Newsgroups: rec.games.board
From: mjunkin@turing.toronto.edu (Mike Junkin)
Subject: Re: SPQR is a crock?
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Date: 22 Jan 93 00:11:34 GMT

In article <1993Jan20.233150.8148@trl.oz.au> s.mathers@trl.oz.au writes:
> Well, having just bought this game, and read the rules through loosely
> once, I think I may have been ripped off.  Sure, you get a lot of nicely
> coloured counters for your $80, but the rules seem hamstrung to me.

I've played the game a couple of times, so I'm hardly an expert, but it's
clear to me that you've misread the rules. In fact, I enjoy the game quite
a bit, and I'm not particularily interested in ancients.

> How does it actually play?  I cant concieve of a satisfying ancients
> wargame where one player gets to make his moves and then the other.
> Where are the counter-charges?

I'm not sure where you got this from. The play doesn't go "I move every-
thing, you move everything, next turn" at all - in fact, far from it.
Each turn consists of a sequence of `order phases'. In simple terms, each 
order phase, one leader is permitted to give a certain number of orders 
(dependent on the leader) to the units in his vicinity. Possible orders are 
move, rally, fire, etc. The particular leader nominated each phase is the 
one with the poorest initiative rating that is not `finished' for the turn.
This is subject to `trumping' by friendly or enemy leaders (in some cases) 
that wish to do so and have a higher initiative rating (i.e. are better). 
After a leader's first order phase in a turn, he may attempt to get one or 
two others via "momentum" which again is dependent on initiative.

>                                 Also, I cant belive the morale system
> of this game!  As far as I can tell, any unit that is 1 cohesion hit off
> routing must test to see if it routs anyway. All over the board!  There
> is no line-of-sight taken into this consideration, or proximity to
> fleeing allies or anything.  If 4 units rout together, but the
> surrounding friends are not 1 CH close to routing, they are fine, they
> dont even have to test.  'Oh look, there goes our centre, not to worry',
> but a shakey unit on the far flank, who cant even see the centre for the
> dust and other troops suddenly takes flight?  Come on!

This isn't true. This type of morale check happens only to those units
"nearing collapse" (i.e. one off their troop quality ratings) after being
involved in shock combat.

> I like the cohesion hit concept as a indicator of unit state.  It models
> troop ability to fight taking physical and psychological factors into
> account.  However, it also reminds me very much of D&D hit point systems
> where the character can fight at 100% efficiency as long as he still has
> 1 HP left.  I dont care how 'superior' a roman unit is to a celtic unit
> in terms of weapons etc...if the roman unit is tired, wounded, and
> disordered they will not have superiority when encountering fresh celts.
> Sure, they will rout in the 1st round of conflict anyway, but they will deal
> out a disproportinate amount of damage to the celts before doing it.
> The celts should have every right to expect almost no penalty for
> creaming such a sorry roman unit.
> 
> How does this interpretation seem to people who have played more than
> one test game?

You're forgetting that all units involved in shock combat must take a troop
quality check before the shock takes place (unless they've just been through
shock). The closer a unit is to breaking, the more likely it will break
before the shock. Thus, in your example, the Celt unit may not have to fight 
at all, thereby sustaining no hits.

SPQR is a good game, and I think that you really should play a few games 
before slamming it (or any other) on the net.

Michael.
Lines: 20