"A World in Arms"- A Carthage: The First Punic War PBF

Leaving a garrison of 3 SP in Massena with Field Consul Quintus Lutatius Cerco, Rome Consul Aulus Atilius Calatinus attacks Hanno’s army accompanied by Proconsul Flaccus.

30 defending SP to 28 attacking SP.

Pluses favor the attacker, Minuses favor the defender:
Force ratio -1 DRM
Cavalry advantage 0 DRM
Elite cavalry (Syracusans) -1 DRM

Roll for Attilius and Hanno’s tactical ability.

Fortuna, who was last seen caressing Calatinus’ cheek, now scratches his face, gouging one of his eyes. A 1 and a 9 are rolled for Calatinus and Hanno, respectively.

-2DRM for a total of -4

Roman horses were fed oats that have turned, sickening the Cavalry providing a major disadvantage in the battle. Or was it poison? We’ll never know.

The battle is well-fought, but the ineffective Roman Cavalry prevent any effective tactical mobility for the Romans, and despite a valiant effort by the Infantry, the result is a draw. A 9 is rolled, -4 the net result is a 5.

Hanno’s Army loses 6 SP (taken as 3 Cavalry SP) and is now at 27 SP. Calatinus’ Army is now at 22 SP. Both Armies stay in the field, eyeing one another after the draw.

But there is horrible news…

Collatinus

Calatinus was wounded after the battle, (another outlier roll, a 9. Fortuna now proceeds to stab Calatinus in the kidney with a stiletto) accidentally trampled by a horse . He will recover, but he is in grave condition.

Thus ends the Consulship of Aulus Atilius Calatinus. He opposed the war, was elected to reclaim it from disaster, was betrayed by the Senate and finally left trampled and dying by Fortuna.

Next up: Carthaginian Activations.

Cool man, good to see you here. Also great info. Very helpful for everyone, including me, I will get this to the table one day I swear :)

Ok, now we will narrate a bunch of activations in a single post, because the situation becomes static and there are now battles. Most of the activations we will see are either siege attrtition or passes.

At the battle of Messana, the Carthaginians used their cavalry to screen the infantry and save some SP. The idea is that soon we might break the siege, and cavalry inside a city is not only useless, it’s aliability, adding twice their SP in attrition SP.

But of course, despite the early Roman misjudgement and the advantageous position we are in, Messana is still in Roman hands, and we have a field army camped next to us that could attack at any moment.

However, the garrision inside the city, under the command of Fulvius, is really minor now. And there’s hope the defenders will surrender soon.

[Player commentary] Ok, so the second half of 263BC will be pretty uneventful. Everything I can activate is besieging the city and thus not really worth doing anything with (I don’t really have the strength for an assault), and the Roman player is in a similar position. The plan is to activate my fleets when the chit comes and move them so that the siege rolls hurt the small garrison left in the city and I can take it.

image

And as you can see, the activations for the turn fell exactly on the worng side, with all three siege attrition chits coming up before I could move by squadrons.

The first two siege attrition rolls were really good for the Roman player, and Messana held with two infantry SP inside.

However, the third siege attrtition did it. Despite the duumvirs being sleeping at their helms.

Messana falls!!!

The siege has been grueling for Hanno’s army, with 9SP total lost along the 3 rolls. The Carthaginians, however, are not that keen on the Syracusans. This is an alliance of convenience and they know the only reason Hiero is not diding with the Romans is because they are not doing that well. So Hanno makes the cruel decision of withdrawing rations from the Syracusans, who lose all their army to attrition.

[Player’s commentary] This forbids me from reinforcing the army (had the Carthaginians taken loses I could raise them next turn, while I can’t raise Syracusans) however I will have enough SP in the city to be willing to risk it, and this way an eventual Syracusan flip is not that damaging and won’t add yet another enemy army in Sicily.

Hanno’s starving army is surprised when the doors of Messana open and the few remaining soldiers (just Flavious’s guard and a some militia, small enough to not be represented at the game’s scale) offer surrender. Hanno reacts quickly and enters the city before the Roman field army can react. Carthaginian scouts have been good at keeping the two sides from communicating to each other. They watch the Carthaginians take the city where they suffered the grueling siege late last year. Where 4 legions melted away… All those deaths for nothing yet…

Flavius, having surrendered, walks towards the field army and joins their ranks… Silently.

Then the Romans (pulling the consul chit) lay Messana under siege. The sides have flipped. All is different yet all is still the same.

If the Carthaginians manage to hold Messana until late 260BC, thaey could have a chance to trigger the auto victory condition. However, that’s easier said than done…

Situation at the end of the turn:

End turn cleanup:

F. Devastation Phase

  • Devastation Recovery Segment. No province is devastated, so pass.
  • Devastation Attempt Segment. nobody can attempt devastation per the rules.

G. End-Turn Phase

  • Inertia Attrition Segment. Hanno’s force could be subject to inetria attrition, but the army it’s so small that there’s no loss (we check agains 5 attrtion points, 3 for undevastated Sicily, one for one Carthaginian army, 1 for 2 legions. Syracusan forces suffer no inertia or movement attrition.
  • Port Segment. Fleets need to return to port, rolling for a major disaster in a single move.II fleet checks against 8 and passes. Now in port at Catana.
  • Legion/Crew Training. No crew or legions were training.
  • Carthaginian Army Efficiency. Both Carthaginian armies increase efficiency. Gisgo to +1, Hanno to +2.
  • Recovery from Battle. Hanno’s and Hiero’s armies are no longer disrupted. Roman legions move from disorganized to disrupted.
  • Victory Determination. No Victory checks until 260BC

On to 262BC!!!

Last night I looked for this thread, but it disappeared. I was sooo disappointed. Now it is back…Hurray.

Potentially the best thread in the history of Q2three. Well maybe almost. :)

Shucks%20Ancients

Thank you, @Spaced_Cowboy

LOL, BTW, I keep reading your forum name as Navarone One Gun. Assuming that is after the “Guns of Navarone” movie or some sort.

OMG, this thread disappeared again. I hope it is due to weekday workload. Teh pulbic demands another turn (I get it though, this is a lot of work).

What a strange year. Quintus Lutatius Cerco is now alone in Massena as Proconsul. First Aulus Atilius Calatinus is gravely wounded. Now Fulvius Flaccus falls ill with the Sweating Sickness and then dies four days later. Cerco alone is in command of this siege, prorogued as Proconsul. But with no naval support to blockade the port! The Senate must send reinforcements!

Cerco

Cerco is honored above in a coin issued in 108-109 BC, honoring him as a hero of the First Punic War…we’ll see what happens here.

The elections of 262 BC produce the following leaders from L-R below:
Rome Consul Marcus Aemilius Paullus (#321)
Field Consul Gaius Aurelius Cotta, (#324)
Praetor Urbanus Gaius Sulpicius Gallus (#336)

262%20Roman%20Leaders

There guys are really good. But Fortuna hasn’t cared yet

Consul Marcus Aemilius Paullus supported the war, but only given Caudex’s assurances that the Carthaginians would back down in Sicily, rather than see the Roman Alliance shattered.
Now that Cartago is an enemy, , Paullus is elected to resolve the situation in Massena, after which strategic deliberations can be made about the next course of action. Likely, taking Syracuse. The Senate is outraged at the fall of Massena and demands that the situation be resolved as quickly as possible.

marcus-aemilius-lepidus

Marcus Aemilius Paullus is an ancestor of Marcus Aemilius Lepidus, above, who was the lesser known Triumver in the Second Triumverate with Marcus Antonius and Octavian Caesar. He will do in depicting our Rome Consul for 262 BC.

The Aemilius family is one of the oldest Patrician families in Rome, and Paullus’ abilities are even greater than Calatinus’! And the Senate is livid! Surely they will back this staunch patriot with deeds and equip him for the War they want ended now!

Marcus Aemilius Paullus makes an impassioned speech in front of the Senate! He bribes specific merchants to throw contracts and business opportunities to the families of key Senators (spends his guile point)! Every effort is made!

+2, Major Defeat previous year (only in Strategic Determination Phase), +1 Rome Consul Marcus Aemilius Paullus is in Rome, +1 Rome Consul Marcus Aemilius Paullus Uses all Guile, -2 Raid
Net modifier is +2

.

.
.
.
.
And…the Senate doesn’t care.

Senate%202

The Senate gives…yet again… 1 Legion.

The Field Consul is placed in Sicily and the Legion in Rheggium.

Next up: Carthaginian Politics, 262 BC

I note the senate is being pretty mean on raising troops, you are aware that you can disband the Consular army and re-raise one by rolling the new Consuls ability (senate permission) number rather than use the troop raising table? then you can use the troops table?
(CR 10.16) The Roman player must attempt to replace the Consular Army(s) (two legions) of the prior Consul(s) if either/both of those armies were Disbanded (CR 10.8) in the Disband Legions segment (B/1). The procedure in CR 10.13 is not used in this situation. Instead, as each affected Consul is elected/selected, the Roman player rolls for Senate Permission (CR 5.66) to replace the army. If granted, two new legions are raised and assigned to that magistrate as his Consular Army. They are placed per CR 10.2. If the Senate refuses, no army is raised. Successfully replacing an army prevents the Roman player from building Fleets. He may, however, still attempt to raise legions (CR 10.11).

That was altered in the Version 3 Playbook we are using (which eliminated that potential Manpower raising option in exchange for allowing more Roman Armies in the field). Having said that, It doesn’t do Rome much good in this particular instance. We need Massena under siege (or reinforced/secured, before it fell).

We’d like additional Armies to put other Sicilian cities under siege as well (Syracuse, for one)… That option hasn’t been achievable, as the 1 Legion we’ve been getting (on the lowest 20% of the chart each turn) have been enough to tread water on losses and contest the city/maintain the siege, and that is it.

What the Senate (and Fortuna) have provided, has been something else.

https://archive.org/download/Carl.Orff.O.FortunaTM/Carl.Orff.O.Fortuna[TM].mp3

IXh6ny

Whoa, looks like i need to get another copy of the playbook that was from the v2 one, been a while since i had this one on the table. Loving your write up, especially the graphic elements. excellent stuff.

FYI - just looking for 3.0 and found this from Alan on Consimworld

Alan Ray - Feb 14, 2018 10:26 pm (#6336 Total: 6395)

BookmarkEmail to Friend
GBoH and Ancient World Series Developer(GMT)
[Ray, Alan]
BTW – I am still not satisfied with the legion disband because it is still more restrictive than is warranted given the Roman manpower historically available. I most likely will revert back to the approach from the original published rules or something akin to that.

With some additional reflection, the original Legion Disband rules are the better solution. The changes to the draft 3.0 documents are included in the following. I am sure there are still some rough edges. I am about halfway through my current pass at the documents and when I finish I will post revised draft.

Attachments:
Revised Roman Disband Legion Rule.pdf (97 KB) (33 Downloads)
the link didn’t come over but its basically the old rule with the extra condition that the legions must be leaderless (so don’t prorogue the consul or if he’s dead) like you say wouldn’t help in siege situations, anyway enough from me I’m disrupting the flow of the narrative, i shall sit down and enjoy the story, please carry on!

You aren’t disrupting anything! This is part of the fun.

I only have 2 issues with the game, having played it here.
First, IMO it needs variance in mechanical methods beyond “tables and cascading rolls”. I know for some Grogs, even the mention of “cards” is like farting in church. But I’m not saying make it a CDG or anything, just have the same mechanics expressed using different methods than the one flavor used in the game. Maybe event cards for Auguries? Or elections/? More little subchoices fo sieges like in 1776s battle system, and also using leader ratings? Something! You know, some variance to provide the color this period deserves. I really do feel like I put my accountant eyeshade on in this one. I don’t mind at all the designer’s effects, what he is trying to do with the mechanisms; the Ancient World was an unforgiving place and death and disease stalked Armies like two stalky things. I just think that in an attempt to provide color, and the cruelty of Fortuna’s wheel, there are more colorful mechanics to use that could be mixed in. And to make the grinding slog of waiting out sieges year after year more entertaining.

Secondly, and much more pertinent. The First Punic War is a poor showcase for the system, IMO. The war was very strange, and centered around Sicily. But here is a system that allows for massive operational sweeps and fluid movement. And a humongous map! It feels like it was set up for the Second Punic War, but settled on the First instead. To use a WW2 metaphor; I feel like the table is set for the Pacific War, but we are just fighting Guadalcanal.

But, while trying to do this outlier War, it hasn’t ever been balanced. So there have been constant attempts to balance, and rebalance, for so many years, and still not really achieving the right way to do Roman Manpower (and the constant tweaking of the Victory Conditions evident as well). up to the present daty Yet the game was released 13 years ago! But I wonder if the problem isn’t the system, but just trying to model this war in the system? Translation: The system that looks like it was designed with the Second Punic War in mind (that never got made) doesn’t quite work for the First Punic War, maybe.

My most recent take is that the system does model the First Punic war quite well. It’s just a really boring war at this scale.

As you said, the system is designed for fluid movement. Yet this specific war limits Carthage to one operative army (and another idling in Carthage) and Rome to an average of 2 armies, maybe 3. In normal circumstances.

Basically, the most optimal option every pull chit is somewhat obvious (we made some mistakes, not having internalized the rules, but as we move on the situation is clearer) and therefore I don’t feel I have many decisions to make.

Granted, all this is due to Hiero winning the first battle. If Hiero flips early I think the game might open somewhat for Rome (and Carthage in the sea, maybe…

As I said before, I love the system so far, but I feel I’m playing something not that suited to its strengths. I have bought the first game in the series, and should a 2nd Punic War or someting that allows 5 or so armies per side come up, I will jump on it. I wish we had chosen the Samnnite wars instead…

Concur. To continue my metaphor, it’s a historical representation of Guadalcanal at this scale. But that’s a boring game. Though the continuous futzing with the Victory conditions, numbers of Roman Armies allowed, and manpower rules 13 years into development, makes me wonder how well it all does work for this war at this scale.

So after Hanno manages to take Messana from the Romans, the mood at Carthage shifts and Hanno-s faction, the Magonids. regain power.

As the Romans keep doing pretty badly, the new Magonid/led council decides Hanno is doing a pretty good job, so why bother even helping? In short, the Council remains as Cautious as possbile (modified roll was a -7!!!)

Since the new fleet is finally operative, Carthage decides to reinforce Hanno’s army, however, per the rules, I can only raise as many troops as I lost, which is not many. In fact, it’s so little I don’t even need to roll, since the minimum roll will allow me to reinforce the 2SP Hanno lost with Iberian infantry.

This is how things are at the beggining of 262BC:

Let’s see how the chits fall…

First chit pull is the newly appointed admiral of Carthage’s massive 180 quintireme fleet.

He decides to leave a force to defend Africa (5 squadrons or 50 ships) and sails with the rest to Sicily. Specifically Lilybaeum, where there is a port big enough to accommodate his fleet.

The going is rough, and the fleet scatters on the way.

Han Halmircar tries to reform his fleet, but he fails the continuation roll.

The fleet remains scattered. This would be bad if this was his last activation, or if, you know, the Romans had any ships left at all.

Next pull is…

Rolls are 9 Roman, 7 Carthage.

Rome has 26 attrtion SP. That’s 6SP loss. Carthage has 23 attrition SP, so 5SP loss.

As Hanno realizes the siege is going to be a hard one to go through, he decides to sacrifice the cavalry’s horses to feed his men. It does help they are Syracusan horses. (the game has a rule where you can sacrifice 2 cavalry SP during a siege to save 1 infantry SP loss).

The Romans seem to really care for their horses. They keep their cavalry and lose 6 infantry SP.

So Han Halmircar again.
the admiral gets his fleets together at Lilybaeum. Then he tries to help relieve Messana’s siege and sails there.

But first he needs to check whether he can move. He can, continuation successful. Then he moves. The transit goes well, and he takes position in the waters around Messana.

image