Page 9 of 9

Re: LORDS OF ITALY circa 280 BC

Posted: Sun Jun 02, 2013 9:18 am
by Morbio
Fogman, was that the last result you just posted? What's the outcome? Who became the Lord of Italy?

Whatever the end result, thanks very much for organising this, it was fun. Some nicely balanced armies, although Rome was a little stronger than the rest, but that's not surprising since they were the superpower of the age.

Re: LORDS OF ITALY circa 280 BC

Posted: Sun Jun 02, 2013 1:03 pm
by ulysisgrunt
You can't argue against historical results
Danny Weitz

Re: LORDS OF ITALY circa 280 BC

Posted: Sun Jun 02, 2013 2:01 pm
by fogman
Morbio wrote:Fogman, was that the last result you just posted? What's the outcome? Who became the Lord of Italy?

Whatever the end result, thanks very much for organising this, it was fun. Some nicely balanced armies, although Rome was a little stronger than the rest, but that's not surprising since they were the superpower of the age.

Rome and Epirus were the most successful. Spears armies are certainly weaker in comparison, as it should be. In a way the comp is unbalanced which was not the intent but mirror games take care of that. Too bad you don't have all the books.

Re: LORDS OF ITALY circa 280 BC

Posted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 10:21 pm
by deeter
Final rematch result:

Gallic (Deeter) 35/44 vs. Rome (lydianed) 47/38

A very exciting battle that I though I'd lost until near the end. Naked men rule!

Deeter

Re: LORDS OF ITALY circa 280 BC

Posted: Sun Jun 09, 2013 11:59 pm
by iandavidsmith
Last game

iandavidsmith: early gauls (lowlands) 21/41 win
vrs
lydianed: later carthaginian (pre-235) 47/45 loss

thanks for the game,
Cheers
Ian