Slitherine

The Graeco-Bactrian old guard generals have been replaced--just in time. Their trainees (replacements!) managed to turn back a Skythian invasion 50-25. In a closely fought battle, the final outcome was not determined until the next-to-last turn!

msaunders865 wrote:The Graeco-Bactrian old guard generals have been replaced--just in time. Their trainees (replacements!) managed to turn back a Skythian invasion 50-25. In a closely fought battle, the final outcome was not determined until the next-to-last turn!

No generals lost?

w_michael wrote:

msaunders865 wrote:The Graeco-Bactrian old guard generals have been replaced--just in time. Their trainees (replacements!) managed to turn back a Skythian invasion 50-25. In a closely fought battle, the final outcome was not determined until the next-to-last turn!

No generals lost?

I find it hard to remember to keep track of lost/routed generals, Not sure this is a very easy campaign rule to apply consistently.

rbodleyscott wrote:

w_michael wrote:

msaunders865 wrote:The Graeco-Bactrian old guard generals have been replaced--just in time. Their trainees (replacements!) managed to turn back a Skythian invasion 50-25. In a closely fought battle, the final outcome was not determined until the next-to-last turn!

No generals lost?

I find it hard to remember to keep track of lost/routed generals, Not sure this is a very easy campaign rule to apply consistently.

I agree. It would be better if the game reported each general's status at the end of each battle. I originally limited it to generals reported as lost during the game, but that is not frequent enough to make significant tie breakers in the campaign scoring. I am open to other suggestions, but I think that the loss of a general should count in campaign scoring. For now, players just have to pay more attention and keep track manually. The new "Review Battlefield" button can be used to determine which generals are no longer on the battlefield.

"No generals lost"?

The Skythians lost at least one general. Another general died, but I am not sure whether it was Graeco-Bactrian or Skythian. Since I had three living generals at the end, I'm betting it was his.

Later...I have re-examined the battlefield, and can confirm that there do not seem to be any living Skythian generals on it. I conclude, therefore, that at least two Skythian generals have met their demise.

Mike

msaunders865 wrote:"No generals lost"?

The Skythians lost at least one general. Another general died, but I am not sure whether it was Graeco-Bactrian or Skythian. Since I had three living generals at the end, I'm betting it was his.

Later...I have re-examined the battlefield, and can confirm that there do not seem to be any living Skythian generals on it. I conclude, therefore, that at least two Skythian generals have met their demise.

Mike

OK, I'll put down the C-in-C and one SG lost for Saka.

Just note when a general dies in the chat log immediately after the event. The chat log is reviewable at the end of the game

Another shock result

The Arabs repulsed Nabataea 60-46

My C-C was dispersed but all others remained on the battlefield , in fact their where probably more generals that units

Hidde got an early advantage , but the Arabs slowing started a slow comeback to defeat the Nabataea tribe once thier archers ran low on Ammunition.
The Lancers making a great advantage.


Great game ,
Ian

]

msaunders865 wrote:The new "Review Battlefield" button can be used to determine which generals are no longer on the battlefield.

Where is this button ?

The Indians have defeated the Armenians 47-64

I believe RBS lost his CiC whom tried to fight a duel with the Indian CIC on a war elephant whilst using an unlucky medium javelin unit as his own mount.

Long gruesome battle of attrition, to my surprise, the elephants carried the day! ( I usually get them slaughtered in droves with little benefit)

iandavidsmith wrote:]

msaunders865 wrote:The new "Review Battlefield" button can be used to determine which generals are no longer on the battlefield.

Where is this button ?

In the EndBattle screen. (The one that comes up before the final casualties screen)

The last order of business for Turn 2, of course, is to seek the fate of any Commander-in Chief lost in battle. We had four:

Parthia rolled 2 = The C-in-C switched armour with his shield bearer before the battle, who died in his place. Nothing happens.
Saka rolled 5 = The C-in-C was mortally wounded, dying shortly after the battle. If Saka had been an overlord then all direct vassals would now be free.
Armenia rolled 1 = The C-in-C was knocked down and stunned, but is otherwise unharmed. Nothing happens.
Arab Tribes rolled 2 = The C-in-C switched armour with his shield bearer before the battle, who died in his place. Nothing happens.

The Turn 2 final scores have been updated.

The Turn 3 movement sequence numbers have been drawn and transmitted to the players. The Rebellion Chit (12) was assigned to Armenia so they throw off their newly acquired shackles and are now free of vassalage. Note that Ptolemaic Kingdom remains a vassal of Nabataea.

Here are the Turn 3 campaign map battles: Movement sequence number 1 belongs to Bactrian Kingdom. It is their move.

Here is the Turn 3 scoring sheet:

When we play this campaign system face to face, the winner of a battle draws two movement chits from a bag, looks at them and decides which of the two he will hand over to the loser of the battle. I shortened this procedure by automatically giving the loser the lowest movement sequence number, because that is what happens 99% of the time. We have had two instances now because of this shortcut where a newly acquired vassal is lost at the beginning of the next turn. Rebellions this way seem to be too frequent, but perhaps that is just bad luck.

I have thought of three ways to address this:

1. Ignore the Rebellion Chit for vassals that became one in the previous turn.
2. Allow the winner of the battle, where the loser of the battle is their new vassal, to choose whether to keep the 12 chit for himself (no rebellion) or give it to their vassal (rebellion). This will delay the start of a new turn while he decides.
3. Do nothing; keep it as it is.

Any thoughts?

w_michael wrote:When we play this campaign system face to face, the winner of a battle draws two movement chits from a bag, looks at them and decides which of the two he will hand over to the loser of the battle. I shortened this procedure by automatically giving the loser the lowest movement sequence number, because that is what happens 99% of the time. We have had two instances now because of this shortcut where a newly acquired vassal is lost at the beginning of the next turn. Rebellions this way seem to be too frequent, but perhaps that is just bad luck.

I have thought of three ways to address this:

1. Ignore the Rebellion Chit for vassals that became one in the previous turn.
2. Allow the winner of the battle, where the loser of the battle is their new vassal, to choose whether to keep the 12 chit for himself (no rebellion) or give it to their vassal (rebellion). This will delay the start of a new turn while he decides.
3. Do nothing; keep it as it is.

Any thoughts?

What about having a die roll with various possibilities if a rebellion chit comes up? 1 or 2 rebellion fails, 3 or 4 buy off/tribute for invader's withdrawal, 5 or 6 rebellion succeeds.

Bactrians attack Hsiung-nu.

I’m biased of course, as my vassal revolted before I even had a chance to piss him off enough to wish to leave our benevolent tyranny.

TheGrayMouser wrote:I’m biased of course, as my vassal revolted before I even had a chance to piss him off enough to wish to leave our benevolent tyranny.

You do get the VP for the 1-turn vassalage as a consolation prize.

Bactrian Kingdom - msaunders865 moves to attack Hsiung-nu - AlessandroD. Hsiung-nu sets up an Auto battle (1,200 FP), map type Steppe, against Bactrian Kingdom (1,100 FP)

It is now the Arab Tribes - iandavidsmith move (MSN 2)