As we've packed-away all the Crusaders we did nt repeat the previous game, but went for a classic encounter - Imperial Romans verses Dacians. As you will see from the pictures we went to 160mm frontage units e.g. 4 of my standard 40mm bases. The table was 8 feet by 4 feet.
|Overview of the table with dice and movement sticks|
|Roman right anchored on a hill|
|Dacian's sir - thousands of um|
|Decebalus looks confident|
The GameMy plan for the attack was to grind forward in the centre and use my two most manoeuvrable troops on the flanks to try and envelope the. By placing the Discipline level 3 Saramtians and Nobles in groups accompanied by a General they would be able to move on 2's. The Romans favoured a fairly static defence and hoped to use their greater firepower and resilience to wear-down the barbarian hordes.
|Sarmatian assault on the right|
|Dacian right pushes ahead|
|The action in the centre|
We finished with the Roman's ahead on points but with their left broken and a large force of hairy Samratians about to gobble-up the flank. So a Dacian victory was likely had be played a little longer.
The VerdictMy opponent really enjoyed the activation system as it enabled constant micro-management of the combat. As a Hearts of Iron fanatic he loves that find of thing!
The combat / activation system is certainly ingenious and does force constant decision making by the players. I guess the issue though is its pretty abstract and does nt seem to reflect "wargames logic" as its not clear what you are really allocating when you make your choices about the dice. So in the end the dice allocation matters much more than tactics or deployments as troops are nt very differentiated from each other and once the main lines clash there is nt much manoeuvre.
I suspect we'll play occasionally though as its a fun game and does give a different feel from most games I've played.