Battles of the Ancient World (Steven Bucey, June 2002, updated January 2004) Four Battles of the Ancient World Battles of the Ancient World, Volume II Battles of the Ancient World, Volume III Zama (Strategy and Tactics #153) Marathon and Granicus (Strategy and Tactics #214) Publisher – Decision Games These games use a common system to portray individual ancient battles. Unit types include everything from the standard heavy and light infantry and cavalry to chariots and elephants. Each side usually has one, or maybe two counters representing prominent leaders. Individual unit scales vary, but the typical unit represents about 400 men. Each scenario has its own set of counters and map. The rules are fairly simple, but not simplistic. Each turn has separate player turns, during which each player performs the following actions: Movement Missile Attacks Melee Combat Rally Each combat unit is rated for Melee strength and Movement Allowance. Many units have some missile ability such as javelins, slings or bows. Counters are not generic, but designed for the particular type of unit it represents for that battle. Melee strength is usually based on the size of the unit in terms of number of men, but it can vary based on the designer’s opinion of the quality of the unit. Some units have two steps, representing very resilient formations. Movement is one unit at a time, and is influenced by terrain (slopes, woods, streams and rivers). Stacking is prohibited at all times (except for leaders), even during movement and retreat. Most Roman armies may displace to avoid over stacking as a result of a Melee combat retreat result. Each combat unit has a Zone of Control that stops enemy movement and requires a Melee combat retreat result to disengage from for most units, though there are exceptions for certain types of light troops. During Melee combat, all units in an enemy ZOC must make an attack, and all enemy units in a ZOC must be attacked. (There is a facing rule that is used in the first two games, but dropped in the third. It’s affects changed between the two versions, and also changed with at least two different versions of errata. In all cases that used it, the unit faced a hex side.) Missile attacks are conducted after movement and before combat, and are useful for softening up the defender prior to Melee combat. Each missile attack allows the player to roll a die, and on a 1 or 2 the target is disrupted. The effect of this is to halve the Melee combat strength of units, and it also prevents light troops from retreating before combat. Multiple disruptions have no further affect. All disruption markers are removed after Melee combat. Melee combat is odds based, comparing the total Melee strength of the attacking units to the Melee strength of the defending unit. Except at high odds (4-1 or 5-1) it is very difficult to kill a unit outright. The typical result at the lower odds is defender retreat, with increasing chances of attacker retreat at odds less than 1-1, and a few Exchange results thrown in. Thus, the best way to try to destroy a unit is to block its retreat paths via ZOC or through over stacking (unless that side can displace). A friendly leader stacked with one of the participating units adds its leadership value to the Melee strength of its side. During the rally phase, a player may try to recover one of his destroyed units. In most scenarios a side is given a rally number that is the number or less on a die that must be rolled. If successful the player may choose any destroyed unit and place it with or next to a leader who is himself not in an enemy ZOC. Each side is given Demoralization and Disintegration levels, measured in terms of Melee strength points destroyed. At the instant a side reaches its Demoralization level then from that point forward all attacks are shifted one odds column in favor of the defender. The Melee strength of rallied units is deducted from that side's Demoralization level, so it is possible for a side to swing in and out of Demoralization many times during a game. At the instant a side reaches its Disintegration level the game ends and victory points are counted up, though usually the side that disintegrates first loses. In most scenarios each side gains victory points for destroying enemy units. Victory points may also be awarded for capturing enemy camps or occupying certain locations on the map. There is a little bit of chrome, such as the aforementioned ability of light infantry and cavalry to disengage from enemy ZOC during movement and before combat. Cavalry, chariots and even elephants may "charge" if they do not start their movement in an enemy ZOC. This doubles their Melee strength, but an Attacker Retreat result is converted to an attacker Loss result, so there is some risk except at high odds. Variant rules in Moves and the Zama scenario cover berserk elephants and simple formation based command control. Also, each scenario usually has special rules that make things interesting and account for any unusual circumstances that were present during that battle. In one scenario, starting on turn 6, the roman player must start checking for the occurrence of an earthquake! The games play quickly, typically taking an hour or two to complete. In most, the action is fast and open. There are ambushes, standup fights, and running battles. Production wise, Decision Games could do better – there are counter errors in each of the games. Volume III in particular has some counter issues that absolutely prevent you from playing one of the scenarios. The maps in volume three are laid out poorly also, with each map sheet often holding two scenario maps and the map fold overlapping one of the scenario maps, causing setup problems if you are working with a small table. Errata and correction counters are available from Decision Games. Overall, the game system works very well and has few problems, and is well worth the money even with the problems. It is not a detailed simulation of ancient combat and cannot compete with the Great Battles of History system in that regard. There are no command and control rules (though see the Zama scenario in S&T), and there is little to functionally differentiate between variations in a unit class (for instance, a Roman Legion unit, barbarian horde and a Macedonian phalanx function the same). However, it takes far less effort to learn and plays much quicker than Great Battles of History (GMT Games), with far fewer markers cluttering the map. It is similar in complexity to the game Ancients (3W), but with each scenario having its own map and unique counters it avoids the problems of feeling generic like that game does, and with a smaller unit scale and thus more units on the map it actually plays better. Most of the scenarios feature battles with a lot of movement and action, and between the three boxed games you get 14 scenarios. More are provided in some issues of Moves.