From: "Jeff Vitous" Subject: Great Battles of Caesar - Early Impressions I got home from work a couple of hours ago and a package from Chips and Bits was waiting... The following was from a playing of the battle of Vercellae, chronologically the first in the game. I chose to play the Romans in this battle against the Gauls. The first thing I noticed was how huge the battle was. The map appeared to be nearly twice as wide as the maps from the other Great Battles games. I guess this would allow for more maneuvering in certain circumstances, but this battle had the Gauls stretched wall to wall (the Roman's still had pitiful amounts of calvary). The CP actually sent a enormous wing of calvary past my over matched flank and penetrated all the way to my rear border. Presumably, this wing would have turned to attack me from behind, had the game lasted long enough to realize this strategy. Gone is the MLE command (no more maniples to extend). In its place on the tool bar is a group attack icon. While still unpredictable, the group attack seemed to work a little better than the previous games (then again, there were no pickets to see if they would glob around single units). In some cases, the attacking units even chose to penetrate and eliminate routing enemy units -- important in scoring points. This might even be useful against other human players! The organization of the Roman army has a leaders units in a block formation (as opposed to single lines). This places the bulk of a leaders command within his command range. The unit commanders were substantially unnamed tribunes, the named leaders were unattached to any formation, and seem to be able to order any unit at a cost of 1 command point. As these leaders also have higher initiative ratings (the tribunes were a generic "2"), they are quite useful in exploiting breakthroughs or rallying units. Leaders also have the ability to change the orientation of their group after issuing group orders. Given enough space, this should provide ample opportunity for group maneuvering. Also, in at least one circumstance, an i ndividual unit was able to order an attack THEN change facing. I'm not sure if this was supposed to happen, and did not go through with the attack (would a combat I initiated be resolved as a flank attack....with my flank being attacked?) As far as the units themselves, I haven't played enough yet to make too many comments. Skirmishers appear to be slightly more robust (Gallic archers sometimes withstood assaults from regular infantry units). Flank and rear attacks appear to be somewhat less devastating than before...I actually had one of my calvary units rout after attacking a Gallic calvary from behind! I don't know how wide spread this trend is. Finally, I can't say for sure since it was pretty close to the end of the turn, but I think the game ended immediately when the Gauls exceeded their withdrawal level. If this is indeed the case, then it's a change I definitely don't agree with. Some of the best battles I've had in the other Great Battles games have been those where both sides rout out (wouldn't be likely if this is the case). Often, games against other human opponents boil down to who has the most luck with momentum...now if you add the luck of the draw in turn order, it takes a little too much control of ones destiny from the players. -- Jeff Vitous jvitous@spamthis.wwa.com