Slitherine

Several questions came up during the game. As this was purely a friendly learning experience we quickly agreed what sounded reasonable and moved on. The idea being that I ask you guys what should have happened. Of course I have forgotten some of these now but will do my best to cover the key areas we had uncertainties.

We plonked a couple of pieces of uneven ground down that played no important part of the game (decided to skip the terrain phase for 1st game). Amazingly the Roman won the initiative phase, but as we lined up fairly conventionally it did not make much difference. (Neither of us was trying to be clever).

We ended up with 3 separate fights. All the heavy infantry screened by all the skirmish inf in the centre. And 2 cavalry medium infantry flanks. I’ll cover the questions that came up in each section in turn.

Centre Skirmishers. The more numerous Carthaginians were deployed 2 ranks deep, the roman velites 1 rank deep.

1st mistake we made was the romans advanced into range and shot. We forgot the Carthaginians could shoot back L

Charged into combat, after a couple or so turns of fighting all Roman velites fell to 50% strength (Ian rolls really badly on death rolls) and automatically routed. We did not really know what to dfo then so just took the velites off the board. I guess they could rave routed through the heavy infantry behind them without disrupting the heavies??

We did not know what to do with the Carthaginian skirmishers so just interpenetrated them backawards and left them out of the rest of the game. In this situation where one side has total skirmisher supremacy in the centre, what can you do with it? The chance of causing a failed cohesion test did not seem very high??

Heavies charged, because of the different sized battle groups there were lots of multiple battlegrouops against multiple battle groups. We rolled up the hits, marked them against each unit and then stopped whilst we tried to work out howe you decided who won! Found the right page and it was surprisingly easy to do then.

Only real problem I think there was my gauls stuck out past the roman line. I only had one base in front contact, with another counting as overlap. The others were contributing nothing. Is there any way I could have expanded around his side to increase the number of gallic elements fighting?


Roman left flank.
Ian had one cavalry unit and I had 2 heavy cavalry units. Looked Like I would overwhelm him. So Ian arranged one of his triarii units so it could make an intercept charge on one of my cavalry units if it tried to charge the roman cavalry. Is this OK?

Result I charged the roman cav with only one unit. I eventually won this fight. 2 questions on this 1 on 1 cav fight. Ian rolled badly on death rolls and eventually lost 2 cav elements. Being at 50% he should then auto rout? He did have a general with the battlegroup though not in the front line. It did not appear that this affects the auto rout rule?? 2ndly when the unit did rout we weren’t sure what to do with the general who was with the unit but not in front rank. We routed him with the cav unit??

The other carth cav unit did not charge because of the Triarii. Then on next roman go the Triarii charged the cav. This all seems a bit strange. Was this strange situation due to us missing something in the rules or just poor generalship on my behalf? The Triarii slowly won the battle.

Roman right flank
This was the complicated battle we were not at all sure what to do.
I had 2 numidian units and a scutarii unit. Romans has a MF allied unit and a heavy cav unit.
Roman MF charged a Numidian unit. Numidians evaded easily out of the way. As far as we could tell that is it you con’t have to “Rally” either unit or anything?
Other Numidians got around flank of Roman MF and on following turn charged them in flank (Roman MF have no frontal opponent)
This did not seem to do much damage. We fought the impact at ++ -- POA but only with one base V 1 base so not much damage. Weren’t sure if the Numidians lost one of their 2 dice for fighting MF?? We immediately turned the end two elements of the Roman MF to face the Numidians. In the following Melee round it was assumed all 4 Numidians could fight but only count 2 dice as fighting MF. The Roman MF get 2 dice. Basically a stalemate and because the MF became disrupted by losing a cohesion test the Numidians were not allowed to break off. Was this correct??

Roman turn, we chose NOT to reform the Roman MF to face the numidan cav for 2 reasons.
1) this would leave the MF to be hit in the new flank by the other numidian unit
2) It would block the Roman h/cav from hitting the now tied up numidian cav

Did we do this right?

Romans charged their h/cav onto the numidian overlap. As the numidians were engaged they could not evade and of course got murdered by the heavy cavalry!!

On the next Carth turn I charged the Spanish scutarii and other numidian unit into the front of the Roman MF. The scutarii hitting the MF was at an angle but still easy enough to work out. The 2nd numidian unit was trickier. I will try to explain ….

6 Roman MF 4 facing forward and 2 facing sidewards engaged by the 1st numidian unit
Scutarii hit the 4 MF facing them. 2nd Numidians hit the side of the 2 units that are turned to face the 1st Numidian unit. I hope that made sense. I have no idea how you resolve the impact or melee in that case????

Negatives about the whole game :-
Not many. It took quite a long time. We played for over 3 hours with small armies and little terrain. Superior armoured troops seem to be able to smash any number of average protected troops very quickly.
It looks as though almost all moves by almost all troops types come out as a “Simple” move. The advantage of being drilled does not seem to be very much at all???

Positives about the game:-
We enjoyed the game and want to play again next week.
There were surprisingly few rules issues, we all appreciated the fairly simple movement rules
The results of each engagement seemed “reasonable” which I like. The balance between luck of the dice and stacking the odds with POA’s seemed about right to us.

miffedofreading wrote:Several questions came up during the game. Charged into combat, after a couple or so turns of fighting all Roman velites fell to 50% strength (Ian rolls really badly on death rolls) and automatically routed. We did not really know what to dfo then so just took the velites off the board. I guess they could rave routed through the heavy infantry behind them without disrupting the heavies??

We did not know what to do with the Carthaginian skirmishers so just interpenetrated them backawards and left them out of the rest of the game. In this situation where one side has total skirmisher supremacy in the centre, what can you do with it? The chance of causing a failed cohesion test did not seem very high??

The job of skirmishers is to harrass enemy heavies and clear enemy skirmishers out of the way to allow your own heavies to get into contact.

Normally outnumbered skirmishers will (should) fall back through their heavy supports.

The Romans are probably best to charge the lights with their heavies and force them to evade through the Carthaginian heavy foot.

Heavies charged, because of the different sized battle groups there were lots of multiple battlegrouops against multiple battle groups. We rolled up the hits, marked them against each unit and then stopped whilst we tried to work out howe you decided who won! Found the right page and it was surprisingly easy to do then.

Only real problem I think there was my gauls stuck out past the roman line. I only had one base in front contact, with another counting as overlap. The others were contributing nothing. Is there any way I could have expanded around his side to increase the number of gallic elements fighting?

Alas no. Your 'spare' elements can only move over to fight frontally. As a general rule if you have the longer line you probably want to use the shifting rule as you approach to get an overlap on each end of the enemy line.

Roman left flank.
Ian had one cavalry unit and I had 2 heavy cavalry units. Looked Like I would overwhelm him. So Ian arranged one of his triarii units so it could make an intercept charge on one of my cavalry units if it tried to charge the roman cavalry. Is this OK?

Sounds like a good use of the Triarii to me.

Result I charged the roman cav with only one unit. I eventually won this fight. 2 questions on this 1 on 1 cav fight. Ian rolled badly on death rolls and eventually lost 2 cav elements. Being at 50% he should then auto rout? He did have a general with the battlegroup though not in the front line. It did not appear that this affects the auto rout rule?? 2ndly when the unit did rout we weren’t sure what to do with the general who was with the unit but not in front rank. We routed him with the cav unit??

A BG that has reached the level of losses to auto break routs as normal until the end of the JAP at the end of the JAP it is removed.

Commanders witn BGs do not increase the quality of the BG, they do increase the effective quality as far as roling for combat is concerned but only if the commander is in the front rank. Otherwise all a commander does is add to cohesion tests (+1 if a TC or FC, +2 if an IC)

The other carth cav unit did not charge because of the Triarii. Then on next roman go the Triarii charged the cav. This all seems a bit strange. Was this strange situation due to us missing something in the rules or just poor generalship on my behalf? The Triarii slowly won the battle.

It sounds like you missed the cavalry break off rule. If cavalry are fighting steady foot they have to break off at the start of the JAP. Also if your cavalry had been in a single rank they could have evaded the charge of the Triarii

Roman right flank
This was the complicated battle we were not at all sure what to do.
I had 2 numidian units and a scutarii unit. Romans has a MF allied unit and a heavy cav unit.
Roman MF charged a Numidian unit. Numidians evaded easily out of the way. As far as we could tell that is it you con’t have to “Rally” either unit or anything?

Correct but the BG that charged cannot move in the movenemt phase of the turn it charged.

Other Numidians got around flank of Roman MF and on following turn charged them in flank (Roman MF have no frontal opponent)
This did not seem to do much damage. We fought the impact at ++ -- POA but only with one base V 1 base so not much damage. Weren’t sure if the Numidians lost one of their 2 dice for fighting MF?? We immediately turned the end two elements of the Roman MF to face the Numidians. In the following Melee round it was assumed all 4 Numidians could fight but only count 2 dice as fighting MF. The Roman MF get 2 dice. Basically a stalemate and because the MF became disrupted by losing a cohesion test the Numidians were not allowed to break off. Was this correct??

Light horse lose one dice per 2 if fighting MF (infact if fighting anything except LF,LH or fragmented troops). Often throwing LH into a melee on their own with non skirmishers is a quick way to lose a BG of LH. In the mele phase the Roman MF could if they wanted have all turned to face the LH and would have probably cut them to pieces. Of course if their front is threatend by your Scutarii then that may be a bad idea on the Roman part.

Roman turn, we chose NOT to reform the Roman MF to face the numidan cav for 2 reasons.
1) this would leave the MF to be hit in the new flank by the other numidian unit
2) It would block the Roman h/cav from hitting the now tied up numidian cav

Did we do this right?

Aha, the problem with answering as I read. Yes you did this right.

Romans charged their h/cav onto the numidian overlap. As the numidians were engaged they could not evade and of course got murdered by the heavy cavalry!!

See getting LH into melee in the wrong place is dangerous.

On the next Carth turn I charged the Spanish scutarii and other numidian unit into the front of the Roman MF. The scutarii hitting the MF was at an angle but still easy enough to work out. The 2nd numidian unit was trickier. I will try to explain ….

6 Roman MF 4 facing forward and 2 facing sidewards engaged by the 1st numidian unit
Scutarii hit the 4 MF facing them. 2nd Numidians hit the side of the 2 units that are turned to face the 1st Numidian unit. I hope that made sense. I have no idea how you resolve the impact or melee in that case????

I think I understand and I am pretty sure (from memory) that this would not count as a flank charge even though you hit the side of a base. I believe that the Numidians would get 1 dice at + vs 2 at - for the MF + for mounted vs MF, - for the MF being armed with light spear (I assume) so even which means that the light spear POA of the Numidians counts.

Negatives about the whole game :-
Not many. It took quite a long time. We played for over 3 hours with small armies and little terrain. Superior armoured troops seem to be able to smash any number of average protected troops very quickly.
It looks as though almost all moves by almost all troops types come out as a “Simple” move. The advantage of being drilled does not seem to be very much at all???

3 hours is a bit long for a small game but as it was your first seems reasonable.

As to all moves working out as simple you were I suspect just advancing and getting stuck in. Once you start to change formation, turn and move etc. you will rapdily find that drilled troops are LOT more handy than undrilled. In a straight up head to head being drilled is little if any advantage.

Positives about the game:-
We enjoyed the game and want to play again next week.
There were surprisingly few rules issues, we all appreciated the fairly simple movement rules
The results of each engagement seemed “reasonable” which I like. The balance between luck of the dice and stacking the odds with POA’s seemed about right to us.

Glad you enjoyed yourselves and for a first game it sounds like you managed most of the rules correctly.

Thanks Hammy,

A couple of comments


""I think I understand and I am pretty sure (from memory) that this would not count as a flank charge even though you hit the side of a base. I believe that the Numidians would get 1 dice at + vs 2 at - for the MF + for mounted vs MF, - for the MF being armed with light spear (I assume) so even which means that the light spear POA of the Numidians counts. ""

Agree we never thought it would be a flank charge, because those elements were already fighting a unit to their fron we were not even sure we could hit them there at all. I think we could and it would count as a frontal charge.


""It sounds like you missed the cavalry break off rule. If cavalry are fighting steady foot they have to break off at the start of the JAP. Also if your cavalry had been in a single rank they could have evaded the charge of the Triarii""

Spot on I forgot about the break off rule at this time. Did not really have enough space to get the cav down to 1 rank to allow an evade.

Funnily enough I agree with you, I don't think we got many of the rules wrong at all....


Once my 2 large battlegroups of slingers and javs had retreated back through the Carthaginian heavy infantry (having destroyed their roman equivs ), what realistically could I have donw with them?? We could not think of anything else for them to do. They do not at first appearances appear to be much use??

Andy

Just remembered one more question....

On the roman right where the numidians were hanging around the roman MF. Once one numidian unit had hit the MF in the flank, the other numidian unit was sat in front of the rest of the MF unit. Could it shoot??

We assumed you could not shoot into a melee, even though it was nice an clear as the only fighting was on the flank. This doesn't feel right but we did not want to waste the time trying to find the page in the rules at the time.

Andy

miffedofreading wrote:Just remembered one more question....

On the roman right where the numidians were hanging around the roman MF. Once one numidian unit had hit the MF in the flank, the other numidian unit was sat in front of the rest of the MF unit. Could it shoot??

We assumed you could not shoot into a melee, even though it was nice an clear as the only fighting was on the flank. This doesn't feel right but we did not want to waste the time trying to find the page in the rules at the time.

Andy

You can shoot into a melee but not at a base that is fighting or providing an overlap or in a second rank behind such a base. There is a - POA for shooting at an engaged BG.

You can shoot at a BG in melee but not at those elements of the BG that are in position to fight as a first or second rank or overlap in melee this turn (some differences in other situations eg shooting at pursuers). Similarly an element can shoot on the same basis. It is on page 84. Note there is a POA minus against the shooters for shooting or being shot at while in melee.

Paul

miffedofreading wrote:Once my 2 large battlegroups of slingers and javs had retreated back through the Carthaginian heavy infantry (having destroyed their roman equivs ), what realistically could I have donw with them?? We could not think of anything else for them to do. They do not at first appearances appear to be much use??

If I have 'spare' light foot after they have done their job in the centre I tend to redeploy them to the flanks to support any troops I have out there. If you can get two or three BGs of LF shooting at one enemy BG on the flank while you distract the enemy with something substantial you can relatively easily cause them problems.

In my game at the club on Monday I broke a BG of 8 armoured superior HF just by shooting (and threatning their flank with cavalry) Once they were isolated they were mine

Using LF to really delay part of the enemy line can work well too. Let one half of the line advance but really try hard to slow the other half.

Ref other uses for LF after they've beaten their opposition,they are very useful skirmishing with protected troops especially foot ,if you're brave several BG s can have ago at cavalry evading in opposite directions makes it easier to get away when charged.
David

what realistically could I have donw with them?? We could not think of anything else for them to do. They do not at first appearances appear to be much use??

They do what skirmishers should be doing - Protecting your line-of-battle troops, chasing off (or not) your opponents skirmishers, slowing down you opponents advance, and harrassing flanks.

When deployed in front of the main battle line, they rarely have a role to play once the battle lines have engaged.
If deployed on the flanks, or in terrain they usually coninue to have an effect throughout the game.

hammy wrote:
In my game at the club on Monday I broke a BG of 8 armoured superior HF just by shooting (and threatning their flank with cavalry) Once they were isolated they were mine

Using LF to really delay part of the enemy line can work well too. Let one half of the line advance but really try hard to slow the other half.

Respect!! I certainly have not got the hang of taking out 8 armoured superior HF just by shooting yet.

A little unsure about the delaying thing. Surely you put your skirmishing inf in front of half your opponents heavy infantry line. He then charges with this half and you evade. The other half advance as normal. Except for funny results on the variable move dice, both halfs of the heavy line continue to advance with no real delay?

Have I missed something?

Andy
PS Thanks guys for the comment on shooting into melee I suspected we did something wrong.

miffedofreading wrote: A little unsure about the delaying thing. Surely you put your skirmishing inf in front of half your opponents heavy infantry line. He then charges with this half and you evade. The other half advance as normal. Except for funny results on the variable move dice, both halfs of the heavy line continue to advance with no real delay?

Have I missed something?

If your opponent is willing to fight your LF with his in melee then if he is advancing and you only fight half his line you will hold that end up while the rest can advance.

Again on Monday I sacrificed a BG of LF which my opponent charged with his LF (I had a chance of winning but it was no better than even). My LF took a couple of turns to die during which time the rest of his line pushed on. Then by repeatedly putting my slingers in front of him I gradually split his line up (from VMD rolls) and in the end the BG on the far end of his line rolled up on a VMD and hit the end of my line while the BG next to it only rolled average and didn't get into combat. By the time the second BG made it in the first was in trouble and things went from bad to worse for my opponent.

Thanks Hammy I think that makes sense...


I have found an entry on page 53 that refers to my complicated fight between the roman MF and the numidian cavalry. I have included the quote and drawn you a picture. can you comment...


Page 53. A charge cannot be declared if it would contact only the flank or rear edge of an enemy base which is already in melee to it’s front except by a legal flank or rear move

My 2nd numidian unit would have charged the “front” of the MF BG but they would only have contacted the end element which had been turned 90 degrees to fight the 1st numidians on the flank. This implies they would not be allowed to do this.

I shall try and draw a diagram (I have edited it to what I think it should be - Moderator Hammy)

Mod comment: Preview and code are your friend when doing ASCII diagrams.


1 is the 1st numidian unit which hit the roman MF on the flank
2 is the 2nd numidian unit which could only charge one element of unit 3 to the side.
3 is the 6 elements of roman MF the 2 on the right have been hit in side and turned 90 degrees
4 is the carth scutarii who charged the Roman MF

Assuming my edited diagram is correct then are you not contacting the flank of a base that is not already fighting to the front in the form of the rear element of MF? Look at P53 and P57 and see what you think.

Sorry Hammy, not following you. Thanks for doing your magic on my diagram, it is spot on.

Unit 1 charged unit 3 on an earlier turn that units 2 or 4 hence the way 3 has conformed.

Only one element of Numidians 2 is contacting anything. It is contacting the flank of the 2 elements of 3 that have turned 90 degrees. Of those 2 elements the front is in contact with an element of Numidians 1 whilst the rear one is providing rear rank support.

As such I think page 53 says that Numidian 2 is NOT allowed to charge at all......




Sorry Hammy, in addition to not following your explanation above I have remembered one more incident that happened.

We believed that you were only supposed to take one cohesion test per turn. But we also found we were testing cohesion during the impact phase for losing combat. Also testing in the melee phase for losing combat and then when a BG broke we were trying to work out how we test other units for seeing that? We believe it is at the end of the turn.

As such a unit could easily test cohesion at least 3 times in a turn. So we were a little unsure when you take ONE test and apply the more than one reason for testing modifier, and when you take multiple tests??

Ta

Andy

miffedofreading wrote:Sorry Hammy, not following you. Thanks for doing your magic on my diagram, it is spot on.

Unit 1 charged unit 3 on an earlier turn that units 2 or 4 hence the way 3 has conformed.

Only one element of Numidians 2 is contacting anything. It is contacting the flank of the 2 elements of 3 that have turned 90 degrees. Of those 2 elements the front is in contact with an element of Numidians 1 whilst the rear one is providing rear rank support.

As such I think page 53 says that Numidian 2 is NOT allowed to charge at all......

I think that you can charge and that you will fight the rear rank base at impact. In melee you will swing round to line up with the other Numidians and provide an overlap.

Sorry Hammy, in addition to not following your explanation above I have remembered one more incident that happened.

We believed that you were only supposed to take one cohesion test per turn. But we also found we were testing cohesion during the impact phase for losing combat. Also testing in the melee phase for losing combat and then when a BG broke we were trying to work out how we test other units for seeing that? We believe it is at the end of the turn.

As such a unit could easily test cohesion at least 3 times in a turn. So we were a little unsure when you take ONE test and apply the more than one reason for testing modifier, and when you take multiple tests??

It is possible to take a whole pile of cohesion tests in one turn. If we assume you always roll 12 for your CT and pass them all then you could in theory take:

One at the start of the impact phase when someone declares a charge on you
Another just after that when the fregmented BG next to you fails a test and breaks
One at the end of impact combat for losing the impact
One more for seeing the BG on the other side of you break at impact
And another when the general holding your troops together is cut down before your eyes.

That is just in the impact phase and is five distinct tests.

Look at the detailed sequence of play, it mentions every case where you may have to test.[/quote]

Thanks Hammy, I think that all makes sense, and I think you have earned a break from my questions.

Do Slitherine pay you to moderate this forum? If they don't they should. If they do they should pay you more

miffedofreading wrote:Thanks Hammy, I think that all makes sense, and I think you have earned a break from my questions.

Do Slitherine pay you to moderate this forum? If they don't they should. If they do they should pay you more

At the moment I do this out of the goodness of my heart. Should I actually get a real job sometime my posting rate may well decline.

Hammy

We appreciate you!!!

He needs to get a real job so he can go to Helsinki - well more accurately he needs a new job so his partner will allow him to go as he can probably afford it anyway