Game: Commands & Colors: Ancients Expansion Pack #1: Greece & Eastern Kingdoms

Image

Luftwaffe Flak — 2008-11-19T02:41:48+00:00

My girlfriend looking forward to rolling for her Heavies against my Mediums.

Thread: Re: Cunaxa, brother against brother...

Minedog3 — 2008-11-13T08:06:26+00:00

Cunaxa is one that deserves EPIC treatment.. but this one is hovering at the top of my play list

Thread: Cunaxa, brother against brother...

franchi — 2008-11-12T18:22:08+00:00

I played my Cunaxa scenario yesterday. For those not knowing much about this battle, it takes place right after the Peloponnesian War, in which Cyrus the Younger helped the Spartans in their final push against the Athenians. In return, the Spartans proposed to help him with 10,000 hoplites in his attempt to take his elder brother's place (Artaxerxes) as King of Persia. Their respective armies, the Imperial and the Rebel one, met at Cunaxa. If one of them gets killed, his army has no reason to keep fighting and the opponent wins an automatic victory. If not, the battle is to 7 banners, and if a Persian unit begins its turn in the Greek camp on the right it wins 1 banner.

]]>
The game followed more or less the historical battle. The Persian started sending the Chariots against the 2 light units in the Rebel center (they cannot evade and have to stand the charge), and began to advance his stronger right flank (the Rebel army does not extend that far away from the river). Some casualties in the center but nothing important. Then the Rebel started moving the Greeks towards the Persian left-center, trying to cover Cyrus and threaten Artaxerxes.

The Persians took advantage of this Greek drift to attack with Tissaphernes and his cavalry units along the river. Cyrus, when seeing a Persian MC coming to help the Chariots, went out of his lines and attacked (he is with his Companions, a special unit). Artaxerxes, seeing his brother, came out of his lines to him! First encounter, some casualties and unsuccessful leader checks: the battle continues.

Cyrus attacks his brother in return (it seems the battle will not take long!), but sees his Companions disappear after the Royal battle back, and gets to evade into the left-most Greek HI: he is safe! In the meantime, Tissaphernes has not reached the camp, but is attacking the right-most HI from the back and eliminates it.

Artaxerxes does not dare to charge Greeks, and so sends his MI against them. Once more, Cyrus sees his unit eliminated, and once more evades, but not that safe, towards one Auxilia. Clearchus is killing some Persians, but now he is fighting alone on the Persian left. The Rebels have reached 6 banners, just 1 to victory, though their situation is weak: Cyrus is screeining his Auxilia unit with other Rebel lights, but they don't seem able to get the last banner needed...

The Persians are getting closer, 5 banners, and they find the winning move: Tissaphernes attacks the LI defending the camp, and at the same time put one weak Auxilia 2 hexes away from Clearchus and his HI: they eliminate the LI in the camp, and momentum advance into it! 6-6, but they will get the 7th banner at the begining of their next turn (no Rebels are close to the camp and thus Tissaphernes will stay there, come on, just one turn and victory!)...

So Cyrus knows he is going to play his last turn... until he draws a Double Time!!! Clearchus smiles and goes for the weak Auxilia, that thought itself safe 2 hexes away and cannot stand these formidable Spartan warriors! So 7-6 for the Rebels, Cyrus breaths and Artaxerxes has to leave the Persian empire to his brother...

This was one of my first designs, but among the ones I prefer the most. It always has unexpected events happening, the fighting between brothers, one of them hiding when his army is doing better, the fighting for the camp... The direction taken by the Greeks often dictates how the battle will play, the Persian has to adapt his reaction in order to avoid them as much as possible.

I hope others will enjoy it too, it is available here in Hellenica+.pdf and in VASSAL module at CCAncients.net

Miguel

Image

franchi — 2008-11-11T13:40:56+00:00

The first night scenario: assault on Epipolae (in GreekTragedy+.pdf)

Thread: Re: Request for Franchi (Miguel)

franchi — 2008-11-11T10:13:00+00:00

The file has been uploaded HERE...

Thread: Re: THIS is Sparta!

franchi — 2008-11-11T10:11:16+00:00

I forgot that I was using minis for the leaders, and thus didn't thought about including Spartan leaders among the labels...

Now I'm back to the wooden leaders, and I have added a new file HERE with the Spartan leader labels:
]]>plus other specials for the existing armies.

Thread: Re: Request for Franchi (Miguel)

kduke — 2008-11-08T18:49:34+00:00

Ah- wonderful stuff.

I can wait for the higher rez/finer stuff.

As I requested on another matter, given the use of "sticker paper" to print this work, it's helpful to have additional images, even duplicates. That way one person can print and share with others. (Lots of CCA players out there.)

I do hope GMT adds some additional leaders to the mix for Exp 4. I know I had a discussion with someone there about the value of having a "4th leader" for Epic battles (which sometimes call for that many). And, much as I appreciated your "dots/symbols" system for differentiating the leaders that game with the games, I think your idea of alternative plume colors or trim colors or something as part of the base art would be good and useful too. If it doesn't matter to the scenario, it's easy to ignore. But maybe--just as an example-- Scenario XY has a leader who should only command cavalry... or only light troops or only warriors...

The possibilities for more detail without a lot more complexity are certainly there, with just a little bit of graphic design planning.

thanks

Thread: Re: Request for Franchi (Miguel)

franchi — 2008-11-08T17:52:36+00:00

I know the feeling, just when you think everything is OK and you're ready to just "play", someone appears with an idea that makes you re-think your storage, scenario binder, etc...

Sorry for that! It really does make a difference for me having a 2nd Greek army, not necessarily Spartan. And for large scenarios where your black army will not be big enough, you can complete it with Roman gray blocks, black and gray go well together. Having enough black Spartan HI and MI is the important point, having gray light/mounted troops to complete is not that bad. These are two pictures of my black blocks in battle:

]]> ]]>
At Chaeronea I had enough black blocks, at Pylos I needed to "hire" some Roman Aux sailors...

Thanks for your kind words (I came across your latest post at CSW too), I don't plan to travel to the states any time soon, but definitely a game and a glass of wine will be an extra motivation if the possibility arises!!!

EDIT: I didn't see your Leader request when I first typed... Well, I have been discussing in another thread about creating special leader labels. I may add a "Leader file" to my existing label file page, with the Spartans and the other "specials", just wait a few weeks till acceptance (if you are in a hurry I can e-mail it to you first!)...

Thread: Re: Camel "symbol hit"

franchi — 2008-11-08T17:33:43+00:00

kduke wrote:
Now if we just had scenarios that INCLUDED Camel troops! And does it bother anyone else that the Greek army has camel troops but the "eastern" army does not?
I thought Camels were not being "officially" used, until someone pointed out here that Magnesia has one Greek Camel vs the Romans!

And yes, I would have liked at least one Persian Camel, I missed having one when I designed my Thermopylae (I finally used MC and gave the "exotic touch" with one Elephant and one Warrior...).

They seem to add only units being used in the corresponding scenarios (like the Greek Camel in Exp#1 because of Magnesia). So I guess they will add Persian Camels ONLY if they appear in one of Exp#4 scenarios.

Thread: Re: Request for Franchi (Miguel)

kduke — 2008-11-08T17:24:11+00:00

I've just discovered your posting of the "Spartan" army, using the black blocks (banners) and some extras.

The idea of using glass stones for banner/victory counting is very nice too, and I always thought using a block for "special units" was a tad cumbersome.

Aside from the pure "Spartan" idea, just having an alternative "Greek" army is good for several scenarios-- it always did bother me to be using the "eastern" army for those Greek vs Greek scenarios.

So you've given me something ELSE to work on!

I had a single plastic carrying case that handled everything in the first two boxes wonderfully and had to scrap that for a bigger case for Exp 2 and 3. Exp 4 and 5 don't add whole new "armies" but add enough stuff that my already-crammed case #2 was going to have to be replaced. I'll just have to find room for another army box to accommodate your Spartans. (Maybe 'carry it all' Case #3 will have wheels on it!).

Again, thanks for you efforts. If you come to the states sometime, let us know and maybe some of us can meet up with you for a game or a glass of wine (or both!).

ARRGHHH! I JUST REALIZED YOUR SPARTAN SHEET HAS NO LEADERS! CAN YOU DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT?

Thread: Re: Camel "symbol hit"

kduke — 2008-11-08T17:15:07+00:00

And to answer the question not asked, why bother differentiating "symbol hit" from "crossed swords" hits?

We have several units that can ignore one or more crossed swords hits, so why not let camel troops work the same way?

Keep in mind that ranged fire and light troop close combat already don't hit on crossed swords, so this change makes camels stronger against both.

(Now if we just had scenarios that INCLUDED Camel troops! And does it bother anyone else that the Greek army has camel troops but the "eastern" army does not?

I wonder if that's one of the additions for the next expansion? I know they are fleshing out a number of things LIKE that in the army mixes, but don't recall if this one is specifically addressed.

Thread: Rundown of solo plays, Part 6

badweasel — 2008-11-05T07:09:15+00:00

This marks the last session report for my solo run through of all of the Expansion Pack 1 scenarios. The final three battles do not have an overarching theme, though the last two feature the Romans utilizing Roman Tactical Flexibility which creates some interesting tactics. I think in a few days I will write a review to go along with the session reports. But the quick opinion: definitely worth picking up.

Raphia This battle developed very oddly. The first initial moves resulted in a clash between Antiochus and the Ptolemaic left flank. This resulted in minor casualties on both sides as if the armies really did not care about fighting. Eventually the left Seleucid flank closed with the Ptolemaic army and exactly the same thing happened. Now minor casualties on both sides with neither side appearing dominant. Well, at this point the two phalanxes closed in the center. Ptolemy's army gained the upper hand and broke the Seleucid line wide open, but unfortunately was not able to capitalize. At this point the battle warmed up on the Seleucid right flank and they effectively crushed Ptolemy's forces in that area. Amazingly, there was still no winner. Nicharchus pushed his center forward to try and eliminated some units but failed to do much damage. The end finally came when Echecratus punched through the enemy line and attacked a light unit from the rear after cutting off its retreat. Very close battle.

Ptolemy 8 - Seleucia 7

Raphia The battle opened with a cunning move by Antiochus to open up his right flank to take a charge and overwhelm the Ptolemaic line. The following turn they were able to charge the completely unaware enemy line. Surprisingly, the bold attack completely failed despite a +2 on the dice roll! The Seleucid right flank was nearly annihilated by the valiant enemy troops battling back. Ptolemy tried to capitalize on this by completely sweeping this flank for the win, but could only manage a paltry four units (pathetic I know). He followed up this success with an aggressive push by Echecratus against the Seleucid left, conspicuously stealing a page from the enemy's playbook. The results were surprisingly similar, with the Seleucid troops managing to hold off the cavalry and inflict severe damage. By this time, both sides had built up a collection of center move orders and the advance of the phalanxes began. Ptolemy easily gained the upper hand with a surprise Double Time to move in and cut Nicharchus to pieces.

Ptolemy 8 - Seleucia 6

Cynoscephalae I expected the Roman army to massacre the Macedonians, which seemed to be the plan for the first part of the battle. Every time the armies clashed, the Romans came out on top: damaging units and forcing them back. The Macedonians were inflicting some light casualties, but nothing major. This was until the Roman army stalled out and could not finish off any units. The Macedonians had five units with only 1 or 2 blocks that the Romans could not seem to kill. Phillip V decided to go for a gutsy move and push his cavalry forward. The Romans had moved away from that side of the battlefield and it should be open to exploitation. The Macedonian cavalry smashed into the Roman units remaining on the left flank and swept them from the battlefield to take victory.

Macedonia 6 - Rome 3

Cynoscephalae The Romans completely manhandled the Macedonian force. The score may have been relatively close, but they stood no chance against the Romans. The Romans completely destroyed the leftmost Macedonian phalanx and supporting auxilia. They then cut through a bit of the second phalanx for the win. The gods just were not on the Macedonian side as they failed to eliminate units several times. That and the superior Roman Tactical Flexibility prevented them from capitalizing on any slight gain.

Rome 6 - Macedonia 4

Magnesia The Seleucids cleaned the map with the Roman army. The initial Seleucid move was to aggressively push their line forward to instigate the conflict. The Romans responded in similar measure by using a Counter Attack. Scipio assumed his more elite forces could cut the Seleucid army apart. The Seleucid left drew first blood with a surprise charge that annihilated the Roman right flank. So crippled, the Romans became more cautious, trying not to leave units out in the open. Antiochus witnessed this timidity and pushed his right flank forward. The Warriors and medium infantry completely dominated in combat. Clearly, this battle was not going to fall to the Romans today. The Seleucids exited the conflict with only 9 blocks of casualties! Pretty impressive in a battle to seven banners.

Seleucia 7 - Rome 1

Magnesia This time the battle was relatively different. The Seleucids attempted the same charge on the left flank, but this time it was quite unsuccessful. They managed to eliminate the Roman cavalry, but at a cost of three of their own mounted units. The Romans very slowly developed their line, while the Seleucids tried to maneuver their heavy units to the front to initiate combat. Unfortunately, the Roman light units were uncharacteristically on and managed to weaken any unit that approached them. The Roman legions were then able to finish the job and secure a victory.

Rome 7 - Seleucia 4

Thread: Re: GMT Customer Service

renza22 — 2008-11-04T12:52:08+00:00

One of my sticker sheets was cut off-centre and with overlap. Emailed the company last Friday and this Monday had a response saying that my replacement sticker sheet was on its way to Australia. If it arrives then they'll deserve my loyalty on my next expansion purchase.

Keep up the good customer service GMT.

Thread: Re: Rundown of solo plays, Part 3

CM Randall — 2008-10-31T20:59:42+00:00

Thanks for the input. I'm really getting weak willed to the temptation.

Thread: Rundown of solo plays, Part 5 (Battles of Pyrrhus)

badweasel — 2008-10-31T20:07:29+00:00

These battles were ones all involving Pyrrhus leading Epirote armies against the Romans. Interesting contrast between the two forces: Rome used very little heavy units or cavalry compared to the several heavy units and cavalry of Epirus. Requires some interesting tactics from Rome to counter this seeming disadvantage.

Heraclea Well, as expected the Epirote elephants completely panicked the entire Roman left flank. Not a single unit that began on the left flank for the Romans survived the onslaught, though they eventually eliminated the elephants. The initial phase of the battle was entirely made up of Epirote harassing fire on the Roman right flank (they started the game with: 2 Move-Fire-Move, Green Units, and Move 3 left). Though they did not take many banners they forced the Romans to advance or else be slowly whittled away. After the elimination of the elephants, the Romans regained their battlefield courage and pushed the center foot units forward for combat. It a rather lucky turn of events they almost stole victory from the Epirote army, but failed to off a leader for the win. The next turn the Epirote phalanx cut Cassius' unit to pieces.

Epirus 7 - Rome 6

Heraclea No elephant fun this time around. Instead the Romans pushed their whole line forward hard and fast. They closed with the Epirote phalanx and inflicted some casualties to earn some early banners. Unfortunately, the battle swung the other way. The Epirote phalanx completely massacred the Roman line leaving two heavy blocks remaining of the heavy and medium units (that's five total banners worth of kills). The remaining members of the phalanx pushed forward to eliminate some cavalry for the victory. Surprisingly very little movement on the Epirote right, with the elephants and cavalry only moving a single time.

Epirus 7 - Rome 5

Asculum The Epirotes smashed the Roman legion. Who says the phalanx is weaker? The initial Epirote strategy was to push the right cavalry and elephants forward. This proved devastating as the elephants and cavalry wreaked havoc on the Roman left flank. The legion was essentially cut to pieces when they made contact with the phalanx despite initiating the conflict. The Romans failed for most of the game to get any kind of consistent strategy going. They would push units forward only to have them stall out and not press the attack. The superior planning of Pyrrhus was definitely what caused the Epirote victory (6 command cards to 4).

Epirus 6 - Rome 3

Asculum The Epirote army was absolutely pathetic this battle. They were in position for an easy win with a Line Command, a couple of center moves, and a bunch of right moves to push the flank up. On the other side of the battle field, the Romans had pretty much crap to work with at the start. However, a gloriously botched Mounted Charge by the Epirotes changed all that. Somehow they managed to lose three units in the process and outside of the elephant successfully killing two units, the other four mounted units managed to kill three BLOCKS! After this, the Romans used their cavalry to pick off lone units and not close with the phalanx because of the lesson learned from last time. Pretty poor showing by Pyrrhus in this battle.

Rome 6 - Epirus 2

Beneventum This battle was very back and forth. The first phase of the battle belonged to the Epirotes as they pushed their cavalry forward to massacre the Roman right flank. The Romans responded by cutting down two of the mounted units to bring the battle closer. The Epirotes grew bold and threw their Warriors forward who were promptly cut down by the legion troops. Both sides marched towards each other with the legion harassing the light Epirote troops. The initial clash between the legion and phalanx was inconclusive with both sides taking damage and tying the battle at six banners. Pyrrhus decided to take a gamble and threw his elephants in to combat with a Mounted Charge. They failed to kill the Medium Infantry unit they attacked and were almost cut down and forced to retreat. However, luck was on their side as the Elephant Rampage killed the remaining two blocks in the unit for the win! It was almost a simultaneous victory, but the elephants failed to kill a single block of their own troops with the rampage. Very close battle.

Epirus 7 - Rome 6

Beneventum Pyrrhus got destroyed this battle. Trying to mimic his strategy from the last go through, the Epirotes through their left flank forward to try and pin the Roman cavalry. This plan... umm... kind of backfired as they failed to land a hit and instead lost two units. Not a good start. Both sides pushed their lines forward, hopefully to witness a phalanx vs. legion clash. Unfortunately, once they had closed ranks the Romans were able to cut the Epirote line to pieces. After moving into position, the Epirotes failed to draw any more center movement cards! There whole center line was stranded and could only be cut down by the better commanded legion units. The only orders they had were for the left flank (which had one unit remaining) and for the right flank (entirely composed of light skirmishers and one heavy unit). To add insult to injury, despite making over 20 attacks through the course of the battle, the Epirote ranged units failed to land a single hit! This was definitely a demonstration of Roman superiority. MVP goes to Dentatus' heavy infantry unit, which managed to claim four banners after it was reduced to one block!

Rome 7 - Epirus 1

Thread: Re: THIS is Sparta!

franchi — 2008-10-30T21:50:16+00:00

I had opened it today to check something else, and have just opened it right now. No problem at all, works fine...

Have you tried opening any other file here?

Thread: Re: THIS is Sparta!

Minedog3 — 2008-10-30T21:45:09+00:00

is it just me, or is this files corrupted? I can't make http://www.boardgamegeek.com/file/download/30547/CCA-sparta.... open.

Error message says
There was a problem reading this document (9)

not very enlightening

Thread: Rundown of solo plays, Part 4 (The Successor Wars)

badweasel — 2008-10-30T07:19:07+00:00

Over the last couple of days, I have managed to get in 8 games of C&C: A. They happened to cover all of the Successor battles in Expansion 1 (played twice of course). It's kind of bizarre, but except for one battle, the historical loser won every time. Eumenes also seemed to die a lot for whatever reason. These battles also have tons of elephant fun.

Hellespont Craterus' Successor Army quickly took the lead putting Eumenes on the defensive. Between the two armies' starting hands there were three line commands. This pretty much ensured wholesale slaughter across the battlefield. The two phalanxes eventually closed on each other with Eumenes definitely having the upper hand here. Unfortunately, Craterus took advantage on the flanks and picked off the weaker troops and cavalry. Eumenes himself fell near the end of the battle, before the remainder of his army collapsed.

Craterus 6 - Eumenes 4

Hellespont Much different than last time. Eumenes let his forces wait for Craterus to approach. The only forward motion was by the cavalry on the wings in an attempt to harass Craterus' flanks and inflict some casualties. This allowed Eumenes to take a early lead by eliminating a few light units. Then the battle began to turn as Craterus crushed the cavalry units on his left flank by cutting off retreat. As the two phalanxes approached each other, Eumenes used plenty of harassing fire to weaken the enemy units. The fire proved quite effective by preventing any of Craterus' heavy units from reaching their line! The battle was quite close though, as both sides had taken large casualties with Craterus' units barely standing. The final blow came when Craterus led an auxilia against an evading light cavalry unit and luckily managed to hit with all attacks.

Craterus 6 - Eumenes 5

Paraitacene Initially looked to be a massacre by Antigonus. Quickly taking the lead with the elephants and heavy cavalry wreaking havoc on Eumenes' flank. Eumenes eventually was able to stave them off and eliminate both units, but now both sides had severely weakened flanks on that side. As the battle progressed, the middle proved to be the decisive factor. Antigonus pushed the whole line forward with a Line Command using harassing fire to weaken Eumenes' phalanx. After the initial clash, it appeared that Antigonus would win big after destroying or severely damaging most of the center units. Eumenes struck back in a desperate win attempt by throwing the heavy cavalry and the Silver shields into combat to try and take the win. The heavy cavalry managed to score 2 banners but failed to eliminated Peithon, which would have given a win. Likewise, the Silver Shields failed to kill an evading light infantry unit despite landing three attacks. The next turn Antigonus' advanced the phalanx to eliminate a weakened heavy infantry unit.

Antigonus 7 - Eumenes 6

Paraitacene Much different flow and tempo from the last game. Both sides had Line Commands to start and so closed with their infantry. Eumenes then declared a Counterattack to further push his troops forward. The next few turns belonged solely to Eumenes who just massacred Antigonus' center taking a commanding 6 - 1 lead. The Silver Shields and the rest of the phalanx just cut Antigonus' force to pieces. In an attempt to get some banners, Antigonus ordered his last three heavy units (elephants, heavy infantry, and leader led heavy cavalry). They managed to eliminate an impressive 4 units (2 at full strength!) and a leader, bringing the game to a 6 - 6 tie! There was even an outside chance of them winning, but that required everything to fall their way, which never happens. The following turn Eumenes wisely decided to eliminate a lone auxilia block to take the lead, probably fearing Antigonus might win the following turn. After two plays, this scenario seems to be very evenly matched.

Eumenes 7 - Antigonus 6

Gabiene Very close battle. The MVP for both sides went to the elephants and mounted units. The foot units played almost no part in the game barring an initial first turn advance and volley by Antigonus' light foot units who forced two elephant retreats in the center weakening the phalanx. Eumenes pushed his left flank forward hard which essentially crushed the enemy advance until the medium cavalry routed everything. No foot units closed for an attack during the whole battle with only mounted units on the offensive. The battle was won when Eumenes' rightmost leader pushed the medium cavalry and rightmost elephants against Antigonus' line and scored three banners in one turn. Very close. Also as in the real battle, Eumenes ended up dying though not by betrayal this time.

Eumenes 7 - Antigonus 6

Gabiene Wow, Eumenes' elephants were absolutely unstoppable. They completely destroyed Antigonus' center. Again the battle was completely cavalry based. Both armies started with hands that favored a cavalry push and so they both went with that focus. Antigonus started with 4 of the 6 cards that would enable a power play from his right flank. Unfortunately they were almost completely wiped out during battle back. The elephants were just too powerful. Antigonus' troops were also unable to injure a single elephant unit. The only thing they could do was force retreats, which wasn't beneficial when the enemy elephants are only adjacent to your troops. Elephant rampage probably resulted in 6 blocks of damage throughout the game. This scenario definitely appears to favor a cavalry attack with most starting hands.

Eumenes 7 - Antigonus 3

Ipsus Umm... did not go the way I expected it to go. Looking at the lineup, I figured Seleucus' army would massacre Antigonus. They had better foot units, better cavalry, and twice as many elephants (plus an additional command card). Unfortunately for the Seleucid army, Antigonus was able to very effectively command the center phalanx which just rolled over Seleucus' central force. The elephants could not do anything against the packed heavy infantry ( a well played Rally card really helped the Antigonid units). Eventually they beat back Antigonus' army but not before heavy casualties had been taken. After the center for both sides were essentially collapsed. Demetrius advanced the Antigonid right flank completely crushing the Seleucid units (suave play of two Leaderships + 3, and a move 4 units). The only real big victories for the Seleucid army was the effectiveness of their light ranged fire which accounted for many of the casualties caused.

Antigonus 8 - Seleucus 4

Ipsus Another big victory for Antigonus. Antigonus started the battle of with an aggressive right flank push. This ended up being quite successful, wiping out the heavy chariot, light cavalry, and heavy cavalry by the end of turn three with no casualties. Seleucus tried to respond and was eventually to eliminate three of the cavalry units. The Seuleucids began to advance forward with the perfect hand to do it with. The kept getting Heavy Units, Line Command, Double Time, and Move 4 Centers to keep pushing it forward. Unfortunately Antigonus was holding onto two inspired Center Leaderships and a move 4 center. The Antigonid center massacred Seleucus' phalanx and took very little casualties from the elephants. Again, I was surprised by the ineptness of the elephants. Antigonus' light infantry also rained tons of harassing fire that really helped weaken the Seleucid line. It seemed they just had all the right cards at the right times.

Antigonus 8 - Seleucus 4

Image

franchi — 2008-10-29T18:27:49+00:00

Alexander and the Sacred Band facing each other at Chaeronea (in SacredBand.pdf)

Thread: Re: C&C Ancients Expansion No. 1 - How good?

Gemlin — 2008-10-29T18:18:21+00:00

There is now a #5 too! See GMT website

C & C: Ancients Exp. Pack #4: Imperial Rome

C & C: Ancients Exp. Pack #5: Epic Ancients I

Image

franchi — 2008-10-29T17:59:38+00:00

The Spartan triremes approaching the beach at Pylos (in GreekTragedy.pdf)

Thread: Re: Rundown of solo plays, Part 3

badweasel — 2008-10-29T06:34:38+00:00

CM Randall wrote:
Beau,

I was wondering about your thoughts on this expansion. I'm pretty new to C&C:A, but this expansion I want. The battles of Alexander have always interested me. So what is your experience? Is it worth getting even though I have not fully played the base game? I'm quickly falling into the I need all the expansions fever with Ancients..

Great quick session reports!

Randall

I have played through the first 12 scenarios from Exp. 1 and I have to say that I like them. There are several interesting river crossing scenarios and most feature unbalanced forces. Jaxartes River is a good example with a heavy Macedonian force versus an almost entirely Light Cavalry Scythian army. The battles with Alexander are definitely interesting due to the presence of the Companion Cavalry and Alexander's own ability.

Some of the scenarios are just massive with 20 units a side. If you like the base game, I'd recommend picking up this expansion. It's pretty much a slightly different take on the same thing, but when the base game is that good, you can always use more.

And in all honesty, I've only played through a third of the base game scenarios. Can't become too familiar with them as I don't want to have a huge advantage if my main opponent wants to start playing again. After I finish Exp. 1, I'll probably move back to the Truceless War scenarios and the ones in C3i. Still, Exp. 1 is good stuff.

Thread: Re: Rundown of solo plays, Part 3

CM Randall — 2008-10-29T02:36:53+00:00

Beau,

I was wondering about your thoughts on this expansion. I'm pretty new to C&C:A, but this expansion I want. The battles of Alexander have always interested me. So what is your experience? Is it worth getting even though I have not fully played the base game? I'm quickly falling into the I need all the expansions fever with Ancients..

Great quick session reports!

Randall

Thread: Rundown of solo plays, Part 3

badweasel — 2008-10-28T22:28:24+00:00

Jaxartes River Very close game. The Scythians and Macedonians kept neck and neck for the entire game. The banners started to come early when the entire center phalanx was eliminated. After that, the Macedonians achieved some kills before the game stalled out for awhile with the remaining units at full health but neither side wishing to close in to combat. The end looked in sight when the Macedonians attempted a river crossing, but were then stopped by the Scythian cavalry who almost eliminated a unit of auxilia for the win. Surprisingly, the auxilia managed to last two more turns eventually eliminating a light cavalry unit on a battle back from the river.

Macedonia 5 - Scythia 4

Gaugamela The Persians fell behind early (5-3) but through some clever moves and some luck, they managed to decimate the Macedonian center again and eliminate Alexander to pull ahead. Things were not looking good for Macedonia, but the remnants of their center managed to hold and the phalanx managed to triumph over the Persians to break the army.

Macedonia 7 - Persia 6

Gaugamela Well, finally a turn of events for the poor Persians. They tore the Macedonia center to pieces. In a single turn, they managed to eliminate the Companion cavalry, a medium cavalry, and Alexander himself. After that, there wasn't much fight left in the Macedonians as their center crumbled and the Persians picked them apart. This is despite the Macedonians receiving three Line Commands during the game, which should have allowed the center phalanx to quickly close and overwhelm.

Persia 7 - Macedonia 4

Issus Macedonia advanced slowly at the beginning in sharp contrast to the rapid Persian advance through a Move-Fire-Move. Unfortunately, the rest of the battle was all Macedonia. The phalanx in the center tore the Persian line to pieces winning 5 banners in quick succession. The Companion Cavalry led a charge on the right to add another two, which allowed an easy victory when the leftmost Macedonian medium cavalry battled back to eliminate a unit. Just a complete bloodbath.

Macedonia 8 - Persia 1

Issus Again the Macedonians win, but it was much closer this time. Unfortunately the Persians could not land any damage on the left, which was their eventual downfall as it completely collapsed. The final last gasp by them involved rolling 7 dice against a strength 1 companion cavalry and failed to roll any hits at all. The next turn the cavalry cleaned up a weak unit for the win.

Macedonia 8 - Persia 6

Hydaspes Complete massacre, the Indian elephants were completely ineffective despite closing with the center phalanx. They should have done at least some damage. Instead they petered out and were cut down in retaliation. The Indian right collapsed under a charge from the Companion Cavalry leaving only the central auxilia as a fighting force. A late last gasp push in the center by the Indians resulted in 3 banners in one turn from a courageously led auxilia unit. Unfortunately, the severely weakened Indian force could not stand up to the Macedonian counter attack.

Macedonia 7 - India 3

Hydaspes Very fast game, it last only four turns! The Macedonians began the game by advancing the center phalanx forward. After all, it proved quite successful last game. The Indians undertook a mounted charge to push the elephants and chariots into combat. They inflicted some casualties scoring only one banner though. The Macedonians retaliated with a mounted charge of their own eliminating the left most elephant and chariot units. As it seemed to be quite popular, the Indians continued the trend with a counter attack which decimated the entire center phalanx. There were almost no units left in the Macedonian center. Macedonia attempted over the next couple of turns to eliminate some elephants and/or the remaining chariot unit to no avail. The elephants eventually picked away crushing the remaining center for the win.

India 7 - Macedonia 3

Image

Vidocq81 — 2008-10-26T20:47:41+00:00

War Elephants just before the charge...

Image

Vidocq81 — 2008-10-26T19:52:11+00:00

My Oh My... real BARBARIAN!! leading a Roman army...

Thread: Rundown of solo plays, Part 2

badweasel — 2008-10-25T07:03:00+00:00

Crocus Plain Well... hmm... that was a massacre. Macedonia slowly advanced forward positioning their line together. Phocia had a line advance and pushed their army forward. They most likely need to pick units off from afar due to the lack of heavy units. Only a handful of casualties for either side to begin with, mainly retreats from the ranged fire. At this point, Phocia moved the light cavalry forward to do some harassing fire (for no effect).

The Macedonian cavalry advanced next turn and wiped the light cavalry out in a single attack by cutting off retreat. The Phocians played a second line command to further close. Their attacks nearly wiped out a unit of medium infantry, but the cost was TWO of their own medium units (the lone block survived a second attack and wiped out the second attacker as well.) The next turn the Macedonians ordered a double time to close with their heavy infantry. They managed to wipe out three units (!) and almost eliminate a unit of Auxilia for the win. Well, at this point it was 5 - 0, so the Phocians tried to get at least some points and tried to use a leader led medium infantry to pick off two weak units and the associated leader. Unfortunately, they only managed to kill one unit. The next turn the Macedonians finished off the lone Auxilia for the win.

Macedonia 6 - Phocia 1

Crocus Plain Again the Phocians lost. This time it was a lot closer, but still difficult for the Macedonians to lose. A couple more good dice rolls and they would have only won by one banner, but they still had the upper hand. Phocians used range fire again, but failed to do much damage. However they had a Clash of Shields at the right time to help break the Macedonian center. That really equalized the game some.

Macedonia 6 - Phocia 3

Granicus Absolute massacre, the Macedonians used a range attack the first turn to soften up the Persian cavalry. Persia then attempted to cross the river into combat but got beaten back. With a very powerful hand of Line Command, Double Time, and Inspired Leadership Center, Macedonia marched all of their heavy infantry across the river to fight the remainders of the Persian army. Alexander never crossed the river, but there was no need for him to get his feet wet at all. Persia only managed to eliminate 8 blocks from the game despite the use of a mounted charge and darken the sky. I will need to try this one again to see if Persia can pull it off.

Macedonia 6 - Persia 0

Granicus Much closer this time. The Persians chose to not attempt a river crossing and waited for the Macedonians to come to them. First blood came to the Persians who offed a Macedonian auxilia. However this did not last long as Alexander pushed the Companion Cavalry in an aggressive attack. Over a few turns 4 banners fell, including 3 banners in a single turn for the Companion Cavalry (unit + leader, additional unit). Things looked grim as the Macedonian heavy infantry also began to move. Luck began to swing as the Persians fought back slaughtering Alexander's push and then crushed some additional units attempting cross. This all ended with a two turns in a row Double Time that pushed the heavy infantry forward to pick off an auxilia.

Macedonia 6 - Persia 5

Image

franchi — 2008-10-22T08:59:15+00:00

Who will succeed Alexander?

Thread: Re: Rundown of my first few solo plays

badweasel — 2008-10-18T17:52:02+00:00

Well, seeing as I got them both at the same time and have played about the same number of scenarios of each. It seems that there is a lot more use of terrain in the expansion scenarios.

I also feel the scenarios may be slightly lopsided in favor of the historical victor in some cases. Not too terribly unbalanced, but it will require solid play and some luck to overcome some of the difference. On the whole, I think the scenarios are roughly more of the same. The first six are relatively light on cavalry but have some interesting mismatches of a slower, more powerful force versus a lighter ranged force.

I haven't yet played any of the ones with Alexander or Roman Superiority, which are probably decidedly different. But, I would definitely recommend giving it a try, it is at least somewhat different from the base game.

Thread: Re: Rundown of my first few solo plays

bestbandis — 2008-10-18T17:42:49+00:00

Thanks for the report. I have had this expansion since it came out, but still haven't gotten around to playing all the scenarios due to one thing or another. What's your impression of these compared to the ones in the original game?

Thread: Rundown of my first few solo plays

badweasel — 2008-10-17T20:25:25+00:00

Marathon: The battle initially was going Greece's way as they had a line advance in their starting hand and moved everyone forward one hex. Through the first few turns they managed to severely damage several Persian units (but not outright kill). Persia was able to pick off some Greek units and led for most of the game. The score finally became tied at 4, when the Persians managed to eliminate the last heavy infantry on the right flank boosting their score to 5. On the next turn, the Greeks played I Am Spartacus which only allowed them to move a whopping 2 units! They played this to the best of their advantage and managed to land three hits against a weakened Auxilia unit w/ Leader on the baseline resulting in 2 banners and the win.

Greece 6 - Persia 5

Himera: The forward Syracuse cavalry managed to eliminate three units by the end of Turn 3. Half the banners gone, Cartage tried to rally on the right side and push back the Syracuse infantry, but failed to do much damage and only eliminated a single unit of medium infantry. The Syracusans did an excellent job of protecting their weakened units and managed to hold their line together for TWO separate Line Commands. They tore the Carthaginian infantry to pieces and ended with a massacre.

Syracuse 6 - Carthage 1

Plataea: The Persians were getting decimated early and the Greeks took a fast lead by eliminating two units and a leader. The Persians did not give up, though taking heavy casualties, they focused on using their light infantry to weaken the Greek units before finally eliminating two units in one combat. Next time may need to be a bit more aggressive with the Greek army. Try and close in faster to eliminate the range units. Still it seemed as if the Greeks stalled out and couldn't advance any more.

Persia 5 - Greece 3

Leuctra: The Spartans were massacred by the Theban left flank. The other loss was the decimation of the center cavalry. The Thebans were very aggressive in marching across the battlefield and had very damaging attacks.

Thebes 4 - Sparta 1

Leuctra: Because the last battle went so fast, I decided to reset and play again. The Thebans advanced on the left again, but the Spartans had a counter attack that led to a unit of heavy infantry and the Sacred Band getting wiped out. Sparta almost eliminated a leader with a ranged attack as well, but alas it did not come to pass. Thebes hand was swamped with ranged attack cards (move-fire-move and Darken the Sky). Unfortunately, the Spartan commander capitalized and wiped the Theban left flank for the win.

Sparta 4 - Thebes 2

Mantinea: Sparta managed to grab some quick points from eliminating some heavy units from the the Theban left. This kind of stalled out as Thebes eventually tied Sparta at 3 banners before pulling ahead with 4. Both armies had decimated centers with the Spartan right also extremely weak (down to the unit of heavy infantry. Thebes pushed a cavalry unit forward to try and eliminate the last Spartan cavalry but only managed to weaken the unit before being destroyed in battle back. The next turn the weak Spartan cavalry undertook a mounted charge and eliminated the center Theban heavy infantry and leader.

Sparta 6 - Thebes 4

Thread: Re: C&C Ancients Expansion No. 1 - How good?

bestbandis — 2008-09-24T13:23:46+00:00

thepackrat wrote:
The 4th? Pray tell us what is in the 4th?

B>

The 4th? That's the 'Remove Foot From Mouth' expansion

Thread: Re: C&C Ancients Expansion No. 1 - How good?

thepackrat — 2008-09-24T11:01:32+00:00

The 4th? Pray tell us what is in the 4th?

B>

Thread: Re: C&C Ancients Expansion No. 1 - How good?

bestbandis — 2008-09-24T09:26:31+00:00

Franchi says it all. It's the expansion I like the best, though I haven't got to play as much of it as I would like, yet.

There a few too many tricks and novelty in 3rd and 4th expansions for my liking. Exp 1 is a bit more straight-up - and a lot of the battles are classics for students of Ancient history.

Thread: Re: C&C Ancients Expansion No. 1 - How good?

Jury — 2008-09-24T09:26:24+00:00

I too thoroughly enjoyed the base game of C&C Ancients. While it has been sometime since I played C&CA I would play it again if an opponent was available. I liked most of the base game scenarios. I quickly pre-ordered the 1st Expansion, in particular because I am very interested in the period it covers - the Greek, Macedonian, Pyrrhus and Successors, and some clashes between the Eastern and Roman arms -so the theme was a particular sell for me. I have played a number (but not all) of the scenarios from the 1st expansion and found them worthwhile and am pleased I got it.

I did not have as much of an interest in the Rome v Barbarians period so did not get subsequent expansions. The base game and the 1st expansion, with GMT released scenarios (e.g. The Truceless War, etc) have provided me with around forty scenarios to use which I have found more than enough given my now more limited play of the game.

If you are a very regular player of C&CA and have a particular interest in and fondness for the period represented by the 1st expansion it would be worthwhile getting, otherwise there are plenty of other games out there waiting for your dollars!

Thread: Re: C&C Ancients Expansion No. 1 - How good?

franchi — 2008-09-24T09:19:00+00:00

Exp#1 is the one I like the most, but that may mainly be because it is this period of History I like the most.
So this is something you should first take into account before buying?

The three main axes of the Exp are:
- Greek vs Persian battles.
- Alexander battles + Successors.
- Greek phalanx vs Roman legion battles.

I think the three of them offer quite different situations. Persian armies are weaker but have more missile weapons, these battles play quite differently from Base or Exp#2.

Alexander battles are the ones I was expecting already when the Base game came out (see my avatar...), and the Successors' battles are huge clashes between quite similar armies, loaded with HI, cavalry and elephants!

The Greek vs Roman battles are a good transition towards the "Roman-dominated" scenarios that follow, in particular Cynosphelae and Pydna display quite effectively how a heavy phalanx can become useless when going through rough terrain.

And remember, if you buy Exp#3 and want to play Epic scenarios, you'll need the Greek and Persian armies...

Thread: C&C Ancients Expansion No. 1 - How good?

Greggers — 2008-09-24T08:25:01+00:00

I have the C&C:Ancients base game and Expansion No. 2 (Rome vs Barbarians). I thoroughly enjoy the base game and the some of the scenarios from Expansion No. 2 - although not all.

I am very tempted to get the first expansion, but it is expensive and I already have about 40 scenarios with the base game and the second expansion.

My question is this - are the scenarios in Expansion No. 1 good enough to justify the price, bearing in mind that I have about 40 to choose from already?

I know this has been covered in some early reviews, but I would be interested to hear from people that have now played a good number of scenarios from Expansion No. 1.

Thanks,
Nigel

Thread: Re: Thebans lose Leuctra

dbucak — 2008-09-12T14:29:35+00:00

I would not have been able to get two kills without a lot of luck though, and you probably would have won the next turn.

Thread: Re: Thebans lose Leuctra

Dweeb — 2008-09-12T11:06:27+00:00

It's true that I did hold back on the right at first. I had TWO "Leadership any section" cards and an "order three units right" card. But as you say, facing the Sacred Band and your leader seemed a losing proposition regardless.

But I got lucky on my battle-back rolls, which was really the decider. If I hadn't gotten FOUR HITS on that last roll, you would have wiped that medium inf and tied the game.

Thread: Thebans lose Leuctra

dbucak — 2008-09-11T20:03:51+00:00

Before our game, Dave (BGG User Dweeb) was telling me how the Thebans broke with tradition and concentrated their forces on the left to meet the strong Spartan right. I suppose if I (the Thebans) had been able to re-enact the historical scenario, I would have been OK, but instead much of the action was in the center, with too late an advance on the left. There are only four flags in this scenario, so I didn't have time to recover.

My opening hand didn't have much left flank cards in it, but it did have a line command, an out-flanked card and a co-ordinated attack card. I delayed at first, playing an irrelevant right flank card and hoping he would advance in his right flank, so I could use my line command. Instead, he advanced his center to make a long line of infantry. I attacked his lone cavalry with mine, unsuccessfully. His counter attack sent me fleeing with just one block. His cavalry pursued mine, killing it, then attacking my auxilia on my right. I played a outflanked, advancing my heavy troops and my medium troops on the left, and using my auxlia to cut off his cavalry on the right. His cavalry was wiped out. He double timed his units in the center and took out one of my auxlia.

I was facing being crushed in the center, so I shifted focus. I used my line command on the left and advanced everything and killed a medium infantry. He played leadership on the right and removed my auxlia. I played a order three units on the left, attacking with my medium troops, my heavy troops led by Epaminodus and my other heavy troops. I resolved my medium troops first, doing some damage. However his counterattack wiped out my medium troops, ending the game.

I probably should have tried harder to attack with my heavy troops and the Sacred band in the beginning. However, with limited cards that could activate my left, I was hoping he would come into range first. However he was too smart for that, since he knew the history of the battle.

Image

Antz — 2008-08-30T23:17:36+00:00

Sheet 5

Image

Antz — 2008-08-30T23:16:52+00:00

Sheet 4

Image

Antz — 2008-08-30T23:15:51+00:00

Sheet 3

Thread: Re: GMT Customer Service

Brigz — 2008-08-10T00:05:09+00:00

Yes, GMT has excellent customer service. I was sorting out the blocks to Expansion #2 and discovered I was missing one of the elephant blocks. I shot off an email to GMT and in just a couple of days got a reply that a replacement was on the way. Excellent!!!

Thread: Re: GMT Customer Service

Arontje — 2008-07-30T04:09:17+00:00

Yes!!! I got it today. It is great to see that a company like GMT has great customer service even to those outside the US.

Thread: Re: GMT Customer Service

brandysta — 2008-07-30T03:53:35+00:00

[I love this kind of customer service. Normally it would take centuries to find a good customer service... but GMT does it even in its email and its actions. Great work.

GMT is always excellent, in this regard.

Thread: GMT Customer Service

Arontje — 2008-07-25T17:19:17+00:00

Dear BGG Community,

Last week I finally went to sticker the expansion nr 1 of CCA. I was horrified to see that of the 5 stickersheets I had nr 3 two times... and I am missing sheet 4!

So I mailed (I am from the Netherlands) to GMT. And they are sending the missing sheet to me!!!

I love this kind of customer service. Normally it would take centuries to find a good customer service... but GMT does it even in its email and its actions. Great work.

Thread: Re: Command and Colours Tournament at UK Games Expo

TommieSL — 2008-05-18T20:01:12+00:00

Thanks Richard.

Main tourney thread here... http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/313839

Thread: Command and Colours Tournament at UK Games Expo

rdenning — 2008-05-18T19:39:01+00:00

On Sunday 1st June we have a C+C Tournament at UK Games expo in Birmingham UK run by Barry Ingram.

See www.UKGamesexpo.co.uk

Thread: MEGALOPOLIS (331 BC) - HE05

franchi — 2008-04-29T10:01:23+00:00

i]See scenario list at the top of the thread[/i

I had worked on this battle a long ago, but was waiting to put it into one of the booklets. It was Sparta vs Macedon, a bloody fight! Even if Alexander was out of town, these were the two strongest armies of the time, and the battle put and end to Sparta's history as a leading power in Greece.

About the design of the scenario:

1) The Spartans chose a narrow pass, so there had to be impassable hills on both flanks. The Spartan setup is good IF they hold their position, if they go out the Macedonian numerical advantage may decide the battle.

2) Leaders are placed freely, all the journalist were following Alexander exploits and little is known on the details of this battle...

Some tips about how it plays:

1) The Macedonians have just one HI on their right, the troops here had little experience, and Antipater should lead them. But their left wing can be strong too, the warriors can charge 2 hexes away when the Spartans will venture outside the pass.

2) The Spartans should stay grouped, if you feel the need to go out DO it but split at most into 2 groups. A Double Time can be useful, as usual for the Spartans...

Miguel

Thread: TANAGRA (457 BC) - HE03

franchi — 2008-04-29T09:44:44+00:00

i]See scenario list at the top of the thread[/i

The 1st Peloponnesian War is not so well documented as the 2nd one (a pity Thucydides was not born before!), but from Mycale to Pylos I wanted at least one battle! And Tanagra seems the best suited one, one of the first Athens/Sparta encounters, and with the desertion of a cavalry unit.

About the design of the scenario:

1) The relative numbers are given by Thucydides, but I left the leader setup free. The Athenian HI are the Argives.

2) The Thessalian cavalry can desert. I chose to link it to the play of Mounted Charge, since there are 2 of these cards there is a reasonable chance for the Spartan to use them for him.

Some tips about how it plays:

1) This is a standard line vs line battle, so no particular tips. Again the Spartans have a stronger right, so they should hit there. And maybe wait for a Thessalian desertion to hit the opposite flank.

2) The Athenian should try to use the cavalry early in the battle, or at least move it a bit far away from his back...

Miguel

Thread: MYCALE (479 BC) - HE02

franchi — 2008-04-29T09:31:31+00:00

i]See scenario list at the top of the thread[/i

This battle ended the Persian Wars. It seems that it was fought on the same day as Plataea, but the latter was fought at dawn and Mycale during the afternoon. At least that's how Herodotus explains that just before Mycale began the Greeks received a "divine sign" of their victory at Plataea. And it had some interesting facts, like the Athenian/Spartan splitting, the Persian Shield Wall, or the Ionians' desertion from the Persian ranks.

About the design of the scenario:

1) The Spartans begin further away on the left, with broken ground terrain to go through. And the Athenians are close enough to the Persians to be tempted to begin the fight on their own, specially if they don't want to suffer from range fire while waiting for the Spartans to get closer.

2) The desertion of the Ionians had to be included. I finally chose to make them change sides in the same turn that a Greek unit approaches the Persian camp. They are replaced by full strength (blocks are morale, not men) Greek units, and may move and battle.

Some tips about how it plays:

1) Some historians say that there was no divine sign making the Athenians overconfident on their ability to win the battle on their own, but that they charged because the Persian were firing at them. So the Greek has to decide if he wants to hold for the Spartan arrival or not. If cards allow, he should press on the right flank in order to provoke the Ionians' desertion.

2) The Persian should delay the Spartan advance with ranged fire, or occupying the broken ground hexes and evading when possible. Fire towards the Athenians while they cross the river, they cannot Double Time directly against the wall. If you see that the Athenians are getting closer to the camp, you may use the Ionians before it is too late!

Miguel

Thread: THERMOPYLAE (480 BC) - HE01

franchi — 2008-04-29T09:03:54+00:00

i]See scenario list at the top of the thread[/i

After Greek Tragedy (Peloponnesian War) and Sacred Band (Theban battles), I thought I had already covered the biggest gaps in Greek History, but there were some battles left. So I decided to pick 5 of them and make another file, Hellenica.

The first on the list was Thermopylae, with a renewed interest after the film 300. I have enjoyed Don Clarke's scenario a lot, but I wanted to give this battle a personal try, and at the same time change some things in order to make it play closest to what I had imagined the battle to be.

About the design of the scenario:

]]>
1) Hydarnes' Flanking Force. In Don's scenario it takes almost 2/3 of the board, and almost every turn you have to choose between attacking the Greek Wall or advancing Hydarnes' troops, at the sight of the Greek player. I have given the full board for the battle, and changed this force into an "ambush", that enters the board in one turn if the Persian has the right cards (the Greek doesn't know exactly when). So the players focus on the real battle but know that some encircling is going to happen...

2) Cliffs. I wanted the Persian retreat path to be blocked by the cliffs when attacking the wall section closer to the coast (like in 300). So the wall is a bit longer and follows a diagonal, with the coast along the upper row.

3) Persian waves. I organized the Persians in three waves, the 1st very weak, the 2nd with warriors and elephants (300), and the 3rd with Xerxes himself, just in front of his camp.

4) Pre-dealt cards. The Persians begin with Darken the Sky and the Greeks with Rally, it gives the right flavor to the battle. And 20 cards are discarded before the battle, so some cards are not going to show up and the deck is smaller, if the Greek stands about 15 turns he wins! If he kills Xerxes too, but this is going to be harder...

5) When the parts of the Phokian Wall are broken, the rampart tile is replaced by a broken ground one, not easy to fight in the ruins!

Some tips about how it plays:

1) A good Persian opening is using Darken the Sky and then taking as much as you can of the 1st wave out of the Greeks' way! You will begin with some loses, but your 2nd wave should balance things out. Since there are 20 cards discarded, you may find hard to get the Inspired Leadership Left or Order Mediums card. Sometimes it may be a good choice to enter just 2 or 3 units on the left with Hydarnes, the other ones are lost but do not count as banners for the Greek.

2) The Greek should try to get 4 banners from the Persian 1st wave, and rally when elephants and warriors arrive! Don't forget that time is on your side, sometimes discarding a card on your left section may be useful. The 2 units on the right may come to help if Hydarnes is not showing up, Move-Fire-Move takes them fast to the wall.

And now you can push elephants down the cliffs!
Miguel

Thread: COMMANDS & COLORS ANCIENTS, THE FIFTH ONLINE TOURNAMENT

zatopek — 2008-04-26T21:42:27+00:00

The tournament is organized by the C&CA Vassal Players League and hosted on:

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/ccavassal/

The full rules for the tournament can be found in the Files section of that Yahoo website. The tournament winner will be awarded a $65 (US dollars) prize voucher provided by "Strategia e Tattica", the finest game store in Rome. Registration is open until May 22, 2008. The flyer for the tournament can be downloaded here:

http://www.strategiaetattica.it/PDF/OpenTournamentV_flyer.pd...

Thread: Re: Do I need this game?

kduke — 2008-04-22T17:15:21+00:00

Expansion 1 has sometimes been criticized for being nothing but "more blocks, stickers, and scenarios." They also included the improved dice (important for 1st edition owners) and lots of scenarios. There are some minor rules revisions and additions as well.

The harder-to-see part of Expansion 1 is that, while the Greek army is not very "different" from what we got used to in the base game, the Eastern army is. I'm talking about the makeup of troops, not changed rules. To play them effectively requires some new learning about tactics and combined ops.

Expansion 2 added a wonderfully heavy, mounted board, another sheet or two of terrain, plus lots more blocks and stickers (and 20+ scenarios), and some 'advanced' rules for special units, especially Roman differences. The Barbarian army is also very different.

Expansion 3 was a small one-- additional units for TWO full Roman armies to do RCW battles, another heavy board, 20+ more scenarios, and-- most important-- rules for 2 board actions. There are 4 scenarios for 2 board actions so far, one of which is based on the Exp 1 armies.

Many people like that the blocks are a lot easier to transport and set up than minies versions, but other folks simply have to be pushing lead. The Exp 1 scenarios are very interesting, fwtw.

I don't know if I've answered your question. The short answer-- "different deck or terrain" is a definite "no." Only some slight additions in rules.

Thread: Do I need this game?

DougAcker — 2008-04-22T15:54:39+00:00

I play C&C:A with my DBA troops, and hex-sized terrain using the standard rules. See my session report in C&C:A for photos. Is there any reason for me to get this game, other than to express my appreciation for RB, and the manufacturers? I have the original game, but will I get a different command deck, terrain or advanced rules with this Expansion Pack? I have already achieved the zen-like state of stickervana.

Thread: Re: SPARTANS, TONIGHT WE DINE IN HELL!

Luftwaffe Flak — 2008-04-17T14:12:41+00:00

Jedit wrote:

I don't believe the Persians do retreat. The Spartan objective in Thermopylae isn't to defeat the Persian army, it's to slow them up long enough for the main Greek army to assemble and to demoralise the Persians enough to make Plataea winnable.

The scenario isnt included in the official scenarios, its done by a fan here on the board. The way he had it setup was 6 Banners for the win or once I am Spartacus is played you dont reshuffle the deck and if you run out of cards the Greeks auto win regardless of banners. But yes indeed you could play it till one or the other is completely annihilated thats the beauty of this game almost every part of it is customizable to suit your tastes and or time restraints.

But historically, the Persians retreated at least twice, the ground they had to cover to get to the Greeks I would consider to be no mans land because the Greeks didnt move out to occupy it, nor did the Persians the Greeks didnt go back to their camp until the Persians retreated back to their camp so in my honest opinion if you compare it to WWI standards then the attackers were the ones retreating because they went back to their camp after crossing no mans land. (IE if the Germans mounted an attack against a French trench and the French held then the Germans would have to retreat back to their lines)

Thanks guys! All the best, Jon

Thread: Re: SPARTANS, TONIGHT WE DINE IN HELL!

Jedit — 2008-04-17T14:06:34+00:00

Luftwaffe Flak wrote:

So in a word no, only a few Spartans dine in hell tonight and they will be remembered ! Heres what the table looked like at the end, the brave Greeks cheering as the Persian dogs retreat!

I don't believe the Persians do retreat. The Spartan objective in Thermopylae isn't to defeat the Persian army, it's to slow them up long enough for the main Greek army to assemble and to demoralise the Persians enough to make Plataea winnable.

Thread: Re: SPARTANS, TONIGHT WE DINE IN HELL!

GeneSteeler — 2008-04-17T05:50:01+00:00

desertfox2004 wrote:
Neat report - makes me want to go and sticker-up my Expansion #1, which I just bought to complete the set! That, and watch "300" again!

Heh, I just spent the last couple nights stickering-up Exp #2 & #3

Thread: Re: SPARTANS, TONIGHT WE DINE IN HELL!

desertfox2004 — 2008-04-17T02:38:11+00:00

Neat report - makes me want to go and sticker-up my Expansion #1, which I just bought to complete the set! That, and watch "300" again!