014 Lazic War (548 AD) Petra Mountain Passes

Written by Alessandro Crespi. Posted in Lazic War

Victory Results:
 100 %
Record a victory for BOTTOM ARMY  0 %
Total plays 9 - Last reported by RiverWanderer on 2020-02-05 02:16:42

Historical Background

The Lazic War was fought between the Byzantine Empire and Sassanid Persia for control of Lazica, a province on the eastern shore of the Black Sea. As part of the Eternal Peace of 532 AD, Sassanid Persia granted control of the region to the Byzantines.
However, an uprising against the Byzantines in 541 AD allowed the Sassanids to retake the area. In 548 AD King Goubazes revolted against the Sassanids and requested help from the Byzantines. The Byzantine general Dagisthaeus marched to assist Goubazes in the siege of the fortified city of Petra. A Sassanid relief force, under the command of Mihr-Mihroe (yes, the same Sassanid general who was defeated years before at Satala), was sent to relieve Petra. On his way, Mihr-Mihroe encountered a small Byzantine force that was guarding the mountain passes.
The Byzantines were defeated, and Mihr-Mihroe advanced to successfully raise the siege of Petra.
The stage is set. The battle lines are drawn and you are in command. Can you change history?

War Council

Sassanid Army (Use Tan blocks)

• Leader: Mihr-Mihroe
• 5 Command Cards
• 3 Inspired Action tokens
• Move First

Byzantine Army (Use Purple blocks)

• Leader: Not Known
• 5 Command Cards
• 2 Inspired Action tokens

Victory

5 Banners

Special Rules

Print

Log in to comment


mk20336 replied the topic: #239 1 month 6 days ago

Mark McG wrote: MT01 results
Sassanids won all 7 matches, 5-3 was best Byzantine result, with three 5-2 and three 5-1 results.

My view is that to be remotely competitive, a Time Pressure objective rule needs to be in play such as;
"The Byzantine player when playing a Scout Command card, instead of drawing 2 Command cards at the end of his turn, may instead draw 1 Command card and take a Victory banner. Taking a Victory banner is not possible if doing so would give the player the final Victory banner to win the battle."

I'd consider removing the 2nd sentence as well.


That particular scenario is very prone to luck factor thus results can be unbalanced. While ok as a standalone play, as a part of tournament could actually skew the results.
g1ul10 replied the topic: #202 1 month 2 weeks ago
As far as I understand, CC scenarios are not supposed to be fair. This one is surely not. But I think it might be still interesting for the Byzantine player. The challenge is to try to do the maximum damage before the Sassanid player wins. So if played back-and-forth it might still be competitive. It is true however that the difference of total medals is likely to be of the order of 1 or 2, which means that the final result is particularly sensitive to the luck factor.
Mark McG replied the topic: #201 1 month 2 weeks ago
MT01 results
Sassanids won all 7 matches, 5-3 was best Byzantine result, with three 5-2 and three 5-1 results.

My view is that to be remotely competitive, a Time Pressure objective rule needs to be in play such as;
"The Byzantine player when playing a Scout Command card, instead of drawing 2 Command cards at the end of his turn, may instead draw 1 Command card and take a Victory banner. Taking a Victory banner is not possible if doing so would give the player the final Victory banner to win the battle."

I'd consider removing the 2nd sentence as well.
g1ul10 replied the topic: #127 4 months 4 days ago
Two victories for the Sassanids 5-2. In the second game, the Sassanid won the last medal by exiting one light cavalry unit. It seems however that unit exit is not essential for the victory, as the Sassanid can efficiently collect medals through an orderly advance, exploiting the advantage in the number of troops.