"Cynoscephalae using Lost Battles" Topic

Here's a link to a brief photo report of Cynoscephalae. A good, fun game. If you've never tried Lost Battles, I'd highly recommend it – especially for people (like me) who play a lot solo.

link

Cheers,
Aaron

Pictures looked nice! Any thoughts about the rules? I have toyed with picking the book up but don't know a lot about it.

Thanks,

John

Hi John,

Lost Battles is more of a combat model than a game. It is pretty simple and straight forward but there are some subtle intricacies that really make the game work.

Units are divided into broad categories. Light Infantry, Heavy Infantry, Light Cavalry, Heavy Cavalry, Chariots and Elephants. There are sub-categories of heavy Infantry: Legionaires, Phalanx, Hoplites and archers, each with some special rules. There is also a subcategory for Indian and African elephants. These can be lead by light infantry or be deployed on their own.

The game is largely IGO-UGO where eahc player gets a certain amount of combat points. You use these points similar to DBx games for movement and combat bonuses. Leaders give exemptions that are essentially free move points and combat bonuses.

Movement is done on a broad square grid. Most units can move 1 square. Cavalry can move 2 and infantry can double or triple time. Units fight other units in adjacent squares. There is a "to-hit" number based on unit match-up. A hit results in a step reduction to the target. If a unit takes 2 hits it shatters and causes a morale check which can rout (eliminate) other units.

There are rules for generals being able to negate hits at the risk to the general. Roll high and the general keeps the affected unit fighting. Roll low, and the general is killed.

There are subtle rules such as being able to deploy deep formations of phalanx or hoplites for a combat bonus.

There are something like 27 battles in the book outlined. The game can be played as a board game or as a miniatures game. Note that Aaron (the OP) used a regular table and estimated the square grid with his eye. Speaking of grid, the entire battlefield is a 4 deep by 5 wide grid.

That's it in a nutshell. There is plenty more to learn about the game but it plays out that simply. Like I said, it is more of a model than a game and it does the job admirably.

John

"Any thoughts about the rules?"

My favourite set of Ancients rules. They use a grid and are mainly aimed at refighting historical battles, neither of which are to everyones taste. They focus on command decisions and cyclying units in and out of combat at a tacticla level. Although they seem a bit dry and abstract on first reading they do a very god job of capturing the differences between different armies, and we've done everything from classic wheeling hoplite battles to Roman vs Gauls slugfests. It is possible to replicate Cannae with these as well.

We did Cynoscephalae, an interesting scenario.

"Note that Aaron (the OP) used a regular table and estimated the square grid with his eye"

I mark the corners of the areas with rocks, trees etc. This has the advantage that you can make them bigger or smaller, very handy if someone jams 50,000 levy pikemen into one square…

"Lost Battles is more of a combat model than a game."

What's the difference?

What's the difference?

It sort of runs itself. You do make decisions but they are not as deep as some other games. Most of the "game" decisions are how you choose to use your commands. The combat decisions are largely abstract and you will likely see historical outcomes unless you are really unlucky…like the Romans in this post.

Aaron

Good account, always felt sorry for Philip and the phalanx against the legion. Does demonstrate that Flamininus' skills were more diplomatic than military. He was certainly lucky in his gifted subordinates.

I do like Lost Battles and the way you can apply sensible troop modifiers on the day. His accounts of the battles do make a lot of sense.

Garry

Thanks gents,

John L: thanks for your comments. John A and Martin have already summarised LB perfectly. The rules can seem a bit dry on paper, but once you've played it a few times (and made the inevitable rules mistakes!) it begins to come together. When you've played more and start to see all the inter-relations, Lost Battles/Strategos is revealed as a thing of beauty. Each sub-system of the design (movement, combat, morale, ground and troop scale, etc) is finely tuned to the others, so that each event has both its own and a broader significance. It's really well done.

As John mentioned, the choices you make often seem straightforward, so it's great for playing solo (and for modelling the historical events); but with the free deployment option in play there is a plenty of room for cunning ploys. Cynoscephalae begins with both armies surprised (ie, mostly undeployed), so you have to nut out the best way to deploy and then employ your troops. Played solo it's an interesting little puzzle, but played against an opponent the deployment can be quite a gripping phase of the battle, especially if the terrain is unusual, or the attack limits are high or low.

Mithridates: Flamininus will need all his diplomatic skill to explain how he couldn't shift Philip off the ridge ;-)

As it turns out, the game mirrored the historical situation quite well, with both sides getting drawn into a general engagement as they try to exploit local successes or support troops in danger. Rome just never found her unnamed tribune…

Cheers,
Aaron

"You do make decisions but they are not as deep as some other games"

Hmm, we often find the amount of decision making quite exhausting. I certainly wouldn't want to have to make any more! We like quick, simple games thuogh and this one is pushing the boundary of complexity for us.

One thing I really like is the way that armies withdraw/rout in chunks, it produces real tension and hair tearing swings in fortune. You never really know who has the upper hand. Great stuff.

Well

That's my copy ordered

Hmm, we often find the amount of decision making quite exhausting. I certainly wouldn't want to have to make any more! We like quick, simple games thuogh and this one is pushing the boundary of complexity for us.

I play pretty fast and loose which is why Aaron has sometimes hammered me but good! He used his Elephants on the front line even after they were spent. I couldn't buy a killing hit!

BTW, should probably read "combat/maneuver decision making." Command decisions are where the game shines.

John

You guys are killing me with all this tempting feedback!

Thanks for a heads up from acarhj (thanks again) I picked up the book. Looks pretty interesting so far. Any supporting sites on the net?

I know this is an old thread. I'll start a new one if no replies.

Thanks,

John

Hi John, there's a Yahoo discussion groupp

link

Paul

Thanks Paul. I signed up and am waiting for approval.

John