"Basic Impetus Skirmish in Boston, MA" Topic

Boston Trained Bands ( bostontrainedbands.com ) ran a trial game of Basic Impetus ( BI ) to see how the rules compared to our other ancients rules. We've used DBA, Spearsong( ! ) , WAB and WMA.

We pulled the free rules and army lists from the company site and ran Imperial Rome against Ancient Briton. The Romans had legion, some auxilia, and a scattering or archers, medium cav and artillary. The Britons has a much larger force of foot with a few chariots, cav, and skirmishers. We used Warmaster 10 mm bases and arranged them in 8 cm by 4 cm units. Immediately we appreciated that armies based for either DBA or WMA can be put to use right away without rebasing.

The battle that followed resembled enrollment day at University of Texas more than a well arranged battle, entirely because of our unfamiliarity with the rules. In the midst of our ignoble scrum we did get a good sense for some of BI's characteristics. BI allows you to move any or all of your units. It oncorporates a movement cost for wheeling and in addition forces wheeling units to become "disordered." Disordered units fight slightly less effectively but also have to spend a turn rallying before they can wheel again. This was an interesting twist but not an undue irritation.

The other movement rules involved defining which troops can easily move through rough terrain or move in an oblique. Again the key word is "easily," with some types being disorganized as a penalty. In practice this allowed troops to get out of the way if necessary, but they would have to rally afterwards if they wished to do anything fancy next turn. We found that this allowed skirmishers to move about nimbly as we imagine they might, that warbands cruised through the woods with less penalty than legions, say, and that setting up your line well at the start was key.

Our initial setup was far less than ideal but we did wrestle our troops into combat eventually. The melee and missile rules are simple and run quickly. Certain troops have bonuses if they haven't taken damage, certain troops can disrupt charges, and certain troops get a bonus when charging certain opponents. Getting all this straight took about a minute. Our combats appeared "realistic" enough, resolving as one might expect with an occasional suprise lucky or unlucky roll. The game system seemed to leave less opportunity for those dramatic flanking rollups that one can see with WAB or WMA. I didn't find myself missing them personally. Weaker units will dissolve after a few rounds with a stronger adversary but you'll never see the sort of mayhem that a WMA flank charge can cause. In addition we didn't see cavalry being as decisive as it is in WMA. This may be because of the army lists or because of the ruleset. Either way it was nice to see infantry playing an important role.

The group was pretty enthused after the battle. It was more of a learning experience than a model of tactical genius, but after two hours of playing I think we've gotten the basics down cold. It's a managable system, quick to play, with enough color to make the armies distinct from one another. We'll be playing again and I'd recommend folks take a look for themselves.

B.

I tried the rules, but they werent to my taste. But I have a horrible suspicion I was doing it wrong.

The biggest issue I have is that units have a 'combat factor' that decreases as you take damage. This necessitated putting a marker behind each unit to keep track of just how strong it was. Didn't appeal to sense of ethsetics.

The other problem I had was that the combat factor indicated how many dice you rolled. I had a couple of combats where the forces on either side were reduced to a combat factor of 1. That meant you rolled one dice, needing a 6 to hit. And the opponent did the same. Similarly, with two units with a strength of 6 battling it out, unless you are very lucky you will probably only do one or two points of damage. So the net effect to me was that combats were slow.In these cases combats dragged on while combats in other areas (say two units with a strength of 6.

The rules were certainly easy to read and well laid out, and you cant beat free -- so give them a try!

I'm looking forward to trying out BI as well. The "track casualties" thing doesn't appeal to me, but the rest of the game seems good enough that I'll put up with it. With the full-sized bases, the markers won't be as obvious as the would be in my 1/2 scale test games.

IIRC, in close combat a second disorder will cost you a damage point, so you can even wear down those strength 6 guys after a while. But yeah, it seems like combats between tough opponents will drag on. But then again, the same thing happens in DBA with +5 elements – you won't break one unless you flank it.

I'm looking forward to trying Impetus too. The small number of units (and often of different, distinguishable types) means that a roster would be practical – though I'm not keen on that. On the other hand, decent casualty markers should be possible, with a little imagination.

I absolutely love Basic Impetus. It's the most fun I've had playing with my historical figures. I actually find it fast paced enough that it's actually exciting, and not just interesting. I don't need many figures for an army and the game is finished in under an hour, sometimes closer to 1/2 an hour. Basic Impetus is free, has tons of army lists, it's lots of fun so why not check it out?

We did try both rosters and casualty markers. For us the roster was the simpler and better looking solution.

I think the combat math can be approached from the point of view of weak vs. weak, strong vs. strong, and mismatch.

In the first case you might imagine two groups of skirmishers. They flail at each other until one side throws an extra sharp stick, whereupon their opponents rout. That seems to be the case with two people trying to roll a six on one die.

When two strong units fight you might imagine hoplites on the field. I don't remember the exact quote but it ends something like "heavy casualties are inevitable, and the loser, well they're wiped out."

Finally in the mismatch you have some skirmishers try and slow a powerful warband. The skirmishers get one shot and either bounce or disrupt the enemy. In the latter case the stronger unit has taken one hit and loses their impetus bonus.

The concepts seem reasonable enough to me, although there is no doubt that some combats can lock in and drag a few turns. I think that may also be addressed by picking the right tool for the job- ie. taking on warbands with auxilia, or using skirmishers to wear down legion before charging, that sort of thing.

Anyway, we're all painting away for the rules and will throw some armies up against each other soon-
B.

2cents from the author

I know that someone could be disafected by the idea of markers, but if it is just a visual problem, you can even improve the image of the battlefield by using real casualties, I mean figures instead of markers. I have seen excellent results.

As for the fast games I think that BI (and Impetus) is pretty bloody. This if for 3 reasons:
1) The coehsion test could be very cruel!!!
2) In many cases you can follow-up if you win a melee, with a result that more melee phases can occur within a turn.
3) disordered troops suffer more as even if they pass the test get 1 more casualty. When your VBU is 1 and you are disordered (and you cannot recover from disorder while in melee) a single 6 is lethal as you are automatically destroyed.

Ancient cavalry is not so resolutive like medieval cavalry. Troops with VBU=7 or even 8 are very hard to stop. If they charge as Fresh troops only other good heavy cavalry can try to stop them.

Also the good shooting capabilities of some troops combined with a progressive weakening of the enemy allow you more options on the right timing to charge the enemy.

Still a hoplite vs hoplite match can last more. But this was like thet fought and the wrong cohesion test could accelerate the process.