Special title, is it not?
All I really want to do is pick your brains. So read on! I was looking at Hannibal Rome v Carthage with renewed interest after my successful engagement with the title in Seattle.
My original intent for buying the game has always been to play it as a campaign, and use the ‘battles’ to generate Great Battles of History tactical scenarios!
I know that I have enjoyed playing thru the 2nd Punic War using the campaign rules from one of the C3i magazines, so once more into the breach would be awesomeness and unique each play!
How to determine for mix?
If according the experts on BGG 1 Combat Unit in Hannibal : Rome v Carthage is worth 5,000 men then could we not re create battles in the Great Battles of History system for each battle we have in the H:RvC title?
Napkin sketch time!
Above in Column 1 is the Year in H:RvC terms, then TQ – or Troop Quality ratings over that time period based upon the GBoH scenarios.
The last columns are force mix by unit types in Great Battles of History (GBoH) based upon various scenarios.
The various unit types would need to be represented proportionately and change over time as they did historically. For instance Cavalry figured less prominently at the end stages of the 2nd Punic War relative to Rome, as Africanus began to leverage the power of cavalry and his formations flexibility. Hannibals numeric advantage and tactical capabilities were thus diminished in regards to Cavalry.
Similarly Hannibals morale of his armies was incredibly high due to the loyalty to him for nearly a decade. Romes tropp Morale was conversely low as the ability to lead or lack thereof caused morale problems, but this was resolved over time and can be reflected in the Roman TQ rating going up slowly over time.
The last messy column attempts to capture Roman Force mixes.
Rome had Alae legions made up of conscripts, what I will call regular or average Legions and Elite Legions. Depending upon battle location we are more likely to run into Alae say in the Iberian Peninsula than the Italian mainland? – Probably.
We can keep the force mix a “surprise” by rolling on a simple table for what the CU’s will be comprised of. For example with a 1 in 10 chance of at least one Elite Legion being present, 8 in ten for Regulars and 2 in ten for Alae, increasing outside of Italy to 4 in ten for Alae.
OR….I can get all historical and put the actual Legions in…too hard?
I did some rough sums on force mix for both sides at Zama and Cannae the bookend battles.
I like the force mix ratios for both sides, but might bump up the PH/HI factor subject to location and or substitute in additional 1 hex sized counters for double Phalanx counters. My thinking here is the closer to home the more likely we are to see more Heavy Units and less mercenary/tribal forces.
This then leaves us with dealing with losses on retreats? I think we take something like the loss difference in TQ points and make that the equivalent #of CU’s lost after factoring in the 5k per CU number.
Those pesky combat cards and actual leader units on the board need to be dealt with also.
Perhaps we cycle in Hannibal leader ship team based upon what is actually on the board and historical presence. The Romans will need to lead with who they have on the board and subordinate leaders I guess.
As for the combat cards, if a army has an overwhelming advantage in the Battle Cards earned we provide them with some additional forces OR Elite Initiative for 2 turns rather than one?
Love to hear what you folks think. Crazy? Possibly. Fun? YES!
Once I have The Dark Valley Case Blue Scenario knocked out I will have a mostly clear desk for me to experiment in!