Punic Wars Battle - with 'Battle Command: Ancients & Medieval'

Last post, I talked about ‘Midgard Heroic Battles’, with the promise that we would do the same battle with the Piquet/FoB3 based: ‘Battle Command: Ancients and Medieval’ (BCAM) by Brent Oman/Piquet Wargames.

Again, I offer the compare-and-contrast style previously completed for ‘Field of Battle vs  Volley and Bayonet’ Both sets target similar periods (or at least play-styles as Midgard has more fantasy elements and sorcery etc.) but deliver very different experiences.

Midgard explicitly embraces a “heroic deeds” ethos, with systems for battle, heroes and reputation at work - inspired by sagas and legends. BCAM spans Biblical-era wars through the Wars of the Roses and stays firmly historical with a strong emphasis on command friction and fog of war, evolving from DNA and mechanics of the Field of Battle/Piquet family.

I just played the Punic Wars scenario again  – much more tense, more drama, more to and fro of initiative. Excellent game, right to the wire…

Core Philosophy and Feel

• Midgard is narrative-driven and cinematic. Heroes are game-changers who lead from the front, perform Mighty Deeds, and can duel enemy champions. Battles are designed to feel epic and heroic — charging your warlord into the fray is  encouraged and decisive. Reputation (victory points) is tied directly to preserving the army’s prestige and the heroes’ glory.
• BCAM is a command simulation. Leadership quality, card decks, and the Action Matrix create constant friction and tough choices. It’s less about individual heroics and more about managing an army under imperfect information and limited control. The feel is closer to a gritty, decision-heavy historical recreation — broad-brush but tactically rich.  

The feel is very different – but the tense play definitely came from BCAM today. Midgard does give Hollywood/Iliad heroism; but BCAM offers command chaos and actual drama.

 

Activation and Turn Sequence

• Midgard: Semi-alternating IGOUGO with an Attacker/Defender role
1. Mighty Deeds phase (heroes refresh points).
2. Attacker moves
3. Melee (including hero single combats).
4. Defender repeats movement + melee.
5. Alternating missile fire. Units can become fatigued (fewer moves) as stamina drops.
• BCAM: Card-driven, non-linear sequence (core Piquet/Field of Battle DNA). Each side has a small deck (8–9 cards). Initiative, leadership quality (CiC rating), and the new Action Matrix determine what you can do (less randomness – more choice).
• Cards offer primary actions (Move, Melee, Infantry Fire, etc.) plus secondary options via the Matrix.
• You constantly choose where to focus limited command pips — whole army, a command group, or a single unit. Multiple decisions and built-in friction.

Critical take: Midgard is smoother and more predictable, though has many systems operating on different ‘wavelengths’. BCAM is more tense and re-playable for players who love  “what do I do – what can I do -  with this card?” moments.

BCAM’s system reduces downtime compared to older FoB systems. There is some administrative overhead, but it's quite unique.

Combat and Morale

• Midgard: Units roll Combat Dice (based on type/quality). Hits must equal or exceed the target’s Armour value to cause Stamina loss (basically HP). Fresh vs. depleted units matter. Support saves, secondary/supporting units in melee, and hero interventions add depth. Morale is baked into reputation and stamina.
• BCAM: Opposed dice with modifiers, armour classes, and UI attrition (like Field of Battle). Skirmishers and evasion are more nuanced for ancients. Pursuit rules and morale checks feel grittier…and battle is bloody, gaps open up, and you have to command the army, not hero systems.

BCAM gives more granular period flavour (especially light troops and missile fire).

 

Victory Conditions

• Midgard: Reputation-based. Start with 8–10+ tokens. Lose them when units rout or heroes die. First to zero reputation (or most at scenario end) loses. It elegantly rewards heroic preservation and punishes reckless hero deaths, but the system needs to managed in game.
• BCAM: Classic Piquet-style army morale/break point via cumulative UI losses and morale checks triggered by cards.

Midgard’s system feels more “heroic”; BCAM’s is more attritional and realistic.

 Midgard captures the “heroic age” element. Lots of systems/traits/dice/hero elemnts, but tactically deep once mastered.. Encourages aggressive, characterful play. There are some gamey systems – many traits and d6 systems (re-roll 1s, 5 and 6s hit etc. etc.) – systems not always intuitive. Needs multiple plays to manage systems. There are more modern systems akin to Warhammer Ancient Battles, Hail Caesar, or Dragon Rampant.

Battle Command: Ancients and Medieval: Outstanding command-and-control simulation. Always intuitive. The Action Matrix creates constant meaningful decisions. Excellent fog-of-war feel (always a bonus). Solo-friendly. Scales well across the entire ancient/medieval spectrum with period-specific tweaks (evasion, skirmish). Demands more plays - realistic command friction, tough tactical choices every turn, and a system that rewards clever use of limited resources.

Both are strong modern rulesets that avoid (most of the) bloat of older systems. BCAM is superb if you already love the engine.

Early cavalry action on the Roman left

Some of the Roman units are unstoppable - the Carthaginians avoid them where possible

Gauls pushed back on the left, despite their willingness to press the attack

'ELE-CAM'

Carthaginian pressure...as Romans fare poorly on their right

Gauls suffer on the Carthaginian left, and their commander goes down

The Gauls on the Carthaginian left have been all but stopped - with a dead commander. Greek mercs hold the centre against a strong Roman counter-attack.

 

'Diskoball the Mighty!'

'Havnoball' the squeaky

'Bothballs' goes down

Elephants still very active despite losses - they have only broken once...causing minor devastation

Greek Mercs on the Roman right

Severe pressure on the Roman left and in the centre, as Greek mercs move and stop the Roman juggernaut - critical times, as Army Morale runs out for the Romans

By game end, a close run thing, the Carthaginians force the Roman centre to break, and a withdrawl of the remaining force. Another excellent game.

 

Punic Wars test battle - with 'Midgard: Heroic Battles'

With the superb marketing strategy, and widespread push to develop a following in the 'game-o-sphere', I eventually succumbed and bought 'Midgard Heroic Battles' (I watched all the youtube videos and was convinced).

For the test game, we used 20mm plastics -- of which I am finding loads more each day ...

 

My reasoning was that now that I am consolidating all my 'Sword & Sorcery' lead pile and ancients plastics (though not an ancients gamer, I seem, to have collected a veritable shedload of 20mm Airfix, Hat and Italeri ancients over the years), I was looking for a single unifying ruleset. My thought had been to use 'Battle Command Ancients & Medieval' (effectively Piquet : Field of Battle variant), though the lure of Midgard was too strong, though Battle Command will get well tried too.

 

The Roman centre holds steady throughout

That said, it is a unique approach in many respects, more traditional in others. It will take several plays to get used to all the moving parts that are at work. The most efficient machine has few moving parts, that is not to say that the 'machine with many parts' does not give the best performance(?!) - though it can of course require the most maintenance - and depending on the system, parts might not always be required  (stretching this analogy until it snaps!!! in terms of car design -  AdBlue tank...Ah'm lookin' at you!). 

Cavalry attack on the Roman right flank

There are a number of different systems operating simultaneously in the game, necessitating an approach which rewards expertise in all, to get the best from gameplay:

• 

  Attacks in the centre - the charging mechanisms are most satisfying

  
  
  Combat is relatively simple, and works off 'buckets 'o' d6'. Now normally, this makes me scream, but seemed to work ok here.

  

  I mentioned d6 right?

•  'Heroes' and leaders can lead units, affect combat, challenge other heroes, and generally use leadership 'stuff' which affects play. They can use 'mighty deeds' as a resource to influence command and combat.

• 
  Command tests are excellently done- a flat 3+, but the need for command tests varies - i.e. 2nd move, or restraint from pursuit etc.
• Traits can affect everything from rewarding full strength units charging through to command test re-rolls. Again, this makes the difference between bland units and suitable characteristics for your favourite ancient or fantasy unit . normally I dislike traits (Slack Chowder for instance), but they really work here. 
•  A 'reputation' numberis ground down if leaders do not accept personal combats, and do not 'lead' effectively, and due to losses in combat...this was where we missed a few things, but once understood, there is a great system here.
• 
  Gameplay is rewarded by being conversant with all of these systems, so the game will take a few plays to get used to. 

To and fro on the Roman left - with the centre and right holding

Roman epic push in the centre - but it will not be enough to guarantee victory today

The Roman right flank, holds, as the Romans threaten to push the Carthaginian al;lies back to the start-line

Hero and unit match-ups on the Roman right

Scattered combats in the centre

Down to the last reputation point, the Carthaginian allies outflank the Roman centre, who had pushed just that bit too far forward

Age of Hannibal - Messana 264BC

 'Age of Hannibal' by the guys over at Little Wars TV is a superb game!

I am no ancients expert - indeed, my excitement over ancients is most succinctly exemplified by violent dudes and luscious ladies in the early 00s 'Spartacus' show, and bad experiences with 5th edition WRG and DBA. Anyway - these rules are superb.

I get that an ancients 'expert' will be all over rules mechanisms from WRG 5th and 6th through DBA then DBM etc etc etc...and to the evolution of javelin and kontos and points values of same, as i either fall asleep or drink their wine... 

I could argue that ancients 5th ed WRG was what got me into wargaming in 1980, and similarly what pushed me into other periods VERY quickly because of its lack of cohesion and the actual lack of anything which could be considered enjoyment...however, I digress.

 These rules incorporate a number of design mechanisms from years gone by - that said, they incorporate the Chipco mechanisms from the rules of the same name in the 90s / 00s.

• The morale clock (a d10 as indicator) counts down as your army takes hits over the opponent and vs a threshold number - meaning that units will start to degrade faster, and you will have to assign morale 'hits' as same degrades. Keeping on top of your opponent's actions re. the morale clock is the name of the game, whilst fighting for tactical advantage.
• Combat is beautifully simple (d8s plus mod-  beat for DMZ marker or double etc.), and thereby devastatingly final - command is what you  have to think about.
• The morale clock, as it works downward. thereby controls the number of units you can move - unless you remain cohesive - and in command; combat and hits and general movement and your opponent want to prevent same. 
• Units, based on troop type, also therefore have 'traits' that affect combat, morale, movement through others, rallying etc. It all works well - the main thing being that until you get the hang of your army, there's a lot to forget - show me a set of rules where that does not happen, and this improves with experience of the mechanisms and rules. 

This scenario has one problem however: the allies, Greeks and Carthaginians hate each other, but have decided today to fight their common enemy - the Romans (it's like MSNBC and ABC clubbed together to fight Fox News...but with less violence...).

I played the allies - and my daughter, having taken an interest in ancient history recently - would take the Glory of (early) Rome.

The game is very straightforward - and can be hacked for many ancient/medieval periods with ease. Worth consideration is an R.E.Howard based Hyboria campaign with it. that would be epic, and align with Tony Bath's excellent work in the 1960s in his legendary Hyboria campaign I think...   

The setup for Messana - Hanno with Carthaginians who have deserted the city at top left, Romans outside the city of Messana with enemies on flanks, and Hiero II with the Syracusan army, who have taken a break from bullying the Carthaginians, to fight a common enemy, at bottom right...

The might of Rome (and HAT 20mm plastic, and Airfix 1970s fort, and polystyrene covered in polyfilla...)

Greeks - famous for moral philosophy, democracy, and kebabs.

Appius Claudius finishes his apple

The Greek / Syracusan lines

Early attacks across the river

The Roman reserve

My opponent's nails done this morning - I have been asked to let the internet see this superb nail art...

...if 5 DMZ (demoralizations) or kills happen in the turn (bar skirmishers), then someone will lose on the morale clock - so those 'hits' have to be managed

Carthaginian troops stay silent - for now

Romans cross the river - the reserve and a foray face the Carthaginian forces

First hits on the Carthaginians

Heavy fighting with the skirmishers and Hoplites...

The new nails - and the attack against the Carthaginian elements

Hoplites under pressure...

Romans start to get the better of the Hoplites, who have ...let's say, questionable loyalty to the cause...

...though Carthaginians do not give up easily

The Hoplites are losing steadily...

...though cavalry actions on the flank persist

The Roman reserve - decides that it will take on the Carthaginian force...

...as the Greeks are beaten

...the end of the Syracusan/Greek element

The Roman reserve closes

The Final Battle

In the end, the Romans would defeat the disparate Carthaginian/Syracuse force, which could never seem to consolidate its efforts.

A truly great set of rules; simple, but not simplistic, without all the bullshit which would otherwise convert a game into an exercise in rampant futility. recommended. Game designers who do not want to make money from hardback books full of crap, but who give a shit about how the game plays, could learn a lot from these rules and scenarios.