PDA

View Full Version : Roman Invasion of Britain Campaign.


Cromwell
02-22-2011, 12:52 PM
Having some spare time I drew up a very simple Campaign to represent Carractacu's battles against Plautius and then Scapula.

Details are below with a report of how it worked out.

First attempt at doing something like this so be gentle:) as I am still new to DBA

Plautius, Scapula and Carractacus.


THE ROMAN INVASION OF BRITAIN.

The campaign consists of the three main battles fought by Carractacus.

Battle of Medway, Romans commanded by Plautius

Battle of the Thames, Romans commanded by Plautius

Battle of Caer Caradoc, Romans commanded by Scapula.

The terrain for each battle is set up as per DBA rules. Except for the following. Medway and Thames must each have a river that divides the armies. The difficulty of the river is determined by usual DBA rules.
The Battle of Caer Caradoc must be predominantly hilly.

Armies involved are Ancient British II/53 and Early Imperial Roman II/56.

The first battle is fought between the two armies normally.

The elements eliminated in the battle are transferred to that armies reserve.
Each element eliminated gives 1 point to the opposition.
Each element pushed over a board edge also gives 1 point (however they are returned to their army for the next battle not moved to the reserve like eliminated units).
A camp captured gives 5 points.
If a General element is eliminated 5 points are awarded.
If Carractacus is eliminated at any stage his brother Togodumnes takes over for the next battle. If he is eliminated then the Romans have won the Campaign.
If Plautius is eliminated then Scapula takes over. If Scapula falls then Vespasian takes over. Killing Roman Generals does not win the campaign for the British in the short term (points earned by it may).

Before the next battle the armies can recruit from their reserve. Roll 1 x d6 for each element in the reserve. A roll of 4-5-6 means it can join the army as recruits. Those scoring less means they stay in reserve.

If the British won the previous battle and or they have more points than the Romans they can re – roll for one failed recruitment. This depicts warriors joining the cause buoyed up by past success.
The Romans have no extra chance, they have to manage with what’s available.

At the end of the final battle total up each sides points score. Deduct from it the number of elements eliminated that battle and still in the reserve. That is the sides final score. The highest side wins the campaign.




CAMPAIGN OUTCOME

Battle of Medway

The River ran midway between the armies with a hill and woods near by.
The Roman cavalry tested the river and found it to be paltry.
The British mishandled their chariots and cavalry which let the Legion Cohorts supported by the Auxilia steamroller the Warbands with the Roman Cavalry covering the flanks.

The first combat of the last bound saw the fourth element eliminated. The subsequent combats saw a further three bite the dust! The Romans lost just one Auxlia cohort element.


A total of seven elements lost were a severe blow for Carractacus.

He managed to call in 5 elements from the reserve leaving him short of a Chariot and Psiloi elements. Also Plautius was unable to obtain reinforcements for his Auxlia.

Points Score = Romans = 7 Ancient British = 1

Battle of the Thames

Again the river ran between the combatants. The British secured a strong defensive position with the flanks of their warbands secured by woods. The river proved to be exceptionally difficult. The Romans moved to attack but lost all cohesion trying to cross the river and many elements of Auxlia perished attempting to gain the other heavily defended bank.
The British won the day having eliminated four Roman Elements to the loss of only one of theirs.

The British managed to call in one reserve The Romans managed to replace all the Auxlia Cohorts but were unable to replace a lost Legion Cohort.

Points Score = Romans = 8 Ancient British = 5


Battle of Caer Caradoc

This was a hilly terrain with a marsh between two hills. Once more a defensible river separated the forces. Again the British managed to secure a good defensive spot. The warbands formed in the centre behind the marsh with the chariots and cavalry commanding each gentle hill.

The Romans were immediately out flanked by a combined chariot and cavalry attack on their left. The Legions came to grip with the warbands whilst the Auxlia and an element of Cavalry attempted to deal with the other chariot and cavalry on the other flank. The Roman Artillery was starting to worry the centre warbands.
The flank attacks deprived the Legions of any support they might have had and the Warbands using rear support quick killed a number of them.

The battle ended with the Romans losing another five elements to the British one.

Total Final Score for the Campaign = Romans = 7 ANCIENT BRITISH = 8

So Carractacus won the campaign. That means he would not have had to have fled to the Brigantines only to be betrayed and sold out to Rome.
But would he have been able from this to gather more support given the meagre overall result. Interesting turn of events.

I enjoyed this Campaign albiet fought solo. The beauty is I was able to complete it in one afternoon. It gave real meaning. to each DBA battle.

Crocus
02-22-2011, 05:29 PM
I'm really glad you seem to have enjoyed the linked games so much - I love them myself. I'm waiting for the opportunity to play out the Second Battle of Deva, a resurgent Cunedda facinfg off against the Dux of the North. Campaigns and their development are like watchmaking, I imagine, infinitely complex and fascinating and brilliant when they work!

I do mostly solo and have found the De Bellis Solitarius and Diplomacy rules a great springboard to tailoring a campaign ruleset for solo play that suits my peculiar predilictions. I recommend the Yahoo Solo DBA Development group, run by Dale Hurtt (Ithink), which focuses on solo battle resolution.

Furhtermore, I have run a solo Roman Civil War scenario based on the Wars of the Roses set in the Resources section of Fanaticus - now that would surely be right up your street!

I have found that DBA, its battles and campaign system, has given me more wargaming pleasure than countless other, more complex and more expensive rulesets put together - and long may it continue!

Honestly though - did you let Caratacus win because you like him best?! Cunedda gets the benefit of the doubt often, but that's the joy of solo gaming, and makes for a wonderful campaign.

Crocus

Cromwell
02-22-2011, 06:19 PM
[QUOTE=Crocus;119135]
Honestly though - did you let Caratacus win because you like him best?!

My interest in this period was awakened by reading Simon Scarrow's books.

They follow the careers of the fictional Centurion Marco and his Optio, Cato. They take part in the battles the campaign follows.

In fact in the book it is Centurion Marco who killed Togodumnes in single combat!!

I actually liked Vespasian best! He commanded the Legion that took the brunt of the fighting. He comes across as honest and actually cares for those he commands.

However Carractacus was no savage. He was a skilled commander and politician. He was a good orator as shown by the speech Tacticus recorded that he made to the senate. Remember! He spoke good Latin! And thats before the Roman Invasion!

Part of which:

"I had wealth, arms, warriors and good land! Why would I not fight to keep that?"

His comment when he viewed the city of Rome "You have such great possesions and many of them! Why then did you covet our squalid huts and tents?"

My memory of what he said may be a little rusty!!

Yes! I do like Carractacus! The thinking mans barbarian!!

But I did try to be fair in the battles!:rolleyes

I also feel that DBA gives the best wargame pleasure I have known. I have tried many rules over the years. But these are fast, gritty and give accurate results.

Thanks to DBA I am getting far more from my hobby than I ever did before!

Chris Brantley
02-23-2011, 01:06 AM
[QUOTE=Crocus;119135]
However Carractacus was no savage. He was a skilled commander and politician. He was a good orator as shown by the speech Tacticus recorded that he made to the senate. Part of which:

"I had wealth, arms, warriors and good land! Why would I not fight to keep that?"

His comment when he viewed the city of Rome "You have such great possesions and many of them! Why then did you covet our squalid huts and tents?"

The speech that earned him a pardon at the time of his planned execution, according to Tacitus: "If the degree of my nobility and fortune had been matched by moderation in success, I would have come to this City as a friend rather than a captive, nor would you have disdained to receive with a treaty of peace one sprung from brilliant ancestors and commanding a great many nations. But my present lot, disfiguring as it is for me, is magnificent for you. I had horses, men, arms, and wealth: what wonder if I was unwilling to lose them? If you wish to command everyone, does it really follow that everyone should accept your slavery? If I were now being handed over as one who had surrendered immediately, neither my fortune nor your glory would have achieved brilliance. It is also true that in my case any reprisal will be followed by oblivion. On the other hand, if you preserve me safe and sound, I shall be an eternal example of your clemency."

Tacitus had a habit of putting great speeches into the mouths of barbarian rulers. I particularly like the speech attributed to the Caledones warlord Calgacus at Mon Gaupius..."But there are no tribes beyond us, nothing indeed but waves and rocks, and the yet more terrible Romans, from whose oppression escape is vainly sought by obedience and submission. Robbers of the world, having by their universal plunder exhausted the land, they rifle the deep. If the enemy be rich, they are rapacious; if he be poor, they lust for dominion; neither the east nor the west has been able to satisfy them. Alone among men they covet with equal eagerness poverty and riches. To robbery, slaughter, plunder, they give the lying name of empire; they make a desert and call it peace."

Cromwell
02-23-2011, 04:17 AM
Thanks for the full quote Chris!!

I am humbled! I should have taken time to look it up before hitting the keyboard!

Chris Brantley
02-24-2011, 01:02 PM
Oh no..the other quotes are good too, just trying to add a third. This was just the speech he gave (according to Tacitus) when he was taken to the place of execution and asked for any last words. This speech supposedly earned him a pardon.

The "why do you covet our squalid tents" quote was supposedly a remark made on seeing the grandeur of Rome while being paraded about during the Triumph.

I always wondered why/how Tacitus got away with saying such nasty things about his bosses and his society in the guise of speeches by barbarian kings.

Cremorn
02-24-2011, 07:27 PM
I like how you have got the leaders involved. I have been playing something similar with Mithridatic vs. Galatians (b), using pretty much the same recruiting system linked to wins/losses. Except that Pontus finds raising horse easy, but heavy foot is more difficult.

They are an exciting matchup! Pikes destroyed-if-beaten by warband, warband vapourising under the scythed chariot - big holes in the line! I will try to incorporate the leaders more after reading your report - thanks!

Richard.

Cromwell
02-25-2011, 06:59 PM
Oh no..the other quotes are good too, just trying to add a third. This was just the speech he gave (according to Tacitus) when he was taken to the place of execution and asked for any last words. This speech supposedly earned him a pardon.

The "why do you covet our squalid tents" quote was supposedly a remark made on seeing the grandeur of Rome while being paraded about during the Triumph.

I always wondered why/how Tacitus got away with saying such nasty things about his bosses and his society in the guise of speeches by barbarian kings.

I think the Romans had the notion of "The Noble Savage" much as the British did during their empire. Both empires were mainly expanded through taking over under developed nations. In the case of the British empire India was an exception. It was a well developed country but badly fragmented. Many of Romes enemies also fell into this catergory.
To have a Truimph you had to have a worthy enemy!

Maybe Tacitus played and on that.