OT2023 Round 5

Round 5 Game 2

RiverWanderer (Palmyrene) 6
Joe Gonzo (Roman) 0

A flexible opening hand afforded the Palmyrene cavalry a sustained, aggressive start. On the other hand, after an indifferent Move-Fire-Move, the Romans were limited by low order cards and mis-fortune that spiralled when crucial mid-game melees went against the Roman attackers. Even a promising Rally result was negated by the subsequent combat. Eventually, the Roman defence stiffened and Palmyrene options narrowed but by then a dominant lead afforded the Palmyrenes more latitude for risks to take the final banner.

An outlier of a game where the luck of card draw and dice rolls just seemed to go one way, as shown in the final scoreline. Thanks to Joe for his fore-bearance on the rough end of it.

G1
TTK (Rome) 6:4 Gileforn (Pal)

G2
TTK (Pal) 3:6 Gileforn (Rome)

Game 1

Player 1 (Palmyrene, cgrandl) 6 banners

Player 2 (Roman, scrum4you) 4 banners

Both front lines were disrupted very early. Roman MCs played a bit recklessly and Rome got the early lead, but Palmyrene caught up and went on to win. Most of the key action was on the left flank. Rome could not kill the HCCs and Palmyrene won with 3 units at strength 1. The game was well-summarized by Palmyrene mid-game: "this is ugly and scrappy, no clean line movements, no order".

 

Game 2

Player 2 (Roman, cgrandl) 4 banners

Player 1 (Palmyrene, scrum4you) 6 banners

Lines disrupted early. This time, Palmyrene got a substantial early lead, Rome caught up, but Palmyrene closed out the end game. Unlike game 1, Rome pushed the right flank and dislodged Palmyrene in the hills. This was probably the only organized foot unit attack line in either game.

 

SUMMARY:

Both games were won by Palmyrene, somewhat of a surprise. Both players used HCC to disrupt the Romans. Lines were not held for long and were not important. Palmyrene had the better dice in both games. We made multiple consequential rule mistakes in each game... sigh...

Game 1 PCScipio42 (Roman) 6 banners
             Javelinthrower (Palmyrene) 5 banners

             Rome was able to kill the three HCC's first but then the Palmyrene missile units took it's toll and had a chance near the end game to win, but the dice didn't cooperate. Rome finished it off the next turn. 

Game 2 Javelinthrower (Roman) 6 banners
              PCScipio42 (Palmyrene) 5 banners

             Rome prevails in another close one. Both games were only played with 1 Palmyrene leader which had it's effect as in both games the one Palmyrene leader were evaded off the board.

             Both were good games.

 

for little understood reasons, I have to go to Adelaide on business this Wednesday-Thursday, so won't get to closing off the round until Friday 18th

so consider this a 3 day extension of time to this round.

rams1984 wrote:

By the way. Zenobia should be added to the Auxilia in Hills right for Palymrene?

wow..  yes it should

I did think it was a little rough the Palyrenes getting 1 leader, but never thought to check the scenario book.

Of course Zenobia should be added to A unit. We added it in our both games.

stephent wrote:

In the first game we forgot to use caltrops and Roman legionary missile fire, and looks like in both games we missed that Zenobia needed to be added...

I didn't see a correction about Zenobia (I assume there was one, but I've been away for a few weeks). She will obviously have to stay on her tea-break for our game 2.

I had to go back to the hard-copy game to confirm that Zenobia should indeed be on the hills, with her Auxilia. Another long-standing miss from the Vassal module and consequently, this site. I will fix the module scenario in a maintenance release, unfortunately too late for this tournament. 

In the first game we forgot to use caltrops and Roman legionary missile fire, and looks like in both games we missed that Zenobia needed to be added...

Log files here

Round 5 Game 1 Immae
Viridovilas/Max Palmyra banners 5, blocks lost 27
SteveT Rome banners 6, blocks lost 24
The Roman infantry advanced quickly on the right, capturing the hills and two banners (0-2). The cavalry clashed in the centre, with one banner each – but an attempt to cut-off Palmyrene lights was unsuccessful and ultimately led to the loss of two Roman cavalry units that had been in turn cut-off (3-4). Not learning my lesson, the Roman slingers advanced far forward in the empty centre, aiming to pick off depleted Palmyrene units – they missed, were cut-off by Palmyrene cavalry, and destroyed (5-4). Racing against time, the Roman left flank infantry moved forward, warding off missile fire, and trapped the Palmyrene lights against the rear, destroying two units (5-6).
A tough and very close game!

Round 5 Game 2 Immae
SteveT Roman Palmyra banners 6, blocks lost 7
Viridovilas/Max Rome banners 0, blocks lost 25
Fortuna turned her eyes from Rome, I had the better of the early shooting, weakening the Roman cavalry, and the Roman cavalry lacked orders and was gradually hunted down by the Palmyrenes. The only time Max was able to order his cavalry, an attack against Zabadas’ cataphracts was hit by first strike with loss of two Roman units and a leader. Without dice or cards it could only go one way for Rome.
Thanks to Max for fun games and for putting up with terrible luck in the second game

By the way. Zenobia should be added to the Auxilia in Hills right for Palymrene?

 
Round 5 Game 1

Joe Gonzo (Palmyrene) 4
RiverWanderer (Roman) 6

Both sides took time to form up; the Romans in some kind of skirmish line, the Palmyrenes to put their Heavy Cataphracts forward. Roman skirmishing claimed an early banner but soon the enemy's cavalry was pushing them back. Meanwhile, the Roman's attack plan was developing against the Palmyrene left. This became the general theme of the game; strong Palmyrene cavalry roaming the centre, Romans evading and taking shelter where possible; the Roman right pressing forward. Both sides claimed banners in this way, with the Romans taking cavalry losses in support of their right flank assault, making for a close middle and end game.

Eventually Roman right flank Auxilia managed to press home the attack, edging the Romans ahead at 4:5. The last remaining full-strength Palmyrene cataphract unit forced back a lone Roman slinger unit but the hard-to-remember Caltrops rule claimed a hit and intense Roman ranged fire claimed another. More ranged fire claimed the Cataphract unit as a final banner as it was trying to make good its escape.

Joe & I are scheduling round 2 ASAP.


 

OT2023 Round 5 Immae
mk20336VSAndygor Game 1
mk20336 (Palmirene) 4 - Andygor (Roman) 6
mk20336VSAndygor Game 2
mk20336 (Roman) 3 - Andygor (Palmirene) 6    

deadline is coming up on 15th August..  so please arrange outstanding matches ASAP

Anyone has contact of RobS? Hes my opponent this round.

I'm on discord rams1984#4864

It was alright.My bad

Round 5 Game 1

Mark McGr (Palmyrene) 3
soul1st (Roman) 6

The Romans got lucky in their first turn with eliminating on heavy cataphract cavalry and more important Zabadas. Now the palmyrenes were leaderless. In their next turn the palmyrenes took out two Roman units. The score was now equal again. The Romans attacked with their cav in the center, decimating a LC and rolling three flags against a HCC which could not retreat. The palmyrenes stayed unlucky with no hits on a move fire move card. The Romans stayed lucky rolling two flag against a LC which was unsupported and could not retreat.
In the endgame each side scored one more banner.

Lady luck was on the Roman side in this game.

rams1984, it may be the automated evade marker quirk in the module.

If you select the attacked unit in anticipation of it losing some figures, VASSAL will automatically put the evade marker on it when you didn't intend to evade. This happened in our game a number of times. Sometimes we remove the evade marker, sometimes we didn't bother since we were using Discord and we knew the evade was not intentional. So if you are playing back the vlog, you may think there was an evade when their really wasn't.

You are mistaken rams1984. There was no such fault in our games. But I'll check once more.

Togan Alper vs Polonus 100

Round 5 Game 2

soul1st (Palmyrene) 1
Mark McGr (Roman) 6

This was more of a match than game 1. The Romans dutifully took the initial rush and evaded backwards, keeping a continuous line to avoid haaving retreat cut off.
Aa small counterattack on Zabadas didn't do as well as Game 1, but the HCC couldn't trap anyone, and now the Roman foot reacted. 

THe key moment was the Roman advance on the left that brought the Heavy Roman foot and leader into melee with the HCC whilst the MC cut their evasion. HCC went down, Romans advanced and combated a second HCC that evaded, but took a hit, and lost the final block evading across Marsh. The MC failed to deal with Zabadas on his HCC and fled, but the HCC attack on the Heavy foot took a First strike badly and went down. Zabadas survived again, but the power had drained from the Palmyrene attack. 

With 3 Line Commands and a Double Time, it was clearly up to the foot.. So Aurelian advanced on the hapless Zenobia and eventually arrived and finished off the match.
 

Which games are you referring to, Rams?

In both games cavalries MA'd after opponent evaded. Cannot MA when opponent evades.