CRITIQUE OF "HANNIBAL: THE SECOND PUNIC WAR" ============================================ by Gary Hladik I've been interested in the Punic Wars since high school, so I was looking forward to the "Hannibal" game in S&T 141. However, remembering S&T's previous dismal treatment of the subject (S&T 53, 1975), I was also prepared for a letdown. It's just as well that I was, because in my book, S&T is now 0 for 2 on the Punic Wars. What makes this especially disappointing is that some aspects of the game are very good. In particular, the modified "House Divided" game system is an excellent foundation for a Punic War simulation. It has such potential, in fact, that I was encouraged to try and salvage the game (more on that later). As published, however, "Hannibal" has little in common with the historical events it claims to portray. Among the problems I found: 1) The game was apparently rushed to publication. In several places the Designer's Notes are inconsistent with the game, e.g. the suggestions for Hannibal's opening move. The errata takes up two and a half pages, hardly a sign of careful development. The additional advice to the Roman player in the errata suggests a serious problem with play balance (the lack of blindtest credits is probably significant here). Though the people at S&T deserve credit for attempting to fix their game, I'd be more impressed if they'd done it right the first time. 2) Diplomacy [6.0] is not handled well. Since Carthage moves first in each turn, it can take advantage of favorable diplomacy, or minimize the damage from unfavorable results. For example, if "Syracusa Surrenders," Carthage has a chance to snatch back the city before the Romans can move in. The Romans have no such opportunity after "South Italy Defects." If the city of Rome is full when "Rome Rallies,"Romans must forgo the new infantry, or Carthage will catch them outside the city and gain two easy promotions. If "Roman Impetuosity" or "Defense of Italy" is rolled, Carthage conducts its own turn with full knowledge of the upcoming Roman restrictions. Though some attempt was made to link diplomatic events to the current state of the war, the connection is too weak. "Syracusan/Macedonian Intervention", "South Italy Defects", and "Treachery" should all become more probable as Hannibal wins more victories. "Roman Impetuosity" should become less likely. 3) The game's mechanics don't fit its time scale. In a typical opening move, Hannibal storms at least five cities, promotes numerous units, and wipes out Publius. He invariably storms "II" city of Pisae before the Romans can reinforce it, a highly unlikely feat in the real world. Blockades, which should require months to take effect, are resolved before the enemy player has chance to intervene. Given a scale of one turn per year, the game needs more player segments per turn, reaction moves for the inactive player, or more limits on the active player. 4) Although I very much like the "battle board" method of resolving combat [13.0], the current rules need some tuning. The "House Divided combat sequence (defender fires all units before the attacker) is a reasonable abstraction of most Civil War battles, in which the attacker could only close by advancing into the defender's fire. It's less suitable for simulating a typical ancient hand-to-hand stand-up melee in the open, which calls for a more simultaneous procedure. On the other hand, one "House Divided" feature that should be in "Hannibal" -- and isn't -- is the die roll modifier against veteran units. This is better way to emphasize the cohesiveness of hardened troops than the current rally bonus. 5) Retreat before combat [13.3] is chancier than historically. Whenever Hannibal attacks Fabius, for example, he has a 21/36 chance of forcing battle. Since he can try several times per turn, you can kiss Fabius (and history) goodbye. Typically, the Roman shelters his new units inside cities or in Messana (protected from Hannibal by the navy) until he can build an army huge enough to survive against Hannibal. This hardly resembles the historical picture of medium-sized Roma armies operating against Hannibal for years on end. 6) An easy Siege Assault shouldn't qualify units for combat promotion [15.5]. By attacking ungarrisoned "I" cities early in the game, Hannibal makes a mockery of the supposed limit on Punic infantry promotion. Though play balance is not greatly affected -- the Romans can also promote units this way, even their cavalry (!) -- the net result is a lot more Regular and Veteran units running around the board. If the designer saw promotions as a serious limit on army size, the current rules don't reflect his intention. 7) Under the attrition rules [27.0], a marching force risks starvation, disease, and desertions any time it crosses a mountain pass. In reality, Hannibal's ordeal in the Alps was the predictable result of a winter crossing complicated by hostile tribes. Hasdrubal easily crossed the Alps in the spring of 207 BC, and Roman and Punic armies routinely crossed and recrossed the Appenines during the campaign season. Attrition in the mountains was hardly the random event S&T makes it out to be. The preceding list is by no means exhaustive, but it's sufficient to illustrate the game's shortcomings as a historical simulation. Though S&T's cover proclaims "COMPLETE HISTORICAL GAME INSIDE!", it seems that in issue 141 the emphasis is on "game" rather than "historical". Presumably this odd choice of priorities is part of the attempt to orient the game "towards people who are just getting into wargaming" (see S&T 141's editorial page). This approach is apparently a success, judging by the "favorable" feedback reported in S&T 142, but the reason is a mystery to me. The contrast between S&T's excellent historical narrative and its not-so-historical game is so striking that I can't see how anyone who actually plays the game can be fooled into thinking they're recreating the Second Punic War. Though my own credentials as a new gamer are twenty-odd years out of date, I'm pretty sure that even as a novice I'd have turned thumbs down on this sorry Roman spectacle. ==================== Revisions to "Hannibal: The Second Punic War" As a historical gamer, I'm at least as interested in the historical aspects of a wargame as in the game play (otherwise I'd play chess, which is a far better GAME than S&T will ever produce). Fortunately for the history-minded gamer, the basic system in "Hannibal" is sound, despite its numerous errors in historical detail. I delayed publishing this variant until the errata came out, hoping that some of the game's obvious mistakes would already be fixed. Unfortunately, few were, and some new bugs were introduced, e.g. more severe Naval Attrition (!) and mandatory placement of new recruits INSIDE cities (what, no tents?). Anyway, even with all the fixes to the original game, and all the fixes to S&T's "fixes", the final result isn't THAT much more complicated than S&T's version. There are, however, a LOT of changes to wade through. The following are my proposed revisions to "Hannibal: The Second Punic War". Some of the new rules include a commentary in parentheses. I suggest that the revisions be read alongside the old rules, so players can mark changes as they go. [3.0] How to Set up the Game 3.3 Add one red Recruit infantry unit to each "II" city in Italy, and put one orange Recruit infantry unit in Emporiae. (Rome and its allies had more manpower reserves than shown in S&T.) 3.4 Start Hannibal's force (including fleets) in Nova Carthago. Add 1 Elephant. (After wintering in Nova Carthago, Hannibal marched with 37 elephants, leaving 21 with Hasdrubal). 3.5 Set up all Macedonian and Syracusan land and naval units. (Only when allied fleets enter the game can Carthage match Rome's navy.) 3.6 The Carthaginian player automatically rolls "Gallic Support" in his turn 1 Diplomacy Segment (see 6.0). [4.0] Sequence of Play 4.1 Carthaginian Turn Roman Turn Diplomacy Diplomacy Recruiting Recruiting Action Action Attrition Attrition [6.0] Diplomacy (Replace S&T rule except where noted.) In this variant, each player has his own Diplomacy Segment. He rolls two dice, adjusts the result for current game situations (see below), and consults the appropriate table: Carthaginian Diplomacy Table Roman Diplomacy Table Dice Total Event Dice Total Event 2 or less Diplomatic Success -4 or less Rome Seeks Terms 3 - 6 Gallic Support -2, -3 Rome Rallies 7, 8 Barbarian Unrest -1, 0 Allied Exhaustion 9, 10 War Weariness 1, 2 Natives Restless 11 Mercenary Rebellion 3 - 6 Defense of Italy 12 Hannibal Recalled 7 - 10 No Event 13 Carthage Rallies 11 Re-defection 14 or more Carthage Seeks Terms 12 or more Numidian Rebellion All Diplomacy dice rolls are adjusted according to the following table. Adjustments are cumulative. Situation Adjustment Hannibal in Italian Theater -1 Per Carthaginian major victory -1 Per 5 victory points (see 21.4) of red or gray cities controlled by Carthage -1 A Roman leader in African Theater +1 Per Roman major victory +1 Per 5 victory points (see 21.4) of blue or gray cities controlled by Rome +1 Explanation of Diplomacy Table results: Diplomatic Success: ------------------ Roll one die. On 1, 2, or 3, South Italy defects; on 4, Macedon intervenes; on 5, Sardinia AND Corsica betray Rome; on 6, Syracusa intervenes AND Sicilia betrays Rome. Implement the events as in S&T, no more than once per game per event. If the event called for by the die roll has already occurred, roll again. If all have occurred, treat this case as "Defection" (see next). Defection: --------- Carthage chooses one unoccupied city in the Italian Theater to immediately come under Carthaginian control. Gallic Support: -------------- Carthaginian leaders may march recruit at a cost of 2 Action Points in Taurasia, Genua, Placentia, and all areas of Gallia except Massilia. Barbarian Unrest: ---------------- Same as S&T, but affecting only Carthage. War Weariness: ------------- Roll one die. On 1 or 2, Macedon is war-weary (see S&T effects); on 3 or 4, Syracusa is war-weary (see S&T); on 5 or 6, Carthage is war-weary (no units may be recruited in Carthago on this turn). The term "Syracusan units" refers to Hippocrates, all light blue units stacked with him, and all light blue units in Syracusa. Mercenary Rebellion: Same as in S&T. ------------------- Hannibal recalled: Same as S&T. ----------------- Carthage Rallies: ---------------- Same as S&T. If no recruits are available, Carthage may instead promote one dark blue unit of ANY type in Carthago. Carthage Seeks Terms: Same as S&T. -------------------- Rome Seeks Terms: Same as S&T. ---------------- Rome Rallies: ------------ Same as S&T. If no recruits are available, the Roman may instead promote one red unit of ANY type in Roma. Allied Exhaustion: ----------------- The Carthaginian player chooses one "II" city in Italy. The Roman player may not recruit there in this turn. (In 209BC, 12 Italian allies withheld their levies from Rome.) Natives Restless: ---------------- Roll one die. On a roll of 1, the Romans must remove one land unit (if any are present) from Spain; on 2 or 3 from Gallia; on 4, 5, or 6 from Genua, Placentia, or Taurasia. (The Gauls of northern Italy defeated Roman armies in 225 BC, 218 BC, and 216 BC.) Defense of Italy: ---------------- Same as S&T. This applies only if Hannibal is in the Italian Theater. Re-defection: ------------ The Roman player chooses one unoccupied city in the Italian Theater to immediately come under his control. Numidian Rebellion: ------------------ Place 1 orange Regular cavalry, 1 orange Recruit infantry, and 1 Roman Consul in East or West Numidia. Rome may have five leaders in play until this "Numidian" Consul is eliminated. The "Numidian" leader may not leave Africa; if eliminated, he can't be replaced. If a Numidian Rebellion has already occurred, treat this case as "Re-defection". (The Numidian civil war had nowhere near the favorable effect on Roman cavalry portrayed in S&T's game, but it seriously threatened Carthage's position in Africa.) [7.0] Recruiting New units MAY be placed outside a recruiting city if the city is full. (The errata sheet is too restrictive.) Units may not be recruited in a city under Blockade (see 28.0). (A city under siege can't reinforce itself!) 7.5 c If the "Numidian" Consul is in play, the Roman leader limit is 5. (This helps counterbalance the 6 potential Carthaginian leaders.) 7.6 b Eliminated Consuls and Generals MAY return to the game. (Rome and Carthage had an endless supply of mediocre military leaders.) 7.6 c During his recruiting phase, a player may remove a leader counter from its current location and place it in his capital with its "Consul" or "General" side up. (For example, a blockaded leader can be fired and a new one chosen to lead a relief force.) [8.0] Actions 8.2 Actions Initiated by Leaders The following changes and additions are made to the Action Table: Action Action Point Cost Battle - 1 AP Attempt to force battle with retreating defender - 1 AP Siege Assault: against "I" city - 1 AP against "II" city - 2 AP per defending infantry unit - +1 AP Blockade: against "I" city - 8 AP against "II" city - 10 AP against "III" city - 12 AP Forage: (see 27.0) - 6 AP (AP expenditure for battle represents pre-battle maneuvers and post-battle reorganization. Forcing combat includes pursuit, flanking moves, laying of traps, etc. When storming a city, the tougher the target, the longer the preparation, e.g. for catapults, towers, ladders, and rams. Blockade expenditures increase with the extensiveness of the siege works required. Note that S&T's rules prevent Publius from investing even a lowly "I" city on an unlucky die roll.) 8.4 SPQR (New rule) If Hannibal is in the Italian Theater at the start of the Roman Action Segment, the "senate and people of Rome" may demand action against the invader. a The Roman player adds the number of Carthaginian major victories to the roll of one die. On a result of 1 - 4, he must attack Hannibal. b The attack must be carried out by at least 10 land units (roughly a double consular army). The Roman player must use the leader who can do so with the lowest Action Point die roll (the Roman resolves ties). In the Action Segment, the designated leader is moved first. c If no Roman leader can meet the requirement, or if the designated leader rolls too few Action Points, or if Hannibal attempts retreat before combat, the SPQR requirement is satisfied. d also affects Roman Retreat Before Combat (see 13.3e). (In S&T's game, the Roman can meet the "impetuosity" requirement with one unit, and thus avoid a major defeat. This is hardly in accordance with the Romans' historical aggressiveness and valor.) [10.0] Movement 10.5 a A leader does NOT need a fleet to move alone by sea. A leader moving alone is automatically eliminated if intercepted. [13.0] Battles 13.1 Procedure - Note the attacker's Action Point costs (see 8.0). 13.2 Commanders a The Commander's ACTION Factor is used for retreat before combat. b If a force has no leader, it is considered to be commanded by a leader with a "1" Battle Factor and a "6" Action Factor. 13.3 Retreat Before Combat Retreat is automatically successful unless the attacker expends 1 Action Point to force a die roll. Ignore the S&T and errata sheet retreat rules. See 13.3f for retreat restrictions. a To determine if retreat is successful, each player rolls one die and adds it to his commander's ACTION Factor. The defender also adds to his roll according to terrain: +5 in a yellow area, +4 in a green area, or +3 in a brown area. (An energetic leader could seldom be brought to battle unless trapped, e.g. against a river.) b Same as S&T. c Same as S&T. d Ignore the Retreat by Sea rule in the errata sheet. (I suspect it was introduced because S&T's retreat rules were too restrictive. Anyway, I just can't see a force completing a leisurely embarkation with an enemy army on its heels.) e Before a Roman force can even attempt retreat, the Roman player rolls one die and adds the number of Carthaginian major victories. If the result is 4 or less, the Roman force may not retreat. All Roman leaders in the area, and all units outside the city stand and fight. (SPQR again.) f A force may retreat to a friendly city in the same area, but units over the city stacking limit must stand and fight. If the force retreats to an adjacent area, the destination is chosen according to the following criteria, in decreasing order of priority: (1) A friendly-controlled area (2) An area containing the fewest enemy land units (3) An area closer (in movement points) to a friendly area A force may NOT retreat to an area containing BOTH enemy land units AND an enemy leader, unless they are blockaded. 13.5 Setting Up Battles d Friendly leaders may set up anywhere on their side of the board. (Ignore the errata sheet. Commanders routinely accompanied a wing of their army into battle.) 13.7 Melee a In each zone, the player with Tactical Superiority (see 24.0) attacks first with one of his units. The results are applied, then the enemy player attacks with one of his units. Players alternate attacks until all eligible units in the zone have attacked. If neither has Tactical Superiority, the defender attacks first. b Players designate the target of an attack at the instant of the attack, i.e. they can take earlier combat results into account. c If all units in a zone are eliminated, subsequent friendly attacks from that zone in the same round are Flank Attacks. d Same as S&T, except that frontal attacks on ORGANIZED Veteran units add 1 to the die roll. If a Veteran unit is disorganized, fleeing, or target of a Flank Attack, the die roll is not adjusted. e Same as S&T, except that players alternate attacks in each zone. f Leaders may not stack with Elephant units. (Hannibal's charisma didn't extend to elephants.) 13.8 Flank Attacks b Cavalry units MAY Flank Attack different units. (Ignore that pesky errata sheet.) 13.9 Disorganization Effects See the errata, or S&T 143 p. 55 for the Berserk Elephant rule 13.11 Rally b Each leader may attempt to rally a number of units equal to his Battle Factor, e.g. Hannibal may attempt to rally three units. c A unit is rallied on a die roll less than or equal to its Combat Strength (Combat Strength plus one for Veterans). (This prolongs battles and helps emphasize battlefield leadership.) 13.12 Flight a Each player rolls one die and adds it to his Commander's Battle Factor. The defender also adds one for every battle round except the first. All fleeing units become Disorganized UNLESS the loser's adjusted die roll exceeds the winner's. (After a long battle, mutual exhaustion may limit pursuit.) b An organized cavalry unit attacks TWICE against fleeing units. An organized infantry or elephant attacks ONCE against fleeing INFANTRY only. (Mounted survivors were harder to catch than those on foot. I find it interesting that S&T also decided the original rules were too bloody. Did they finally playtest their game?) c Delete S&T's rule. See the new 13.3f for retreat priorities. d The leader(s) of a fleeing force is only eliminated if all friendly combat units are eliminated. 13.14 A Draw is declared at the end of FIVE battle rounds. (Draws will still be rare.) [14.0] Siege Assault 14.1 a Only infantry may attack (see 14.2). b Only infantry may defend (see 14.2). d When attacking units in a city, or the city itself, add "1" to the die roll for each point of the city's Defense Strength. Thus both Capitals are immune to Siege Assault. (In this variant, a city's fortifications are represented by the attacker die roll modifier. Its Defense Strength is a regular garrison, not just "local factions" and "militia". This frees the entire counter mix for portraying mobile forces. A city's owner may of course throw in a legion or two to thwart an expected assault or prolong resistance to a blockade, but the normal garrison can put up a good fight against all but the most determined assaults. Note that Scipio's capture of Nova Carthago was, in game terms, a lucky die roll against the intrinsic garrison only.) 14.2 Elephant and cavalry units don't participate in Siege Assaults. If present in a city when it falls, they are eliminated. (Since much of a cavalry unit's combat strength is derived from its battlefield mobility, and since it's about half the size of an infantry unit, its impact on a Siege Assault would be minimal.) [15.0] Post Combat 15.3 e A major victory in which the winner eliminates at least 10 enemy units counts as TWO major victories. (Cannae had a much bigger impact than Hannibal's previous battles.) 15.5 c After a Siege Assault, only infantry that eliminated at least one enemy infantry unit may be promoted. 15.5 d After a drawn battle, one unit on each side may be promoted. [16.0] Naval Combat 16.1 e The active fleets must check for Naval Attrition (see 27.1) before any combat takes place. 16.2 Interception is also automatic if the enemy fleets are moving to a Naval Base under friendly Blockade (see 28.0). 16.3 c Intercepting fleets return to their original base after combat. [18.0] Recruiting on the March Units may be also be recruited in friendly areas without cities. (e.g. Hannibal recruited much of his army from Bruttium.) 18.3 A player may not march recruit more than one unit per area in any one turn. (A given region has only a limited supply of recruits, ship-building supplies, etc.) 18.4 Any time after a Numidian Rebellion has occurred (see 6.0), Roman leaders may recruit Regular cavalry in the African Theater by expending 8 Action Points per recruited unit. (Numidian cavalry promotion must be part of recruitment for the Romans, who have no distinct African units.) [19.0] Promotion on the March 19.1 Roman leaders may promote only red infantry units. Carthaginian leaders may promote only dark blue cavalry units. My references all agreed that Spanish, Gallic, and Italian cavalry were outclassed by the Numidian horsemen. They also rated Roman and Italian infantry levies above Gallic and Spanish recruits.) [20.0] Neutrals 20.3 Roman units (only) may pass through Syracusa without triggering invasion. (Until Hiero's death, Syracusa was pro-Roman. Besides, the land route from Lilybaeum to Messana goes through Syracusa.) 20.4 Neutral units are all placed at the beginning of the game. [21.0] Victory 21.4 Major victories are not counted toward Victory Points (VP). VPs are earned for territorial control only. (In the long run, that's all that counts.) 21.5 Levels of victory are determined in the context of a long struggle for supremacy in the Mediterranean. Draw - VPs are equal (Carthaginian moral victory). The Third Punic War (10-20 years in the future) is a toss-up. Marginal - Winner has more VPs than the loser, and an advantage in the next war. (Note that Rome starts with enough VPs for a Marginal Victory.) Substantive - Winner has a 3 to 1 margin of Victory Points. The loser survives as an independent, but second-rate power. Decisive - Winner has a 4 to 1 margin of Victory Points. The loser survives as a client state. (Historical outcome) Overwhelming - Winner controls both capitals and all recruiting cities. Carthago (or Roma) delenda est. [24.0] Tactical Superiority 24.1 (Addition) A blockading Roman force always has tactical superiority when attacked. (Roman siege works typically faced both in and out.) 24.2 If the Commanders have equal Battle Factors, then neither side has Tactical Superiority. The Defender sets up first, attacks first in each Battle Zone, and does Battle Movement first. [26.0] Land Units in Naval Combat 26.1 Only infantry may participate. (Elephants and horses weren't much use against quinqeremes!) Either the infantry unit attacks, or the fleet carrying it attacks, but not both. 26.2 If a "III" infantry unit is attacking, enemy fleets are sunk on adie roll of 1 or 2, and captured on 3. (Captures were routine in ancient naval combat.) 26.3 Leaders do NOT participate in Naval Combat. (It makes naval combat a little too decisive for my taste.) [27.0] Attrition (Replace entire S&T rule and ignore the errata sheet.) 27.1 A force must check for attrition under the following conditions: a When a leader expends movement points above his Action Factor to cross a mountain pass, consult the Winter Attrition Table. Example: Hannibal moves from Nova Carthago to Southern Gallia (10 AP), then to Taurasia (14 AP). He must roll for attrition. b If a force exceeds the supply capacity (see 27.3) of the area it occupies during the friendly Attrition Segment, consult the Winter Attrition Table. c When a force moves by sea, consult the Naval Attrition Table once, regardless of the number of Sea Zones entered. d When a friendly city is blockaded during the friendly Attrition Segment, consult the Blockade Attrition Table (see 28.0). 27.2 Effects: Eliminate the number of units called for by the die roll. a Leaders are never affected by attrition. b If any elephants are among the units checking for Winter Attrition, they are eliminated first. c A land unit embarked on an eliminated fleet is also eliminated. d A city's Defense Strength is eliminated only after all land units in the city have also been eliminated. The city then surrenders. e Within the above limits, the owning player chooses the units to be removed from a force. 27.3 Supply a Each area on the map may supply a limited number of occupying land units. A yellow area may supply up to 15 land units, a green area 10, and a brown area 5. b In the friendly Attrition Segment, any units in excess of their area's supply capacity must check for Winter Attrition. c Units inside a city are automatically supplied, unless blockaded. d The supply capacity of an enemy-controlled area is zero, unless the friendly force expends 6 Action Points to forage. The foraging force then checks supply as if the area (NOT the city) is under friendly control. Attrition Tables Naval Winter Blockade Fleets Units City Die 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 I II III 1 - - - - - - - 1 1 2 - - - 2 - - - - - - 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 3 - - - - - 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 4 - - - - - 1 1 2 2 3 2 1 1 5 - - 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 2 2 1 6 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 3 3 4 2 3 2 Cross-reference the die roll with the number of affected units, or the size of the city. The result is the number of units lost. If a force checking Winter Attrition exceeds six units in size, apply the die roll to groups of six, plus one group of any remaining units. [28.0] Blockade 28.1 The Action Points spent to initiate a Blockade depend on the city size (see 8.0). The Blockade is initiated in the friendly Action Segment, but resolved in the enemy Attrition Segment. A Blockade ends the instant the number of friendly land units in the area falls below the Defense Strength of the defending city. 28.2 Attrition due to a friendly Blockade is resolved during the ENEMY Attrition Segment (see 27.1). 28.4 Delete this rule. 28.5 If a friendly fleet is present in a blockaded Naval Base during the Attrition Segment, no Blockade Attrition occurs. (A port supplied by sea was immune to blockade.) 28.6 The Action Points expended to initiate a Blockade include foraging, i.e. the area's supply is available to the blockading force 28.7 No Action Points are needed to maintain a Blockade as long as the required units remain in the area (see 28.1). However, Blockading units must still forage, or risk Winter Attrition. [30.0] Syracusa Same as S&T, except that attacks against defending infantry still subtract only 2 from the die roll. I have one disagreement with the map clarifications in the errata: In the histories of the Second Punic War, Tarentum is described as a bigger port than Crotona. Indeed, S&T's earlier Punic Wars game (issue #53) shows Tarentum as a "II" city. Assign the Crotona Naval Base to Tarentum instead. ==================== Players who have waded through the proposed revisions will notice that there is still no incentive for the Carthaginian player to send Hannibal across the Alps. The lack of such incentive in S&T's game may be an oversight; John Sutcliffe's advice to take "the historical route" suggests that an earlier version of the game encouraged such a course. My variant, however, reflects the view that Hannibal's historic march was a serious mistake. Hannibal's intent was to avoid the hostile Gauls on the coastal route and pass through hopefully neutral tribes to his allies in Cisalpine Gaul. He apparently wanted to avoid contact with the Romans until he reached Italy, in the reasonable belief that their morale would suffer most from defeats on Italian soil. Unfortunately, the sacrifice of nearly half his army was a high price to pay for the ultimately futile strategy of demoralizing Rome. Even worse, his roundabout invasion failed to prevent the Roman march into Spain, a move that, in John Sutcliffe's words, "was ultimately to win the war for Rome." Hindsight suggests, then, that Hannibal should have bypassed the Alps and engaged Publius in Gaul. The Roman was certainly willing to fight (he missed Hannibal by just four days at the Rhone crossing), so his force would probably have suffered the same fate as the other Roman armies that fought Hannibal in the early years of the war. John Sutcliffe's argument that "Hannibal was unsure that his army could break through at Massilia" is unconvincing, since Hannibal planned to lead that same army against other Roman legions on their home ground. Unless the terrain was so restrictive that a few Roman survivors could block the way (not reflected in the game), Hannibal might have been better off taking the coastal route to Italy. Although Hannibal invariably used this approach in playtesting, Rome still won about as often as Carthage, and usually by a wider margin (Substantive or Decisive victories vs. Marginal). Rome's resilience is such that it can still bounce back after consecutive disasters, where as Carthage has less resources to fall back on. Carthage won its only Decisive Victory with an unbroken string of battlefield triumphs and a long, grinding series of blockades. Given a revised strategy and a little more commitment from the Carthaginian leadership, this seems like a plausible balance of outcomes. Whether other players will get similar results is an interesting question. When I first started playing around with the rules to "Hannibal: The Second Punic War", I had no idea that I'd end up making so many changes, or spend so much time in the effort. However, I think this variant is much closer to history than the original certainly enjoy playing it more than S&T's version. I hope readers hardy enough to wade through all the rule changes will agree. Please Email any criticisms, suggestions, or questions to gah00@duts.ccc.amdahl.com. -- Gary Hladik