I'm curious to here from anyone who has won the battle as Hannibal. I've tested this numerous times as matched games against the best players (and others) and no one has won a game as Carthage. Any replies would be appreciated.
Deeter
Trebbia
Re: Trebbia
As we already discussed, I won it once and lost it badly against you. I agree it's harder for Carthage than the Roman but it doesn't too much unbalanced against the AI.
Maybe the best players aren't good enough to beat you with Carthage, but I'm sure you will be able to beat other people (including) playing Carthage.
Maybe the best players aren't good enough to beat you with Carthage, but I'm sure you will be able to beat other people (including) playing Carthage.
Re: Trebbia
Never won this with Carthage even against the newest players. Never seen Carthage win regardless of skill level.
Deeter
Deeter
Re: Trebbia
Maybe we could organize a Trebia Knockout tournament. Same battle over an over, and see the stats.
Re: Trebbia
Could but I'm rather tired of this scenario. No one seems to have won as Carthage (or can't be bothered to comment) so I'll take this silence as my answer.
Deeter
Deeter
-
Karvon
- Sr. Colonel - Battleship
- Posts: 1687
- Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 12:36 pm
- Location: Osaka, Japan
Re: Trebbia
I recently completed a scenario as the Carthaginians and eeked out a 60-53 win. This was my first time to play this scenario and I made one rather stupid mistake of not realizing I had a flanking force hiding in the woods on my far left until several turns into the battle.
I initially swung both of my cavalry wings supported by the lone elephants out wide to threaten envelopment. The mixed bag of infantry I immediately shifted right and then back, taking up a defensive position anchored on woods on each flank, plus a large rough patch and marsh on the left. My lights valiantly attempted to screen the line from the cloud of Roman velites, but didn't last too long given their numerical advantage. The few survivors retreated into the woods and behind the battle lines.
The Romans aggressively countered my flanking attempts by breaking off a fair number of their heavy infantry on each wing to support their inferior number of horse. On the right, with less room to work, my cavalry got chewed up and/or chased off the board, though they did manage to take out a couple of the enemy in the process. A couple of survivors plus the elephant retreated behind the battle line and then shifted behind that towards the left flank. A couple of the LH pursued broken Romans for a while then returned to harass the Romans rear. On my left, my lights shot up and broke a couple of his cavalry and then pursued them till dispersed before returning to the action. The number of heavy infantry and velites supporting his surviving cavalry made any further flanking efforts futile for my cavalry, but I had draw a significant number of his heavy foot well away from the infantry fight developing on my far right. This had actually been my secondary objective, and I now redeployed my half a dozen cavalry and a couple of LH back to right with the objective of falling on the flanks and rear of his now engaged infantry.
The infantry battle broke down into really three fights. He tried to force his way around and through the woods on my far right with just heavy foot. A Triarii unit tried to push through my waiting African spear and got slowly ground down. A couple of Hastati tried to go through the woods but got pinned by some of my infantry waiting on the far edge of the woods. Several Hastati pushed into the open ground between the two woods into my waiting line of spear and warbands. These got ground down, flanked and broken and my surviving infantry wheeled right to flank the ongoing battle beyond the woods, and left to aid the battle raging in and around the left woods. The hottest action took place on my left in the rough ground and woods anchoring my left. I initially had a few Spanish in the marsh supported by a couple of surviving LF. A couple of spear and a warband held the narrow gap between the marsh and woods. The Roman heavy foot bravely assaulted the marsh and the woods on my left. The legions took heavy losses and a number of disruptions but stubbornly persisted I managed to flank a couple of these and fragmented them, but they still refused to die - gee do I hate veteran legions. My flanking infantry from my center finally rolled a couple of them and my cavalry from my left flanking attempt slammed into the rears and flanks of a couple more, but they did not break either. My elephant and reserve cavalry charged in and finally broke a couple but the others still hung on and my elephant got flanked and died. My Spanish defending the marsh evaporated after a prolonged fending off of 2-3 heavy foot. A number of his broken heavy infantry rallied after a few turns of fleeing - did I say how much I hate veteran legions? Fortunately, my loitering LH found these guys and managed to break and pursue off 2-3. My cavalry also ran down one or two of his beat up cavalry and that got took him to the breaking point.
An honorable mention goes to my left wing elephant who took a scenic route around the Roman right to avoid his massed infantry when their cavalry comrades redeployed back to the right wing. He was doggedly chased by a pair of Triarii spear and climbed to the top of steep rough hill where the spear finally ran him down, only to discover the disordered elephant was more than happy to fight the disordered spear and slowly ground both of them down, killing a few each turn and taking no losses itself.
A few random observations.
1. In the past, I have read a number of modern histories of the Punic Wars which include accounts of the battle of Trebia. I recently read Appian's account of the battle and went back to look at Livy's and Polybius' versions. These accounts raise issues with scenario as is.
2. The Roman velites numbered 6000 and the Carthaginian lights were reported as 9000, 8000 screening plus 1000 in the ambush. That would work out o 12 elements of Velites vs 18 elements of mixed Carthaginian LF at the current scenario scale. In contrast, the scenario gives the Romans 18 elements of Velites and the Carthaginians 14 elements of LF, 12 screening and 2 in the ambush. This reverses the numeric ratio, giving the Romans a significant numeric advantage. Furthermore, accounts indicate the Velite had used up nearly all of their spears in the skirmish with the Numidian light horse which immediately preceded the battle. Thus, the scenario would be more accurate if the Romans ammo was reduced to maybe 1 or 2. Replacing the six elements of Velites with a couple more allied Gallic warbands would keep the numbers equal and make the Gallic contingent more reasonable; the exact number of these being unknown but this would put them at about half the Gallic contingent in the Carthaginian army which would be reasonable I think given a fair number of the Gauls weren't happy with Hannibal's pillaging their settlements and threw in with the Romans.
3. Accounts indicate the Carthaginians had about 40000 men in the battle , 8000 Gauls, 12000 Africans and Spanish, 9000 lights and 10000 cavalry, facing about 40-42000 Romans. While there are about 42000 Romans in the scenario, there are only about 36000 Carthaginians. Adding in 4 more LF to the screen and another Spanish, to give two equal bodies, would bring the numbers up match the historical record.
4. Appian's account has the Carthaginian horse forming behind a line of elephants on each flank contributing significantly to the quick defeat of the Roman horse on the wings. I would suggest adding an additional elephant on each wing so that the Carthaginian could space the two units a bit a part - simulating the long line - and have their horse following in support. A single elephant is too easily avoided by the Roman horse and easily dealt with by nearby infantry.
5. Given how easy it is for the Romans to swing infantry out and block of the edges to prevent envelopment it might be accurate to slightly condense the Roman front a little by shifting the Gauls back to the third line as part of the reserve with the Italian foot.
6. Opinions vary on the actual quality of the legionnaires present. Scipio, the other Consul who was recovering from wounds advocated avoiding engaging Hannibal and urged the winter be spent in drilling the troops to bring them up to snuff. Some historians speculate Sempronius raised at least some of his troops on the march enroute from Sicily to Northern Italy to face Hannibal and these were little better than raw recruits. In light of these factors, I think it might balance things out a bit more if most of the veterans were downgraded to regulars and maybe a quarter to raw. Maybe 25% veteran, 50% regular and 25% raw?
Anyway my 2 cents,
Regards,
Karvon
I initially swung both of my cavalry wings supported by the lone elephants out wide to threaten envelopment. The mixed bag of infantry I immediately shifted right and then back, taking up a defensive position anchored on woods on each flank, plus a large rough patch and marsh on the left. My lights valiantly attempted to screen the line from the cloud of Roman velites, but didn't last too long given their numerical advantage. The few survivors retreated into the woods and behind the battle lines.
The Romans aggressively countered my flanking attempts by breaking off a fair number of their heavy infantry on each wing to support their inferior number of horse. On the right, with less room to work, my cavalry got chewed up and/or chased off the board, though they did manage to take out a couple of the enemy in the process. A couple of survivors plus the elephant retreated behind the battle line and then shifted behind that towards the left flank. A couple of the LH pursued broken Romans for a while then returned to harass the Romans rear. On my left, my lights shot up and broke a couple of his cavalry and then pursued them till dispersed before returning to the action. The number of heavy infantry and velites supporting his surviving cavalry made any further flanking efforts futile for my cavalry, but I had draw a significant number of his heavy foot well away from the infantry fight developing on my far right. This had actually been my secondary objective, and I now redeployed my half a dozen cavalry and a couple of LH back to right with the objective of falling on the flanks and rear of his now engaged infantry.
The infantry battle broke down into really three fights. He tried to force his way around and through the woods on my far right with just heavy foot. A Triarii unit tried to push through my waiting African spear and got slowly ground down. A couple of Hastati tried to go through the woods but got pinned by some of my infantry waiting on the far edge of the woods. Several Hastati pushed into the open ground between the two woods into my waiting line of spear and warbands. These got ground down, flanked and broken and my surviving infantry wheeled right to flank the ongoing battle beyond the woods, and left to aid the battle raging in and around the left woods. The hottest action took place on my left in the rough ground and woods anchoring my left. I initially had a few Spanish in the marsh supported by a couple of surviving LF. A couple of spear and a warband held the narrow gap between the marsh and woods. The Roman heavy foot bravely assaulted the marsh and the woods on my left. The legions took heavy losses and a number of disruptions but stubbornly persisted I managed to flank a couple of these and fragmented them, but they still refused to die - gee do I hate veteran legions. My flanking infantry from my center finally rolled a couple of them and my cavalry from my left flanking attempt slammed into the rears and flanks of a couple more, but they did not break either. My elephant and reserve cavalry charged in and finally broke a couple but the others still hung on and my elephant got flanked and died. My Spanish defending the marsh evaporated after a prolonged fending off of 2-3 heavy foot. A number of his broken heavy infantry rallied after a few turns of fleeing - did I say how much I hate veteran legions? Fortunately, my loitering LH found these guys and managed to break and pursue off 2-3. My cavalry also ran down one or two of his beat up cavalry and that got took him to the breaking point.
An honorable mention goes to my left wing elephant who took a scenic route around the Roman right to avoid his massed infantry when their cavalry comrades redeployed back to the right wing. He was doggedly chased by a pair of Triarii spear and climbed to the top of steep rough hill where the spear finally ran him down, only to discover the disordered elephant was more than happy to fight the disordered spear and slowly ground both of them down, killing a few each turn and taking no losses itself.
A few random observations.
1. In the past, I have read a number of modern histories of the Punic Wars which include accounts of the battle of Trebia. I recently read Appian's account of the battle and went back to look at Livy's and Polybius' versions. These accounts raise issues with scenario as is.
2. The Roman velites numbered 6000 and the Carthaginian lights were reported as 9000, 8000 screening plus 1000 in the ambush. That would work out o 12 elements of Velites vs 18 elements of mixed Carthaginian LF at the current scenario scale. In contrast, the scenario gives the Romans 18 elements of Velites and the Carthaginians 14 elements of LF, 12 screening and 2 in the ambush. This reverses the numeric ratio, giving the Romans a significant numeric advantage. Furthermore, accounts indicate the Velite had used up nearly all of their spears in the skirmish with the Numidian light horse which immediately preceded the battle. Thus, the scenario would be more accurate if the Romans ammo was reduced to maybe 1 or 2. Replacing the six elements of Velites with a couple more allied Gallic warbands would keep the numbers equal and make the Gallic contingent more reasonable; the exact number of these being unknown but this would put them at about half the Gallic contingent in the Carthaginian army which would be reasonable I think given a fair number of the Gauls weren't happy with Hannibal's pillaging their settlements and threw in with the Romans.
3. Accounts indicate the Carthaginians had about 40000 men in the battle , 8000 Gauls, 12000 Africans and Spanish, 9000 lights and 10000 cavalry, facing about 40-42000 Romans. While there are about 42000 Romans in the scenario, there are only about 36000 Carthaginians. Adding in 4 more LF to the screen and another Spanish, to give two equal bodies, would bring the numbers up match the historical record.
4. Appian's account has the Carthaginian horse forming behind a line of elephants on each flank contributing significantly to the quick defeat of the Roman horse on the wings. I would suggest adding an additional elephant on each wing so that the Carthaginian could space the two units a bit a part - simulating the long line - and have their horse following in support. A single elephant is too easily avoided by the Roman horse and easily dealt with by nearby infantry.
5. Given how easy it is for the Romans to swing infantry out and block of the edges to prevent envelopment it might be accurate to slightly condense the Roman front a little by shifting the Gauls back to the third line as part of the reserve with the Italian foot.
6. Opinions vary on the actual quality of the legionnaires present. Scipio, the other Consul who was recovering from wounds advocated avoiding engaging Hannibal and urged the winter be spent in drilling the troops to bring them up to snuff. Some historians speculate Sempronius raised at least some of his troops on the march enroute from Sicily to Northern Italy to face Hannibal and these were little better than raw recruits. In light of these factors, I think it might balance things out a bit more if most of the veterans were downgraded to regulars and maybe a quarter to raw. Maybe 25% veteran, 50% regular and 25% raw?
Anyway my 2 cents,
Regards,
Karvon
Chaos Tourney and Little Wars Organizer, TDC V Early Medieval Coordinator
Re: Trebbia
Thanks for the report. After two months with no reply, I was beginning to doubt my existence. I'm guessing that this was against the AI?
I agree that the velite should have their ammo reduced drastically. Also the "chilled" debuff is insufficient and all infantry should be reduced to ave/raw across the board. The ambush isn't as it appears immediately instead of hitting the Roman line after it's engaged. But, to me, the most egregious thing is the ability to run the triarii around as an anti-cavalry hit squad when its true function was as a last line of defense to protect shattered friendlies. But that gets into a fundamental problem with FOG. I believe infantry are too flexible in being able the chase cavalry, but it's in the game and everyone does it -- me included.
Deeter
I agree that the velite should have their ammo reduced drastically. Also the "chilled" debuff is insufficient and all infantry should be reduced to ave/raw across the board. The ambush isn't as it appears immediately instead of hitting the Roman line after it's engaged. But, to me, the most egregious thing is the ability to run the triarii around as an anti-cavalry hit squad when its true function was as a last line of defense to protect shattered friendlies. But that gets into a fundamental problem with FOG. I believe infantry are too flexible in being able the chase cavalry, but it's in the game and everyone does it -- me included.
Deeter
-
Karvon
- Sr. Colonel - Battleship
- Posts: 1687
- Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 12:36 pm
- Location: Osaka, Japan
Re: Trebbia
No, this was a MP match; I don't normally like playing epic scenarios and have only played a couple - always MP. The AI isn't challenging enough to waste my time with in playing such massive battles.
I think keeping a portion of the legion as veteran is defensible; they did punch through the middle of the Carthaginian line and fight their way free of the disaster, but half the army as such is a bit too overpowering.
I agree on the misuse of the Triarii, and yeah, I do it too
I think one thing that could reduce this a bit would be to have them initially deployed as a solid third line, rather than spaced out across the back of the army. That would cut down on their flank blocking ability initially, yet keep them in their role of a final line of support.
I'm not sure one can edit the epic scenarios or not; I've never looked at the editor, but maybe one day - if I have the time - I'll take a look at doctoring this one.
Karvon
I think keeping a portion of the legion as veteran is defensible; they did punch through the middle of the Carthaginian line and fight their way free of the disaster, but half the army as such is a bit too overpowering.
I agree on the misuse of the Triarii, and yeah, I do it too
I think one thing that could reduce this a bit would be to have them initially deployed as a solid third line, rather than spaced out across the back of the army. That would cut down on their flank blocking ability initially, yet keep them in their role of a final line of support.I'm not sure one can edit the epic scenarios or not; I've never looked at the editor, but maybe one day - if I have the time - I'll take a look at doctoring this one.
Karvon
Chaos Tourney and Little Wars Organizer, TDC V Early Medieval Coordinator
Re: Trebbia
You beat a human? Impressive. I like Epic battles to get the feel of managing a real army as opposed to the skirmishes we call battles. It can take a long time to transfer a unit from one flank to another, more chances for RNG to average out and minimizes the impact of generals overall. Plus the terrain is often more open so troop interactions become more important than clever use of terrain.
As for triarii as a solid line, the same can be said for heavy infantry in general. Too easy to peel off that unit of hoplites as an independent abteilung rather than stay part of the phalanx, but that's just my opinion and probably not a popular one.
Deeter
As for triarii as a solid line, the same can be said for heavy infantry in general. Too easy to peel off that unit of hoplites as an independent abteilung rather than stay part of the phalanx, but that's just my opinion and probably not a popular one.
Deeter
Re: Trebbia
This explains how to edit a vanilla Epic battle:
https://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewto ... 91&t=81371
Although, depending upon what you want to edit, you will probably have to consult my other guides in the same section of the forum.
Field of Glory II Scenario Designer - Age of Belisarius, Rise of Persia, Wolves at the Gate and Swifter than Eagles.
Field of Glory II Medieval Scenario Designer.
FOGII TT Mod Creator
Warhammer 40,000: Sanctus Reach Tournament Scenario Designer.
Field of Glory II Medieval Scenario Designer.
FOGII TT Mod Creator
Warhammer 40,000: Sanctus Reach Tournament Scenario Designer.
-
Karvon
- Sr. Colonel - Battleship
- Posts: 1687
- Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 12:36 pm
- Location: Osaka, Japan
Re: Trebbia
Thanks for info: not sure how soon I'll have time to do it.
Chaos Tourney and Little Wars Organizer, TDC V Early Medieval Coordinator