Hannibal: Rome vs Carthage is the latest offering by Avalon Hill and covers the Second Punic War in its entirety. It uses a system heavily based on Mark Herman's game of the American Revolution - We The People (WTP) - which adapts rather well, under the development of Mark Simonitch, to a conflict 2,000 years before.
Before going any further, I would like to state that this game is absolutely excellent and probably one of the best 2 player, 2-3 hour military/political historical boardgames ever produced on the Hill. I believe any dedicated reviewer should spend a minimum of 20 hours immersed in the game he is reviewing. That's about 2 turns for Enemy at the Gates and 5-10 games of Hannibal. I have played twenty three times thus far and would be playing now except for writing this review! (CHV: Bloody hell Steve man! Get a Livy!) (ED: This pun first appeared in Horace's Big Fun Scroll of Capitoline Chuckles AD3)
The setting is 218 BC and the beginning of a 17 year struggle between the two major powers in the Mediterranean. The seeds were sown in the First Punic War as a result of which Carthage lost Sicily and Sardinia and ceded control of the sea routes to Rome. Hamilcar Barca, Hannibal's father, embittered by Carthage's loss, moved to Spain and carved out a kingdom there. This provided manpower and funds for the coming war. He drowned on one of his campaigns allowing Hannibal to later gain control of the army. He used this to lay siege to the city of Saguntum, one of Rome's allies. This event precipitated Hannibal's War: his epic journey over the Alps and subsequent 16 years of fighting in Italy.
The Game
But what about the game? It comes with an attractive multi-colour map of the Western Mediterranean overlaid with a network of lines and circles creating an area based point to point system grouped into provinces. The counters are equally colourful, including unit, tribe, political control and city markers, together with leaders in stands (as with WTP) and even a few elephants. Completing the package are 2 sets of cards: the Strategy Deck and Battle Deck.
Each Leader has a Strategy Rating, which reflects his level of activity, and a Battle Rating which is used in several stages of combat. Hannibal, for instance, is a 1:4 which is the best in both categories whilst Titus Longus (who was beaten at the battle of Trebbia) is a 2:1. Most leaders also have an individual special ability like Nero, who beat Hannibal's brother Hasdrubal at the Metaurus in 207 after a forced march, can move 6 rather than the usual 4 spaces under certain circumstances.
The Strategy cards form the heart of the game system. Each has a number from 1 to 3, and a colour coded event which determines who can use it. The number allows a general of that level, or less, to be activated together with up to 10 men or to play an equivalent number of control markers, either in any empty areas or convert enemy ones under combat units.
Events
The events, if used in preference to the number, help to recreate the historical occurrences of the War. They favour the Carthaginian player overall although there are several attrition cards which can affect his forces adversely and Rome seems to receive stacks of reinforcement cards. Other examples include Philip V of Macedon allies with Carthage, Sophonisba's seduction, numerous Revolts, Native Guides, Traitor in Tarentum, Adriatic Pirates, Grain Shortage, Desertion of Allies and Slave Legions.
Naval movement is uncontested for the Romans although it does require a 3 card to do it. Carthage has to roll on the Naval Combat Table to see if they have been intercepted by the Roman squadrons. There are modifiers for each port on the board and a further one for enemy control. Mago, yet another of Hannibal's brothers, has a beneficial modifier here to reflect his successful journey from the Balearic Islands to Genoa in 205.
Land movement is more difficult across Straits and Mountain Passes and mountains in addition cause attrition. If an enemy army is encountered either through movement or interception then a battle may take place although avoidance is possible as is withdrawal during the battle if a leader can roll his battle rating or less.
Combat
Combat is resolved using Battle cards. Each side receives one card per unit involved plus the battle ratings of the respective leaders, +/- cards for interception or inability to avoid battle and a variable number for friendly controlled provinces if in Spain, Italy or Africa. Rome may also lose cards to an elephant charge. There are six different types of card in varying numbers (from 4 Reserves to 12 Frontal Assaults) and the object is to play cards until one cannot be matched. Both sides lose troops according to the number of rounds but the loser also has to roll on the Retreat Table which compounds his losses. If victory is produced by a Double Envelopment then the Retreat Table is modified by +2 and it is possible to lose your entire army as happened at Cannae to Varro (1:1) in 216.
The course of the battle is usually dictated by the Attacker but the Defender is able to counterattack if his Leader's Battle Rating or less is rolled. As this also applies to withdrawing Hannibal, with a rating of 4, clearly has an advantage over his inferior opponents, at least prior to the arrival of Scipio Africanus, who is also rated 1:4, on turn six.
Carthage has a quota of 5 generals, one of whom (Hanno) cannot leave Africa. Rome begins with 2 and replaces these randomly each turn from a pool of 9. This reproduces rather well the lunatic system adopted by the Roman Senate of changing their army commanders each year using mainly political nominees. This is offset somewhat by a choice of Proconsul from amongst the departing generals. Once Scipio Africanus appears he remains on the board for the rest of the game as a second Proconsul unless killed.
The game may last a maximum of nine turns. Seven cards are given out for each of the first three turns, eight for the next three and nine subsequently. This is due to the turns representing an increasing number of years as the game progresses. Reinforcements are conditional for the Carthaginian player (dependant on control of New Carthage in Spain and the silver mines of Baetica) and there are restrictions on placement for the Roman.
Decisions
The game is decided by political control unless Hannibal is killed or Rome/Carthage are besieged and captured. Provinces are controlled if there are a majority of friendly markers (for example, 3 out of 5). Control markers are lost by isolation at the end of a turn (route to friendly port or combat unit), by losing battles (half units lost) and by Revolts. They are also lost when provinces are counted up as the last action of each turn. If the score is 10:8, the loser removes the difference. If there are no more markers to remove then that side "Sues for Peace". Cities act like other control markers except that they cannot be removed/converted except by Siege which requires 3 strikes. Subjugation of Neutrals & Tribes friendly to Carthage works in a similar manner.
The main differences with WTP are as follows. All Strategy cards can be potentially used as either an Event or Operation. Each General can move with up to 10 units and 5 or more can overrun a single unit without loss. Naval movement is available to both sides, even to enemy ports, although much easier for the Romans. Control markers are easier to place (in comparison to the British player) but harder to convert (nil automatic for Generals or Armies who must undergo attrition if on enemy marker). Isolation is more strict and a route cannot be traced to an empty space or over passes. Both sides can intercept and losses as a result of losing a battle are usually much greater. Double Envelopment cards now lead to automatic loss of initiative. There is no surrender as such but retreating armies must move to a friendly control marker within four spaces and incur further losses if required to move through enemy territory. There is no possibility of a premature end to the game directly due to Event cards. As has been mentioned the number of Strategy cards dealt is not constant.
Reflecting History?
Does the Game reflect History? It does a first class job of reproducing the Strategic dilemmas of Rome and Carthage. Whilst Hannibal headed for the Alps, two Roman armies were poised to strike at Spain (Publius Scipio) and Africa (Titus S. Longus) and were only prevented from doing so by Hannibal threatening the security of Italy and Rome. In fact Scipio did send his brother and most of his army to Spain to disrupt the Carthaginian powerbase and deter reinforcements.
This is certainly possible in the game and a viable approach if Hannibal can be contained elsewhere. Rome can reach any position on the game map very easily by sea but often not in overwhelming force and usually at the expense of a threat elsewhere. This was demonstrated in 218 by Scipio's landing at Marseilles in pursuit of Hannibal's army and later campaigns in both Spain and Africa by Scipio's son. Naval movement may be a little too difficult for Carthage but does demonstrate their reluctance to risk substantial troop numbers at sea until later in the War, unless from Africa to Spain. Interestingly there is no overland route in the game via the Straits of Gibraltar.
The game is less able to recreate Hannibal's admittedly extraordinary feats along the length of Italy. His army is rather brittle and although a substantial proportion of his troops were lost to attrition (both hostile tribes and the elements) his residual force often seems rather inadequate and incapable of achieving much at all. His benefits in battle are significant but come to naught if his army is attrited into extinction. This problem is compounded by the difficulty of reinforcing Hannibal which is historical but does not sufficiently account for his recruitment of the local populace. The result is an uncharacteristic cautiousness on the part of Hannibal as the loss of one battle or even several Pyrrhic victories may be catastrophic.
This may be illusory to some extent as it is possible with shrewd play to maximise his personal advantages. A number of Hannibal's victories were achieved by means of ambush (especially Trasimene in 217) and withdrawal from a difficult situation may be visualised as a feint to entice the enemy into a future trap. It may however encourage alternative modes of play which could be considered rather ahistorical such as remaining in Spain or attempting amphibious assaults.
The political control aspect is rather clever and there are event cards which encourage Hannibal to invade Italy in order to influence control markers. This does reflect his preoccupation with capturing the hearts and minds of Rome's allies and his ultimate aim to turn them against Rome. His presence is also important in activating certain other events such as the siege of Tarentum and defection of Capua. These event cards lend an air of historical authenticity but may lead to some rather odd tactics.
In reality Hannibal was never able to challenge the walls of Rome even after his greatest victory but this is potentially possible in the game by using the Carthaginian Siege Train. This cannot be carried by sea nor cross alpine passes and therefore must be played in Italy to be of any practical use.
Strengths
The starting strengths for both sides is sixteen combat units. Each unit apparently represents approximately 3,000 men, making a total of 48,000 which is clearly too low. Hannibal starts the game at Saguntum with 10 CUs whereas his army according to Polybius was over 100,000 strong. Even if we accept Delbruck's revised figures this still gives him a total army including those that remained in Spain and others returned to Africa of over 80,000. He certainly cannot command and move with an army of 50,000 as at Cannae using this scale. Rome's allocation ignores the legions in Sardinia and Northern Italy. The discrepancy is offset to some extent by the reinforcement cards but the scale should be still increased to at least 5,000 per CU.
Are the Leaders' ratings correct? This is inevitably rather subjective but perhaps there should have been an even greater distinction between the likes of Varro/Longus and Hannibal. Also Hannibal's special ability of using a probe card once as a Reserve in any battle is rather weak.
So, how to win? I believe the Carthaginians are definitely the more challenging side. Maximise your reinforcements - this is especially true for the Carthaginian player and it may be worth spending 3 cards to reinforce Hannibal (1 per card) if the going gets tough (remember only on friendly markers in controlled provinces). Carthage starts with a two province deficit: Cisalpine Gaul is a must and gives you an ally in Italy in the process. Idubeda can also be controlled on turn 1 although you may prefer to set Hannibal on his way (three activations to cross the Alps, two with a forced march which can be very useful).
Never cross the Alps with 10 CUs, leave at least one behind together with Mago + Hasdrubal Gisco. Spain needs generals more than Hannibal and Mago is required to mobilise and transport the troops in Carthage with his naval modifier. Hannibal may well be content to spend the winter in Cis. Gaul but if he has Marharbal's cavalry or other cards which are useful in battle it may be worth seeking out Scipio and giving him a good kicking (winning battles removes opposing control markers).
It is important to use events to your advantage and especially cards such as Philip of Macedon and Syracuse defects for Carthage which together give -2 on the naval combat table. The Roman may play these as operation cards and derive some psychological benefit by pointing this out to his opponent. Carthage normally dictates the start player (unless Rome plays a Campaign) and by nominating Rome it is often possible to build up an overlap of Strategy cards. This is particularly useful for Revolts and also the Truce card which allows naval movement without using the combat table. A campaign card could then be used (which does not break the Truce) and Hannibal be reinforced by 10 men (dream on!).
Control the Battle
It is crucial to be able to control battles as far as possible. This is obviously easier with generals who have decent battle ratings. Do intercept but never attack without friendly control markers nearby (important for avoiding battles and withdrawing) unless completely unavoidable. When in a battle play to your opponent's perceived weaknesses but be ready to withdraw early if running into difficulties. Reduce Hannibal's flexibility by playing probes, although winning with these reduces your opponent's losses.
If afraid of losing provinces to revolt you may consider garrisoning them as only markers not stacked with CUs are normally removed. It is usually vital to protect your powerbase unless on the verge of a winning strategy elsewhere.
Rules clarifications? The main ones confirmed by Avalon Hill are that CUs may never move without a general (the Naval Combat Table is wrong) and single CUs are not overrun if the moving force is intercepted.
Modifications
Modifications? The main concern expressed is that Hannibal in the game is not the Scourge of Rome he was historically. The following may help to redress the balance:
-
Use Probe as a Reserve more than once in a single battle
Use Double Envelopments without automatic loss of initiative (after all he did pioneer the manoeuvre)
Modify the Naval Combat Table making it easier to survive, perhaps with attrition
Make Hannibal equivalent to Scipio Africanus: remove if killed but the game continues
Change to no Allies for the Romans in Italy as appears on the map. This certainly seems to have been Avalon Hill's main method of play balance as it differs in the rules, on the map and in the addendum.
In summary, this is one of the best: go out and buy it now - while you still can. (CHV: a Parthian shot there!)
More Hannibal
Other Hannibal
Back to Perfidious Albion #93 Table of Contents
Back to Perfidious Albion List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1996 by Charles and Teresa Vasey.
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com