COMBINING EMPIRE AND LOST BATTLES

Philip Sabin, April 2010

I explain on page 4 of my new strategic game Empire (available from www.soa.org.uk/store/store_games)
that Lost Battles offers an ideal vehicle for resolving some campaigns in a more detailed way than through
the usual simple die rolls. Equally, Empire allows individual Lost Battles refights to have a wider impact
within a campaign context. The following suggested procedures offer one very straightforward way of
combining the two simulations to get the best of both worlds.
If a campaign in Empire meets certain criteria as outlined below, it may be resolved by fighting the
appropriate tactical battle. Each battle is refought only once during an entire game of Empire, but certain
criteria are associated with a series of battles, and each time the criteria are met, the next battle in turn is
refought until the list is exhausted. Players may always decide to use the normal campaign die roll
instead (due to shortage of time or of the appropriate miniature figures). In campaigns across sea
passages, the preliminary die roll must be passed before any judgement as to whether a tactical battle will
be fought. The criteria for particular tactical battles to be fought are as follows:
- When Carthage attacks an independent Sicilia or Magna Graecia: Crimisus, Tunis;
- When Macedon attacks an independent Graecia on turns 1-3: 1st Chaeronea;
- When Macedon attacks a Persian controlled province inside the original Persian empire: Granicus,
Issus, Gaugamela;
- When Macedon attacks India: Hydaspes;
- When Macedon attacks an independent Aegyptus or an independent province inside the original
Persian empire, on turns 4-20: Paraitacene, Gabiene, Gaza, Raphia;
- When Macedon attacks an independent Graecia or Thracia on turns 4-20: Sellasia;
- When Rome attacks an independent Cisalpina or Magna Graecia: Sentinum;
- When Macedon attacks a Roman controlled province or Rome attacks a Macedonian controlled
province on turns 1-14: Asculum;
- When Rome attacks Carthaginian controlled Africa, Iberia or Numidia on turns 1-14: Bagradas;
- When Carthage attacks Roman controlled Cisalpina, Italia or Magna Graecia on turns 14-20:
Trebia, Cannae;
- When Rome attacks Carthaginian controlled Iberia or Numidia on turns 15-20: Ilipa;
- When Rome attacks Carthaginian controlled Africa on turns 15-20: Zama;
- When Macedon attacks a Roman controlled province or Rome attacks a Macedonian controlled
province on turns 15-20, and no tactical battle has yet been fought this turn: Cynoscephalae,
Magnesia, Pydna;

These criteria try to strike a balance between tying the occurrence of battles closely to their historical
circumstances and ensuring that there is an opportunity to refight the great majority of the 22 real
engagements even if the course of play in Empire diverges somewhat from the historical pattern. Players
can always agree not to fight a battle when the criteria for it are first met, if it seems likely that a more
appropriate campaign to be resolved by that battle will occur shortly.
It is usually obvious which army the player launching the campaign should command, except in the
Successor battles of Paraitacene, Gabiene, Gaza and Raphia, in which the campaigning player may
choose which army to lead. The opposing army is led by the player who controls the attacked province,
or (if the province is independent) by the Carthaginian player at Sentinum, the Roman player at Crimisus
and Tunis, and the Persian/Parthian player in all other cases. Either player may share his or her command
with other players as desired. Battles may be refought using free or historical deployments as players
prefer again, any disagreements should be resolved by a die roll.
Battles are fought normally, but victory is calculated somewhat differently than in the standard rules, as
follows:
11.2: VICTORY POINTS
Once the battle ends, each player calculates his victory point total by adding up the figures shown in the
table below, remembering the special counting rules for average legionaries in rule 9.3.
The fighting value of all spent, withdrawn and routed enemy units and lost enemy generals
An extra 1 for every routed enemy unit
Twice the fighting value of all shattered enemy units and killed enemy generals
5 if your army ever occupied the enemy camp and any enemy are still on the field
10 if your army was fatigued
1 per unit if your army was surprised
Three times the difference between the initial fighting values if your army had the lower total, up to a
maximum of half the enemy armys initial fighting value (rounding halves up)
32 minus the difference between the initial fighting values if your army would have 5 chances out
of 6 of winning a normal strategic campaign
16 minus half the difference between the initial fighting values (rounding halves up) if your army
would have 4 chances out of 6 of winning a normal strategic campaign
To give an example, assume that the Crimisus is refought to decide a Punic attack on Sicilia which would
normally succeed on a roll of 5 or 6. The Syracusans would get 3 times their FV inferiority of 9, making
27 points (which is less than the ceiling of 31 obtained by halving the enemy FV). They would also
receive an extra 11 points (16 minus half of 9) thanks to their 4 chances out of 6 of strategic success. The
Carthaginians, for their part, would get 23 points (one per unit) for being surprised. The net handicap
would hence be 15 (38 minus 23) in the Syracusan favour.

The army with the most overall victory points prevails in game terms, and the campaign succeeds or fails
accordingly. If the totals are exactly equal, the campaign fails. If the army conducting the campaign had
a brilliant general killed (not just lost), he is assumed to have been only wounded, and there is no long
term effect on the great captain bonus for that people. However, the current campaign automatically fails
in this event, regardless of the victory point totals.
The revised victory procedure takes account of the fact that battles between moderately imbalanced
armies tend to produce a large number of narrow game victories for the superior side and a smaller
number of more striking game victories for the underdogs. Hence, moderately inferior armies need a
further bonus in a context in which degrees of game victory are unimportant and it is only the fact of
game victory which matters. The new handicap system (x3 rather than the previous x2) means that
armies will gain 50% more handicap points at low and medium levels of asymmetry. The new system
also takes into account the absolute fighting value of the armies by imposing a proportional ceiling on
handicaps, since armies with higher FVs have more points to lose and so need higher handicap bonuses to
offset this. I recommend that players consider moving to this revised victory calculation system even in
one-off games of Lost Battles, especially in championship games in which all that matters is which side
prevails.
The other aspect of the revised system takes account of the differing chances of campaign success in
Empire. The more evenly-balanced the armies in Lost Battles, the greater the handicap bonus for better
than even chances of strategic success will be. This reflects the greater spread of game victory results in
these cases, compared to battles such as Gaugamela in which outclassed armies strive to inflict damage
before being overwhelmed, and in which the final victory scores are usually more closely bunched
together.
These rules are deliberately flexible, rather than tying users in to the precise scenarios contained in the
Lost Battles book. Players who wish to tweak a scenario to fit in with their own judgements of the
historical evidence may do so freely, since the victory system will adapt to whatever changes they make.
Additional battles or even entirely hypothetical ones may be incorporated on the same basis. Overall, the
rules take two quick, simple games and combine them to produce a project which offers many dozens of
hours of interest and enjoyment as players relive two crowded centuries of ancient military history.