Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

For over a hundred years, the Punic wars were fought on hundreds of battlefields. Many of these battles were important enough to have the accounts reported by the great historians.
This was not one of them.
However, in a farmers field in central France, a flint beer bottle and a fragment of petrified tapioca was uncovered. The text was engraved in nearly perfect Lorem Ipsum, which confirms the local legends of a great battle fought there, some 2,100 years earlier.
Its Rome v Carthage in this L' Art de la Guerre game played via Table Top Simulator
https://philonancients.blogspot.com/2020/09/rome-v-carthage.html

Enjoy

A classic grudge match.

Sometime I think game designers are too influenced by myth-making, both past and present. As such, since the anglosphere is so strongly influenced by Rome and Greece, their army lists are better than their historical rivals due to designer bias. In the computer game Civilization IV, the Roman legionary is awesome: Str 8 when the average is Str 6, and missile defenders are only Str 3. Similarly the Greeks have the Hoplite, a Str 6 Axe equivalent that gets +100% against chariots (who get +100% against axemen). The Persians get the Immortal, who is wrongly made as a Str 5 chariot unit, and the Carthaginians a so-so Horse Archer equivalent, Numidian Cavalry.

In Kings of War Historical (which should have been retitled Kings of War Hollywood), the Roman list may be limited to heavy infantry and siege engines, but they can go head to head with a 16th century landsknecht army with cannon, and have good odds of winning! Who knew the testudo was effective against gunpowder weapons? Similarly, the Spartan list is much better than the generic classical Greek list, and both are way better than the Persian list. I forget what the Carthaginians were like. If they were powerful or really weak, I'd have remembered, so they are probably average.

Nice write up, as always. But some of your comentary struck me as wrong. At least in my edition of ADLG Gauls can be HI, Impact for Hannibal. So that seems like an option you could use. (MI, Impact is also an option) This is Hannibal in Italy. He was able to equip his troops with Roman equipment and armor. You can also take Italian tribes as Swordsmen, Armor, Impact as well. It might be we are reading different lists though.

Looking at my version, I tossed this together, based on your list...

1st Corp Hanno, Master of Horse (Included)
Poeni : HC, Elite, Includes General (Comp)
Poeni: HC, Elite
Gauls: MC x2

Baleric Slingers: LI, Slings, Elite x4

2nd Corp: CiC, Hannibal Brilliant
African Veterans: Hvy Spear, Elite, Armored x4
Gauls: HI, Swordsmen, Impact x2



3rd Corp Galbo Comp.

Spanish Cav: LC, Javlins x4
Ligurians: Javlinmen x3
Elephant: EL, Medicore x1

Fort. Camp

I think that is like 196...? so 4 points to mess with. But this looks like a fine army, and well able to beat Rep. Romans...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So for example in your battle you could have sent the Slingers forward to contest the rough, and used the cav to disorder the infantry, then withdraw to let your infantry strike them next. Elephant, and Javlins can do distraction work, and the LC, Javlins can also disorder, and take flanks as available.