Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
18 Posts

Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage» Forums » General

Subject: Is Hannibal Just Twilight Struggle etal? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Zigi Hogan
United States
The Ozarks
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
What's it going to be then, eh?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

After reading a few reviews it appears that this is just an ancients version of Twilight Struggle or any of the other CDG's (1989, 1960:MoTP).

I own TS and 1989 and really don't see any reason to get another game in a similar vein but in a different time period.

Am I wrong? Let me know.

I am looking to step up the complexity of my Ancients gaming and don't believe this is a very large step up. I currently only own one ancients game: The Battle of Raphia (which is great! and I play it a lot) but want something to bridge the gap between BfR and SPQR (Deluxe Edition).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Brosius
United States
Needham Heights
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
My favorite 18xx game for six players is two games of 1846 with three players each.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It certainly has similarities, but Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage features leaders and armies maneuvering on a map. I'd say it's a bit more complex than Twilight Struggle, though not extremely complex for a CDW.

I enjoy both games quite a bit and they feel different to me.
15 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Moore
United States
San Francisco
California
flag msg tools
mbmb
What Mr. B said.

They are different, and in a good way. The cards - - broadly speaking - - Are the game in TS. Hannibal has interaction between the combats and cards. There is more of a visceral narrative arc in Hannibal.

Play it sometime.

PS looking at your games mentioned I think you may have found a cross between your SPQR and TS, with a lighter combat mechanic. Hard to say if you'd enjoy it but there it is.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
brian
United States
Cedar Lake
Indiana
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mb
A lot of the CDGs have similar mechanics but play very differently. I think H:RvC is a more involved game and has more traditional war game elements to it - Units, leaders, siege, etc.

Something like Sword of Rome (which is basically a multi-player extension of this game) is much more similar to H:RvC, but think they are different enough from the "political" branch of the CDGs.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tobrukker
United States
flag msg tools
???

TS is just an area majority game where units co-exist in the same spaces, ie countries. Areas are scored through the scoring cards.

Hannibal has armies moving around on a point to point map, with interceptions, retreats, battles. It includes Naval movement, attrition, and sieges; most of what needs to occur in a strategic level wargame. You need Leaders to move armies since you can only activate leaders. Spaces contain only one player's units, except for sieges. While there is majority-control of territories, this is accomplished almost exclusively through force projection.

Battles are fought with a separate deck of cards, dealt at the beginning of combat, the number dealt depending on leaders and army size, etc.

In both, all actions take place through card play. Cards have the Ops value/Event format.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Zigi Hogan
United States
The Ozarks
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
What's it going to be then, eh?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

So how much like Combat Commander: Europe (which I have) is Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage?

I saw several mention that there is movement, some type of command structure, etc.

Does it have massed formations squaring off like The Battle of Raphia?

Also how light is H:RvC? Is it the weight of Twilight Struggle? I am looking for something a bit heavier but not quite the level of SPQR (Deluxe Edition). I am in the process of indoctrinating some Eurogamers and I don't want to break out something to light (ala M44) but also don't want them to get spooked by a too complex game just yet.

Thanks for the replies!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Zigihogan wrote:

So how much like Combat Commander: Europe (which I have) is Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage?


CC:E doesn't have a traditional CDG ops/event structure. Besides, CC:E is squad level and HRC is grand strategic.

Zigihogan wrote:
I saw several mention that there is movement, some type of command structure, etc.

Does it have massed formations squaring off like The Battle of Raphia?


I can't tell you for certain because I've never played The Battle of Raphia, but HRC has general who have stacks of units under their control. A battle happens when one general enters (or intercepts into) a space with another general. The battle is resolved through the play of battle cards (a separate deck with four different suits).

Zigihogan wrote:
Also how light is H:RvC? Is it the weight of Twilight Struggle? I am looking for something a bit heavier but not quite the level of SPQR (Deluxe Edition). I am in the process of indoctrinating some Eurogamers and I don't want to break out something to light (ala M44) but also don't want them to get spooked by a too complex game just yet.


The HRC rules are about 15 or 16 pages longer than the TS rules, but it's really not too bad in terms of complexity. (I don't think it's as complex as SPQR.) I can tell you that I taught HRC to my friend who had never played a wargame before and he picked it up just fine, although circumstances obviously vary.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Randolph
United States
Denver
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
ColtsFan76 wrote:
A lot of the CDGs have similar mechanics but play very differently. I think H:RvC is a more involved game and has more traditional war game elements to it - Units, leaders, siege, etc.

Something like Sword of Rome (which is basically a multi-player extension of this game) is much more similar to H:RvC, but think they are different enough from the "political" branch of the CDGs.


Well said, H:RvC is much more of a "war" game than TS, and SoR is indeed (IMHO) multi-player H:RvC with a highly shortened version of combat resolution. I don't think TS is really anything like H:RvC at all, though they both are card-driven, that's about the extent of the similarities.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oliver Paul
Iceland
Reykjavik
None
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I own both and love both (rate TS a 10 and Hannibal a 9) and they are very different. Hannibal is much more about maneuvering your forces and attacking the other person, while TS is all about just straight up area majority and trying to deal with bad events. In Hannibal, if it's an oppoenent's event, and you play the card, the event doesn't happen, so no having to deal with bad events.

Very different games, both very good.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Arnaud MOYON
France
Thorigné-Fouillard
BZH
flag msg tools
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hannibal is a wargame. TS is not.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Russ Williams
Poland
Wrocław
Dolny Śląsk
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
These are weird questions.

It sounds like you haven't read any info at all about HRvC before asking if it's just like TS or CC.

http://boardgamegeek.com/forum/2165/hannibal-rome-vs-carthag... is your friend!
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Daglish
United Kingdom
Cheadle
Cheshire
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Zigihogan wrote:
this is just an ancients version of Twilight Struggle


I think in terms of human artistry that subtly blends game design with clear exposition of history, there's a difference.



1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charles F.
Germany
Berlin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Zigihogan wrote:

After reading a few reviews it appears that this is just an ancients version of Twilight Struggle or any of the other CDG's (1989, 1960:MoTP).


TS, 1989 and 1960 are all area-majority games.

HRC is a game of manoeuvre warfare.

Other than these all being driven by multiple-use cards (albeit in different ways!), the former class of games has just about nothing mechanically in common with HRC.

To say that HRC's "just an Ancients version of TS" must be among the most outlandish ideas I've read on BGG. Simply put: Crazy talk.

Claiming that all wargames are just more elaborate versions of Chess or Go would make more sense than that.

As for HRC's complexity, it's rules-wise slightly more complex than TS. But easier in terms of the learning curve, because to play TS well you MUST have a good knowledge of the card deck. The same is FAR less true for HRC. So my bottom-line is that HRC's as accessible as TS. Because of that, HRC should be in the comfort zone of any TS players. Which might explain why these analogies are drawn.

Hope this helps.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Zigi Hogan
United States
The Ozarks
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
What's it going to be then, eh?
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
charlesf wrote:
Zigihogan wrote:

After reading a few reviews it appears that this is just an ancients version of Twilight Struggle or any of the other CDG's (1989, 1960:MoTP).


TS, 1989 and 1960 are all area-majority games.

HRC is a game of manoeuvre warfare.

Other than these all being driven by multiple-use cards (albeit in different ways!), the former class of games has just about nothing mechanically in common with HRC.


FINALLY!

Someone put this in the terms I may have been searching for. I possibly did not ask the question quite succinctly enough to get the answer I was looking for.

What started this line of thinking was the layout of the board (and a couple reviews); it apears to me (with no great stretch), with it's hexes divided by lines that it would be more AoC than a traditional hex and counter wargame. If (and I have no basis to think differently) H:RvC is a traditional wargame then are there ZOC rules? If there are none, what would it matter where you moved your units (?) since you can move where you want without penalty. Where does the maneuver warfare come in?

And comparing wargames to other wargames is a point of comparison rather than the rather moronic saying that wargames are elaborate Chess. Only a Eurogamer would try that comparison! You are very much over simplifying my example.

Also several CDG's have a definite lineage to TS (see: Labyrinth: The War on Terror, 2001 – ?). So it could very easily be said to be a "War on Terror" Twilight Struggle. So that comparison could be seen as valid.

But much like other games when you do not get the description/comparison (of a game I am wanting information on!) quite correct (remember, I am ASKING for information) the fans are all to eager to make sure you (in your ingnorance) are clearly put in your place!

Thanks to those with helpful information, it has helped making my decision. I am just going to go for SPQR (Deluxe Edition) and be done with it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Bachman
United States
Colonie
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I think the ZOC is utilized through the Interception rules.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Max DuBoff
United States
New Brunswick
New Jersey
flag msg tools
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: / Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
badge
Habeo in animo vivere in perpetuum aut mori dum conor.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm not quite sure what ZOC is, but if you're talking about LOC, HRC doesn't quite have it (since communication lines were flimsy anyway and Hannibal especially was historically rather unsupported, generals can go off on their own whenever they want). Isolated PCs are removed, however.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Eric Brosius
United States
Needham Heights
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
My favorite 18xx game for six players is two games of 1846 with three players each.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Zigi, there are a lot of wargames that are point-to-point or area movement, not hex movement. Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage is not a hex game; it is a point-to-point game. But the geography is very important because various key areas are narrow and there is the ability to intercept.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Latto
United States
Foxboro
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Zigihogan wrote:

Also several CDG's have a definite lineage to TS (see: Labyrinth: The War on Terror, 2001 – ?). So it could very easily be said to be a "War on Terror" Twilight Struggle.

Labyrinth: The War on Terror, 2001 – ? and Twilight Struggle are both one-deck CDG's; that is, each turn you play a card (dealt from a deck both players share) with an event and a number on it, and choose whether to use the number for "operations" or have the event take place. Labyrinth borrows one rule from Twilight Struggle; when you play a card with an opponent's event on it, the event happens, though you may choose whether you use the ops before or after the event occurs.

But other than that, there is no similarity between the games whatsoever. Well, OK, it's played on a map of the world, and one player is the US. But that's it. Twilight Struggle is an almost completely symmetric game, other than the events; each player uses ops in exactly the same way, and scores in the same way. Labyrinth is the most asymmetric game I have ever played. The things the US can do with OPS are completely different from the things the terrorists can do with OPS, with no overlap (and neither has any overlap with the actions that can be done with OPS in Twilight Struggle). Even the fundamental way ops points are used is different; the US plays a card to do something in one country, and a higher card allows a greater choice of countries; for the terrorists, more ops lets you attempt to do more, in one country or multiple ones. The victory conditions are completely different for the two sides, and neither is anything like the Twilight Struggle victory conditions. In Twilight struggle, a space has control given by two numbers (US and USSR influence), with the difference between them being the important thing, and the countries are divided in to map areas, where number of controlled spaces in an area is key. In Labyrinth, control of a space is two dimensional; the government is either Good, Fair, Poor, or Islamist Rule, and at the same time, it is either a US ally, a US adversary or neutral, with all combinations of these possible (though some are rare).

So if you categorize two games that are so radically different as being in the same "lineage", then I don't know how to answer your question as to whether Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage and Twilight Struggle are similar. Of the two things that Twilight Struggle has in common with Labyrinth, one is shared by Hannibal; it's a one-deck CDG. But in Hannibal, your opponent's events don't take effect when you play them. The other similarity is that control of spaces is important, and the board is divided into areas, and controlling more than half the spaces in an area is important, not only at the end of the game, but throughout.

Again, other than that, I can't find any similarities between the games. In Twilight Struggle, control is a quantitative thing, with an amount of US and USSR influence. In Labyrinth, a space is controlled by Rome, by Carthage, or neutral. In Twilight Struggle, you can place influence anywhere on the board, as long as you have influence in an adjacent space. In Hannibal, you can take control of an enemy-controlled space only if you have combat units there, and can only move your combat units by using your generals, which you will have at most 5 on the board (4 if you're Rome). When Combat units of one side encounter units of the other side (with a general on one and often both sides), there will be a battle, using a mechanism that uses a separate deck of cards, and is nothing like anything in Twilight Struggle (or Labyrinth for that matter).

Hannibal is a point-to-point wargame. It doesn't have zones of control as such (though the ability to intercept from an adjacent space can have somewhat similar effects), but ZOC wouldn't be appropriate for a game on the time and space scales of Hannibal. This is a game with the broad sweep of a war, with campaigns all around the Mediterranean, and the grand strategic decisions of where in the world your generals and troops should be, rather than a static battle line with a row of your troop counters on your side and a row of my troop counters on my side, trying to push each other back.

Hannibal is a great game, a war game, and nothing like Twilight Struggle (also a good game) except that they are both CDG's. By which I don't just mean "they both use cards"; I don't consider Commands & Colors: Ancients or Combat Commander: Europe to be a CDG, because they don't have the "Should I use this card for Operations or to make the event occur" decision that is characteristic of CDG's. But that's all they have in common.



6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.