Author Topic: Aurelian for another periods?  (Read 3699 times)

Ignacio

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
    • View Profile
Aurelian for another periods?
« on: December 06, 2015, 05:14:21 AM »
Could be useful the Aurelian system (with any changes) for another ages? I don┤t talk about napoleonic or modern of course, but for the early roman or similar?

Le Grand Fromage

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5278
  • "Il faut cultiver son jardin."
    • View Profile
    • HONOUR
Re: Aurelian for another periods?
« Reply #1 on: December 06, 2015, 08:06:35 AM »
This is something that came up in the early days of design, back when it was going to be a "game for hire" for a miniatures manufacturer.

There's no reason why it can't be used for other periods of Ancients or Medieval. BUT... each army in Aurelian has its own unique set of action cards.  So you'd have to create those for each belligerent.

One obvious possibility is:  Crusaders vs. Muslims.  Two armies that are different enough to be interesting and have a lot of period flavor, each with its own deck.

Let's get the game out of the door first, though!

curlerman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 63
    • View Profile
Re: Aurelian for another periods?
« Reply #2 on: December 21, 2015, 03:26:37 AM »
Having read the rules now There are many more scenarios that can be played with no change at all. For instance Fall of Rome in Britain . The late Romans will serve admirably as the last of the legions with no change and the barbarians will do nicely for about all the opposition ie saxons , picts, Irish with some very minor changes. Very handy as I have all my 10mm armies of that theatre of war mounted on 60x40mm bases so I am good to go.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2015, 03:29:52 AM by curlerman »

Paul.b.garnham

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 65
    • View Profile
Re: Aurelian for another periods?
« Reply #3 on: January 20, 2016, 01:35:52 AM »

Anyone thought of the earlier period
Republican Roman --- use Romans as is just remove Clibanar11
Succesors - ??? Pike, Cataphracts, Horse archers +++

I think I have a reasonable idea on force mix but any thoughts on action cards ?

kac

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: Aurelian for another periods?
« Reply #4 on: January 20, 2016, 06:42:12 AM »
One thing that comes to mind for the Republican period is that I would amend all the Roman cards so they in no way buff Roman cavalry. Roman cavalry then was notoriously bad, and was often a liability. That is one of the first changes I would make.

Further suggestions would depend on whether you were discussing pre the Marian reforms or post.

Paul.b.garnham

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 65
    • View Profile
Re: Aurelian for another periods?
« Reply #5 on: January 20, 2016, 10:07:29 PM »
One thing that comes to mind for the Republican period is that I would amend all the Roman cards so they in no way buff Roman cavalry. Roman cavalry then was notoriously bad, and was often a liability. That is one of the first changes I would make.

Further suggestions would depend on whether you were discussing pre the Marian reforms or post.

Initially I was thinking - post - so late Republican.
Easy to weaken the Armoured Cav (reduce Elan to 4 or 3). Only 1 specific Cav action card - Magister Equitum - can probably leave it.


flatsix518

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: Aurelian for another periods?
« Reply #6 on: February 14, 2016, 09:32:54 AM »
I have some thoughts on some traits / definitions / special rules that might be necessary for other periods.  I'm mostly doing this because I don't have the armies for Aurelian as published and I want to push the figs I do have from other periods.

But before I get into that, I want to first say that I am a big fan of elegance and simplicity in rules design.  Sam is masterful in this respect.  So I think that limiting traits and unique rules for units/periods should be a guiding principle. 

Having said that, I can think of several unit types that *might* require some special treatment.

I also don't know how far Sam would want Aurelian "stretched".  I'm going to talk some into the high medieval age, and Sam might want to do a major supplement or replacement of Aurelian before that point in history.  So forgive me if I'm kind of making a long pass, here.

1) Phalanxes - Frontal assaults on true phalanx type infantry was pretty difficult if they were in good order.  In my opinion, true phalanxes include classical Greek hoplites, Macedonian/Successor phalangites, and probably Swiss pikemen.  For these types of units, I think maybe a "Phalanx Trait" might be appropriate.  It would halve (FRU) the Úlan of enemy cavalry attacking the front of the unit, if the unit is in open terrain and has two or fewer disruptions.  I also think we should be careful about what units are "phalanxes".  There are many spear-armed units in history who should not receive this trait.  Only those which demonstrated the discipline and order to defeat frontal cavalry charges should get it.  One of my gripes for other rules is treating all spearmen like they are hoplites.

2) Pikes and Spears - Just as an aside, I think these require some careful consideration for their Úlan.  I personally think average spearmen should at best have an Úlan of 4.  Elites an Úlan of 5.  (I'm using the Romans as base of reference.)  Average pikemen should probably have an Úlan of 5, with elites (think Hypaspists or Swiss pikemen) having an Úlan of 6.  I could also see pike blocks taking more than five hits to break -- like maybe six.

3)  Chariots - I'm not even sure what should be done here.  But something will be needed.  You can't really treat them like cavalry on wheels.  I'm not going to hazard suggestions -- I just can't think of good ways to handle them.

3)  Knights - My guess is that the elite high medieval knight might have an Úlan of about 7 with four armor.  Just guessing.  These units might stretch the game design, or might be easily accommodated.

4)  Longbow - I generally don't like the idea of weapon-specific considerations -- but longbows would require something.  Probably a special trait that raises their effectiveness vs mounted targets.

5)  Cav armies -- my favorite period is dark age.  I don't think the core army concept is appropriate for this period for some of the armies (Sassanids, Byzantines, Vandals).  Might drop it -- or have it apply to cavalry units.  Not sure.

This is mostly thinking out loud.  Not meant to stir up too much controversy.

John
aka flatsix518

Osmoses

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
    • View Profile
Re: Aurelian for another periods?
« Reply #7 on: February 19, 2016, 07:29:58 AM »

One obvious possibility is:  Crusaders vs. Muslims.  Two armies that are different enough to be interesting and have a lot of period flavor, each with its own deck.


Is this just an example or an indication of a possible future project?  ;)

Le Grand Fromage

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5278
  • "Il faut cultiver son jardin."
    • View Profile
    • HONOUR
Re: Aurelian for another periods?
« Reply #8 on: February 19, 2016, 10:11:07 AM »
Well, nothing is decided or settled yet.  But Tobias Peylo is trying to persuade me to do the Crusaders next, yes.

Sir Tobi

  • Play Testers
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 230
    • View Profile
Re: Aurelian for another periods?
« Reply #9 on: February 19, 2016, 10:35:32 AM »
I'll do my very best. it simply would be a Hobby-Dream come true...  ;)

Osmoses

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
    • View Profile
Re: Aurelian for another periods?
« Reply #10 on: February 19, 2016, 10:55:02 AM »
That would be awesome. If your next two titles are called 'Bohemond' and 'Zhukov' I'll be a very happy person.  :)

Nick the Lemming

  • Play Testers
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 576
    • View Profile
Re: Aurelian for another periods?
« Reply #11 on: February 19, 2016, 02:25:54 PM »
Crusades would be interesting. Are you looking at 4 armies (as with Aurelian?) And which crusade(s)? There are plenty of options, anyway, 1st Crusade Crusaders and Byzantines vs Seljuk Turks and Fatimids, or later (3rd?) Crusaders and Military Orders vs Ayyubids and maybe Byzantines?

And still want to hear more about Rommel. :D

Leonini72

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Aurelian for another periods?
« Reply #12 on: September 22, 2016, 01:20:20 PM »
Just saw this....Crusader expansion would be very interesting. Here is my take on the 4 armies:

Kingdom of Jerusalem
Crusader Army of Richard the Lionheart
Fatimid Army of Salahedine
Byzantine Army

Just my two thoughts....please push this back a while....still working on Aurelian armies....lol :)

Patrick

Sir Tobi

  • Play Testers
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 230
    • View Profile
Re: Aurelian for another periods?
« Reply #13 on: September 23, 2016, 09:15:14 AM »
At the moment Sam has his hands full with Rommel. But be assured, I won't rest to plague him until "Saladin" becomes reality. I'm sure we'll make it  ;) ;D Until then have Fun with Aurelian.
 

Leonini72

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: Aurelian for another periods?
« Reply #14 on: September 25, 2016, 02:55:39 PM »
Hahaha, I'll be on the look out for sure!