2nd Test Game- Roman vs NKE (Leeds Comp)
Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 5:04 pm
Battle Report 2 04/03/07
Palatine Roman vs New Kingdom Egyptian
Synopsis
Egyptian had already fought a Roman army in a previous game, and their infantry had been butchered by the Legionaries, so he deployed most of his foot/archers in the rough terrain on his right flank, and his chariots in the open, with his light foot archers and javelin-men in support of his medium foot, and screening in the rough terrain on his left.
Romans deployed in with the legionaries and heavy auxillia in the open centre, lighter auxillia facing opposite all the enemy foot on my left and BG of cav and Lh on the right and supporting the legions in the centre
The 2 light auxillia BG drove off the archers covering the heavier infantry and then charged in out-numbered on the flank were lucky in disordering both opponents as they were better armoured on the charge- however one Auxilla BG eventually broke with the weight of numbers against it, but the other broke though and caused their opponent to turn, rather than execute his plan of pushing forward and turning the Roman left flank.
In the centre the legionaries and heavy auxillia with the cavalry performing admirably against the light chariot BG??™s supported by Medium Archers. First they pushed them back despite losses from Egyptian bow and then broke up the chariots formations, however they lost their FC for the second game in succession! Then a rout and the collapse of the Egyptian centre, as the chariots files to evade charges from a combination of cavalry and infantry.
Impression to the result of the battle
Given what happened in deployment and decisions made by the players, the Egyptians in my opinion were a little unlucky to lose their 1st chariot BG on the first charge they received, which left a big hole where the Roman Cav. turned the flank of the centre. Result a decisive Roman victory, causing 11 moral losses whilst receiving only 3 in return, almost a complete victory.
Problems and queries.
Occasionally difficult for players to find rule references etc due to inexperience- see below, but from my point its getting better- still occasionally forgetting to do charges in the right place, and moral tests for other BG??™s within 3MU after groups rout.
One of the chariot BG??™s was caught by Roman BG??™s after their opponents broke, the Egyptian player queried as to why they were not allowed to evade this charge, and we could not find the relevant section in the rules during the game so the contact stood (, and as it turned out it would not have effected the result). I found the rule when I got home, so I think this section should be hi-lighted in bold.
However as these bases had already evaded from a charge by legionaries in that same bound, should evaders be allowed to evade for a second time in the same bound without some other penalty?
Also the Egyptian player queried as to why the chariots were not able to shoot from the rear edge as they evade as well as its front, which would also be the case for evading LH suggested the Roman player (Parthian shot tactics).
Palatine Roman vs New Kingdom Egyptian
Synopsis
Egyptian had already fought a Roman army in a previous game, and their infantry had been butchered by the Legionaries, so he deployed most of his foot/archers in the rough terrain on his right flank, and his chariots in the open, with his light foot archers and javelin-men in support of his medium foot, and screening in the rough terrain on his left.
Romans deployed in with the legionaries and heavy auxillia in the open centre, lighter auxillia facing opposite all the enemy foot on my left and BG of cav and Lh on the right and supporting the legions in the centre
The 2 light auxillia BG drove off the archers covering the heavier infantry and then charged in out-numbered on the flank were lucky in disordering both opponents as they were better armoured on the charge- however one Auxilla BG eventually broke with the weight of numbers against it, but the other broke though and caused their opponent to turn, rather than execute his plan of pushing forward and turning the Roman left flank.
In the centre the legionaries and heavy auxillia with the cavalry performing admirably against the light chariot BG??™s supported by Medium Archers. First they pushed them back despite losses from Egyptian bow and then broke up the chariots formations, however they lost their FC for the second game in succession! Then a rout and the collapse of the Egyptian centre, as the chariots files to evade charges from a combination of cavalry and infantry.
Impression to the result of the battle
Given what happened in deployment and decisions made by the players, the Egyptians in my opinion were a little unlucky to lose their 1st chariot BG on the first charge they received, which left a big hole where the Roman Cav. turned the flank of the centre. Result a decisive Roman victory, causing 11 moral losses whilst receiving only 3 in return, almost a complete victory.
Problems and queries.
Occasionally difficult for players to find rule references etc due to inexperience- see below, but from my point its getting better- still occasionally forgetting to do charges in the right place, and moral tests for other BG??™s within 3MU after groups rout.
One of the chariot BG??™s was caught by Roman BG??™s after their opponents broke, the Egyptian player queried as to why they were not allowed to evade this charge, and we could not find the relevant section in the rules during the game so the contact stood (, and as it turned out it would not have effected the result). I found the rule when I got home, so I think this section should be hi-lighted in bold.
However as these bases had already evaded from a charge by legionaries in that same bound, should evaders be allowed to evade for a second time in the same bound without some other penalty?
Also the Egyptian player queried as to why the chariots were not able to shoot from the rear edge as they evade as well as its front, which would also be the case for evading LH suggested the Roman player (Parthian shot tactics).