Review of Ravenfeast and Ruminations on Saga

 I recently played a game of Ravenfeast, a set of Viking-era skirmish rules by the guys at Little Wars TV, with my U.S. gaming buddy Shawn (not my Australian gaming buddy Shaun 😉). Although I messed up a really important rule, it still played well enough that I could both get a sense of how it should play, and that I wanted to try it again.

Ravenfeast

Ravenfeast is a really simple set of rule – which I honestly prefer these days – in that there are very few mechanics, the dice rolls are in the unit stats, and everything is pretty easily applied. What I mean by that is shown in the movement rules. There is no wheeling, movement is by figure, not unit, figures can pass through friendly figures without issue, and firing is 180º to the front.

This probably gives you a hint about the game scale. As I said it is a skirmish game, which to me has always been a figure equals a single man, but also that each figure acts autonomously, not as part of a unit. (Warhammer 40K and Flames of War are both examples of games where a figure represents a single man, but figures move as part of units, and thus are not skirmish games, to my mind.)

That said, you can play larger actions, both in the sense of running more figures, and in having the figures represent more than one man. The former is possible because of the simplicity of the rules while the latter is just a form of 'bathtubbing'; the figure represents any number of men, but it still fights in the game as if it were a single man. In my first play of the game we played the 'Ashdown' scenario that can be downloaded from the Little Wars TV web site, which allowed us to put 30+ figures per side on the table.

Turn Sequence

This is not a typical IGO-UGO turn, but rather where the turn is broken down into phases and both players perform in that phase before moving on to the next phase. The phases are:

• Initiative
• Rally
• Movement
• Missile
• Melee
• End

Initiative

Each players roll a D6 and subtract a modifier for having Leaders and Heroes. The lowest roller gets to choose whether they go first or second.

Having the initiative only has any significance in the Movement phase. When a figure moves into contact the opposing figure is pinned and cannot move (although it can change facing in melee). The only way to escape is to disengage from combat and grant your opponent a free attack against you.

In the Missile and Melee phases you still resolve combat in player order, but figures killed may still make their attack, so there is no 'Alpha Strike'.

Rally

Figures that fled during a previous turn and were marked with a Coward Token (see "End" below), must roll their Morale Rating or lower in order to remove the Coward Token and act as normal in the upcoming turn. Failure to do so and the figure is removed from the battle.

Movement

Movement is handled simply in that you measure the path moved on the board. No rules about having to move in straight lines or not being able to cross over friendly figures' bases (you stop on contacting enemy figure bases though). The only complexity is terrain. There are essentially two type – area and linear – each with their own way of dealing with moving through or over it. Area terrain requires double the movement to move through and obstacles reduce movement by 2" each. In general foot figures have 6" or 8" of movement and mounted have 14" of movement.

Missile

Bows shoot 18" and javelins 8" and require a clear line of sight. That means that skirmishers cannot fire from rear ranks. (You may wish to 'house rule' that, allowing figures in base-to-base contact with a friendly figure to not obscure the shooter's line of sight.)

Generally speaking missile troops have terrible stats. The Missile skill determines the number or lower on a D6 that the shooter must roll in order to score a hit. The defender then rolls their Armor stat or lower to cancel the hit. With most missile troops having a stat of 2 and the unarmored fyrd having a 3 for armor, the odds are against you taking down the enemy with missiles.

Melee

All figures in base-to-base contact with an enemy figure may attack in melee. Figures have a Melee stat that they must roll or under in order to inflict a hit. As with missiles, the defender then must roll their Armor or under to cancel the hit. Figures generally have 1 wound although the Hearthguard, Heroes, and Mounted troops generally have 2 and the Warlords 3.

Unlike missile attacks there are modifiers to the die roll needed for melee, such as -1 if the attack is across an obstacle or uphill, or -1 if engaged by more than one enemy.

There is one special item that must be noted when die rolling. If the Melee roll is a natural '1' and the Armor roll a natural '6', a free second attack is rolled (with no save) to see if the second hit is a gruesome wound, causing a morale check to those in close proximity.

Shield Wall

It would not be a Viking game if it did not have a shield wall rule. Three or more figures, armed with shields, not engaged in melee, may form a shield wall during the movement phase. Once formed the group moves at 1/2 speed, may only move straight ahead or a 1/4 move back, and may never move over obstacles.

Once formed the figures in the shield wall get +2 to their Armor, +1 to their Morale, are not subject to the bonus for being attacked from the rear, are not subject to the penalty for being engaged by more than one enemy, and can fight in melee from the second rank if armed with a spear.

A figure cannot leave one shield wall and join another in the same turn.

End

As you were going through the phases, you were accumulating Blood Tokens (when a figure is hit by missiles or in melee) and Raven Tokens (when hit with a gruesome wound in melee) on figures and now you must resolve them. If the number of Blood and Raven Tokens on a figure equals or exceeds it wounds (again, most figures have 1 wound), the figure is removed, along with the Blood Token.

After figure removal each side then must roll morale for the following:

• Leader was killed this turn (every figure in that warband)
• Warband suffers over 50% casualties (every figure in that warband)
• Hero was killed this turn (any friendly figure within the Hero's Morale rating, in inches)
• Death Worthy of a Song (every friendly figure within 6" of a Raven Token)

Leaders and Heroes do have a function in that any figure within their Morale Rating in inches can use their Morale Rating as their own, as long as the Leader or Hero passes their morale roll first.

Figures that fail their morale rolls flee their full move back towards their baseline and are given a Coward Token. If the fleeing figure is in base-to-base contact with an enemy figure, that figure gets a free attack.

Note that once you lose 50% of your figures in the warband, you will basically take a morale test for each figure every turn, so your army will disintegrate rapidly (as it should).

Additional Rules

Ravenfeast includes a number of cards, called Rune cards, that target figures, terrain, and even opposing players taking effect immediately or last a phase, turn, or even the entire battle. It is a way to 'break the rules' by injecting a chance element into the game. They are completely optional.

Another optional rule is to introduce currency into the game. Each player starts with a certain amount and scenarios may have objectives that grant additional currency. Currency can be spent on certain things like a re-roll during the game, an additional Rune card, or even adding a Berserker to your warband. This makes more sense if you are playing a campaign, of course, because you can slay the enemy Warlord and loot their bodies and add it to your loot.

Although Ravenfeast primarily focuses on Vikings, rules for Saxons – and their stats – are included. The Saxons main advantage is that they get the Mounted Spearman.

Ravenfeast does have a points system, but it is recommended that you play scenarios and campaigns.

Big Battle Ravenfeast, which is what the 'Ashdown' scenario is, basically introduces the concept of using the exact same rules as normal Ravenfeast, but treating each figure as representing more than one man. It doesn't matter how many, but play it the same. Forming a shield wall does require a Leader or Hero to be close by, however.

And what Dark Ages came would not be complete without a fantasy variant. There is a separate download for that which includes trolls, dragons, wolves, spells, and other monsters.

Scenarios

In the base rulebook there are three scenarios, "Back to the Boats!", "Fight for Honor!", and "Pillage and Burn!". More scenarios can be downloaded from the Little Wars TV web site and found on forums. You could easily adapt scenarios from Saga.

Final Analysis

Ravenfeast are really simple and straight forward rules that my old brain can digest. Almost no die roll modifiers to speak of and everything is rather 'standardized'. If I have to keep anything close to hand it is all of the special rules surrounding a shield wall and the stats for each of the figure types.

Comparing Ravenfeast to Saga

Although it might seem like we are comparing two very similar games, we are not. Ravenfeast is a true skirmish game (by my definition), but Saga is not as the smallest autonomous group is the unit, not the figure. Saga is what I would call these days a 'grand skirmish' set of rules. Games of Saga with 8 points can run from 29 to 85 figures, although this is not typical. Saga can handle more figures because figures are grouped into units, reducing the number of autonomous groups the player must manage. Figures in a unit thus become glorified markers for the number of hits a unit can take.

The telling difference between the two rules is that once the figures get stuck into melee, there are little to no decisions to make in Ravenfeast; you roll dice until a decisive result is achieved. In Saga you are always rolling the Saga dice, choosing special abilities, and planning for which units to buff and how. In this regard it makes Saga richer, but more complex.

One of the nice aspects of Saga is that each faction has a distinctive 'feel', which is supposed to reflect how they fought historically. Scots are a wall of spears, Saxons cluster in large supporting groups, the Irish have lots of missiles and even the occasional wolfhound, Vikings their ferocity, and Normans their crossbows and charging cavalry. I think you can simulate this flavor in Ravenfeast through the use of faction-specific Rune cards. Wherever you see a special ability in Saga, you could translate it to a Rune card. Not only would this simplify the faction concepts in Saga by reducing special actions to one-use cards, but it would also get rid of needing expensive custom dice.

The one criticism of Saga that I have never voiced on this blog is the seeming ahistorical nature of how it represents combat by putting like type figures into units. That wasn't really how it was. As shown in this diagram below from European Medieval Tactics (1), battle lines were formless not a series of units in line formation.

Dark Ages battle lines could curve, especially on the ends where it acted as a defense against being flanked. The line would ripple as groups of men would surge forward to try and break through the enemy line, then fade back as the fighters became exhausted. The elite warriors might be found in several points along the line, adding strength to help it hold, while some concentrated at a point of attack, as indicate in the diagram at point E. In The Viking Art of War, it cites that 'units' of berserkers would often act as these 'line breakers', but beyond that a chieftain's retainers would all fight together, regardless of what our games might call 'unit types'. The more heavily armored would be in front, the less armored but veteran fighters next, on back to the missile troops firing overhead from the rear, or spreading out to the flanks in an attempt to get better shots into the enemy line.

Our rules just do not play out like this. One thing Saga does represent better is the concept of 'fatigue', but it can really only do this because it groups figured into units with standardized stats. I think Ravenfeast would be all the better if fatigue could be incorporated, but because each figure is a unit, it would be a nightmare of markers to try and track it for each figure.

Overall, I like the simplicity of Ravenfeast, but it lacks many things that make Saga an interesting game, such as the management of resources (fatigue, dice, etc.), faction 'flavor', and meaningful decisions for the player to make that impact the game. I definitely want to look more into incorporating ideas from Saga into Rravenfeast.

Updated Tlaxcaltec Battleboard for Saga

Tlaxcaltec Battleboard

I have updated the Tlaxcaltec battleboard and created a faction rule page for Saga. I dropped the concept of modeling the warrior units as two separate units, one melee and one bow-armed. Now they are a sort of "super Warrior" unit that fights as well as any Warrior unit in melee, but can also fire bows. In order to keep in line with the Saga design philosophy – where each advantage has to be countered by an equal disadvantage – the bows cannot be fired on the move. (I admit that it is not much of a disadvantage, as no moving fire is still better than no fire, but this is a draft.)

To replace the Saga ability that supported the old warrior model, the Welsh Taunting ability was added. Seems like a dangerous sort of ability for the Tlaxcaltecs, but Ralph suggested that they use it to draw units into bow range, rather than onto Uneven Ground, which is the Welsh tactic.

The Tlaxcaltecs now have their version of the Cuachiqueh, so Berserkers for everyone!

The other difference from the Aztecs is the lack of atlatl. As that weapon is tied to a Saga ability, giving them the weapon meant giving up an ability. Overall, I think it is easier just to forego the atlatl for the Tlaxcaltecs as the Warriors and Levy are all missile-armed.

I think the Tlaxcaltecs will do pretty well. Although the Aztec battleboard is pretty focused (its theme is that it inflicts FATIGUE), the Tlaxcaltec board is designed to inflict casualties at range. So like the classic battles Don and I used to play with Welsh versus Anglo-Danes, one side strives to stay at range while the other side strives to get stuck in. If the former can inflict enough damage before the latter inevitably close the gap, they will probably win.

I am looking forward to trying out these new boards. First, however, I have a "normal" Dark Ages Norman versus Vikings game to umpire first.

Tlaxcaltec Faction Rules

If you have any questions regarding the battleboards or faction rules, feel free to comment or join the Mesoamerican Saga forum and post.

Updated Aztec Battleboard for Saga

Aztec Battleboard

 I have updated the battleboard for the Aztec faction, including a separate rules page, so you can print it double-sided. I decided to remove the Tomahawk Studios background, as someone suggested that people might find it confusing when this is an unofficial, fan-made variant, but also because this is less ink intensive for printing out. I may come up with a true ink-saving version once everything has been shaken out.

There are no changes to the Saga abilities; I think they worked out well in my test games, although they can always use more testing. The real addition to this version are the Cuachiqueh rules. These are a new unit type, basically an upgraded version of the Hearthguard. like the Irish Curaidh. The difference is that I made the Cuachiqueh two figures for 1 point, rather than buying 4 Hearthguard, designating two as this special unit type, then trying to balance advantages and disadvantages to justify the point cost. Personally, I think they did it wrong for the Irish, and if I were playing them, I would definitely buy the Curaidh as I believe they are under-costed.

After long discussions on the Mesoamerican Saga forum, I decided to keep the atlatl weapon as a "super javelin" rather than try to model it as a pilum (a pre-melee weapon), or as both. I have been reading more about the period, including Hassig's Aztec Warfare: Imperial Expansion and Political Control and Castillo's The Memoirs of the Conquistador Bernal Diaz del Castillo, Vol 1 (of 2) Written by Himself Containing a True and Full Account of the Discovery and Conquest of Mexico and New Spain. (The latter book is free on Kindle. There are free Kindle readers for the Mac, PC, iOS, and Android.) So far neither has given a really good impression about how the weapon was used, just that it had good penetrative powers. So "super javelin" it is, despite this You Tube video on atlatl versus steel armor.

My biggest problem, at the moment, is coming up with a new Saga ability for the Tlaxcaltec faction. I took out the Shielded Volley ability, which emulated the way Tomahawk Studios modeled shielded archer units for the Byzantines. Personally, I don't think that the model works, at least not for the combination of abilities I gave the Tlaxcaltec. So I scrapped that ability and am in search for a new replacement. Unfortunately, I have not really hit upon anything in Hassig's book about them, so it looks like it will just be something from the pool of abilities already out there that "fits". If you have any ideas, let me know.

Aztec Faction Rules

So that battleboard is already changed to the new style, including a rules page, but I am not going to publish it until I figure out what the new ability will be.

Ralph sent me some clarifications on his Bolas ability for the Inca faction, so I will update that and may re-publish soon, assuming all of the kinks are ironed out. I think there are more.

It turns out that there are some players in Mexico that are trying out these battleboards, or some variation of them. The more feedback, the better. Unfortunately no pictures or battle report, but it sounded like it was a game between the Aztecs and the Anglo-Saxons. (Who knew?) The good thing it that it did not seem that the Aztecs were over-powered compared to the Old World factions. Although I never expect these factions will be allowed in a tournament – they are starting to ban the use of banners, and those are official rules from an expansion – it is still good to hear that they play well with others.

Historical Gaming Night

The local gaming club wants to get something going for historical gaming – the idea is for one person to host a game, providing (or arranging for) the figures, terrain, etc. and doing the setup so that the other players can just roll in and start rolling dice – so we are going to give Saga a whirl as the first hosted game. I just bought a painted collection of "Vikings" (120 foot and 10 mounted) and started re-basing them on Saturday. I intend to take before and after pictures as I touch up the figures. (They are what you would call "wargaming standard" paint jobs for most of the figures, although some are pretty nice, especially the mounted.) Don has been collecting Normans, so the game will probably be those against a band of Vikings. As this is the first game for another local player (I will be refereeing, looking up rules, and generally keeping things moving) we will be keeping the forces to four points and I figured the Vikings are pretty straight forward to play.

As Don has never played the Normans, I think it will be an interesting challenge for him, despite the fact that he has more Saga games under his belt than his opponent. Normans have the inherent conflict of being half shooting army, half mounted melee. The goal will be to commit the mounted troops early enough to make an impact, but not so early that the missile troops have not softened up the enemy sufficiently. I cannot think of any worse result than throwing in the Knights and getting beaten up so badly that you feel compelled to retreat the unit for fear of losing a Saga die. Although the Knights may utterly crush their opponents, if the result is an exchange of your unit versus his, you have probably gotten the worst of the exchange.

I'll have to read the Norman battleboard, but I think it is as "conflicted" as the army composition is. If I recall correctly, it has both shooting abilities and mounted charging abilities. Personally I prefer abilities that can be applied to as many units as possible. So a board full of abilities that apply only to specific units is, in my mind, hard to play. The Vikings are relatively straight-forward. Their theme is to shed fatigue, so that is useful for most any unit they would have.

New 6mm Science Fiction Miniatures

Unfortunately, I was scheduled to paint the new Abominations from Onslaught Miniatures this weekend, but the preparation for the Saga game (which was originally scheduled for tonight) and Round 1 of the BattleLore tournament Finals took up all my time. I did get one figure completely painted (waiting for basing), and one of each of the others started. (I usually paint one figure completely in order to get an idea of what something will look like, and to help me decide what order to lay the colors down onto a figure.) The figures are very easy to paint, as the details are sufficiently raised or etched, and clearly visible once primed. Running a brush along a detail is usually sufficient to pick it out neatly.

Basically the Abominations are similar to the old Genestealer Cult Hybrids. Some figures have two arms, some three, and some four. Some of the arms have fingers on the hands while others have claws similar to their Prowler figures. I hope to get pictures up later this week, along with size comparisons.

In the meantime I "discovered" another line of 6mm science fiction figures: PFC/CinC. Their Solar Empire Marines line looks pretty good. In the past I have found CinC miniatures to be softer metal, and less well defined than GHQ. This line looks about the same, in that the figure looks more rounded or "softer" than Onslaught Miniatures or Microworld. Not that it is necessarily a bad thing, just different. Despite the name, it is not just Space Marines, however. They have a Felid race, intelligent, weapon-using Raptors, and another humanoid race. CinC also has a second line of 6mm science fiction vehicles. Most are of the GEV design, but the tracked tank hunter is a particularly interesting design, sort of like a shorter Merkava.

BattleLore Tournament

Round 1 (or two) of the Finals in the BattleLore tournament has been completed, and I won 8-2. Chris wanted to play the side with the Goblins first – as he sees it as the weaker side he wanted to get them out of the way – but our random draw of forces made for a pretty even affair with mostly human forces on both sides.

Chris came out of the gate swinging and drew first blood, taking out a critical unit of mine (the Dwarf Heavy Swords), on the flank I had planned to win on. We exchanged losses and were at 2-2 when "The Event" occurred: Chris drew, as a replacement to the card hand we both shared, the BattleLore card. Now the ironic part of all this is that Chris dreaded the event, figuring I would hose him with the card. I, on the other hand, did not want to play it, as you can only move three units on average (albeit, with large combat bonuses) and I had cards that would allow me to move more units. But by the time The Event occurred, Chris was pressing very hard on the flank I was trying to withdraw, so I played the card not because it was a good play for me, but because I could not risk him rolling a lot of Blue banners or Lore and completely crushing that flank. So I played it in order to deny him the card.

Well, that play was The Event because I used two units to attack and was lucky enough to break his attacking formation. I ended up reversing the situation on that flank, using my cavalry to chase down his fleeing troops who were desperately trying to reform. I intentionally pushed my one heavy cavalry unit in order to chase down a unit, knowing that it would be vulnerable to a counterattack. When the counterattack came, I had a First Strike card that allowed me to ambush the attacking unit and I rolled so well I destroyed the unit outright. (That was "The Second Event".) That put me at 5-2 and had resulted in the last formed resistance on that flank broken. With three units scattered on the flank and only three victory banners to go, I had my plan. Further, the cards had been cooperating and giving me access to card after card on that flank. Chris was well and thoroughly demoralized.

It took quite some time for me to whittle down the enemy units to a point that the time was ripe for "The Final Event". It came in the form of a Mounted Charge card, allowing me to pick off two strength 1 Goblin units hiding in the rear, and a strength 3 Sword unit. Chris had been prepared for this, and attempted to stave off the killing blow by holding onto an Evade card (allowing a unit to escape from combat), but I attacked all of the units in such a way that there was no retreat.

It was an exciting game (for me) and Chris is swearing vengeance, but honestly I think the forces were more evenly balanced than the games he and I both played in the Semi-Finals, which were heavily stilted against the Goblins. I have prepared the game and tonight Chris and I will do our deployment (and maybe a few turns), probably finishing the game either over the course of several week nights or next weekend.

Although I have had great fun in this tournament, and proud to have made it to the Finals, I am getting weary of the "pressure" of scheduling games and trying to notify people so they can watch (and then seeing almost no one show up). Now I have a few more email addresses, and a sense of how fun some of the guys might be to play, so I can probably get a few more games in the future. Not that playing Chris is a problem! He has obviously gotten better, and like me, likes to analyze the games afterwards; what worked and what did not.

Draft Inca Battle Board

Two Milestones Hit

Well, I finally made it to 250 posts! Not only that, but I hit the 100th blog reader milestone too!

So welcome to new reader Howard, who put me over the top. I hope you enjoy the "eclectic" style (read: "schizophrenic") of the subjects, and as alway, comments are always welcome. (By the way, I like your profile icon; very Tekumel looking.)

Here Come the Incas

Ralph (Bowman) has been hard at work drafting up the Incan faction rules and Saga abilities and I finally got some time to make the battle board. As always, remember this is a draft and it all needs to be play tested.

I decided to put some effort into this one, as I wanted to move away from the template provided by Tomahawk Studios and come up with a more "Mesoamerican" themed board. Also, I started standardizing fonts and element positioning. It was a lot of work, but the board looks a lot cleaner. (I dread going back and redoing the Aztec, Tlaxcaltec, and Conquistador battle boards in the same way.)

I started with searching for an Incan textile pattern. In hindsight, I probably should have blown the pattern up, making it larger, rather than using the smaller pattern and repeating it. As it is, you really have to look close to see the repeating, as so much of it is covered by the abilities.

On to the faction rules!

Saga: Inca

1. All Inca (Apu, Huaminca, and Auqua) are armed with a champi (a 5-starred stone or metal warclub) or a thrusting spear (the original Quechua term is not known), with a canipu (metal breastplate) and a polcana (shield).
2. The Apu (Warlord) may be on foot or carried in a War Palanquin. If in a palanquin he is considered Mounted. Due to the large size of the model, use the body of the palanquin for measuring. This corresponds roughly to a large Warlord base size. The figures carrying the palanquin are only for decoration and have no effect in the game.
3. You may take between one and two Huaminca (Hearthguard) units. If you decide to take two units then one unit will be from the Upper Huaminca and the other from the Lower Huaminca. (Upper and Lower pertains to the neighborhoods in Cuzco City.) These units are very competitive and antagonistic and they suffer from the Animosity Special Rule.
4. Animosity Special Rule: If during the game the two Huaminca units finish their turn within M of one another, both units instantly accrue a FATIGUE marker.
5. Huaminca soldiers are armed with a yauri (halberd), which is treated as a two-handed Danish Axe.
6. The Auqua (Warriors), in addition to the equipment listed above, are also armed with the huaraca (sling). They may fire with their slings if they do not move in their turn. (Note that not being able to move on a turn they fire is their penalty for having both ranged and melee weapons and combat values.)
7. A unit of Auqua may be exchanged for a unit of Cunti. They have no slings, but carry a two-handed macana (sword). Treat the macan as a two-handed Danish Axe.
8. Auqua may use the "Bolas" SAGA ability. A single Bolas shot strikes two foot figures or one Mounted figure within M range. Against Mounted figures, the bolas is -1 to shoot. (Note: I need clarification from Ralph on exactly what this means.) As with a sling, the bolas cannot be used if the unit has moved in the turn. Further, the unit cannot move after firing the bolas. As with a sling, using the bolas for more than one Shooting activation accrues a FATIGUE on the second and each subsequent Shooting activation.
9. The Inca warband must take at least 1 unit of Anti or Chuncho (Forest) Indian Levy.
10. A guanca (or huaca, or waka, depending upon the source) is a collection of stones that had magical and spiritual qualities that Inca soldiers could draw upon in the battle. Make some rocky terrain that is based on a Warlord-sized base (about 40mm). At the beginning of battle, before any troops are deployed, the Inca player may place the guanca on the battlefield.

Now if only I had some 25mm Incas to try these rules out with. (I do have some unpainted 15mm Incas that I received as a gift, however. No 15mm Conquistadors, however.)

Update on C4ISR – Science Fiction Command and Colors

I decided that, to start, I am going to have to use the Command deck from Memoir '44, if I want to get a game going in some reasonable amount of time (i.e. this weekend or next week). I am also probably going to have to use the Memoir '44 Combat decks, and their attendant rules, until I come up with my own science-fiction themed events and combat buffs. Not that either of these is a problem, it just won't look as good until I have it all done. (As the figures are not all painted, the cards are actually the least of my worries.)

I have been developing a list of differences between C4ISR and Memoir '44 and other Command and Colors games.

• Units will represent far smaller units, probably platoons or squads/sections.
• Units will be allowed to move through friendly units, although they cannot remain in the same hex. (There are exceptions, such as a transport unit transporting a foot unit.)
• Aerial vehicles will be units, not abstract cards.
• Aerial vehicles can be eliminated by anti-air units (whether ground- or aerial-based), eliminating the ability to call in further aerial attacks.
• Support will allow a unit to ignore one retreat.
• Artillery and Command units can provide support from farther away; they will not be required to provide support to a unit by being adjacent.
• Artillery will be easier to eliminate by direct attack.
• Close Assault will be deadlier. Actually, ranged fire will be less deadly than in Memoir '44. I am going to allow the Grenade to hit only in Close Assault, rather than always.
• Units can only ignore one Retreat, or all, depending upon circumstances. Command units, support, digging in, etc. will each grant the ability to ignore one Retreat, but unlike other Command and Colors variants, they will not stack. Other elements, like fortifications, however, might allow you to ignore all Retreat results. So it will be one, all, or nothing.
• Foot units will be able to mount transport units, which allows them to move faster and may change the unit type from Infantry to Armor or Aerial (depending upon the transport type) while being transported.

Let me know what you think, or if you have any ideas of your own.

Draft Conquistador Battle Board

First off, welcome to new reader InChigh74. Your 20mm WW II figures look really nice. Other might want to check it out on his blog, 1914-45. As always, I hope you enjoy the writing – even if the subjects are all over the place – and comments are always welcome.

Ralph Krebs (Bowman) has been working on some Saga battle boards for our A Mesoamerican Saga project. I drafted up a graphic from his specifications, but have not had a chance to try it out (mostly as I have no figures for them). Comments are welcome, as always, and discussions can be found on the Mesoamerican Saga Forum.

I need to create a template for the faction rules, but here they are for now:

Conquistadors

1. The Capitano (Warlord) may be on foot or mounted. (See the Mounted rules from other factions for the effects on a Warlord's stats.)
2. The number of units (not points) of Hildago (Hearthguard) you may have depends upon the theater of operations. If you are playing the Caribbean, Mexican, or Floridian theater you may only take one unit of Hildagos. They may be on foot or mounted. If you are playing the South American theater you may take up to two units of Hildagos, one of which must be mounted. (See the Mounted rules from other factions for the effects on a Hearthguard's stats.)
3. If you are playing the Mexican theater you must take at least one unit of Tlaxcaltec Yaoquizqui (Native Warriors) and at least one unit of Tlaxcaltec Macehualtin Archers (Native Ally Levy).
4. If you are playing the South American theater you must take at least one unit of Incan Auqua (Native Warriors) and at least one unit of Anti Indians (Native Ally Levy).
5. If you are playing the Caribbean or Floridian theaters you may take no Native Warriors or Native Ally Levy. Use Conquistadores for Warriors and Slave Archers as Levy. You may not use the Advance the Allies ability.
6. Any remaining points are to be made up of Conquistadors (Warriors).
7. One unit of Conquistadors may be armed with crossbows or arquebuses. These two weapons have the same specifications; just field the figures you have handy.

This board definitely needs playtesting. With five of the ten right-side abilities requiring two dice, two of them require two rares, this will be a tough faction to play. Let us know what you think.

Other News

I have enough 6mm science fiction figures based (but not painted) for a test game of C4ISR; now I have to work on the Command cards. I will probably just use the Memoir '44 deck to start though. Part of the concept was to have specialty cards embedded into the single card deck, then having rules to allow a player to make sure his hand was not clogged with them. Really, it was about having to manage only one hand, and this came from a complaint that some of the complexity of BattleLore was in having to manage two hands and a token pool. As I think about Memoir '44, however, we sometimes manage two card hands (Command and Combat), but no tokens to "spend". So maybe the line is that two hands and a token pool are too much to handle but two hands are not. In any case, moving to two hands removes a bunch of rules designed to make sure you don't end up with an unusable hand.

Part of this has come about by playing Samurai Battles. In that game you get a spendable token each time you roll the "miss" symbol (the "Honor and Fortune" symbol in Samurai Battles, the "Lore" symbol in BattleLore, the "Star" symbol in Memoir '44, etc.), but you can also get either two tokens or one "Dragon" card (equivalent to a "Combat" card in Memoir '44 or a "Lore" card in BattleLore) every turn. If you get "lucky" with your misses, that means you can rack up quite a hand with "Dragon" cards, something not possible with BattleLore (which imposes a limit on the number of "Lore" cards held) or Memoir '44 (which limits your ability to draw "Combat" cards). As all of these cards represent combat buffs and game changing events, games of Samurai Battles tend to be a bit more raucous than the others in the Command and Colors family. I want something with more impact than "Combat" cards, less than with "Dragon" cards, and more like the impact of "Lore" cards, but without the token pool management.

And therein lies the problem. Lore strategy centers around the cost of playing Lore cards (i.e. do you play a lot of low-cost, but low-impact Lore cards or do you play fewer high-cost, high impact ones). So if you take out the token pool management aspect, you reduce high- and low-impact cards to the luck of the draw. I am not sure I like that, so it requires a little more thinking.

New Aztec and Tlaxcaltec Battle Boards

New Battle Boards

First up is the revised Tlaxcaltec battle board. The names of the Hearthguard, Warrior, and Levy have been changed to Nahuatl equivalents. The name for the Hearthguard is still probably incorrect, in that it means "Eagle-Jaguars", and that is more related to Aztecs. I just don't like the term "Zoomorphic Warriors" and using "Elite Warriors" when all of the other names are in Nahuatl would look strange.

The real change is the Take Prisoner ability, which is now only triggered if your unit won the melee (i.e. the other side disengages). Originally I had intentionally allowed it to be used, win or lose. But I began to consider that a player might throw weak Warrior units at Hearthguard simply to score one kill and gain a valuable prisoner. Given that the concept of this ability is that you have captured an unconscious or disabled foe and have brought people up from the rear to bind the captive and take them away (and thus is the reason you do not have to lose figures guarding or escorting prisoners), you would really need to drive off your opponent and hold the ground where the captive foe would be.

So from a narrative point of view, a unit disengaging should not be able to take advantage of this ability; only the unit winning the melee should. From a gaming point of view I don't think you want units throwing themselves into combat with, say three Warriors against eight Hearthguard, in a hope that they can score a lucky hit and thus gain more prisoner points than their opponent (who only capture a lousy Warrior).

The design philosophy of the Tlaxcaltec abilities is that they are good at shooting and have a few melee abilities. Some of the abilities (Shoulder to Shoulder, Shielded Volley, and Common Efforts) model the use of paired archers and arrow catchers. Here are the ideas behind each ability.

Harassing Fire: This ability models using concentrated fire to halt an enemy unit's advance or drive them back. By being within range of a missile-armed unit, one enemy unit's movement activation is canceled.

Shoulder to Shoulder: This models the archer/catcher pair in huddling together, thus increasing the unit's armor rating, or simply closing ranks prior to melee impact. The figures are not physically moved, as this causes all sorts of additional rules; the abstract use of the ability is sufficient and simple.

Massed Volley: If the Tlaxcaltec unit does not move at all in a turn (either before or after using this ability) they can perform a "sustained fire bombardment" on an enemy unit, earning double the Attack dice as normal. (Remember, a unit may not increase their Attack dice to greater than double the base dice, so unless another ability comes into play, this one ability maximizes the dice count for a unit.)

Aimed Volley: This represents taking more care to aim. Despite it being another "type" of volley, there is nothing to stop a player from using both Massed Volley and Aimed Volley in a single shooting action.

Eye of the Eagle: This represents sharpshooters in a missile unit getting a particularly effective result. It adds three or four Attack dice, so is better suited for using on smaller units. It is also effective stacked with Aimed Volley, but note that it cannot normally be stacked with Massed Volley.

Take Prisoner: This represents the propensity for units to capture prisoners in melee, rather than simply trying to kill everyone. This is one of the abilities that give these factions their Mesoamerican flavor.

Shielded Volley: As with the Byzantines, where this ability first appeared, this is a way to model units that were mixed between shielded and missile firing men. Rather than breaking the core rule of "everyone in a single unit is armed and armored the same", two separate units are created with one being the shield bearers and the other with the missile weapons. The shield bearers are placed in front of the missile weapons, allowing them to protect the missile unit and take the casualties while this ability allows the missile units to fire through (over) the shield bearers. Although some situations may look strange, it is a simple rule to model a concept logically without building in a lot of rules and exceptions.

Show of Strength: This represents a unit, perhaps behind and off-board, rushing to support a unit attacked in melee, and thus causing the charging unit to "balk" and back away. Rather than forcing the movement of troops and such, this models that abstract event resulting in this effect on combat.

Common Efforts: Another Byzantine ability, this represents one unit's close presence providing relief – in the form of transferring FATIGUE from one unit to the other – to another unit. This encourages keeping units close together and to form a second line of reserves.

Loose Arrows!: This models a signal from the Army Commander (higher up than the Warlord on the board) for all units armed with missile weapons to fire a barrage at the enemy. Good for a missile-oriented army.

I decided that the focus of the Aztec battle board would be on inflicting and controlling FATIGUE (fear), with some shooting (atlatl) and melee capabilities thrown in. Here is what I settled on, but it is no way final:

Orders and Orders/Reaction Abilities

Tlamemehque Bring Water: Allows units not activated to recover FATIGUE for free. Same as the Anglo-Saxon Truce, but does not have the option of recovering two FATIGUE (yet it costs the same). This represents porters moving up to refresh the troops with water and such. As they will not move up too close to the enemy, this is represented by only servicing units that were not activated. (Rationale being that if they activated, they must be close to the enemy…)

Relieve the Line: Allows you to move FATIGUE from one unit to another. This represents the concept that the units are not as rigid as imagined. Some men from one unit move into the other unit, allowing some of the second unit to fall back and rest. Rather than worrying about each specific figure, the two units simply need to be close enough for this "relief support" to occur. Same as the Tlaxcaltec ability Common Efforts, but a different rationale.

Ambush: The Aztecs tried to use quick double-envelopment movements to trap enemy. They also used a number of stratagems to ambush the enemy, such a hiding troops in holes covered with grass, then rising up after the enemy moved past them. This sort of "mass terror" is modeled well by this ability.

Activation and Activation/Reaction Abilities

Weapon of the Gods: The atlatl requires this ability to fire. As the dice are the same as for activating a Hearthguard unit, all this ability does is limit the use of the atlatl to one unit per turn. That said, the atlatl has the capabilities of a javelin but with crossbow penetration at VS range, so that is the reason for using a "right-side" ability.

Veterans Advancing: This represents the enemy seeing the banners and colored suits of enemy veterans off-board advancing towards this sector of the battlefield and thus causing a unit to "balk" (lose its activation).

Beat the Huehuetl (Drum): Better than a similar Viking ability, but recovers fatigue within L of the Warlord instead of M (and thus one costs more). Essentially the Warlord is banging his drum and calling out the names of heroes, giving orders, and providing encouragement.

Melee and Melee/Reaction Abilities

Lords of Battle: I like this ability as it combines adding dice to the conflict and increases the enemy's FATIGUE. Combined with No Mercy (below), an enemy unit can get Exhausted very quickly. Part of the theme in using FATIGUE as a weapon.

No Mercy: Like the Anglo-Danish Unforgiving and the Arabs Merciless abilities, this causes your enemy to take an additional FATIGUE at the end of a melee. Part of the theme in using FATIGUE as a weapon.

Cuachiqueh Trick: This ability allows you to cancel an enemy ability if it uses only one die. As this is a Melee/Reaction ability, it fires in Phase 0 and thus trumps Phase 3 Melee abilities. This can really upset someone going into a melee expecting to use an ability.

Take Prisoner: Part of the Mesoamerican theme of taking captives for glory and promotion.


Rules Variants for Saga

I have created a new sub-forum on the Saga Variants forum: Rules Variants. This is where you can toss ideas regarding rules variants for Saga that are not tied to specific factions or abilities. I've created a subject about doubling up on the size of Saga units, and what impact that might have on the game. The idea is that those that might have large collections – say if you play Warhammer Ancients Battles you probably have large collections of singly-based figures that are ideal for Saga – and want to put more figures on the board, how can you accomplish that without breaking the system. Doubling the size of units, both minimums and maximums, might be one way to do that.

As always, I would love to hear your comments on the blog or the forums.

Draft Aztec Battle Board for Saga

New Reader

First off, let me welcome new reader James Brewerton to the blog. Glad to have you on board. I welcome and appreciate comments. Now that I have a forum for Saga, feel free to post and join in the conversation.

Saga Updates

The Search for a Larger Army

The Mesoamerican Saga variant is humming along. In fact, I am digging this so much that I went out and bought some of the Tin Soldier UK Aztec miniatures that I don't already have. (I bought a painted collection of 450+ Tin Soldier Aztecs.) Now I am on the hunt for compatibly-sized miniatures.

• I bought some The Assault Group (TAG) Aztecs and Tlaxcallans (hey! that is what they call them Bowman) and although they are nice, they are 28mm and would be big lads in the unit. Maybe okay for a separate unit, but not for mixing.
• I bought some Ral Partha Aztecs on eBay, but was later told that they are puny and will not mix well with Tin Soldier.
• The sculptor of the Eureka Miniatures 28mm Aztecs told me that his figures would not mix with Tin Soldiers either; they are too tall. Too bad because the Caymen "Knights" look really nice.
• Monday Knight Productions has some 25mm Aztecs and [Conquistador] Native Allies, and as they are relatively inexpensive and in the U.S. I decided to order a handful.
• Outpost Miniatures have a really extensive Mesoamerican range, but are listed as 28mm. I am hoping someone will know how they compare before I order some from the U.K. They look pretty chunky, but then again, so are Tin Soldiers.
• I was told that the Foundry Miniatures Aztec line, although about 2-3mm taller, have the same body proportions and so should mix well.
• It looks like no one sells Naismith Designs 25mm Aztecs anymore. They are supposed to be "true 25mm", which means that may be a little thin for Tin Soldier, even if I could get my hands on some.

The problem with Tin Soldier's figures is that they are almost too "characterful". They often have exaggerated poses, and because each figure type has only a single pose, they look like units of dancers. Sort of like the old Airfix figures and when you tried to make a battalion out of those guys that are charging.

I know that "Saga" and "large army" sounds a little out of place, but what if I want an eight-point army of (almost) every variation? Okay, so it won't be that bad. Besides, I am re-painting some of the Tin Soldier figures to be Tlaxcaltecs, and adding bits and pieces to get some variety. I am not sure if I am going to try any head swaps, however.

The Aztecs

Ralph the "Bowman Stringer" (or just Bowman) and I have been working hard thinking up ideas for the Aztec battle board and faction rules. So far I have all but four Saga abilities defined, although Chili Fires may be dropped if it proves inadequate or unworkable after testing.

By the way, this Mesoamerican Saga "supplement" will include a pronunciation guide!

The Aztec Tlacatecatl (Warlord) is armed with melee weapon, shield and atlatl. It has the same statistics as the standard Saga warlord.

The Cuauhocelotl (Hearthguard) may be armed with one of the following combinations:

• Melee weapon and shield
• Melee weapon, shield, and atlatl
• Two-handed melee weapon and shield

Like the Vikings, you can purchase one unit of Cuachiques/Otomitl (Hearthguard) and promote them to 'Berserkers'. These figures are armed with melee weapon and shield.

The Yaoquizqui (Warriors) can be armed with melee weapon and shield or two-handed melee weapon and shield.

The Macehualtin (Levy) can be armed with sling or bow.

Two-Handed Melee Weapons

These are exactly the same as Danish Axes, with the attendant advantages and penalties.

Atlatl

This weapon operates just like a javelin, in that the unit can take a Movement action and receive a free Shooting action on the same activation. How it differs from the standard javelin rules is as follows:

• The unit may only take a Shooting action (whether combined with a Movement action or not) when the unit is activated with the ability Weapon of the Gods. This means that only one unit¹ may fire per turn.
• The weapon can be fired to M range, but if fired from VS range the target's Armour value is reduced by 1.

Chili Fires

When the Chili Fires ability is played, the designated Macehualtin (Levy) unit indicates a target within L of it and rolls a D6. If the roll is a '2' through '6', the target unit takes one FATIGUE must retreat S away from the Macehualtin unit. If the roll is a '1' the Macehualtin unit takes one FATIGUE and must retreat S towards its board edge.

There was a bit of discussion about whether this ability is appropriate or not. The "Chili Fires" weapon represents a unit of Macehualtin throwing chilis onto a fire when the wind is blowing in the correct direction and "tear gassing" the enemy. The basic problem with this idea is the thought of walking around with a ready-made fire while you are out on a raid. Looked at from that angle, it does not really make sense to have this weapon (and attendant ability).

However, the concept of a Dark Ages skirmish is not really that viable in Aztec warfare either. If you come at this with visions of Mel Gibson's Apocalypto in mind – Mayan warriors on slave raids – it might make sense. Instead, I am trying to use the Saga rules to play out a small portion of a larger battle with larger forces. Rather than repeat it all here, you can read my concept on what the game models on the Saga Variants forum. If you come at it from that angle, then committing the Macehualtin (Levy) to your force means you may also have them bringing their fires and chilis with them. As it stands, the unit can either fire L for damage, or use an ability to force you to retreat (and take a FATIGUE) … maybe. I think most people will choose to damage, at least until the unit gets whittled down and cannot do any real damage with their missile weapons.

I still have four abilities to fill for the Aztecs. (Actually, probably five, because the more I ponder the "utility" of Chili Fires the more convinced I am it is not worth allocating dice to it.) So if you have any ideas, either comment on the blog or the forum.

More Walkerloo Figures

I used to be a strong advocate of paper figures, as their cost is just so low it is easy to test out a new period or set of rules by printing up an army. I pulled away from it largely because I moved out of living full-time in my RV and bought a house and land (and a guest house, taken over as my semi-permanent Game Room). Having all this space let me collect armies, rules, terrain, etc., etc. Gone was the need to minimize the storage space of figures (paper armies store flat in envelopes). Gone was the limitation of having no painting or gaming space. Gone was my primary reason for using paper figures.

Of course, no matter what I do I cannot seem to get my act together, either in figure scale or rules, when it comes to Napoleonics. For figure scale I have more 6mm than anything, but I cannot decide on a basing scheme. I have about three or four I am currently using, thus it is really hard to do anything with them. As for rules … forget it. I really liked Drums and Shakos Large Battles, but gaming buddy Don did not.

I saw Chris Walker's Walkerloo figures quite some time ago. They are 1/35th scale Napoleonic paper figures for the Battle of Waterloo, and they are pretty good. The problem was he was selling the actual paper figures, not the digital files so that you could print out your own forces. (He even had a fun name, "printfantry", but that was only a few select figures that you could print out yourself.)

Eventually he realized that his business model was off (he wrote on his blog that he lost money on the venture) and finally decided to sell PDF files on Wargame Vault. Not only were there French and British (and a single Prussian Silesian Landwehr unit), but the Russian government commissioned him to create Russian figures for some promotion about the 200th anniversary of the Battle of Borodino (if I got the story right). Well today Walkerloo released not a Bavarian unit, but the Bavarian Corps. It includes line and light infantry, cavalry, artillery and commanders. All in one PDF file for $4.95.

Did I mention that I had already bought into the Walkerloo collection? Although I do not really have the same storage problems that I had in the past, it is still a great way to quickly get an army up and running if you want to try out a rule set. I own Lasalle and Napoleon at War and I have played neither, because the basing scheme for both is neither what I have, nor what I want to use (unless these rules turn out to be really good). Also, I still have this fantasy of playing someone using the Chef de Batallion rules.

Tournaments on Vassal

The BattleLore tournament on Vassal is still running. I have finished three of my six rounds, but have not been able to get anyone to play a tournament round all week. Everyone wants to play practice games or else they are people that are not in the tournament. This tournament has stimulated the online BattleLore on Vassal community, such as it is, and thus there are more people out there playing than in a long time. This week there were nine separate games, whereas before the tournament had started there were ten games the previous month, and Chris and I accounted for five of those!

I know, the numbers sound low, but we are talking about a "dead" game after all. Anyway, this has spurred other games to start tournaments on Vassal. I was originally signed up for a Command and Colors: Napoleonics on Vassal tournament, but due to an administrative error, ended up on the reserve roster (in case someone drops out). There is a signup sheet for Samurai Battles on Vassal and a second BattleLore on Vassal tournament also. I have signed up for the first, but am still thinking about the second. I need to make sure that the CCN tournament doesn't get me wrapped around an axle; they play two games per round.

Don owns Samurai Battles and although we have not played it, I have mixed feelings about it. First off, the figures are in pieces, literally. They are multi-part Zveda 1/76th plastic figures from their newly re-branded Samurai Battles line. Apparently once you put on the back banner (which identifies which side the unit is on, red or yellow) you are not going to get it off. (I have not looked closely at the figures, but my first thought was "magnets".) Secondly, I have heard of problems with missing cards and misprints. Richard Borg went online and published the corrected scenarios and has already posted an FAQ.

Interestingly, someone has posted a sheet to print stickers, so you can use wooden blocks for the units, just like GMT Games' Command and Colors series of games (Ancients and Napoleonics). I can see myself doing that, which means Don will never get his miniatures put together.

What draws me to Samurai Battles – other than a fascination with Samurai when I was young, compounded by my time spent in Japan while I was in the U.S. Marine Corps – is that it is very much like BattleLore. It has "Dragon" cards which are much like the Lore cards, only the effects are not so magic-oriented. More like dirty tricks, traps, events, and power-ups. I am reading the rules and will let you know what I think once I give it a try.

Well, that is about it for now. Good gaming!

---

¹ If using the Weapon of the Gods ability on the Tlacatecatl (Warlord) it may also use its We Obey special rule to allow a Cuauhocelotl (Hearthguard) unit armed with atlatl to activate for a Movement action and also fire. This is the only exception to when more than one unit can use this ability in a single turn.

Updated Tlaxcaltec Battle Board for Saga

I have updated the Tlaxcaltec battle board (no longer Tlaxcalan – I have been convinced of the error of my ways) for Saga with a lot of input from Ralph "Bowman Stringer". We are working on an Aztec board. You can always see (and participate in) the discussion on the new forum.

The primary changes are:

• The Heavy Arrows ability was removed as being ahistorical.
• The Take Prisoner ability replaced Heavy Arrows. This increases the melee-to-missile abilities ratio slightly.
• The Massed Volley fire has been re-worked and no longer looks anything like the Norman ability of the same name.

Take Prisoner

This is a cool new ability that most Meso-American peoples will have on their battle boards. Taking enemy warriors prisoner not only gave the priests more fodder for sacrifices and appeasing the gods, but conferred rank and privilege upon the warrior who made the capture.

If you play this ability and an enemy figure is removed during the course of a melee, it is considered captured and taken prisoner, as opposed to being killed. The figure is still removed¹, but the player gains Prisoner points for the capture. The number of points awarded  depends upon the figure removed. Levy garner 1 point, Warriors 2 points, Elite Warriors 4 points, and Warlords 8 points.

This allows you to create a new set of scenario victory conditions centered around taking prisoners. You could, for example, play until one side reaches at least 20 Prisoner points.

Massed Volley

Ralph didn't like the "2 x L" range for bows, as per the Norman ability. The idea is that the unit lays down a barrage of arrows and thus is more likely to damage the enemy. In order to accomplish this, however, the unit cannot move either before or after the volley.

Due to the space limitations on the board, it is probably necessary to have some clarifying rules. By "no movement" it is intended that the player not have activated the unit for a Movement action prior to playing this ability and not activating for Movement after the ability. If the enemy plays an ability that forces a unit to move, that would not necessarily count.

That is how I am going to play it on this draft. I think the easiest route to take is that the unit cannot take any action other than Resting that turn when using this ability. This gets away from exceptions on moving, future abilities that move a unit without using Movement actions, etc. and also does not allow a unit a Shooting action either before or after the ability. As the intent is for the unit's entire turn to be taken up with delivering a barrage of arrows, represented as a single Shooting action at a single target, something cleaner like that might be better. But, I need to test it as it is first. The whole doubling of Attack dice might be too powerful as it is. Especially when combined with Aimed Volley (which allows you to re-roll missed Attack dice).

I think this faction is starting to look pretty characterful. It already means a change to my FSM program for playing the Tlaxcaltecs solo!

In Other News

The Russian expansion for Command and Colors: Napoleonics arrived yesterday. As always the GMT Games components look great. I have not looked over the rules yet, but I started adding stickers to the wooden blocks when I needed something mindless to do. If the Command and Colors: Napoleonics on Vassal tournament for North America ever gets off of the ground, I will start playing those rules again. I just need to keep the differences between those rules and those of BattleLore straight.

Speaking of BattleLore, I finished my third game in the six round BattleLore on Vassal tournament. I currently sit at 12 VP, or 4 VP per game, so unless I come back with three straight wins, it looks like I will not make the semi-finals. [cue The Gong Show music]

My BattleLore on Vassal gaming buddy and I played a game last night that was an absolute blast, however. It is the round six scenario and it was to be practice for both of us. In all honesty, I played that scenario solo three times before, and each time I got a worse result. My opening moves were just awful and I was still searching for a strategy for when it came time to play the actual tournament round.

But as the game progressed my vulnerable troops hung on and my card hand kept getting better. I was finally able to move my cavalry into position to charge – I had been holding a Mounted Charge card since the beginning of the game – when I drew a second Mounted Charge! I played the first and really hammered the enemy units, bringing us even in score. I then drew a Counter Attack card to replace my first Mounted Charge card and what should my opponent play but Counter Attack. This meant he got to pull off a Mounted Charge of his own (it duplicates the previous card played), but it now meant that I could use my own Counter Attack to get the equivalent of three successive Mounted Charge attacks. Given that I had two Red Lancer Knight units, that hit on 6 dice with Mounted Charge, I would be able to throw 36 dice over the course of three turns, just with those two units! Added to the fact that I also had two Blue Cavalry units also charging, that would have been 60 dice total in three turns! As it was, the enemy could not withstand even two turns of that kind of horsepower (pun intended), so I turned a 1-3 game around to a 5-3 win.

In case you are wondering what the image to the right was, that is an odds chart for BattleLore. It came in really handy for understanding the odds of success for any given attack. It has a table for each type of attack (hitting on one face, two faces, two faces but ignore one shield, and three faces), listing the number of attack dice and the percentage chance of getting a hit. What is interesting about the chart is seeing the difference between hitting on two face (banner color and sword-on-shield) and hitting on two faces but ignoring one shield. Given that most attacks are either three dice (Blue infantry or cavalry) the chance of obtaining any number of hits goes down from 70% to 48%, a substantial drop! Something to remember when groaning about your "bad dice" after you attacked with all that Blue infantry against the enemy cavalry and came up empty.

Also interesting is the Critical Hits chart, which shows you the chance of killing a creature. Let's see my charging Red Lancer Knights can kill a creature 29% of the time or wipe out an enemy unit with strength 3 32% of the time; hmmm, which should I do?

Feel free to pilfer it. It works for all Borg designs. (For example, for Memoir '44 hitting infantry uses the Hit on Three Faces table while hitting armor uses the Hit on Two Faces table.)

---

¹ Prisoners are considered to be immediately removed. As capturing prisoners was a large part of Meso-American warfare they had it down to a science. People were assigned the specific task of binding, collaring, and escorting prisoners away when they were captured. So, no figures from the unit need be assigned to guard or move prisoner figures (which were often unconscious or wounded); they are simply removed and points awarded.

Added a Forum to the Blog

At the suggestion of Bowman, who has been emailing me about my Meso-American Saga variant (and coming up with great ideas and discussion), I have created a forum to discuss topics on the blog. Although I have long encouraged comments from readers, I have noted that sometimes people ask questions and their profile does not have an email address associated with it (for example, Jonathan Freitag, who posted a comment about my AWI adaptation to Neil Thomas' rules¹), so I cannot really answer them directly, except through a blog post. But also, to a lesser extent, a blog is a medium for directing a message, whereas a forum can go in any direction (including towards spam, flame wars, etc.).

So, in the interest of enhancing a conversation about "A Meso-American Saga", and other variants of Saga that interest me (i.e. I already have figures for), I have created a Saga Variants forum on Nabble. (I am pretty sure you will need to create a Nabble account to post, but maybe it accepts other profiles like Yahoo and Google.) To make it easier to get to this forum, I have included a link to the Blogs and Forums Pages at the bottom of this blog, below the Blog Archive. Click on the Saga Variants Forum link and it will take you to the Nabble forum, embedded within the blog.

So, you can use the link at the bottom for a basic experience, or go to the Nabble forum directly and get a full-featured interface. In the meantime I will be transferring some of the comments and email exchanges to the forum so everyone else can see the conversation and join in, if they wish. If you do not want to create yet another account to keep track of, you can always read the discussion through either link without logging in and then comment on the blog. (I won't guarantee that I will transfer the comment to the forum, however.)

So, I hope you enjoy the forum. Right now it is an experiment to see its utility over a Yahoo forum. If it works out I may create a forum for the AWI and a general discussion about the blog. As I am considering focusing more on game and rules reviews, with battle reports to illustrate the points in the review, a forum to discuss future topics might be warranted.

As always, comments appreciated.

---

¹ In answer to your question Jonathan, I have not played AWI much lately as I have been caught up in Saga. Whole unit removal is easy: use hit markers as you do with the base rules. For every four hits use one less base in firing and melee. On the 16th hit, remove the unit. This allows you to continue to use four bases per unit, if you want to show formations, or use one base per unit and use formation markers or just assume the best formation for the moment.