LORDS OF ASIA, circa 200BC

[fogman]

Around 200 BC, the Seleucid king Antiochus the great campaigned far and wide, from the Levant against the Ptolemaics to Afghanistan against the Graeco-Bactrians and back to Greece against the Romans. This is the historical backdrop for Lords of Asia.

5 encounters, 6 armies:

Seleucids vs Romans
Seleucids vs Ptolemaics
Seleucids vs Graeco-Bactrians
Indians vs Graeco-Bactrians
Indians vs Saka

Armies Restrictions (500 pts):

*Graeco-Bactrians (Immortal Fire)
4 leaders (1 Inspired, 3 troop), no allies, no mob, 35 BGs max.
3-5 Light (min 3, max 5)
must take Fortified Camp

*Maurya Indians 320BC-180BC (Immortal Fire)
4 leaders (1 Inspired, 3 Troops), no allies, no mob, 45 BGs max.
3-5 Light
at least 3 elephants and 2 heavy chariots
must take Fortified Camp

*Saka 129BC-129BC (immortal Fire)
4 leaders (1 inspired, 3 troop), no allies, no mob, 40 BGs max
3-5 Light
15 foot (including LF) max

*Late Republican Roman 105BC-25BC (Rise of Rome)
4 leaders (1 Inspired, 3 troop), no mob, 35 BGs max
3-5 Light
must take Bythinian Allies (filling in for Pergamese)
at least 15 legionaries
Must take Fortified Camp

*Later Seleucids (pre-166BC) 205BC-167BC (Rise of Rome)
4 leaders (1 Inspired, 3 Troop), no mob, no allies, 35 BGs max
3-5 Light
Average Pikes > 2 superior Pikes (number of avg pikes must be at least twice number of sup pikes)
must take Fortified Camp

*Later Ptolemaics (greek) 166BC-56BC (rise of rome)
4 leaders (1 insp, 3 troop), no mob, no allies, 35 BGs max
3-5 Light
No Romanised Infantry
Average pikes > 2 superior pikes
must take Fortified Camp


Games Schedule

lords of asia sked.jpg (55.77 KiB) Viewed 6476 times

Read schedule horizontally. For example, in round 1, player1 (Ulysisgrunt) is challenging player2 (Kmaher) and player4 (Fogman). He is accepting challenges from players 3 (Giacomo),5 (Rex) and 6 (Ricoual). When challenging player2 (Kmaher), player1 (Ulysisgrunt) will play Romans against Player2's Seleudids. When challenging player4 (Fogman), player1 will play Graeco-Bactrians against Player4's Seleucids. (first named army is played by challenger).


Game Settings:

BEWARE: No FOW, No Double Moves.
Both players must choose VERY OPEN terrain


Scoring

Players score points by inflicting casualties expressed as a percent x 10. For example, Player1 30/35 (86%) vs Player2 36/33 (109%) means player1 scores 10.9 pts and player2 8.6 pts.




Participants

Player1: Iandavidsmith
Player2: Kmaher
Player3: Giacomo
Player4: Fogman
Player5: Rex
Player6: Ricoual


TIme Frame:

Round 1: Now to March 29 (5 games in 3 weeks)

Recruitment:

CLOSED

[rexhurley]

If I may an entry would be appreciated for something new and refreshing from my perspective. (Please refer my PM)

Regards Rex

[iandavidsmith]

I would like to partake , but having played in them all sofar i understand
if you want to make room for others , cheers Ian

[batesmotel]

Count me in if you have room.

Chris

[fogman]

if there's overflow, i'll open another section, or move up another Lords series.

[ricoual74]

you can count me if still possible

[gianfrancocimino52]

I would like to join, if there is room

[kmaher]

I'd be very tempted if there are still places..


Ken

[fogman]

Since we now have 7 players, there will be two pools.

Room for 5 more.

[ulysisgrunt]

I would like to play.

Danny Weitz

[fogman]

RECRUITMENT CLOSED

I want to address the issue of Fog of War since I had a discussion about it with a couple of people:

One of my favourite trick is to hide an elephant behind a line of infantry and surprise enemy cavalry in this way. A variation of that is with hiding cataphracts when fighting roman legionaries. It's clever but the truth is, unrealistic since they could be seen over the head of the infantry in 'real life'.

Similarly, there is no way a pike, or spear, or lancer units could be hidden behind any other body of troops, or even other pike units since the density of the pikes would be telling.

So in effect the Fog of War rule is a gamey rule and does not further realism.

Moreover Fog of War as implemented allows for the 'one unit sees, the whole army sees', which is problematic in pre-modern warfare. Therefore one has only to park a cheap unit on a piece of high ground to negate FOW, which again gives undue importance to the initiative die.

One can say it's better than being able to see everything like in a TT game. Maybe, but it's certainly not more realistic. I cannot think of any historical battle where we have crack troops hiding behind other troops bursting out at the moment of impact.

[cromlechi]

I understand your view and can see merits in playing without FOW. Personally I think of FOW as slightly more abstract. Dust for example could obscure far more than an elephant as could bright sun, confusion etc. Personally I prefer to play with as I mentioned to you as it adds another fun element. Having heard your views though I would play if it wasn't for the fact I'm out of action in March for at least a week. Rgds Adam

[fogman]

We can start now. We stay with 1 pool as Ian and Batesmotel have been moved to 'Lords of History 2'.

Refer to schedule in first post for challenges: ulyisisgrunt, kmaher, giacomo have 2 challenges to make, while fogman, rex and ricoual have 3.

Build you army carefully being mindful of the restrictions. Open a DAG game to check first before making or accepting challenges. Your opponent can check your army with no FOW.

Follow this template when challenging:

Fogman (Saka) vs Ricoual (Indians). pw: ricoual


remember the settings when you challenge:
*terrain density: VERY OPEN
*show army ON
*any book
*fog of war OFF
*double moves OFF
*password ON

when you receive the challenge:
*terrain density: VERY OPEN

You may start now. All challenges must be made by next Tuesday 11 March or you may be replaced.

GOOD LUCK

[fogman]

sorry gianfranco i don't know why i called you giacomo in the schedule!

[rexhurley]

First game rexhurley (ptolomaic) vs ulysisgrunt (Selecuids). pw: Fogman

Second game rexhurley (maruya indian) vs Giacomo (bactrian). pw: Fogman

Third Game rexhurley (LRR) vs Fogman (Selecuids). pw: Fogman

Regards Rex

[gianfrancocimino52]

sorry gianfranco i don't know why i called you giacomo in the schedule!

Perhaps because there are more James (Giacomo) than Gianfranco in English history ?

[fogman]

challenges up:

Indians (fogman) vs Graeco-Bactrians (kmaher) pw: kmaher
Ptolemaics (fogman) vs Seleucids (gianfranco) pw: gianfranco
Saka (fogman) vs Indians (ricoual) pw: ricoual

[kmaher]

Challenges

Graeco-Bactrians (kmaher) vs Selucids (Gianfranco) pw (Gianfranco)
Saka (kmaher) vs Maurya Indians (Rex) pw Rexhurley

Have fun

Ken

[rexhurley]

First result rexhurley (Indians) 28/40 bt giacono (bactrians) 33/30

Heaps of fun and what a balanced game thanks for the organisation Fogman

Second result rexhurley (ptolomacs) 20/32 bt ulysisgrunt (selecuids) 29/29

Again another beautifully balanced matchup so thanks again

[gianfrancocimino52]

Challenges:
Gianfranco-Giacomo (Saka) vs Ulysisgrunt (Indians). pw: James
Gianfranco-Giacomo (Romans) vs Ricoual (Seleucids). pw: James