and bomb the bejesus out of us while moving forward in an attack column and devastate us. They decided they wanted to make a two-pronged attack, however, which made Andy want to try to hold off their left flank while they were attacking me in the center and the right flank. As you will see shortly their dastardly plan worked.
The game lasted a total of five turns. I was able to hold off that long only due to my committing Wellington himself to the battles. In this game there is a CRT which determines who has the higher combat value. That person rolls. There are no opposed rolls. The British failed due to bad die rolling and an overzealous nature of my dad to give the French a bit too many units I think. Specifically artillery. He also gave them some help of attacking me at the weakest areas in my defense which I felt was a bit over kill. There were some rules that I had questioned as well. For instance adding support of a column which were diagonal and not entirely behind or within 2" of the attacking column. I felt a bit cheesed on that because I was holding the wall with Wellington and I felt they did not need the extra support. Regardless it was he who was the judge and his ruling stood and I am of the opinion the same as he as never let a rule get in the way of a good game. The problem becomes though for the person on the other end of that good time to feel that it is being handled fairly. After reading the rules for myself for the third time I begrudgingly agreed with his decision on allowing support of the column which was diagonal behind the attacking column.
Overall the game was a lot of fun but I think I could have held out longer based on John's die rolling alone. In all though this was a learning game and I felt that given what we had both sides played admirably. I and Andy were the only people who had played LFS in the past. Dad did an admirable job of running the game. I had fun and there were no arguments. I really enjoy playing games with these guys.
The Good
1. We were able to hold off three separate attacks by the French with the help of Wellington until the KGL arrived to back us up.
2. We had a defensive position.
3. We had a plan to fall back.
The Bad
1. We didn't follow the plan.
2. The French guns massacred us.
3. We were unable to effectively use our skirmishers.
4. I had a battalion form a square but they were unable to defend the cav charge. I have NEVER heard of a cav beating square that easily before - ever. I felt VERY bad mechanics on that one because it was not like the guys rolled 11 or boxcars. He just rolled OK. IIRC it was a 9. The statement was even made that no one had seen that happen before in the game.
The Ugly
1. A snake eyes roll by yours truly. Result says "Higher CV Routes" This was my B unit attacking too. :(
2. A failed cavalry charge early on.
3. The cavalry that literally ate its way down our line after the KGL failed to form a square.
4. The other British player had as good dice rolls as I did.
That all being said the game was a lot of fun. The scenario probably needs to be tweaked with less French or more Brits and a little better defense for the Brits. I would drop the guns down to only ONE 12 lber for the French and maybe a really small gun for the Brits perhaps even a mortar. In the past many have told me they prefer meeting engagements because they are more 'fair' and have even said that they are more fun. I disagree about meeting engagements being more fun. I find them lackluster but the comment was made that a meeting engagement would probably have been easier to understand and that was probably true. I prefer something with more tactical options though.
Overall my opinion of Le Flu Sacre is good. I enjoy Too Fat Lardies' rules as they add realism to the game without compromising playability (word meaning fun to play) and give a sense of not having absolute control over everyone like robots. The command points system worked very well and I really enjoyed the challenge that comes with only have limited control of my troops. The game played very smoothly and the mechanics were well thought out and flowed very well. Limited discussions were needed to make sense of some of the more simple rules but I think that was more due to the fact that our group expects complicated rules and we somehow feel we have to find the tricks in all games. The game would have scored an A except I would have liked to have seen a shooting phase and a better defensive bonus applied to defenders in works. I highly recommend this game to those of you who enjoy Column Line Square and Napoleons Battles but want something that will be quicker to learn and maybe bring people into the hobby. Overall score of game A-.
-Robert Adams
Available from http://toofatlardies.co.uk
The game uses a card driven system similar to The Sword in the Flame for Initiative. Each general is assigned a specific card and the cards are then shuffled together and drawn. When that general's turn comes up they roll for PIPS (depending on their score as a general) and then they assign the PIPs to move, change formation or fire artillery. In this game there is a skirmish shooting phase but there is no specific firing phase as that is all included in the close combat tables. I personally would have liked to have seen a shooting table and had the weapons given ranges as well like the artillery but this was not included in the game. Since this game we have actually allowed each unit a skirmish shooting phase and it appears to have made the game much more bloody which is how I like it but to each their own.
The game that day was played by the book and included dad, Andy, JJohn, Ben and myself. Dad was the referee and played on behalf of both sides giving each of us hints as to what we could do in the game. Pop had done a marvelous job of setting up the terrain and we were all very excited to begin the game as we looked over the table of Woodland Scenics trees with a mixture of Terrain Guy and Battlefield Scenics terrain. We used a combination of manufacturers 15mm figures. Andy and I played the British and we were defending a large expanse of unfinished wall. I had Wellington and some Scots Guards and Gordon's Highlanders with Uxbridge. He had a Portuguese Division and the Calvary. His job was to sit with his Portuguese backed up by the KGL Battalions and wait for the French to attack. My job was to sit on the other side of the fence and plug the gap. His cavalry were to move into position and help close the gap between the church and my wall sections.
Ben and John played the French with Masseno. They had a massive army. Their job was simple. Take their two 12 lb guns and sit them far enough away from our 10 lbers and bomb the bejesus out of us while moving forward in an attack column and devastate us. They decided they wanted to make a two-pronged attack, however, which made Andy want to try to hold off their left flank while they were attacking me in the center and the right flank. As you will see shortly their dastardly plan worked.
The game lasted a total of five turns. I was able to hold off that long only due to my committing Wellington himself to the battles. In this game there is a CRT which determines who has the higher combat value. That person rolls. There are no opposed rolls. The British failed due to bad die rolling and an overzealous nature of my dad to give the French a bit too many units I think. Specifically artillery. He also gave them some help of attacking me at the weakest areas in my defense which I felt was a bit over kill. There were some rules that I had questioned as well. For instance adding support of a column which were diagonal and not entirely behind or within 2" of the attacking column. I felt a bit cheesed on that because I was holding the wall with Wellington and I felt they did not need the extra support. Regardless it was he who was the judge and his ruling stood and I am of the opinion the same as he as never let a rule get in the way of a good game. The problem becomes though for the person on the other end of that good time to feel that it is being handled fairly. After reading the rules for myself for the third time I begrudgingly agreed with his decision on allowing support of the column which was diagonal behind the attacking column.
Overall the game was a lot of fun but I think I could have held out longer based on John's die rolling alone. In all though this was a learning game and I felt that given what we had both sides played admirably. I and Andy were the only people who had played LFS in the past. Dad did an admirable job of running the game. I had fun and there were no arguments. I really enjoy playing games with these guys.
The Good
1. We were able to hold off three separate attacks by the French with the help of Wellington until the KGL arrived to back us up.
2. We had a defensive position.
3. We had a plan to fall back.
The Bad
1. We didn't follow the plan.
2. The French guns massacred us.
3. We were unable to effectively use our skirmishers.
4. I had a battalion form a square but they were unable to defend the cav charge. I have NEVER heard of a cav beating square that easily before - ever. I felt VERY bad mechanics on that one because it was not like the guys rolled 11 or boxcars. He just rolled OK. IIRC it was a 9. The statement was even made that no one had seen that happen before in the game.
The Ugly
1. A snake eyes roll by yours truly. Result says "Higher CV Routes" This was my B unit attacking too. :(
2. A failed cavalry charge early on.
3. The cavalry that literally ate its way down our line after the KGL failed to form a square.
4. The other British player had as good dice rolls as I did.
That all being said the game was a lot of fun. The scenario probably needs to be tweaked with less French or more Brits and a little better defense for the Brits. I would drop the guns down to only ONE 12 lber for the French and maybe a really small gun for the Brits perhaps even a mortar. In the past many have told me they prefer meeting engagements because they are more 'fair' and have even said that they are more fun. I disagree about meeting engagements being more fun. I find them lackluster but the comment was made that a meeting engagement would probably have been easier to understand and that was probably true. I prefer something with more tactical options though.
Overall my opinion of Le Flu Sacre is good. I enjoy Too Fat Lardies' rules as they add realism to the game without compromising playability (word meaning fun to play) and give a sense of not having absolute control over everyone like robots. The command points system worked very well and I really enjoyed the challenge that comes with only have limited control of my troops. The game played very smoothly and the mechanics were well thought out and flowed very well. Limited discussions were needed to make sense of some of the more simple rules but I think that was more due to the fact that our group expects complicated rules and we somehow feel we have to find the tricks in all games. The game would have scored an A except I would have liked to have seen a shooting phase and a better defensive bonus applied to defenders in works. I highly recommend this game to those of you who enjoy Column Line Square and Napoleons Battles but want something that will be quicker to learn and maybe bring people into the hobby. Overall score of game A-.
-Robert Adams
Available from http://toofatlardies.co.uk
