1. The Punic Wars, Canadian Style! (Romans vs Carthaginians)

Last night Kevin Barrett and I tried out Vis Bellica for the first time. We played a small battle (300pts each) between Republican Romans and Carthaginians. No photos here since we were just using 10mm figs based for WMA on 40x20mm stands mounted on 60x30mm plinths. I played the Romans who fielded four bases of hastati, two bases of velites, one base of allied light cavalry and one of Roman heavy cavalry. All except the allied cavalry were veteran. Kevin fielded a Carthaginian force that contained four bases of Numidian light cavalry, two bases of Numidian skirmishers, two bases of Libyan infantry, two bases of Libyan javelinmen, a stand of heavy noble cavalry, and two stands of elephants. Most were average except the elite noble cavalry.

The field was flanked on one edge by a stream and the other by hilly rough terrain, the centre mostly clear. The Romans deployed first under blinds along one edge. I placed decoy blinds on the wide flanks, placed velites on the left flank along the stream, cavalry on the right flank edging the hills and the hastati with general in the centre.

The Carthaginians had much more freedom in deployment because of scouting ability, and therefore placed a block in the centre of the board consisting of the Libyans and noble cavalry, a block of Numidians on the right wing, and the jumbo’s wide out on the left wing. This deployment turned out to be the decisive factor in the battle.

On the first turn all forces advanced towards each other and all blinds were revealed and spotted. The velites advanced forward to protect the left flank of the hastati, their own flank secured by a block of rough terrain. They were met by charging Numidian light cavalry. The cavalry was damaged by missile-fire and landed the charge but the velites held and melee was locked in. The Numidian cavalry would break and rout in the subsequent round of melee.

In the centre, both sides ordered charges and the noble cavalry due to its speed met the Roman line first. Outnumbered 2:1 the charge damaged the Romans but broke on the heavy spear and pila of the hastati and routed.

On the Roman right the cavalry division advanced in step with the legions, the elephants were too far wide to have influence and were slowed by the hilly terrain.

On the next round the velites charged the remaining Numidians and would hold them in melee, however they were being ground down under the force of numbers. Nonetheless they were able to hold the Numidians at bay long enough for the centre battle to be resolved, primarily because the terrain forced the Numidians to engage along a narrow front.

In the centre, the Roman line met the Libyan line with predictable results, the Libyans started to disintegrate in the face of the heavily armoured veterans. The Roman cavalry charged the right flank and the Libyan line broke and routed. The jumbo’s continued to waddle from their wide flank position but were just too far away to influence the outcome.

We declared a Roman victory with most of the Carthaginians routed and in disarray. The post mortem revealed a number of aspects of this game that I think quite accurately reflected combat in this era.

Deployment and the resulting concentration of force is key. In this case the Carthaginians were too widely deployed and the battle closed much more quickly than anticipated. This meant that the flanks were unable to support the centre. Key here was the ability of the velites to hold the large cavalry force at bay and protect the flank of the short Roman line long enough for it to steamroll the Carthaginian line.

The combat system is very deterministic, higher quality heavy infantry will always beat medium, so the Libyan line had no chance to defeat the Romans head on, which is clearly realistic. Carthage must turn a flank to defeat Rome using superior mobility. Another lesson was the need for coordination of force, the unsupported charge by the fine noble cavalry broke upon superior numbers of Romans. They basically outran their infantry which lead to their unsupported demise.

The left flank elephants were unable to reach the centre in time. We looked over the modifiers lists and ended up scratching our heads about what the role of these beasties should have been. They would have been easily defeated by Roman infantry, perhaps they are best used to counter cavalry because they force a morale check? They are clearly not panzers to be used in sweeping flank manoeuvres or as a schwerpunkt as they are in WMA, perhaps more like a pointed stick to hold the Roman heavy cavalry off. But even then, chances are that the Roman cavalry in good order would pass morale anyway, so we're open to suggestions about how jumbos should be used in VB. Nice eye candy though!

Overall, we were both mightily impressed with this system. I thought it was very realistic compared to WMA, and it has a very different feel. VB uses big chunky units with less mobility and flexibility than WMA, and a more deterministic combat resolution. Deployment is much more important, and the battle outcome is dictated by the inertia and momentum of the forces once set in motion. I'm a big fan of WMA and will continue to play both systems, but here's two thumbs up for VB as a better historical simulation in my opinion that is still a fun game to play!

Thanks Kevin for hosting a great game.

Dave in Edmonton