Battle of Ravenna: late antiquity game

[ochoin]

The initial game of 'War & Conquest' went well : quite smooth, no outrageous events and lots of good gaming surprises.

The game was to pit the invading Huns and allies under Attila against the Late Roman forces of Lepidus Crixus, Imperial legate, on the plains near Ravenna in northern Italy.

Both sides deployed:



The Romans (randomly generated) terrain favoured them.



The barbarians were strong in Hunnish, Goth & Sarmatian cavalry.





Though the Romans weren't too shabby here either and with quality infantry




The Romans were lucky in their deployment dice & mounted strong attacks, particularly on their right flank, facing the Hunnish camp.





Disaster; although the Huns did not fair too badly in various melees, the Hun Standard Bearer was killed.; triggering several morale tests



The Hun right flank was more successful for Attila's hordes:



However, the Roman infantry on this flank maintained strong lines of infantry in shieldwall formation.







And in the centre, things also looked bad for the Huns as Roman cavalry csplit up and charged:







However, at this stage, the Hun left flank collapsed & the Romans took their camp - end of game.


It could have been a closer game except for unlucky deployment dice & rather faulty deployment on the Hunnish side (sadly, I was the commander...)

donald

[BaronVonWreckedoften]

Looks lovely, but.....

.....the figures look extremely spaced out (in a purely non-narcotic sense). Now I know it's not shoulder-to-shoulder Napoleonics, but I've always thought that infantry units in Ancient-era armies had more of a rugby-scrum look to them. Am I wrong, or is there some specific reason you base the figures so far apart?

[ochoin]

.....the figures look extremely spaced out (in a purely non-narcotic sense). Now I know it's not shoulder-to-shoulder Napoleonics, but I've always thought that infantry units in Ancient-era armies had more of a rugby-scrum look to them. Am I wrong, or is there some specific reason you base the figures so far apart?

You're right. The reason - this all began as figures for a skirmish game. I kept the basing for that as it grew. You'll notice the 8 strong cavalry units? I had to double up infantry units to make them strong enough to fight but they're in 8s & 10s originally.

TBH does it matter? I tend to think of the bases themselves a 'playing pieces' & the figures are just a representative of the unit.

cheers, donald

[Spanner]

It looks impressive, mate. It reads like you had a good game, which is the ost important bit.

[Essex Boy]

Bloomin' awesome, Donald.

Clever sod.

E

[ochoin]

Thanks.

I think the period/game has potential. It remains to be approved by all of my pals, of course, before it becomes the '23 Show game- my objective.

POIs:

* including set up & put away, 3 hours! Game provides different scenarios. This one randomly chosen after we’d deployed, was capture the camp.
*seems easy to play. My opponent had read the rules previously + he still plays Warhammer with his son & W&C is quite GW-ish. He played well.
* bit of a disaster for the barbarians – they perhaps need a 2-3 more units- but also as I was overseeing the game, I forgot to shoot, move & even charge on some occasions (usual ‘ref & play’ issues). Initiative & Activation rolls were notably awful for me.
*We didn’t use all of the potential of the Personality aspect of the game (see GW) but this will add that role-play feel to future games.
* table was fairly full but may be a little too empty for a Show game??? I have no plans to buy many, if any, more figures.
I think I've bought all of Iain's stock.

donald

[Willz the Wargamer]

Very nice looking game.



Willz.