Rod Coffey - 05:14am Oct 9, 1997 PST (#325 of 337)

Kos, 

I'll take a stab at VG's Peloponesian War 

I played it intensely for about 2 months awhile back (3 years ago). All
of my play was solitaire. That's OK because the game has a solitaire
mode where you switch sides. The switch is, if I remember correctly,
based on a weakening of a side to a certain point -- a subtle but key
difference from switching because a side is about to win.

Athenians have better fleets, "the walls" of Piraeus, lots of colonies
with an ability to expand. They have an ability to raid the Peloponesian
coast. They also have a vital grain lifeline running through the
Bosporus.

Spartans have better heavy infantry, can build fleet -- and ultimately
must to win, helots are portrayed. 

Leaders are integral to play, I think they are drawn randomly. Lots to
do, in this game -- raid, attack, isolate colonies, seize enemy
colonies, build forces, auguries that can "end" the turn. It's impulse
based.

I have kept an interested eye on this game at AVALONCON. It still draws
about 10+ folks. Seems the Athenians are winning a lot amongst the
veterans. Did not notice any play balance problems with my limited
experience.

Hope this helps. Memory is starting to fade on this one. I thought it
was a lot of fun however. 

             Chris Camfield - 05:20am Oct 9, 1997 PST (#326 of 337)
             Warning: SF gamer on the loose

VG Peloponnesian War, an outline... 

Nice map with point-to-point movement. The game mainly consists of
alternatingly performing operations, which involves picking a target
location, drawing a leader, moving him around activating troops (and
paying for them), and then moving the troops to the destination. While
moving near/through enemy-occupied locations, skirmishes or battles may
take place.

Units are cavalry, hoplites, and triremes. One ship unit can transport
one cavalry or hoplite unit. Since the turns are three years long each,
movement is unrestricted in distance.

You pay to activate and replace units, and collect money from your
empire, with bonuses for particular conditions. You lose income for
having locations in rebellion or ravaged by the enemy. (Rebellions can
be induced.)

Each battle you lose/win changes your Strategic Confidence Index (SCI)
for the turn. At the end of each turn, a positive SCI increases your
Bellicosity by half the SCI, or a negative one decreases it by the full
SCI. If your Bellicosity gets too low, your people become unwilling to
fight. That's one way to win the game, as I recall.

In the solitaire game, operation targets are determined by the solitaire
system. Depending on your SCI in the previous turn, you may be forced to
switch sides, which lets you retain your VPs but presumably puts you in
a worse situation. (Your VPs are taken to measure your decisiveness in
playing the game, rather than how well one side did, obviously.)

You can also play with 2 people, or with up to 7. (Athens, Sparta,
Chios, Korkyra, Thebes, Corinth, and Persia.) I played 2-player once...

I think the game has a few holes that should be fixed. For instance,
although it's unlikely, I once had an Athenian naval sail up to Corinth
by sea without being intercepted, and they then proceeded to beat the
Corinthian navy and took over Corinth without having to fight the army.

I also think there needs to be some limit placed on long-distance
overland operations. The Spartans can march through Thrace and all the
way down the coast of Asia Minor, if not stopped by an Athenian force
placed to block them, and ravage every location along that long coast,
which is pretty devastating. I find it difficult to believe the gerousia
would really let an army go away from Sparta for the length of time that
would take, too.

Having read some recent works about the *limited* ability of ancient
armies to actually ravage terrain, perhaps that is what should be
reduced instead. One article suggested that ravaging land was a good way
to induce someone to betray a beseiged city, though.

Chris