"Trebbia ; a refight using L'Art de la Guerre" Topic

Madaxeman.com is unashamedly a bit competition-gaming orientated (no sh-- Sherlock!) but occasionally I do play other sorts of games, and with Dan H from the US putting out a series of Punic Wars scenarios on the ADLG Facebook group using pretty standard sized armies, the opportunity to do a club-night refight using some little-seen classic Roman figures was too good to miss out on.

Just to prove it happened as much as anything else, I also brought along my camera and took a load of photos to cook up a short battle report as well.

The battle features a Roman army with lacklustre leadership and questionable morale against Hannibal, who has the advantage of choosing his ground, laying an ambush, and having a full head of thick luxurious hair (resulting in a post-match analysis from him delivered in the style of a Pulp Fiction era Samuel L Jackson).

In this game I commanded the inexperienced, wet and tired Roman legions in a game where setup was entirely pre-scripted and the first turn saw both sides pictched straight into battle – meaning I was essentially hoping from the off that the martial skills of the Legions would help me change history and confound Hannibals cunning plan!

The full report is available here: https://www.madaxeman.com/reports/Trebbia_2023_1.php

That Mago pun is the worst ever.
Love it.

Sounds like the scenario was a bit skewed historically speaking. This was a close run battle and the Romans managed to crack the Carthaginian main battle line leaving Hannibal with the field but hardly an overwhelming victory.

With 3/4 of the Roman army destroyed or captured, vs about 1/10 of the Carthaginian army, I don't think I'd describe it as "a close run battle". It was a decisive victory that prompted the Gauls to flock to Hannibal's banner. It's rated as one of Hannibal's great victories over the Romans.

With 3/4 of the Roman army destroyed or captured, vs about 1/10 of the Carthaginian army, I don't think I'd describe it as "a close run battle".

There is no contradiction between a battle being close run and lopsided final casualties. Zama was considered a close run battle and yet the final casualties were one sided. Most casualties in ancient battles occurred after one side gave way or fled. The fact is that the Roman centre defeated the Carthaginians and retired in good order to Placentia. With a more prudent Roman commander the battle might have turned out very differently, something a good scenario design should permit.

I think it's worth adding that in retrospect I dont think i led my troops particularly well.

I saw the opportunity to punch through the middle right from the start and went for it as my main plan in an attempt to win gloriously – and failed when my men didnt do the business for me.

Adopting a more conservative approach almost certainly would have seen a closer run outcome – but that wasnt me on this particular evening!

One thing I really do like about playing relights like this is that they do give a unique insight into the mindset of the commanders involved, and how that in turn influences the outcome – so on that front it was very illuminating, as I really wasn't playing the role of a seasoned and well read professional tabletop grognard !