Battle of Thymbra 546 BC

[ZeaBed]

There are several challenges with this scenario. The first is the sheer size of the armies involved. Xenophon gave Croesus 420,000 troops and Cyrus some 200,000 plus. As the late great Robert Morley said in the movie Cromwell, "There are quite a lot of fellows down there." Thymbra must have been a really capacious plain. The modern consensus is about one-fourth for each: 105,000 vs. 50,000, or thereabouts. Still a lot of fellows, however.

The second problem is that a key aspect of the battle cannot be duplicated: Cyrus's improvised camelry does not seem to unnerve or even mildly displease the Lydian horse with their aroma. They should have been elephants.

The third problem is that Cyrus's archers, dart-throwers and war towers cannot shoot over the front troops to hit the enemy, which was another key feature of the historical battle. I thought of placing these missile throwers on individual placemats made up of elevation #1 terrain, but decided that it would be considered bad form. After all, it was a plain field. And that would work at that elevation for the first line of missile throwers alone, unless I place the ones behind them on elevation 2 and the ones behind them on elevation 3. Rather awkward I'm afraid.

The fourth problem is that, actually, there are few 'Lydian' troops... The ones available are contained in the Persians folder, a nod perhaps to the absorption of these units by the Persian empire after Thymbra.

But I went ahead and designed the scenario anyway. This is a scenario that can only be played between two human players. Why it cannot be played sanely against the IA will become apparent should you try to do so.

I apologize for my uncharacteristic longwindedness. Any ideas, suggestions, etc. would be welcome. After all, this is a battle that should be gamed.

Updated to v.2.2 on 31/12/2014:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/405 ... 20v2.2.zip

[FedeM]

HI ZeaBed,

Maybe to be able to use the archers properly you can make a house rule for the scenarion that the Xenophon Army can not move till the second turn or something like that so you can place the archers at the front line and shoot.

Just an idea.

Tks

[ZeaBed]

Thanks Fedem. By Xenophon army, do you mean the Lydians? I was thinking of just revising the historical scenario significantly and just put the first line of archers in front of the foot soldiers. But of course, that would leave the second line of archers in the third rank. It could just be that this game just does not translate from boardgame to computer game, unless the historical order is substantially altered, like they did with the GBOH version of this scenario. I'll go back to the scenario editor and will consider placing the archers up front (and on the adjacent flank areas) as a prime option.

[Micha63]

Thank you for the scenario.

[ZeaBed]

Updated to v1.1.

[ZeaBed]

Updated to v2.0 in the original post. Many of the changes I made are superficial, but include some correction of unit composition, provenance, some unit positioning and names, with a few corrections in unit size.

I upgraded the undeserving Persian camelry to Superior (they should be at least Average, some would argue Poor, even though they were manned by cavalrymen) to compensate for the inability to model the camels' effect on the Lydian horse, which was a key aspect of the historical battle (according to Herodotus at least).

[Micha63]

Thank you.

[amenofi64]

Great work the 2.0, thanks Micha.

[rbodleyscott]

Of course there is nothing to stop you using camel figures and then classifying the units in the XML as elephants, although it might make them a bit too effective against foot.

[ZeaBed]

Of course there is nothing to stop you using camel figures and then classifying the units in the XML as elephants, although it might make them a bit too effective against foot.

Interesting suggestion, but that would prove too effective indeed I think. And I think classifying them as elephants in the XML would convert the figurines into elephants in the game. I tried to modify the Genoese crossbows in Crecy that way and they were turned into slingers!

[Micha63]

Great work the 2.0, thanks Micha.

Sorry, is not my scenario.

[ZeaBed]

Great work the 2.0, thanks Micha.

Sorry, is not my scenario.

Micha, I think he was thanking you for saying thank you. I did the same thing with stockwellpete vice fogman recently. And btw thank you again Micha for taking the trouble to post that link to all those player-made scenarios. That must have been a time consuming endeavor.

[Micha63]

Yes, i forgot Zeabed was the creator of the scenario, lol, my misstake.

There are only a few games i really like ,Fog is one of them. Collecting the scenarios is a small thing i can do for this game and so i do it.
I would also create scenarios for the game but to do it rigth is a long learning process. I needed almost 2 years to learn this for " Peoples General ".
I dont have the momentum to do this againe for another game. But playtesting i like for Fog.

[ZeaBed]

Yes, i forgot Zeabed was the creator of the scenario, lol, my misstake.

There are only a few games i really like ,Fog is one of them. Collecting the scenarios is a small thing i can do for this game and so i do it.
I would also create scenarios for the game but to do it rigth is a long learning process. I needed almost 2 years to learn this for " Peoples General ".
I dont have the momentum to do this againe for another game. But playtesting i like for Fog.

Well, said Micha, but you're too humble. "To do it right is a long learning process" hasn't stopped me, btw. Lol. I'm still learning as I go. Those user made scenarios are, after all, recyclable and even disposable. I've even ended up wanting to push the envelope, even though I may end up in Mars - which is another digital game altogether!

[Micha63]

Hi, ok never say never. I could imagine to do some scenarios for the 30 years war or the german peasent war. But i think we dont have the units for this.
Or do we have ?

[ZeaBed]

Hi, ok never say never. I could imagine to do some scenarios for the 30 years war or the german peasent war. But i think we dont have the units for this.
Or do we have ?

I hope one day we will have the units for the 17th century. I'd love to see some scenarios for the 30 Years War and for the English Civil War too. But right now the next option seems to be getting some key units for the renaissance.

[Micha63]

You are rigth, thats the top priority for the moment.
But for me is verry important to have buildings, walls and such things in the new field of glory. How you could create a siege of a city scenario if there is no city ?

[ZeaBed]

You are rigth, thats the top priority for the moment.
But for me is verry important to have buildings, walls and such things in the new field of glory. How you could create a siege of a city scenario if there is no city ?

Absolutely right. Imagine a proper depiction of the siege of Alesia. Many of the scenarios already in FoG are based on historical battles where the depiction of a city or town is very desirable. For scenarios such as Crecy, Qadesh, Panipat and Teba, just to mention a few that I've gamed thus far, cities or towns are on the map but the best I could do is to simulate them with Impassable terrain. Luckily, I think the new FoG will include some of these structures. But also, like in the old GBoH, elephants should rampage into their own troops when routed, and new units could enter the map later than the others, as happened in many historical battles. These additions and a few other additions would be a great improvement in the game if they could be done without disturbing some great celestial plan.

[rbodleyscott]

Of course there is nothing to stop you using camel figures and then classifying the units in the XML as elephants, although it might make them a bit too effective against foot.

Interesting suggestion, but that would prove too effective indeed I think. And I think classifying them as elephants in the XML would convert the figurines into elephants in the game. I tried to modify the Genoese crossbows in Crecy that way and they were turned into slingers!

Having selected a suitable camel unit to be depicted, you then would need to manually edit the .XML lines and set

training="0" armor="0" rangedWeapon="0" impactWeapon="0" meleeWeapon="0" experience="1" (or "0" if you want them to be poor) troopType="6"

This would not reset the figurines to elephants, but the game will report the units as elephants when you mouse over them . However, you could explain that in your scenario notes.

[ZeaBed]

Of course there is nothing to stop you using camel figures and then classifying the units in the XML as elephants, although it might make them a bit too effective against foot.

Interesting suggestion, but that would prove too effective indeed I think. And I think classifying them as elephants in the XML would convert the figurines into elephants in the game. I tried to modify the Genoese crossbows in Crecy that way and they were turned into slingers!

Having selected a suitable camel unit to be depicted, you then would need to manually edit the .XML lines and set

training="0" armor="0" rangedWeapon="0" impactWeapon="0" meleeWeapon="0" experience="1" (or "0" if you want them to be poor) troopType="6"

This would not reset the figurines to elephants, but the game will report the units as elephants when you mouse over them . However, you could explain that in your scenario notes.

Thanks again. Well, I've already gone back to XML expecting the figurines to become elephants or be reported as elephants, but I've been able to play-test them post-XML and they remain camelry and are reported as such in the mouse flyover, although now they are Superior and Armoured. I wonder why that won't work for the Genoese archers in Crecy!? I guess Thymbra 2.2 is in the offing.