No chance of a Napoleonic Field of Glory

Slitherine’s latest video briefing contains both heartening and disheartening news. Although Field of Glory 2 won’t be getting any more DLCs (“We’re actually thinking that FoG2 is kinda… finished”), the Crusader Kings-style meta game the Epsomites have in the works promises to keep FoG2: Medieval fresh and sought after for years to come.

While AGEOD tackle the development of Field of Glory: Kingdoms, FoGfather Richard Bodley Scott is working on another project “in the Field of Glory realm” that Slith aren’t ready to unveil just yet. Could that project be the Napoleonic spin-off that some series fans hanker for? It seems not. Somewhat surprisingly, Marketing Director Marco Minoli rules out a Nineteenth Century FoG on the grounds the theme simply isn’t popular enough – “You’ve got a lot of people interested in Napoleonics, but there are not enough to justify the development of a game.”

Eight years ago, Marco was much more enthusiastic about Bonapartian diversions. Talking to Pocket Gamer in 2015 he stressed the importance of innovation in game publishing and pointed out that “Slitherine released five Napoleonic games this year to mark the anniversary of the battle of Waterloo, which means for the first time ever WWII is not our best-selling game”.

One wonders what has occurred since that interview to alter his view. Hopefully, March to Glory’s and Victory and Glory: Napoleon‘s sales figures weren’t factors.

Judging from my 2018 review, MtG’s prospects were scuppered by serious mechanical flaws not setting. I enjoyed VGN much more, but low-profile, board game-like, and lacking a Coalition play option, it was never going to be a smash hit.

To this digital wargamer, Matrix/Slitherine’s new-found coolness towards Brown Besses and bearskins, Grognards and Grande Batteries, makes little sense. Chart-toppers like Total War: Napoleon, Imperial Glory, and Cossacks prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that punters will flock to 19th Century battlefields when designs are strong. A wargame specialist such as Matrix/Slitherine effectively turning its back on one of military history’s most colourful and fascinating chapters, isn’t something I had on my 2023 bingo card.


  1. War and Peace, the digital version of the old Avalon Hill classic, is coming out in early access on August 24 on Steam. About half the scenarios currently have AI, and the Grand Campaign has no AI, but with rules enforcement it still makes a good single player experience. All the scenarios will eventually have AI by next year. So will the Grand Campaign, but that is probably a long term project. I am one of the Kickstarter backers and the game is looking sweet. Scratches the strategic Napoleonic itch.

  2. Is Napoleonic warfare really more niche than the medieval warfare of FoG2? Seems a bit odd to me but maybe their engine just doesn’t cope with it that well? Gonna guess that the project “in the Field of Glory realm” will be a reworked Pike & Shot on the more modernised engine, although early modern warfare has to be even more bloody niche than Napoleonic lol.

    I really do wish there was more accessible Napoleonic wargames out there that don’t look ancient. There’s the John Tiller/Wargame Design Studios stuff but even with the recent updates they still look like something out of Windows 95, or 98 if I’m being generous, and the AI is pretty crap.

  3. Ultimate General : American Revolution (1775) comes to mind. I hope they will do a Napoleonic version sometimes in the future. They already have a good engine.

  4. I’m really looking forwards to FoG:Kingdoms. I hope it has a bit of a longer tail, as considering the huge amount of dlc FOG2 got Empires only got the one, fairly simplistic expansion.

    Empires had some really interesting ideas with the decadence/age mechanic, but if you weren’t fighting the battles they got a little grindy.

Comments are closed.