Recommend
21 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

Lost Battles» Forums » Sessions

Subject: Alexander II of Epirus in Italy rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Society of Ancients
msg tools
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
(Reposted with permission from Here's no great matter: http://prufrockian-gleanings.blogspot.com/2014/02/alexander-...)

On the Lost Battles yahoo group there is a member who is playing a campaign derived from Phil Sabin's Empire. She usually uses DBMM to resolve the battles, but last week she posted details of the latest engagement and it sounded so interesting I decided to use it as the basis for a game of my own.

The situation is that Alexander II of Epirus, Pyrrhus's son, has joined forces with the denizens of Magna Graecia to take advantage of a Rome weakened by a just-concluded Punic War. If successful, this brave endeavour will establish once and for all the independence of the Greek city states of Southern Italy.

Alexander has brought over 15,000 phalangites, 15,000 mercenaries and 4000 horse to combine with the Tarentines.

In Lost Battles terms, his army looks like this:


25,000 phalangites organised into six average (Macedonian) and two levy (Tarentine) units.
7,500 Thracians and Illyrians, or three average heavy infantry units.
5,000 peltasts, or two heavy infantry units.
2,500 slingers, or one light infantry unit.
4000 Greek cavalry, organised as two guard veteran and two average units. Alexander and his general, Nearchus, each have a veteran unit under their personal command.
2000 Tarantine cavalry, organised as one veteran and one average unit.


The total fighting value of this force is 70.

The Romans in response send a somewhat thrown-together force comprised of 4 legions plus alae, and an additional legion and ala picked up en-route.


30,000 heavy infantry organised into twelve legionary units.
12,000 light infantry in two levy units.
4,000 cavalry organised as one veteran and three average units.


With the addition of the consul Gauis Genucius Clepsina as an average commander, the total fighting value of this force is 71.

Alexander has a gentle hill on which to deploy, while the Romans have a wood in their right centre and a steep hill on their left flank.

Turn 1 (deployment turn).

The Romans deploy with the infantry in the middle three zones, pushing forward the velites in the centre and through the wood. The cavalry is divided into a weak left and a strong right.

Alexander deploys his phalangites on the hill with the peltasts and thureophoroi in support. Nearchus leads the bulk of the cavalry against the Roman right while Alexander himself goes to the right with a view to taking the heights on the Roman left and turning the flank.


(Romans on left and Greeks on the right.)


Turn 2.

The Romans push forward all along the line and dress the cavalry for contact.


(Roman Advance.)


Roman advance.
Alexander moves forward aggressively on the right, while the slingers cause some damage (1 hit) to the unscreened legionaries who are approaching the Greek infantry. The Greek foot advance to the edge of the hill and Nearchus readies his command to receive a charge or, if one is not forthcoming, to initiate one himself.


(Greek cavalry advances.)


Turn 3.

The Romans attack all along the line. They drive off the slingers (1 hit), disorder the Tarantines (1 hit) and sow confusion amongst the peltasts holding the left of the Greek line (2 hits). On the right an unnamed tribune leads an effective charge against Nearchus who pays for his caution by seeing his Tarentine light horse and the mixed Greek cavalry unable to withstand the Roman attack (2 hits). Only tiredness prevents the Romans from following up their advantage further (they just miss scoring another hit due to the negative modifier for charging from a distance).


(Roman success in the charge.)



(The cavalry battle it out.)




(The peltasts are met with missiles from the woods.)



(The phalanx must be driven off this hill!)


Nearchus and Alexander lead the Greek ripostes as the cavalry fights continue to build in intensity. The uphill assault is treacherous, but the equites holding the hill have been shaken (1 hit). On the other end of the line Nearchus's second line of horse cut into the Roman line and fight them to a standstill (2 hits).

In the centre the phalanx is proving to be an intimating opponent as the velites and the hastati wrestle its moral and physical weight (2 hits in the centre). On the left of the infantry line the experienced Thracians hold the line against the advancing Romans and the velites fall back under a volley of spears (1 hit).


(The cavalry fight continues.)


Turn 4.


The cavalry on the hill hits back at the Tarentines with Alexander, driving them back down the slope (1 hit). The legionaries of the left make a concerted effort against the far end of the Greek line, and as they work their way into the gaps opened up by their pila and the uneven ground the troops supporting the Macedonians begin to give way (2 hits).

Elsewhere the combats have devolved into exchanges as the troops conserve their energy, but not so in the cavalry attack, where the Romans drive in again on Nearchus and his men. They hold, but barely (1 hit).


(Lines engaged.)



Alexander now commits himself and his guard to the attack and they carry the hill, breaking through on the right (1 hit - a shatter).



(Breakthrough on the right!)


The centre, seeing the success of the king, pushes against the Roman line, with dramatic results. The fresh phalangites in depth push back the Romans like rag dolls, and their line - so determined just moments before - is now on the brink of collapse (3 hits, now all the Romans in the central zone are spent).

Nearchus urges his Macedonian guard cavalrymen to remember their fame in war, and they return to the combat with renewed vigour. This time all but the veteran Italian cavalry break in the face of the Greek spears (3 hits - 2 shatters).

Everywhere now the battle favours Alexander. What can Clepsina do to turn the tide?


(The Romans are falling apart under the pressure.)


Turn 5.

The veteran cavalry on the right fall upon the flank of one overly-enthusiastic unit of pursuers, shattering them and driving them from the field (1 hit - 1 shatter), but there are three more units to deal with and the odds against the Italians are long.

Clepsina decides to pull back his demoralised centre and force the phalanx to come down off its hill to continue the fight. He cannot retreat them all, so the rest of his men hold in place to cover the withdrawal.


(Clepsina pulls back)


Nearchus and his men now overcome the last of the Italian cavalry and rush on to outflank the Roman right.


(Nearchus attacks.)


Alexander comes around behind the Roman left and threaten Clepsina's centre. The central phalanx follows up the retreating Romans while the rest of the line attacks. The Macedonians left on the hill now turn the tables on their Roman tormenters with a furious attack that leaves the legionaries confused, disorganised and demoralised (2 hits, 1 of them an all-out-attack, all units in the zone are now spent).

The thureophoroi press similarly hard and the Romans are only just holding on (1 hit).


(The Roman line fragmented and under pressure.)


Turn 6.

The consul organises his men to face the enemy as best he can. The triarii from the right join him to stiffen the resistance. Elsewhere the pockets of Roman troops flail against the enemy with no success.


(Clepsina tries to reorganise the line.)



Alexander leads the attack against the milling infantry and Clepsina rides to meet him. After a brief and bloody clash Clepsina falls (1 hit, Clepsina dies in a rally attempt - 1 shatter, 4 rout) and the end is nigh for the Romans.


(Alexander leads the charge and the last Roman resistance begins to crumble.)


Elsewhere the Macedonians attack down the hill (1 hit, all out attack) and this is enough to cause panic and the Roman flight now becomes general.


(Last rites.)



(Roman remnants.)



(The day is lost!)



Alexander has won an astounding victory, and all Italy will tremble at the news!

VPs.

Rome: 1 shattered (6vps), 8 average spent (24vps), 1 veteran spent (4vps), 2 levy spent (4vps).

Epirus: 5 average shattered (30), 1 veteran shattered (8), 1 average commander killed (12), 7 average routed (28), 3 average withdrawn (9), 2 levy routed (6) + 3 points on handicap.

38 vs 96 is a great victory for Alexander.

This was a thoroughly enjoyable game and it was interesting to see Rome really struggle against the phalanx. The lack of command points to spend on combat bonuses and the ability of the phalangites to use their depth to advantage (+1) saw a very one-sided combat in the centre, and that is what ensured that Rome would lose.

(Note that Lost Battles uses a 5x4 grid, and while you can't see it, it is present on the table in this report)
23 
 Thumb up
1.51
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
simon thornton
United Kingdom
Liverpool
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Fantastic AAR ! well done.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Very Stout
United States
Back and to the Left-
Up a Bit, Perfect
flag msg tools
An old liberal optimist
badge
An Elf, a Human, and a Dwarf walk into a bar...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't think I would attack a phalanx head on up a hill with a legion.

Why play to the defenders strengths? The legion is much better at maneuvering. Flank the Greek right (even if the scenario terrain shows the edge of the world) quickly before the Greeks can react.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Society of Ancients
msg tools
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Mycroft Stout wrote:
I don't think I would attack a phalanx head on up a hill with a legion.

Why play to the defenders strengths? The legion is much better at maneuvering. Flank the Greek right (even if the scenario terrain shows the edge of the world) quickly before the Greeks can react.


Good idea, but easier said than done unfortunately! Even though this was not a historical battle, Seeing that it wasn't possible in this case and with this particular army can perhaps give a bit of insight into why armies deployed and fought with the limitations they did.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Germany
Osnabrück
flag msg tools
                                                             oooo                             ooo                             o    o                                      o     
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thank you for this AAR!

I had some trouble assigning a year to it on the wiki page due to the conflicting dates:
- The Punic Wars: 264 to 241 BC
- Alexander II of Epirus died 242 BC
- Gaius Genucius Clepsina was born 310 BC
So the battle was after 241 BC, but before 242 BC, additionally Gauis Genucius Clepsina should not be too old to take part in the battle.

So I just assume that either the Punic Wars happened earlier or Alexander and Gaius were born and died later and wrote circa 270-240 BC
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Society of Ancients
msg tools
publisher
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ThomasAH wrote:
Thank you for this AAR!

I had some trouble assigning a year to it on the wiki page due to the conflicting dates:
- The Punic Wars: 264 to 241 BC
- Alexander II of Epirus died 242 BC
- Gaius Genucius Clepsina was born 310 BC
So the battle was after 241 BC, but before 242 BC, additionally Gauis Genucius Clepsina should not be too old to take part in the battle.

So I just assume that either the Punic Wars happened earlier or Alexander and Gaius were born and died later and wrote circa 270-240 BC


Hi Thomas, this scenario was generated by a campaign game using Empire. In the campaign the First Punic War happened earlier than it did historically while the Epirote expedition into Italy occurred later, hence the confusion! Clepsina was consul in 271BC, so the battle could be dated to around that time
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Germany
Osnabrück
flag msg tools
                                                             oooo                             ooo                             o    o                                      o     
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
SoA_BGG wrote:
Hi Thomas, this scenario was generated by a campaign game using Empire.

I know, that's why I put it in the section "Fictitious Battle Scenarios"
SoA_BGG wrote:
In the campaign the First Punic War happened earlier than it did historically while the Epirote expedition into Italy occurred later, hence the confusion! Clepsina was consul in 271BC, so the battle could be dated to around that time

So my first guess was correct, I adjusted the wiki to "circa 271 BC".
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David
New Zealand
Auckland
flag msg tools
badge
May the Great Spirit Bless all who read this.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Wonderful stuff. What a great war room and table, and miniatures. I want to come round to your place to play.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.