OK, here the rematch AAR between myself and Alex (aka bob.). This time we are playing the Pyrrhic Victories scenario, with me as Rome trying to fend off bob. as the Greeks under Pyrrhus.
As with the last game I’m posting these AAR moves with a turn delay, which in this case will be about 12 months. So, both players are free to enter each other’s AAR threads this way, and even comment if they like. [I see now bob. is way ahead of me, with only a 6 month delay. Maybe I will follow suit ...]
Here’s the F7 screen for this scenario:
As you can see, we actually begin the game with most objectives under our control, except for two in Etruria and the southern Greek stronghold of Taras. A few other cities in Samnium of dubious loyalty are listed as uncontrolled, merely because I don’t have a non-militia in garrison there. Hopefully as the game progresses Roman loyalty there will improve past the 50% mark.
Here’s the starting map:
I’m using a new unit description method this AAR [which I get tired of later]. Rather than list each army’s power rating (which honestly, doesn’t really tell you much … last AAR if you notice I went in to battle with large power advantages and lost badly most every time), I’m using a one-letter code system for indicating the composition of each force on the map:
A: Allied legion
H: Heavy infantry (or Hoplite)
J: Javelin throwers
A capital letter indicates a unit is large (5+ elements), while a small letter indicates a small unit (1-4 elements). The color of the letter will indicate its current readiness, based on hits and fatigue losses:
Green: 91-100% of max power
Yellow: 76-90% “ “ “
Orange: 51-75% “ “ “
Red: 50% or below “ “ “
Rome starts with three armies at game start: 2 consular armies in Rome and Naples, and one smaller proconsular army in Spoletum.
My starting leaders are 1) Consul Tiberius Coruncanius in Rome, a 3-2-2 leader with Hated Occupier and Infantryman traits; 2) Consul Publius Valerius Laevinus, a 3-3-2 leader leading the southern army at Naples. He is also a Good Commander (+1 CP) and a Fast Move (+15%); 3) Proconsul Lucius Aemilius Barbela, a 3-2-1 general with the Occupier trait. His army at Spoletium has only one legion each of Romans and allies, but he does have a large elite cavalry contingent merged under a cavalry leader.
Opposing me at start are two enemies, the Greeks (including Pyrrhus and Epirans) in the far south, and the Etruscans in the north. Pyrrhus is a fairly awesome 4-4-5 leader with a whole bunch of nice traits, so, I don’t expect I’ll win too many battles versus him. I do have one key advantage over him though, and that is in replacement costs. Roman heavy infantry replacements cost only 3, while Epiran ones cost 20(!). This means that practically every large battle should be a “Pyrrhic” one for him.
Strategically, my plan at the outset is to deal with the Etruscans first, and rapidly; then turn my combined army south to deal with Pyrrhus and his rather colorful army (made up of Greek phalanxes, mercenaries, slingers, Cretan archers, elepahnts, etc.) So, Barbela will use his Fast Mover trait to move north into Etruria as fast as possible (which is tough, because the weather in Italy is Rain this turn). I will let Pyrrhus do his worst in the south for now.
I also build another Trireme to begin building up my navy (which is no match for the Tarantines). Hopefully I can make a nuisance with what I have; in furtherance of that, we will send our starting triremes on a commerce raiding mission …
We also build three new cavalry units, and supply wagons in Capua and Bovanium to help them resist sieges.
(Incidentally, I’ve noticed a database error in this scenario. Rome begins with a Liburnae unit staffed completely with trireme elements. And I believe the Tarantine navy has similar errors … a Trireme unit comprised entirely of quinqueremes, and vice-versa. This won’t have any impact on play, and is merely a cosmetic problem.)