Fanaticus Worldwide DBA Campaign

[Mike Porter]

Has anyone ever thought of trying to do a worldwide campaign with Fanatici from all over participating, like the "Punic Wars", or "Caesar in Gaul", or the Crusades, something where most people have the armies to participate. GW has done similar campaigns-it would be a ladder scenario campaign and everyone would report wins/losses and that would dictate the next ladder scenario. Just an idea.:rolleyes:

[Bob. (and his dog)]

do it

That text above is too short, a message must be 10 characters or more so I added this extranious part.

[Mike Porter]

do it


Indeed I shall, but first I need to get an idea of what we should do and the level of interest. Would people mind posting if they are interested and please also give your opinion as to whether I should use a historical campaign (Caesar's wars in Germania, which severely limits army lists), or if we should do the Punic War, or maybe we should do something anachronistic (Hispania, Gaul, Germans vs Rome). I'm leaning towards a slightly anachronistic Punic War since most people have one or both of those armies, Marians morph easily enough with 2 stands of 4Sp. We'll start at a given historical point, but let the campaign flow as it will.

I'm willing to run the campaign and write the newsletter.

Opinions are needed!

[Stephen Webb]

I would be willing to participate as would some of the others in Australia for sure.

I think the Punic wars or the Rise of Rome would be a good place to start. Plenty of different armies that most people would have access to.

Another would be the Succession to Alexander.

[Macbeth]

I would be willing to play as well and could probably drum up some further ACT Support.

Personally I would prefer something more medieval or asiatic - but thats just me. Whatever the theme is I will play.

cheers

[Timurilank]

Athanasius,

Are you thinking about operating something like Tony Bath's Hyborian game; players from all over the world were asked to play out battles in his campaign? Which meant players could find themselves playing battles with other armies the following turn.

This could work well if the participants send reports back with photos; the whole could take on a book form on a website perhaps.

A period from Marius to Augustus would cover a lot of enemies and allies; Republic to Empire.

Keep us posted.
cheers,

[Mike Porter]

Athanasius,

Are you thinking about operating something like Tony Bath's Hyborian game; players from all over the world were asked to play out battles in his campaign? Which meant players could find themselves playing battles with other armies the following turn.




That's right, but I must confess that I have only a cursory knowledge of that event. I'm more familiar with the one's that GW does. But yes, everyone, all over the world, would play out the same battle in the campaign.

Please keep posting opinions, suggestions, etc. We're going to need alot of people doing it to make it any fun!

Macedonians could get in on the action since the Macedonia War took place during the 2nd Punic War, so we have alot of options.

I'm getting ahead of myself, but I think it would be neat to finish the campaign with BBDBA, or GBDBA, in each region that participates. Just an idea.

After more people/clubs show interest I will figure out armies and a ladder structure. PM me if you want to help!

[Bob. (and his dog)]

Chris could give you a private thread in Fanaticus for communications



I'm willing to run the campaign and write the newsletter.

Opinions are needed!

[Andrechin]

I am sure Italian players may take part in such a worldwide event, but I would like to know how this campaign system is supposed to work. Is there any draft of the rules?

[Mike Porter]

I am sure Italian players may take part in such a worldwide event, but I would like to know how this campaign system is supposed to work. Is there any draft of the rules?

I'm glad you're interested! I am currently working on which lists would be included in the Campaign, here's a preliminary:

Second Punic War (218 BC to 202 BC)

Carthage and friends:
II/32. Later Carthage
II/40. Numidian
II/39. Ancient Spanish
II/9. Syracusan
II/35. Later Macedonian

VS.

II/33 Polybian Roman

I'm still working on the lists, please post to correct me or contribute! The Carthage list is basically an umbrella for the numerous conflict Rome was involved in during this time. The Macedonian and Syracuse battles can take place outside of the main scenario and I will post the results with the other reports, more info later.

The campaign would be a ladder system, for example: when everything is ready to go, I will release the first battle scenario. Everyone who is participating will fight said scenario within a certain time frame. Afterwards, players will report the results of the battles, along with pictures, and narratives if they like; I am setting up a blog and email address for this purpose. I will also write a narrative newsletter to keep the people of Rome informed of the war.

Based on the results (win or loss for Rome) I will release the next "rung" in the campaign, and so on and so forth towards the ultimate conclusion (Hannibal leaving Italy, or sacking Rome).

I'm still developing the idea and really need input so please post! I am not an expert on the Punic Wars, I'm more a Marius-Augustus guy.

I also billed this as the "Fanaticus Worldwide DBA Campaign"; I have to make sure it's ok by Chris to continue billing it as such, and also make sure that it is worthy of the title by getting enough people involved.

*I've been saying this would be a ladder campaign, but what I'm really thinking of is a campaign tree structure, whereby the progress of the campaign will be determined by the performance of the generals instead of the more static ladder system of prefabricated scenarios.

[Andrechin]

I'm glad you're interested! I am currently working on which lists would be included in the Campaign, here's a preliminary:

Second Punic War (218 BC to 202 BC)

Carthage and friends:
II/32. Later Carthage
II/40. Numidian
II/39. Ancient Spanish
II/9. Syracusan
II/35. Later Macedonian

VS.

II/33 Polybian Roman

I'm still working on the lists, please post to correct me or contribute! The Carthage list is basically an umbrella for the numerous conflict Rome was involved in during this time.

Ancient Spanish, Gallic and Numidian were as much enemies of Rome as of Cartage, which opens a lot of interesting scenarios.

For example, you may actually play a three game set: spanish vs. cartage, spanish vs. rome and rome vs cartage to decide who will control Spain at the end of the campaign.


The Macedonian and Syracuse battles can take place outside of the main. scenario

Which Macedonian vs. Syracuse battle? Syracuse was again enemy/allied of both Carthage and Rome. Initially loyal to Rome, which was occupying most Sicily at the beginning of the war, revolted after Hannibals' initial victories.

You may instead have a parallel campaign in the balkans among Macedonian, Illyrian and Hellenistic Greeks.

I think in your scenarios you should try to give the impression of two powers crashing, more than just having Rome need to sustain the assault/conquer of many enemies.

If you prefer an all-against one campaign, then the end of republic, with Marian roman against spanish, illiryan, gallic, britons, german, galatian, mitridathic, numidian, parthian, armenian, ptolemaic, later hebrew (and do not forget Spartacus') can work well, with Crassus, Caesar and Pompey fighting on different areas and selecting the two most successfull general for the final battle for supremacy in Rome.

[Mike Porter]

Great, great, suggestions! The Syracuse and Macedonian battles (against Rome) were to represent the Macedonian War which was taking place during the second punic war, there was also the Illyrian war too...

I'm thinking that maybe the fall of the republic is a better suggestion which opens up lots of good possibilities and essentially uses the same lists. I also really like the idea of the Triumvirate. The opposing army (Numidian, Early German, etc.) would determine which triumvir the Roman player is fighting for.

Feel free to flesh out your ideas further; my intent was to simply get the ball rolling and write the newsletter/website. More capable campaign leaders are certainly welcome to contribute! What I would really like to do is get a good system set up so we can do something like this every year.

Please continue to weigh in on whether you guys like the way things are going!

[Mike Porter]

Chris has given his blessing and he is going to create a separate forum for the first Fanaticus Worldwide DBA Campaign!:D

[Andrechin]

I'm thinking that maybe the fall of the republic is a better suggestion which opens up lots of good possibilities and essentially uses the same lists. I also really like the idea of the Triumvirate. The opposing army (Numidian, Early German, etc.) would determine which triumvir the Roman player is fighting for.

Feel free to flesh out your ideas further; my intent was to simply get the ball rolling and write the newsletter/website. More capable campaign leaders are certainly welcome to contribute! What I would really like to do is get a good system set up so we can do something like this every year.


Just to keep ithe thread going, here could be a timeline to follow, from which you must diverge, if things do not historical: each matchup can be considered a campaign, collecting all the results of the battles you decide who won the campaign.

Spain 77-72 AD
Campaign against Sartorio:
II/39c Lusitanian vs Marian Roman (Pompey)

Italy 74-70 AD
Spartacus'revolt
II/45c Spartacus vs Marian Roman (Crassus)

Near East 66-61 AD
Campaign of Pompey against Mithridates and his allies
II/48 Mitrhidatics vs. Marian Roman (Pompey)
II/28b Armenian vs. Marian Roman (Pompey)

Gallia 58-55 AD
De Bello Gallico
II/11 Gallic vs. Marian Roman (Cesar)
II/47b Early German (Ariovistus) vs. Marian Roman (Cesar)

Britain 55-54 BC
II/53 Ancient British vs. Marian Roman (Cesar)

Syrian and Mesopotamia 54-53 AD
II/37 Parthian vs. Marian Roman (Crassus)

Gallia 51 AD
Vergingetorige revolt
II/11 Gallic vs. Marian Roman (Cesar)

Civil War
Marian Roman vs. Marian Roman


When setting a battle, you may specify the exact army list for that battle/period/general (for example Parthian should take the minimal amount of Knights, since at Carrae they did not play a major role, mitrhidatic should use the Bd options, since SCh and Pk were used in the early period of the army)

[Mike Porter]

Andrechin, thank you! Just wanted to bump the thread; I am still pondering things, but had a busy couple of days. I will post my thoughts soon. Anyone else can feel free to contribute!

[S.Kirby]

Well, I'm pretty sure the Malaysian DBA addicts will be interested in this. Not sure if we have the correct armies though.

When are you thinking of running this, coz we may need time to order and paint up suitable armies.

[saflex]

I'm another Malaysian DBA-er who's interested. S.Kirby is right to assume that we might not have the required armies to participate but if there is a reasonable amount of time to prepare the armies, we should be able to do it.

[Mike Porter]

Guys, thanks for your interest. It appears that the international community outside of the US are the only interested parties so far! I'd like to see a little more interest stateside (aside from Bob). GLADBAG, WADBAG, anyone interested? :) It looks like clubs will be the best way to accomplish the campaign, given the diversity of armies needed.

I think that I like the Caesar/Pompey/Crassus campaign leading to civil war idea. To everyone interested please don't worry about timing, I'll be sure to give a decent amount of time to put together the right armies.

I'll give it some more time and then make the campaign blog. Thanks for keeping the dream alive!:D

[Stephen Webb]

Has this gone quiet or are you still working on your idea?

[Mike Porter]

Still going, I'm going to get the blog up next week along with the first scenario. Speaking of which, I could use some ideas.

Do we want to go with a "scenario" or straight up battles? Let me know what you guys would enjoy more. I also need to figure out how we will report games.

Either way, start painting your Ancient Spanish. I hear Sertorius needs a smacking. :)

[Jeff Caruso]

Guys, thanks for your interest. It appears that the international community outside of the US are the only interested parties so far! I'd like to see a little more interest stateside (aside from Bob). GLADBAG, WADBAG, anyone interested? :) It looks like clubs will be the best way to accomplish the campaign, given the diversity of armies needed.

I think that I like the Caesar/Pompey/Crassus campaign leading to civil war idea. To everyone interested please don't worry about timing, I'll be sure to give a decent amount of time to put together the right armies.

I'll give it some more time and then make the campaign blog. Thanks for keeping the dream alive!:D

For our CMH club (Colorado Military Historians, Denver) meeting in April we are playing a BBDBA of Marians vs Gauls, if that fits in with your campaign.

Jeff

[Stephen Webb]

Do we want to go with a "scenario" or straight up battles?

I would prefer a scenario.

[Mike Porter]

For our CMH club (Colorado Military Historians, Denver) meeting in April we are playing a BBDBA of Marians vs Gauls, if that fits in with your campaign.

Jeff


It sure does Jeff! Keep checking the thread for updates.

BTW, for all interested in the campaign, Jeff makes some lovely Marian Romans!

[Jeff Caruso]

It sure does Jeff! Keep checking the thread for updates.

BTW, for all interested in the campaign, Jeff makes some lovely Marian Romans!

And I just bought (from Wargames) two packs of Corvus Belli Marians to go with my own.:D

Jeff

[Mike Porter]

*As an FYI until I get the scenario ready--make sure your Ancient Spanish builds are Lusitanian, with the Bd. option.

Jeff makes Ancient Spanish too!

[S.Kirby]

Second Punic War (218 BC to 202 BC)

Carthage and friends:
II/32. Later Carthage
II/40. Numidian
II/39. Ancient Spanish
II/9. Syracusan
II/35. Later Macedonian

VS.

II/33 Polybian Roman

Hi guys.

Is this the confirmed campaign and army list?? If so, us tropical geezers, need to get some armies ordered and painted up.

Look forward to seeing the Blog and getting this thang going.

Cheers

[Stephen Webb]

If that is the list, the Southern Battlegamers can supply all of those armies.

So we are all ready.

[Mike Porter]

Hi guys.

Is this the confirmed campaign and army list?? If so, us tropical geezers, need to get some armies ordered and painted up.

Look forward to seeing the Blog and getting this thang going.

Cheers

Hopefully this list, recommended by Andrechin, will work for you. We moved the timeline up the the time of Caesar:

Spain 77-72 AD
Campaign against Sartorio:
II/39c Lusitanian vs Marian Roman (Pompey)

Italy 74-70 AD
Spartacus'revolt
II/45c Spartacus vs Marian Roman (Crassus)

Near East 66-61 AD
Campaign of Pompey against Mithridates and his allies
II/48 Mitrhidatics vs. Marian Roman (Pompey)
II/28b Armenian vs. Marian Roman (Pompey)

Gallia 58-55 AD
De Bello Gallico
II/11 Gallic vs. Marian Roman (Cesar)
II/47b Early German (Ariovistus) vs. Marian Roman (Cesar)

Britain 55-54 BC
II/53 Ancient British vs. Marian Roman (Cesar)

Syrian and Mesopotamia 54-53 AD
II/37 Parthian vs. Marian Roman (Crassus)

Gallia 51 AD
Vergingetorige revolt
II/11 Gallic vs. Marian Roman (Cesar)

Civil War
Marian Roman vs. Marian Roman

I'm thinking about 2-3 scenarios per event. Hopefully you can come up with the armies between all of you.

[Yozhik]

Mike,

Just wondering. Did the campaign ever get going? Are their any updates?

[Mike Porter]

Much to my shame, it did not.:o It's not dead yet though-I've got it on the back burner and will fire it back up when the time is right!:cool:

[Yozhik]

Well, I wanted to tell you that I think it is wonderful idea. I had some thoughts about such a campaign that I wanted share.

I was thinking that it would be very interesting to have a campaign where each availible army had what could be termed: imperial ambitions. Whether armies were of a given period (book) or a geographical region, or point in history, one could allow for all availible armies to play against each other.

Now certainly this is a departure from history. But when one considers the availibility of players, regarding travel time and places to play, game days, etc., it might prove wise to do so. One could track total wins and losses for each army and declare that army to be winner of the campaign at the end. One could also track wins and losses to various opponents.

Special events could be planned throughout the campaign to simulate battles for the chosen period or war. All players regardless of army could play in these, they could play if their army was an ally, or they could play if their army actually took part in the historical battle. If one of the latter two, other players could play open battles with special scenarios at the same event.

There are many possibilities, but it seems important to ensure that all players can play at any point regardless of their army choice. Maybe this is what you had in mind. I guess it is a matter of interaction (player involvement) vs. historicity (did this happen?).

These are just some thoughts. I am intrigued by the prospect of a worldwide campaign. Thanks.

[Yozhik]

Much to my shame, it did not.:o It's not dead yet though-I've got it on the back burner and will fire it back up when the time is right!:cool:

Hey, don't worry about it. A worldwide campaign would take a good deal of planning.

[Noble]

I must say, I'm kind of glad this got delayed ;) - here are two more interested players.

The era sounds interesting - and just taking a major underlying theme and tying in every army possible worked well enough for Rome Total Realism (aka Total War).

[Mike Porter]

I was thinking that it would be very interesting to have a campaign where each availible army had what could be termed: imperial ambitions. Whether armies were of a given period (book) or a geographical region, or point in history, one could allow for all availible armies to play against each other.

Now certainly this is a departure from history. But when one considers the availibility of players, regarding travel time and places to play, game days, etc., it might prove wise to do so. One could track total wins and losses for each army and declare that army to be winner of the campaign at the end. One could also track wins and losses to various opponents.

That's precisely what I plan to do!

As far as timing goes...I will try and launch the campaign right after Cold Wars, and play it out until July. I'll revise the campaign army list and post it before Cold Wars though, so everyone can make sure they have the armies. Supplimental content will be found at the DBA Gamer (http://dbagamer.wordpress.com).

In the meantime, at least everyone knows they need a Roman army.

[Yozhik]

Forgive me. I didn't understand.

I had looked at the previous army lists and discussion but I didn't catch the format regarding the playing of games (who plays who).

Thanks.

[Mike Porter]

No problem, it's not like I kept my thoughts organized. Who knows, the format may change yet, we'll see. :)

[Muddster1]

This is a great idea! What is the general format for playing? I have Marians and Parthians and Mithradatics - and I want to get a Spanish army together along with the gauls... with Parthians and various Hellenistic armies the Armenians are easy. I will have to talk to Jeff about getting Gauls and more Spanish...

I have wanted to do a campaign based around this time period for years!

Doug Mudd

[Jeff Caruso]

Count me in to play. When I lived in El Paso, Tx, we played a game between Old Saxons, LIR and other Gothic armies and it was fun. In this particular battle the forces were those of players in the UK and somewhere else. We merely played the game to get a result. That may not be everyone's cup of tea, I realize, but it was fun to do. Maybe that's what got my interest up in the LIRs and Goths.

It would be equally fun with the Marians and their enemies. As I said, count me in. And I have Spanish, Marians, Numidians and Gauls already. I think Parthians from OG as well. And dice, lots of dice.:)

Jeff

[Yozhik]

we played a game between Old Saxons, LIR and other Gothic armies and it was fun. In this particular battle the forces were those of players in the UK and somewhere else. We merely played the game to get a result.
Jeff

Jeff,

So basically you played some games in Texas and added the results to those played elsewhere?

[Jeff Caruso]

Jeff,

So basically you played some games in Texas and added the results to those played elsewhere?

Yes, exactly. The campaign was run by Firefall (I think). He has or had, a website.

Jeff

[Mike Porter]

Jeff,

So basically you played some games in Texas and added the results to those played elsewhere?


And that's how this campaign will work also!

[Yozhik]

Looking foward to playing.

[E_A_Lindberg]

I also managed to miss this the first time around. It would certainly be interesting just to compare notes on how the same scenario gets played out in different groups.

I suspect I could dragoon a bunch of folks in the San Francisco and San Jose DBA groups.