America Online Inc. Online Gaming Forums (OGF) Message Board Archive Forum: Strategy Forum Folder Title: GBoH (GMT) Description: GMT's "Great Battles of History" series. Contents Copyright {c} America Online, Inc. All Rights Reserved. First Msg Added: 8/2/95 Last Msg Added: 1/9/96 Total Messages: 78 Latest: Diadochoi BergBROG 8/2/95 GBoH World Champion FragilFox 8/2/95 GBoH suggestions for newbie NOA DANOW 8/6/95 Re:GBoH suggestions for newb TG262 8/6/95 Re:GBoH suggestions for newb BergBROG 8/7/95 Re:GBoH suggestions for newb FragilFox 8/7/95 Re:GBoH suggestions for newb MCBIZED 8/11/95 Phalanxes GKauffmn 8/13/95 Re:Phalanxes BergBROG 8/14/95 Phalanxes GKauffmn 8/14/95 Lion GKauffmn 8/18/95 Re:Phalanxes BergBROG 8/21/95 Phalanxes and their lot in l Daveshoe 8/25/95 Re: Phalanxes and their lot GKauffmn 8/25/95 On short pointy things GKauffmn 8/27/95 Re: Phalanxes BergBROG 8/30/95 Re: New Phalanx Rout rule BergBROG 9/3/95 Re: New Phalanx Rout rule FragilFox 9/5/95 Nest GBoH Game/Module BergBROG 9/9/95 SAMURAI and TERCIO GKauffmn 9/9/95 Re:Nest GBoH Game/Module OGF Marty 9/10/95 Re:Oda Rides!! BergBROG 9/10/95 Re:Nest GBoH Game/Module FragilFox 9/11/95 Bellum Cardgame Laurabeeee 9/13/95 Re:Bellum Cardgame BergBROG 9/14/95 SPQR Rule 9.23 WARTIMEMAN 9/19/95 Re:SPQR Rule 9.23 BergBROG 9/20/95 Phalanx Rout Rule Azatoth 9/20/95 Re:Phalanx Rout Rule BergBROG 9/21/95 Re:Lion R Spreader 9/21/95 berg and herman at play (war R Spreader 9/21/95 Re:Lion Balance BergBROG 9/22/95 Re:Lion FragilFox 9/25/95 Re:Lion R Spreader 9/26/95 Re:SPQR Rule 9.23 WARTIMEMAN 9/26/95 Re: Balance or not To Bal . BergBROG 9/27/95 Re:SPQR Rule 9.23 BergBROG 9/27/95 Re:SPQR Rule 9.23 WARTIMEMAN 9/27/95 Re:SPQR Rule 9.23 BergBROG 9/29/95 Rookie questions on SPQR MarkFranke 9/29/95 Re:Rookie questions on SPQR BergBROG 9/30/95 Re:Rookie questions on SPQR MarkFranke 9/30/95 Lion Balance GKauffmn 9/30/95 SPQR Guide GKauffmn 9/30/95 Re: Balance or not To Bal . R Spreader 9/30/95 Re:Rookie Time BergBROG 10/1/95 Re:Lion Balance BergBROG 10/1/95 Simplifying LION GKauffmn 10/1/95 Re:Simplifying LION BergBROG 10/2/95 Re:Lion Balance FragilFox 10/2/95 just a chat R Spreader 10/4/95 Re:Asculum BergBROG 10/4/95 Diadochoi BergBROG 10/6/95 Re:Diadochoi WARTIMEMAN 10/6/95 Re:Diadochoi BoulderG 10/7/95 Re:Diadochoi Blancht711 10/7/95 Re:Diadochoi Blancht711 10/7/95 Re:Lion Lorisimon 10/8/95 looking for erratta? R Spreader 10/8/95 Re:looking for erratta? BergBROG 10/9/95 Re:looking for erratta? R Spreader 10/9/95 Re: False Errata. BergBROG 10/10/95 Luetzen Question GKauffmn 10/10/95 Re: False Errata. R Spreader 10/10/95 Re:Papp in a Fog BergBROG 10/11/95 Re: False Errata. BergBROG 10/11/95 Hydaspes Scenario- Deluxe Al WARTIMEMAN 10/11/95 Re:Hydaspes Scenario- Deluxe BergBROG 10/12/95 Re:Hydaspes Scenario- Deluxe FragilFox 10/12/95 Re:Hydaspes Scenario- Deluxe GMT Games 10/13/95 Re: False Errata. Polybius 10/14/95 Wanted: Luetzen Strategy GKauffmn 10/29/95 Re:Luetzen Strategy BergBROG 10/30/95 Gus's foot GKauffmn 11/23/95 Re: Lion #s BergBROG 11/24/95 Re: Lion #s R Spreader 11/24/95 Re: Lion #s FragilFox 11/27/95 Closed Folder OGFMusashi 1/9/96 Subj: Latest: Diadochoi Date: 95-08-02 08:08:19 EST From: BergBROG Just a little jump start for this topic. . . the new Diadochoi module (for Deluxe Al) is on its way, Everyone who preordered should get it in a day or 2. Distributors will have it next week . . . Wait'll you see the Theban Square (one of the bunch of extra counters we will be using for the "Hoplite" scenarios that will be appearing in C3i . . . RHB Subj: GBoH World Champion Date: 95-08-02 08:26:36 EST From: FragilFox Congratulations to Sal Vasta, GBoH World Champion at Origins, where his Caesarian army laid low my Republican legion in the semi-finals, then edged out Hannibal's Carthaginians in the final to win the crown (and a really neat-o t-shirt). Subj: GBoH suggestions for newbie Date: 95-08-06 00:51:36 EST From: NOA DANOW I've never played any of the GBoH series, but ancient warfare has always interested me. What's a good starting point in this series? Can I just dive in with the new Deluxe Alexander? I guess Alexander is most interesting to me so that would seem logical. Also, is it possible to play these games by E-Mail? DANO Subj: Re:GBoH suggestions for newbie Date: 95-08-06 08:22:21 EST From: TG262 Any of the GBOH series is a good place to start since they are the best games currently available on the time periods that they cover. Deluxe Alexander could be a bit intimidating unless you have some wargame experience but go slow and take your time, learn the rules at a pace comfortable to you and you should do fine. And remember; enjoy --after all it is a game. You might try to find an earlier edition of Alexander but then you would need to update to the Deluxe at some point if you find the system to your liking. TG262 Subj: Re:GBoH suggestions for newbie Date: 95-08-07 07:08:20 EST From: BergBROG Dano, actually, Deluxe Al would not be a bad way to start, as it has 3 or 4 very small/fast scenarios which enable you to concentrate on certain aspects of the system without doing it all at once. SPQR (2nd edition) has one scenario -Bagradas - which is good for starters, but is somewhat more "involved" than Alex. (Just slightly). Then again, GMT is once again almost out of SPQR's, so one better strike fast as there will be a dearth until the next rerpint. FragileFox failed to add that he would have beaten Vasta Magnus had he not rolled '9's on two consecutive trump attempts for Massanisa . . . RHB Subj: Re:GBoH suggestions for newbie Date: 95-08-07 08:48:35 EST From: FragilFox I imagine it would be possible to play by e-mail, although probably the smaller scenarios would be a better place to start. The big ones, like Gaugamela or Zama, would really run up the 'ol phone bill. And yes, Scipio's beloved green ten-sider failed him when the chips were down. Oh, the fickleness of fate... Subj: Re:GBoH suggestions for newbie Date: 95-08-11 15:41:35 EST From: MCBIZED When you reprint SPQR, do a special "Second Punic War" edition incorporating all the modules, variants, etc. of the Hannibal-Rome rivalry. Package the rest as an add-on. It'll sell like hotcakes, believe me. Subj: Phalanxes Date: 95-08-13 19:29:44 EST From: GKauffmn Question: Has it occurred to anyone that life isn't fair for Phalanxes in SPQR (or Alex)? A line of Phalanxes attacked by, say, a line of LGs means two LGs on each Phalanx, with the LGs splitting the hits between them. Sure, the LGs are on a pretty low table, but by splitting cohesion hits in half, the 600 legionaires are not going down much faster than the 1000-1500 guys with sarissas. This effect bugs me so much I play that 2-hex units like PHs take only half hits on the Shock table, rounded up. The result is that Phalanxes have reasonalble staying power (but the principes still break em in the end). Have I got it all wrong? Gordon Subj: Re:Phalanxes Date: 95-08-14 06:45:21 EST From: BergBROG GK, you do have it wrong a bit, but it has been a question we're wrestling with. One, you seem to be missing the rule that when the PH is on the defensive it gets to choose how to apportion attacker losses. But adjusting the losses by halving them is, as 'they' are wont to say, a "False Positive". Fear not, tho, we are experimenting with a new methodology for double-sized units, which would increase their staying power; however, as for every action there is a reaction, once routed they could not be rallied (which is realistic). More anon . . . RHB Subj: Phalanxes Date: 95-08-14 20:52:12 EST From: GKauffmn Thanks for the response. I've got SPQR II, which allows only attacking PHs to apportion losses at will (Rule 10.12). Is this ability for defending PHs a subsequent rules change? In any event, net hits are still divided among two non-PH units. If attacking PHs apply hits lopsidedly to rout half the LGs sooner, they are forced advance after Shock by wheeling--another 1 or 2 hits to the PH and now the flank's exposed to counterattack. Still a terrible deal for the Phalanx. Not sure I understand what you mean by "False Positive". I am curious what you will work out regarding new rules for double-size units. Inability to rally PHs will be PAINFUL!! Regards, Gordon Subj: Lion Date: 95-08-18 13:45:19 EST From: GKauffmn While Mr. Berg contemplates my follow-up questions on PHs, let me open a new topic. . . . Is anyone out there playing Lion? How do like it? Regards, Gordon Subj: Re:Phalanxes Date: 95-08-21 06:51:11 EST From: BergBROG We are considering a change in how to rate - and use - PH's and other double-sized units. As soon as we come tosome sort of agreement as to exactly what that will be, we'll post it for you folks to kick around . . . . We are now working on getting SAMURAI ready for Xmas release . . . . RHB Subj: Phalanxes and their lot in life Date: 95-08-25 09:11:01 EST From: Daveshoe I guess I'm not sure why everyone feels that the phalanx rules need revision. I thought that there was a historical precedence for the Romans being able to beat them up. You know the old trained troops with short pointy things in a more flexible formation getting in close and beating up the guys with the long pointy things in the less flexible tight formation. I will admit that I haven't played the Alexander stuff, only SPQR & Ceasar (I know you're screaming HERETIC! right now) so I don't know how Big Al's boys do against those nasty Persians, but in the stuff I've played (Rome vs everybody) I've noted that phalanx's can be brittle but can win if used properly, which seems to be historic (at least from what I've read) Anyway, I'll be interested in seeing what the Breg Herman tag team will come up with. Dave Subj: Re: Phalanxes and their lot Date: 95-08-25 17:25:53 EST From: GKauffmn In my experience, Alex's phalanxes do well, but not as well as (in my imagination) they should. Against Light Infantry, e.g., they are attack superior. But the LI's hits are typically divided between two single-hex units. So all the PH gets is a high Shock column. With leadership and TQ advantages, it's usually enough. It's the unequal contest between the Carthaginians and the Romans that bugs me most. What is the "proper" use of Phalanxes vs the Romans? -- G Subj: On short pointy things Date: 95-08-27 11:16:38 EST From: GKauffmn >>>trained troops with short pointy things in a more flexible formation getting in close and beating up the guys with the long pointy things in the less flexible tight formation. <<< SPRQ mechanics generate this effect very well without having to penalize double-size units by allowing their single-hex opponents to split cohesion hits: On the unit level, as the melee gets going, one or few PHs will have to advance or will be routed. Either way, flanks will be exposed, giving those flexible Roman maniples a 12 or so column in Shock plus position superiority. Voila! Rigid PHs are undone. On the soldier level, the 3L shift on initial contact by attacking LGs, which goes away thereafter, is explained as simulating the Romans' ability to get in among those long pointy things. My pointy is the "flexible vs. rigid" is well accounted for; why effectively double hits vs. all double units? When my group plays half hits vs. PHs in Shock, the Romans still beat up on the phalanxes. Regards, Gordon Subj: Re: Phalanxes Date: 95-08-30 05:52:22 EST From: BergBROG Actually, what we're working on is a methoidology to reflect that PHs were nigh impossible to rally and reform once they took to the hills. We're not changing much of anything else . . . . RHB Subj: Re: New Phalanx Rout rule Date: 95-09-03 08:47:35 EST From: BergBROG This is an experimental rule we are testing, so you can give it a try and tell us what you think. PH, and other double-sized HI infantry units, do NOT auto Rout when Hits = or > their TQ. You undergo a PH Rout DR. 1. Roll die; 2. Add to DR the number of Hits the unit has > its TQ; 3. Add three (+3) if unit PH or HI was attacking If Adj DR < unit's TQ, unit Stands, does not Rout, and is given a total number of accumulated hits = TQ minus 1. If adj DR is = or > than TQ, the unit Retreats two hexes (as it normally would), and then is Eliminated, removed from game. Comments, suggestions, etc., are invited. (We also have a new Elephant command/charge rule, but that we'll provide when we see how it works.) RHB Subj: Re: New Phalanx Rout rule Date: 95-09-05 08:36:49 EST From: FragilFox Richard and I played one of the DIADOCHI battles this weekend (the first big one, I forget the name) with both sets of experimental rules (elephants and phalanxes), and both seem to work pretty well. What they do is force players to use elephants as they were actually used- powerful, but inflexible and hard to get to go anywhere except straight ahead- not as super cavalry units. Subj: Nest GBoH Game/Module Date: 95-09-09 06:56:51 EST From: BergBROG The next GBoH game will be SAMURAI, Japanese warfare in the 16th century, with 6 (count em, 6) battles: Okehazawa, Anegawa, Kawanakajima IV, Mikata-ga-hara, Nagashino, and Sekigahara. Due out for Xmas. The next module will be TERCIO (for LION) . . .includes White Mountain and Rocroi. RHB Subj: SAMURAI and TERCIO Date: 95-09-09 09:27:33 EST From: GKauffmn Hurrah for Pikes and Muskets!! --G Subj: Re:Nest GBoH Game/Module Date: 95-09-10 04:52:41 EST From: OGF Marty >The next GBoH game will be SAMURAI, Japanese warfare in the >16th century, with 6 (count em, 6) battles: Okehazawa, Anegawa, >Kawanakajima IV, Mikata-ga-hara, Nagashino, and Sekigahara. >Due out for Xmas. Can any resident military history buff confirm if these battles are in the era of shogun Nobunaga? Subj: Re:Oda Rides!! Date: 95-09-10 06:46:17 EST From: BergBROG Three of SAMURAI's battles include Oda's boys: Okehazama (his first major victory), Anegawa, and, of course, Nagashino, where he (and Tokugawa) destroyed the famous Takeda cavalry corps with volley fire. I don;t have the countermix in front of me, but I'm pretty sure we include 9 major clans in the mix: Oda, Tokugawa, Ishida, Imegawa, Takeda, Uesugi, Asai, plus 2 others I can't remember off-hand. RHB Subj: Re:Nest GBoH Game/Module Date: 95-09-11 08:50:02 EST From: FragilFox The first person to pronounce all six (count 'em, six) battles correctly gets a free game. Subj: Bellum Cardgame Date: 95-09-13 14:39:47 EST From: Laurabeeee GBoH taxes my feeble mind too heavily, but Bellum sounds like something I might be able to enjoy. Any news on what how this game will play, what it will look like, and when it will be released? Subj: Re:Bellum Cardgame Date: 95-09-14 06:34:29 EST From: BergBROG Bellum is entering "beta" testing, as Mark Herman has added much to the system, and eliminated all dierolling!! We hope that this is a "military" cardgame that does not play like one, but it is tough to describe, expect to note that it covers ancient warfare (here, Rome). Expected release is for Origins 96, as the artwork is extensive . . . . RHB Subj: SPQR Rule 9.23 Date: 95-09-19 14:53:06 EST From: WARTIMEMAN I need a clarification on rule 9.23 in regards to the article "Rampaging Pachyderms!", which appeared in the last issue of "C3i". The author, in his example of Velites vs. Elephants, uses the Velites' close volley capability against the elephants. The rule states that to be able to use close volley the unit must have a movement allowance greater than or equal to the defender. Since the Velites' movement allowance is "6" and the 'phants "7" is this a legal play? Or am I missing an exception to this rule? Can anybody post the rules on the "Great Captains of History" tournament at Origins? I'm intersted on how that works. Does anybody know when the next issue of "C3i" will be out? Thanks!!! FGS Subj: Re:SPQR Rule 9.23 Date: 95-09-20 06:12:09 EST From: BergBROG Got me, Warto . . . in any case, all of the Great Capts rules will be in the SPQR Book, due this Xmas. As fore C3i, I think Gene answered that back in the GMT topic. RHB Subj: Phalanx Rout Rule Date: 95-09-20 19:40:29 EST From: Azatoth Richard, The 3rd part of the subject rule, "3. Add three (+3) if unit PH or HI was attacking" is not clear to me. Does this mean if 1.) PH was attacking another PH or HI or 2) was attacked by another PH or HI or 3) either way? Also, when can we expect to see the new Elephant rule? Finally, about 3 weeks ago I sent in my $19 for BROG. When can I expect to see my 1st ish? Thanks, John Subj: Re:Phalanx Rout Rule Date: 95-09-21 06:04:48 EST From: BergBROG zatoth: it means that if you are rolling for a double-sized unit that was attacking, +3. (Why? Attacking tends to be more disruptive that standing and defending.) As soon as the testers finish diddling around with the new EL rule it will be posted. BROG #19 is finishing up and will be mailing shortly. RHB Subj: Re:Lion Date: 95-09-21 22:14:56 EST From: R Spreader regarding lion, while i have only played the first battle, i find the system is a lot more involved than the earlier games, especially due to the way fire combat and advanced calvary tactics give generals more options. the game is great, but the battle i played gave the imperial player very little chance to defeat the swedes. worth a try though, and how hard can it be to make up scenarios that are a little more evenly matched? (oh, the heresy to a historical gamer!) Subj: berg and herman at play (war) Date: 95-09-21 22:18:38 EST From: R Spreader hey guys, i plan on using your counters in a battle. who wants to be the romans? (joke) Subj: Re:Lion Balance Date: 95-09-22 06:35:01 EST From: BergBROG Spreader: the Lutzen battle is one of the more evenly balanced battles in the system; give that a try. And you're right about the difficulties of LION; it simulates 3 different systems, all of them evolving. To get the "interactions" right required a lot of work. We're still trying to simplify it (SAMURAI is much, much simpler), and may do so when we put the module TERCIO out. RHB Subj: Re:Lion Date: 95-09-25 08:31:58 EST From: FragilFox Not much you can do about Breitenfeld anyway, in terms of balance. Like Guagamela and Zama, this was one of those pivotal battles of history where a brand new style of warfare- Gustavus' heavy cavalry and firepower-heavy infantry- rolled right over the age- old status quo of tercio's and caracoles. With such a superior combat system, and one of the great commanders of history, it's hard for the Swedes to lose, except where the weather and/or terrain combine to counteract many of their advantages, which happened at Lutzen. Subj: Re:Lion Date: 95-09-26 11:35:08 EST From: R Spreader Oh, I most certianly agree, and to tell the truth, I don't mind playing the Imperials, I am really curious how to beat 'ol Gus. But as far as most historical battles are unfair, and that's life, well, I think that is the main advantage of unhistorical or even fantastic battles, the ability to face a force supposedly your equal in potential, and allow your genralship to make you shine, not the fact that say, Peter the Great couldn't beat a Swede boyking if he outnumbered him 4-1 and was behind fortifications... Subj: Re:SPQR Rule 9.23 Date: 95-09-26 15:04:51 EST From: WARTIMEMAN Richard-- I hate to be a pain about this, but how would you rule on this Velites vs. Elephant close volley at Origins? If the Velites can use this it might even help balance Bagradas Plains scenario a little. Concerning the SPQR book, is this a gamer's guide deal? Thanks. FGS Subj: Re: Balance or not To Bal . . . Date: 95-09-27 06:09:57 EST From: BergBROG You're gonna love SAMURAI, Spreader, starting off with Okehazama, where Imagawa has about 25,000 troops to Oda's 3800 (2/3 of which don't get to come in for a while) . . . and Oda wins. One of the basic precepts we have discovered with GBoH is what we stated at the beginning of the series: numbers have little to do with balance. Which is why Gus is better: better brains, better system. But Lutzen IS as evenly-matched as they get . . . RHB Subj: Re:SPQR Rule 9.23 Date: 95-09-27 06:13:04 EST From: BergBROG I hate to be a bigger pain, but what was the situaion again? The SPQR Player Guide should be a compendium of useful info, scenarios (some new some old), hints, tips and general phalanx fodder, including all the Great Captains tourney rules, some suggestions for new rules . . .who knows, we go where the Muse hits us (that muse having a large bank account) . . . . RHB Subj: Re:SPQR Rule 9.23 Date: 95-09-27 15:04:26 EST From: WARTIMEMAN OK, the situation is this: Rule 9.23 states: velites may use close volley capability if their MA is greater or equal to the defender. Pretty simple until I read C3i's article "Rampaging Pachyderms" in which the author used in an example velites (MA of 6) using close volley against elephants (MA of 7). This made me believe that I misinterpreted a rule or missed a clarification of the rule. Please help. I will definately be buying the SPQR book and Samauri when it comes out. You design excellent games. Subj: Re:SPQR Rule 9.23 Date: 95-09-29 05:03:47 EST From: BergBROG I did not get a chance to read the Pachyderm article prior to its publication, or I would have spotted that. My feeling is that there is a boo-boo here . . . there is no exception for elephants. You takes your chances with those suckers . . . . RHB Subj: Rookie questions on SPQR Date: 95-09-29 17:34:33 EST From: MarkFranke A friend and I each bought SPQR recently and sat down to play it for the first time this afternoon. We have a couple of bonehead questions about shock combat. This all has to do with units locked in each other's ZOCs for consecutive turns. 1. Is combat mandatory if the units started this way? Does a leader need to issue a command? Do the units have to be in the command radius of a leader? If not, at what point do they fight-- after all leaders are done? (Have I made myself clear on this?) 2. Can a unit ever leave a ZOC if the frontal hexsides contain enemy units? Or do they just sit there and pound it out until one or the other breaks? I believe they are prohibited from changing facing when in a ZOC. And one semi-related question: Since a unit is not required to attack every unit in its ZOC, can units in line alternately "gang up" on every other enemy unit in order to mazimize the result? (In other words, no need for superficial soak-off attacks?) Thanks in advance to any expert who answers these questions. Mark Franke Subj: Re:Rookie questions on SPQR Date: 95-09-30 07:45:42 EST From: BergBROG 1. Shock is not mandatory and occurs after all commands/orders have been issued, in a separate "phase". It does not require a command/.order; the unit simply has to have been issued a command/order that phase . . .or be within the leader's radius. 2. In that case, you cannot leave the ZOC. There is no disengage rule. (The exception for SK's and certain LI being able to move in and out of a ZOC is different; in that case, they're avoiding shock.) 3. I'm pretty sure the rule is that you do not have to attack all units in your ZOC as long as someone is attacking them . . . creating what you term "soak off", altho there is very little of that in this game, given the combat system. The rules are quite clear on this point (transl - we've never gotten a question on it before), so perhaps another look-see will help. RHB Subj: Re:Rookie questions on SPQR Date: 95-09-30 08:58:04 EST From: MarkFranke Prof. Berg's answers to LD student in back row: >>1. Shock is not mandatory and occurs after all commands/orders have been issued, in a separate "phase". It does not require a command/.order; the unit simply has to have been issued a command/order that phase . . .or be within the leader's radius. >>2. In that case, you cannot leave the ZOC. There is no disengage rule. (The exception for SK's and certain LI being able to move in and out of a ZOC is different; in that case, they're avoiding shock.) Followup comment: So the engaged units just sit there and do nothing in game terms if they are out of the command radius. That was our interpretation of the rules, but it didn't seem quite right. >>3. I'm pretty sure the rule is that you do not have to attack all units in your ZOC as long as someone is attacking them . . . creating what you term "soak off", altho there is very little of that in this game, given the combat system. The rules are quite clear on this point (transl - we've never gotten a question on it before), so perhaps another look-see will help. Followup comment from dullard student trying to save reputation: You're right; I found a clear statement to that effect in 8.32. I guess we just got confused in the heat of battle. (Remember I prefaced the question with the "bonehead" adjective, and thanks for being gentle in your response.) This system is so different (durst I say "innovative") that we tried hard to avoid applying the old "Well, Here's What You Would Do In Such-And-Such Panzer Game" interpretation to unclear situations. We tried to do common sense things in terms of period realism, our familiarity with Hollywood's epics notwithstanding. We will definitely play this one some more. I'm looking forward to some solitaire time with the Hammer of God modules (being an Old Testament history buff). Final comment: The elephents were a royal PITA for both sides but it sure was fun watching them rampage, especially when one sent old Xanthippus (in Bagradas Plains scenario) scurrying for safer environs. Now, the phalanxes...they were great fun to move up and engage. Makes me want to get out Alex (another game I bought but haven't played yet) and have a real go with them. Subj: Lion Balance Date: 95-09-30 14:31:06 EST From: GKauffmn Despite Breitenfeld's (historical) imbalance, I find it a fascinating game to play. In one solitaire engagement, BTW, I managed to flank the Swedish infantry line with the tercios and win with the Imperialists--then I fould out I had accidentally left a Swedish infantry brigade out of the set up! Oh well . . . On Luetzen, in our plays it has favored the Swedes pretty substantially, because the Imperialist cavalry wings are quite wimpy on both flanks and Papenheim never seems to arrive before the Imperialists are flanked. Rushing up to block off the elevated road with Holck/Piccolomini just gets the Croats and Caracolers trashed. We are now playing that the 1st turn automatically stays "Heavy Fog". I'm also toying with the idea of trying the battle with a few extra CRs and Isolanos thrown in. (Heresy, of course). -- GK Subj: SPQR Guide Date: 95-09-30 14:32:27 EST From: GKauffmn I understand that this will go forward only if enough of us preorder. So if yall are interested, call GMT soon! Subj: Re: Balance or not To Bal . . . Date: 95-09-30 23:31:53 EST From: R Spreader Yeah, yeah. Just musing on printing up a "wargamer's excuse shirt".... ("1. Scenario unfair..."). While I haven't seen any small plastic swords, anyone who loses in my house can and will get whacked with a bokken... Subj: Re:Rookie Time Date: 95-10-01 07:40:27 EST From: BergBROG Yes, the game system IS quite different from othert games, mostly in terms of how Mark approached combat and command. And those two units sitting there "engaged". They won't for long, trust me . . . RHB Subj: Re:Lion Balance Date: 95-10-01 07:43:19 EST From: BergBROG The key to playing LION is knowing (and knowing well) how to use your cavalry. The Imp cavalry - even the caracolers - can be very effective if they are used in waves (of 3), so that there is al;ways a fresh wave to counter what Gus is doing. Caracolers can be most effective against Disrupted enemy. RHB Subj: Simplifying LION Date: 95-10-01 08:01:29 EST From: GKauffmn Here's my vote for leaving the system as is, or at least not dumbing it down too much. The cavalry system works well and manages to incorporate both cavalry firearms and shock and stay less involved than, say, Bataille or Kolin. Regards, G. Subj: Re:Simplifying LION Date: 95-10-02 06:32:23 EST From: BergBROG We actually had no intention of simplifying LION . . . perhaps cleaning up some stuff, but no system changes. However, SAMURAI, which is a peer-era game to LION is much simpler because the japanese military system, while superficially ornate, was far less complex. We just finished a marvelous test-play for Okehazama, including lots of individual combat and severed heads (and a few losses of face), a few burning castles, some of which were put out, others which caused quite a bit of mayhem in attempts to break out, and a massively historical destruction of Imawaga's main contingent by Oda Nobunaga . . .as the Imagawa boys, filled with sake, were hiding in their tents from a thunderstorm. (Bet 10 yen this will never happen again in just the right sequence as it did yesterday) . . . Whatever, it proved that Oda, outnumbered 26,000 - 3800 can win (and rather handily at that). RHB Subj: Re:Lion Balance Date: 95-10-02 08:33:52 EST From: FragilFox I'd agree with the earlier post about Lutzen-- it is more balanced than Breitenfeld, but Gus' overall superiority in troop quality and command ability has always won the day when I played it, no matter which fog rules I used. As for this being the most balanced game in the series, I would vote for the 'free- deployment, give Romans more cavalry' option in Bagradas Plains from SPQR. This game is so balanced that it usually comes down to one momentum die roll in turn 3. Real nail-biting time. Subj: just a chat Date: 95-10-04 00:03:17 EST From: R Spreader sammy sure has my intrest piqued, especially with command rules being changed the way they are, I always felt it weird that you "had" to have your leaders go in initiative order (yeah, trump for new order, but still...). regarding the last post about bagradas being most balanced with the calvary options and free deployment, first time i ever played spqr i didn't pay much attention to the superiority chart and charged the heavy cav with my roman cav (must have been possessed by the spirit of ww1). i notice though that if you can convince someone to let you move your velites into range to hit their elephants while still close to their line, they can mess them up enough to keep the romans from biting their nails. i like the big battles like ptolomy v antiochus (where is my ancient-spell checker when i need it?), and for fun i sometimes play "to the bitter end"- no army rout. this gets intresting as lines are totally gone and it becomes a race to see who rallies a line first. a q for you players of the phyruss battles, especially the last one. it seems to me that both sides will reach the stream at the same time no matter what, and whoever crosses will get stomped by their opponent. so how do you force a crossing? (i've only done this one solitare, so would be intrested in advice for both sides). Subj: Re:Asculum Date: 95-10-04 07:16:16 EST From: BergBROG Asculum is a very difficult battle . . .as the descriptions of it are most confusing. It is hard to envision how Pyrrhus suckered the Romans out of their good position, but that he did. No one is going to win that won by launching an all-out attack directly across the river at that point. I'm not sure that what I've come up with, in terms of special rules, is "reality", but, as a game, it works as well as anything else. Neat looking map, tho . . . RHB Subj: Diadochoi Date: 95-10-06 07:11:13 EST From: BergBROG As stated, the errata for Diadochoi is evailable thru email/AoL. It is short (less than a page) and contains one new rule (PH Rout) and one experimental rule - EL command. Lemme know . . . . RHB Subj: Re:Diadochoi Date: 95-10-06 15:15:30 EST From: WARTIMEMAN Where can we find this e-mail? Thanks. Subj: Re:Diadochoi Date: 95-10-07 06:57:39 EST From: BoulderG Richard, I could use a copy of the Diadochoi errata. Jim Subj: Re:Diadochoi Date: 95-10-07 13:43:54 EST From: Blancht711 I'm interested. Please send it. Thanks. Subj: Re:Diadochoi Date: 95-10-07 23:12:18 EST From: Blancht711 By send it, I mean the erratta. Thanks. Subj: Re:Lion Date: 95-10-08 18:43:48 EST From: Lorisimon I have experimented with Lion of the North on my own, have never played against anyone with it. So far as I can tell, would be a great game. Few gaming experiences as fulfilling as having your Swedes fire a double salvo into a pesky regiment of Imperials. Would consider playing by mail... but might be messy. Subj: looking for erratta? Date: 95-10-08 22:29:14 EST From: R Spreader look, go to "gaming company support", then gcs file libraries, then scroll through for the eratta. There is also a gmt board there with more gmt stuff to read. also, ignore my spelling error... Subj: Re:looking for erratta? Date: 95-10-09 05:20:25 EST From: BergBROG Except, Spreader, I haven't uploaded it yet . . . so it ain't there. RHB Subj: Re:looking for erratta? Date: 95-10-09 22:23:34 EST From: R Spreader true, but there is erratta for much of your stuff already in the library, just reminding folks that there's more than this gaming area... Subj: Re: False Errata. Date: 95-10-10 05:46:16 EST From: BergBROG Well, Spreader, there may be errata for my games in the Library, but I didn't put it there . . .so, unless Gene (GMT) did, I would treat it accordingly . . . and as somewhat suspect. RHB Subj: Luetzen Question Date: 95-10-10 13:29:10 EST From: GKauffmn Just in the middle of a very foggy Luetzen game: Does the "-3" for Reinforcements during HEAVY FOG mean more difficult to enter by 3 or easier? (Papenheim's arrival hangs in the balance . . .) Thanks, G Subj: Re: False Errata. Date: 95-10-10 22:35:48 EST From: R Spreader what i've found in gcs file libraries: waterloo erratta revised diadochii module in its entirety gba eratta some other stuff, just off the top of my head.. you didn't put it there? suspect info? perhap's it's a plot by wrg... Subj: Re:Papp in a Fog Date: 95-10-11 05:23:25 EST From: BergBROG It's been some time, but I'm pretty sure the -3 is meant to delay entrance, not help it. RHB Subj: Re: False Errata. Date: 95-10-11 05:26:06 EST From: BergBROG The so-called "revised Diadochoi module" is NOT a revision, nor is it errata . . . it is simply the last version of the rules Mark herman had on his disk. It does contain some "corrections" to the deployments, but there is nothing in that file that is not contained on the "official", 1-page Diadochoi errata. As to Waterloo and Alex, someone, not me, perhaps uploaded them into the system. It may have been GMT; but until Gene fesses up on that, I would treat it cum grano salis as they say in the 10th Legion. . . . RHB Subj: Hydaspes Scenario- Deluxe Alex Date: 95-10-11 15:17:32 EST From: WARTIMEMAN Would anybody care to put forth some suggestions on how to play with the Indians on the first turn? Their leaders look out of position on the first turn, should they just blow off the first turn and get their leaders in position for the 2nd turn or just send the 'phants charging? Or am I misinterpreting LOS for line commands? Any help would greatly appreciated. FGS Subj: Re:Hydaspes Scenario- Deluxe Ale Date: 95-10-12 07:05:09 EST From: BergBROG Can't help you on tactics, FGS - and I'm sure FragilFox will warn you away from of my advice if I did, based on my W-L record - but many Al Aficiandos feel that Hydaspes is one of the most balanced scenarios in the system. Perhaps one of those, lurking in the electronic bushes herabouts, will come forth to offer their advice. Maybe even the Playtester Extraordinaire (and breaker of deals), the Fox himself, will tell us "how" . . . (You're better off listening to him, anyway, as he beats me all the time . . .usually with some interesting rules interpretations.) RHB Subj: Re:Hydaspes Scenario- Deluxe Ale Date: 95-10-12 10:31:29 EST From: FragilFox Much as I hate to let everybody down, I've only played Hydaspes once, so I'm probably a poor choice to ask for advice. That one time degenerated into two seperate massacres, with the Companions rolling up the Indian archers at the top of the map, while the elephants stomped the phalanxes down at the bottom, Alex only winning because the phalanxes outlasted the archers. Subj: Re:Hydaspes Scenario- Deluxe Ale Date: 95-10-13 04:53:13 EST From: GMT Games Yes, Richard, those errata uploads were from me (the OGF coordinator won't take errata uploads unless they're approved by the company or the designer). As you note, however, the Diadochoi mess is neither from me, nor is it errata. BTW, I thought I had uploaded most of the GBoH errata to the libraries. If not, let me know and I'll post them. Gene Subj: Re: False Errata. Date: 95-10-14 08:12:21 EST From: Polybius Richard/Gene -- Where is the 1-page official Errata for Diadochoi located? The Strategy Library only has Mark Herman's scenario set- ups. Thanks. Subj: Wanted: Luetzen Strategy Date: 95-10-29 09:33:36 EST From: GKauffmn Well, I'm losing another one with the Imperialists. Anyone out there got any ideas how Wallenstein might throw the Swedes back?? Subj: Re:Luetzen Strategy Date: 95-10-30 06:27:55 EST From: BergBROG Much of how wall Wallenstein does depends on (a) when Pappenheim arrives, and (b) how well he handles his LW cavalry. He really has to keep it in 3 waves (as they disorder rather easily), and he has to take advantage of the fact that it is difficult for Gus's boys to get across that ditch. My feeling is that Wallenstein has to be very aggressive in keeping Gus off balance, because Pappenheim can really throw the balance his way. As to stopping Gus's foot, that one we haven't quite figured out yet . . . but it's still a cavalry battle for the most part. RHB Subj: Gus's foot Date: 95-11-23 10:35:27 EST From: GKauffmn I agree--it is the Swedish infantry brigades that inevitably destroy my Imperialists, not the Swede cav. The Swede infantry's greatest advantage seems to be the size of the individual units (albeit smaller than at Breitenfeld). The Imperialists' salvoes just don't add up to as much and those little Imperialist brigades get below half-strength much quicker than their adversaries. In designing Lino, was the difference in unit size at Luetzen based on historical info, or was it only a mechanic to illustrate Swedish superiority? -- GK Subj: Re: Lion #s Date: 95-11-24 07:08:32 EST From: BergBROG GK, we had some marvelous nu,merical info from both Sweden and germany for this game, so virtually all the units are based on actual numbers present. The Imps problem was that they were playing a game in which their opponent had changed all the rules, and it would take them a bit of time to figure out just how those rules had xchanged . . . by Leutzen they were about halfway there. RHB Subj: Re: Lion #s Date: 95-11-24 19:02:00 EST From: R Spreader <<>> Yeah, like they finally figured out ho to point their weapons _at_ the Swedes. The only direction they point the "right" way in battle #1 is their rout edge... Subj: Re: Lion #s Date: 95-11-27 09:44:40 EST From: FragilFox Historically, the Impies caught up pretty quickly-- by the time of Nordlingen, just a couple of years later, they had figured out what Gus was doing and how to beat his army, although even further down the road, Baner and Torstensson, with the remnants of the Gus' Swedes, dealt them two major losses at Wittstock and Jankov. Subj: Closed Folder Date: 96-01-09 13:14:02 EST From: OGFMusashi This folder will be closed due to inactivity. the contents will be archived and uploaded to the Strategy File Library.