Slitherine

Lake Trasimene victory for Carthage!!
Carthaginians 42/75

Romans 75/75
Interesting fight in which the rear of the column would have escaped
Ulysisgrunt

Ulysisgrunt wrote:Lake Trasimene victory for Carthage!!
Carthaginians 42/75

Romans 75/75
Interesting fight in which the rear of the column would have escaped
Ulysisgrunt

FYI, I played the noble Romans against Ulysisgrunt's Carthaginian mongrels, for whoever's keeping track of points.

It was an interesting fight...for quite a while I thought that the head of my column was going to break through the spearmen in front of them and reach the objective markers, but it was not to be...a "cascade rout" shattered several fragmented units all at once, with the result that even a full strength Superior quality unit in the back rank routed and decided to try to swim the lake rather than fight to the death like true Romans. After having played Cannae, I expected this battle to be equally one-sided, but the Romans in this scenario are not as doomed as their brethren on that grim day. It was an exciting fight, with the score being close for several turns. A well-deserved victory by my opponent, who made good use of his troops.

I have one "complaint", though I want to point out its neither with my honorable adversary, or the design of the scenario.
The difficult terrain gave a distinct advantage to the Punic medium infantry, which I had expected. But the presence of several streams or rivers feeding into the lake caused me to notice something I'd never spotted in my previous games.

Medium Infantry on rough terrain fighting Heavy Infantry on clear terrain will generally prevail, and I've never objected to that. But apparently the game's mechanics treat the disordering terrain of a fordable stream the same as scrub, marsh, woods, etc. To me, this seems counter-intuitive, and I question if a Medium Infantry unit in a stream/river, facing formed heavy infantry defending the bank, should not have a penalty rather than a bonus!

Please disregard this post.

Wasn't your last game (Cynoscephale) against stefano instead of mikemarchant?

You mentioned you played Cannae, is it over? it didn't see the result.

At Lake Trasimene, the key of the fight is whether the head of the Roman column breaks through as they did historically (though they were caught later). The Romans have a lot to do to avoid getting crushed too quickly but they do have a significant number of armoured superior units that can be lethal.

fogman wrote:Wasn't your last game (Cynoscephale) against stefano instead of mikemarchant?

Fogman, I had a moment of major confusion. I'm not sure why...though stress and lack of sleep may have contributed.
I already mentioned that I went to my elderly parents' house for a few weeks to take care of my mother after a surgery, but I've stayed on to deal with other issues they need help with. One of them is my father's worsening dementia. The difficulty of watching him go through this has been accompanied by the nagging worry that I'm seeing a glimpse of my own future, since everyone in his family eventually developed it. In that context, realizing that I posted battle results for a match MikeMarchant had already reported on (as he should, since he won!) and that I posted it with the sides reversed, having not accurately remembered who I had played...even though as the Challenger, I was obviously the Romans...that's worrisome. I've heard of snatching victory from the jaws of defeat, but I have no desire to snatch Mike's victory! I retracted my earlier post, and apologize for any confusion caused by my confusion!

fogman wrote:You mentioned you played Cannae, is it over? it didn't see the result.

That game is still in process, though its definitely near its gory finale for the Romans.

I've got three games still going from my 1st round matches, and given how addled and distracted I've been lately, I think I'm going to postpone starting the 2nd round matches until they finish (which shouldn't be long, two of them are almost over).

you've got to slow down. i don't play more than 5 games, the limit for any lords round, which is all i play nowadays.

seleucids (fogman) 44/82 vs romans (iandavidsmith) 74/74
the romans did a strange thing in leaving their camp and made it easier for the seleucid cavalry. they did not contest the argyrapides either, opting to retreat and sacrifice their holding line. in the middle, the seleucid pike block retreated more or less successufully back to their camp.

Catching up on posting Round 1 results:

Lake Trasimene
batesmotel (Carthaginian) 55/75 beat Londo (Roman) 78/75

This version of the battle seems to do a much better job of capturing the flavor of the battle than the one in the game. It seems like a battle particularly appropriate
for Fogman's approach to scenarios.

Magnesia
batesmotel (Romans) 59/74 beat Jonathan4290 (Seleucid) 84/82

Gergovia
batesmotel (Arvernii (50/62) beat iandavidsmith (Romans) 58/57

This is the battle int he series I'm least familiar with historically. Given the maze like layout of the map, all the immobile baggage lying around to be captured and the traffic jam effects of deploying troops from where they start, I wasn't sure if I was playing FoG or Pacman!

Cynocephalae
batesmotel (Roman) 57/76 beat ricoual74 (Macedonian) 81/81

Thanks for the games.

Chris

Pool 2

Just a reminder of challenges that haven't yet been picked up.

Brindlebane - Lake Tresimene
Stefano - Gergovia

Passwords in all cases is your user name, as I have typed it above.


Best Wishes

Mike Marchant

2 results thus far-Pool 2

Brindlebane(Carthage)43/120 bt Ulysisgrunt(Romans)127/120

Brindlebane(Seleucids)80/82 bt Mike Marchant(Romans)76/74-very close game this one,could have swung either way.

Thanks for the games Gentlemen.

Pool 2 - Round 1

Cannae Battle

Carthaginians 83/120 - Romans 123/120

Ulysisgrunt & Macedonians 60/81
over
Brindlebane's Romans 77/76
I'd rather be lucky than good,,,,,

Lake Trasimene

Romans (fogman) 59/75 vs Carthaginians (ricoual) 76/75

The Romans managed to punch a hole through the Carthaginian left.

Challenges for round 2

Cynoscephalae vs batesmotel. pw: batesmotel
Cannae vs londo. pw: londo

when you report results make sure you include battle and players' names.

batesmotel wrote:
Gergovia
batesmotel (Arvernii (50/62) beat iandavidsmith (Romans) 58/57

This is the battle int he series I'm least familiar with historically. Given the maze like layout of the map, all the immobile baggage lying around to be captured and the traffic jam effects of deploying troops from where they start, I wasn't sure if I was playing FoG or Pacman!

they are objective points without which the gauls cannot win the battle. historically it was a standoff after the romans were pushed down the hill. since there's no point in wargaming a standoff, there must be incentives for the gauls to pursue.

the map overlay are a good way to prevent the Xth legion from getting involved early and to simulate the wave attacks as it would be too easy for players to engage their forces fully on as wide a frontage as the map allows while in reality they were engaged in echelons on a limited frontage.

Challenges posted for my last two games in Round 2:

iandavidsmith - Gergovia - pw smith

Jonathan4290 - Cynoscephalae - pw 4290

Pool 2

MikeMarchant's Carthaginians (71/75) beat Ulysisgrunt's Romans (75/75) at Lake Tresimene.

A close and tough battle that left badly gored bodies all over. The wolves will feed well tonight.

Thanks for the game, Danny.


Best Wishes

Mike

Lake Trasimene

Londo (Carthage) 63/75 beat ricoual74 (Rome) 78/75

Gergovia

Londo (Arvernii) 52/62 beat fogman (Rome) 59/57

Can someone please take down batesmotel - he seems to be running away with the competition!

i did but he still got 98%. i'll update things this weekend.

Battle result report from Pool 2 Round 1, and some thoughts on the scenario:

"Battle of Magnesia"
Seleucids (BloodPhoenix) 39/82 over Romans (JocaRamiro) 76/74

I think this may be my favorite scenario out of this batch. Its interesting as the clash of two very different tactical doctrines each with their own history of success...I've always found the battle of Cynoscephalae fascinating as a contest of Legion vs Phalanx, but this battle had escaped my attention. I'm not sure FOG does the best job of accurately modeling what happens when Roman troops with pilum and gladius engage phalangites...imo there should be missle fire just before contact, that has a chance to disorder the pikes...

As a game scenario, I enjoyed the challenges faced by the Seleucid player: he has some of the most effective troop types of their era, in the form of numerous Cataphracts. But while we are accustomed to playing them as Superior troops, on his left he has a mix of Average and Poor Cats. While this naturally makes them more brittle than normal, they are still Heavily Armored Lancers, and if used properly, pack a wallop. The key for the Seleucids seems to be in getting the most bang for the buck out of some of those "morale-challenged" troops on their left. While I kept the Cataphracts in the fight, some of the other Poor quality (or demoralized) Cavalry were just too light weight to be of much use unless it could be maneuvered into the enemy rear, and my opponent wasn't going to allow that! So I withdrew them via the exit spaces, which was encouraged by the presence of Seleucid objective markers in those areas (in normal FOG the only way to get an unbroken unit out of the battle is to have it evade off the map edge, and the enemy still gets a point!)

The main deciding factor on my left was a completely random event: Eumenes of Pergamon died during a charge early on, causing considerable dismay among nearby units. This was just one example of a trend that kept up throughout the game: the dice harbored a deep-seated prejudice against the Legions of Rome. On the Seleucid right, the success of their powerful pike and cataphract units is a foregone conclusion, and the only hope for Rome lies in inflicting a defeat on the Seleucid left and the weaker phalanxes in the center. There again, the dice abandoned my opponent, as my Average and even Poor pikes stood up to his Superior Impact Foot far longer than either of us expected.

This scenario brought into focus one thing that appeals to me very much about your scenario designs, Fogman. They allow a Player the option to do something a commanding General could do (and did) in real life, that FOG normally denies them: the ability to order units to withdraw from the battle. Its obvious (and you've said as much) that some of your design concepts are inspired by board and tabletop games, which often feature an exit point on the board/map where troops can march off the battlefield. Indeed, some excellent war-game scenarios I've played involved one player staging a "rear guard" defense with a few units against a superior force, to buy time for as much of their army as possible to march off the map and "escape", gaining points for each one that did so. In games between point-based "equal" armies, where we only receive "victory points" for routing enemy units, we become focused on a narrow definition of victory as the annihilation of the opposing army. Its very enjoyable (to me) to play FOG scenarios in which there are Strategic Objectives, and places where badly mauled or weak units can be withdrawn before the enemy destroys them.

Stefano1967 wrote:Pool 2 - Round 1

Cannae Battle

Carthaginians 83/120 - Romans 123/120

That was against me, just for the record. I felt pretty good about the fact that my troops managed to open a respectable
hole in the Punic center, wide enough for some men to live long enough to be hunted down by cavalry during the post-battle pursuit.