For those of you who missed Part I of this article, you can find it here: Rendering Caesar’s COIN (Part I)

Welcome back to our answers to your questions about how our design Falling Sky adapts the COIN Series’ game system, originally about modern insurgencies, to depict the Gallic revolts against Caesar in the late 50s BC.  In Part I , we attempted to address the larger questions you raised about the change in era, and about player roles, incentives, and capabilities.  Now, as promised there, we delve further into the details of individual game mechanics, events, and aspects of war in ancient Gaul as explored in this upcoming COIN Series volume.  Thank you for joining us once more!  – Volko Ruhnke

How are Roman politics handled, when Caesar’s goal was power in Rome, and Gaul was just a way to achieve this?  Can the Caesar player lose the game by losing the support of the Senate?  If Caesar loses the Senate’s support, does it mean he has to go beyond the Rubicon? 

Volko:  As we touched on in Part I, the game treats Caesar’s exploits in Gaul as helpful to his power in Rome because they were an expression of Rome’s larger impulse to expand.  So, the degree of Caesar’s success in subduing the Gallic and Germanic tribes will influence the degree of the Senate (and other Roman interests’) approval of Caesar.  Each Winter, the number of subdued, dispersed, and Roman-allied tribes in Gaul—the Roman player’s victory score—can push Roman politics (a simple the “Senate” track in the game) from the usual intrigue to either adulation of or uproar against Caesar.  Various events (for example, “Cicero”) can have a similar effect.

Andrew:  It is definitely possible for Caesar to lose the game by losing the support of the Senate, although indirectly.  Instead of loss of Senate support causing an automatic defeat for the Roman player, it instead causes several nasty, negative effects, such as decreased auxiliary forces and more limited access to legions.  A Senate in uproar against Caesar will not take legions away from him, but will limit his ability to replace any legions lost.

We have also included an event card which, when played, will trigger a need for Caesar to cross the Rubicon and effectively end the Gallic War and the game and cause a final victory check.  An effect this drastic will of course need a certain prerequisite to be met:  that the Roman score exceeds a certain threshold.  This represents significant opposition from Caesar’s political enemies and a slightly earlier than historical Roman Civil War.  In this scenario, Caesar’s opponents have become alarmed enough by his military success to attempt to remove him as governor.

Will Vercingetorix have a “Gallic tribes support” track?

Andrew:  Yes, tribes supporting Vercingetorix are shown in the form of the Arverni (Vercintegorix’s Faction) available forces display spaces for allied tribes that how many are currently on the map.  Disc pieces in this COIN volume are not “Bases” but rather the symbol of the allegiance of a tribe on the map to a given faction.  This total is one of a set of two of the Arverni victory conditions, the other being the number of legions killed or kept out of Gaul.

How do you determine when the 5^th Faction activates?  With “only” 72 cards in the deck, it can’t use the standard faction-symbol-on-card order (with 5 factions that’d take 120 cards), so you must’ve come up with something else…

Andrew:  We have!  The main way that the 5^th Faction (the Germanic Tribes) acts is during the Winter Round (this volume’s version of a Propaganda or Coup Round), in which they activate immediately after each victory check.  They then perform actions according to a very simple, linear flow chart.  The flowchart’s sequence directs them to execute several Commands similar to a player.

However, this is not the only way.  The other major way that they act is through one of the Belgic player’s Special Abilities—“Enlist”.  Here, the Belgic player can temporarily take command of nearby Germanic forces as if they are Belgic.  This can often be a double-edged sword, as this allegiance does not carry over to the Winter, and the Germanic warbands can wreak havoc in Belgic lands.

A final way that Germanic forces activate is through event cards.  The effects of these events are varied:  some allow other factions to take temporary control of Germanic forces similar to how the Belgae can.  And others cause the Germans to perform an immediate Winter activation sequence, often with some twist to reflect a particular historical occurrence.

I’d like to know how you came to select the Factions’ regular and special actions for their COIN Series treatment.  In particular, how are you thinking about Roman Special Abilities for this game?

Volko:  All the COIN Series Factions’ regular actions (“Operations” for the modern topics, “Commands” for the more archaic settings) must allow forces to build (here, “Recruit” for the Romans, “Rally” for the others), move (“March”), and fight (“Battle”).  Then we add one other activity characteristic of the Faction type, in this case “Scout” for the Romans—to reveal hidden enemy warbands—and “Raid” for the Gauls and Germans—to steal resources.  Then we add 3 new Special Abilities for each player faction.  (As in some of the other volumes, multiple factions—all Gauls and Germans—share an “Ambush” Special Ability, although this “Ambush” is entirely different than that in the modern volumes.)

Andrew:  There are three sets of Roman activities that we are trying to capture, that I think are both important for the Roman faction to be viable and were essential to Caesar’s strategy in Gaul.

The first of these is titled “Build”.  It encapsulates two distinct actions, the first being the Roman building of forts, which was very important for Caesar to maintain control over Gaul.  And the second is the Roman method of “civic action” or “pacification”—subduing hostile tribes and gaining allies by both building infrastructure and supplying Roman goods, especially wine.

The second is titled “Seize”.   This represents the Romans’ practice of gathering supplies, mainly food, either by foraging or by taking it from local tribes, often by force.  A more extreme version of this practice was the actual enslavement, killing off, or otherwise driving away a tribe, both for a greater influx of resources and to ensure that that tribe would not rise against Caesar again any time soon.  In game, this latter method is represented by placing a “Dispersed” marker that renders a tribe a non-factor for a couple years.

The final Roman Special Ability is “Beseige”.  It represents the Romans’ impressive ability to counter fortifications.  It modifies Roman attack within the Battle Command to ensure that usually tough enemy citadels are instead removed automatically.

Given that communications were really slow, that the Romans essentially gave one man control of the forces he had, and that the goals of tribes were very local, how does the design overcome giving the players unrealistic coordination and strategic oversight? 

Volko:  The previous COIN volumes set in modern times did not use Leader pieces, mainly because 20^th and 21^st Century communications mean that the geographic location of a theater commander is less than critical to the operations of forces in the theater.  In ancient Gaul, the physical location of a Caesar, Vercingetorix, and Ambiorix meant a great deal for both force and diplomacy.  In Gallic War, each of these leaders is represented by key piece.  For their Faction to execute a Special Ability, that leader must be in the target region or within a distance of 1 Region.  If that named leader falls, his successor allows only for Special Abilities in the same region—a sharp drop in the potency of that Faction.

Naturally, many event cards concern other leaders.  “Titus Labienus” represents Caesar’s able lieutenant in the Gallic campaigns:  it either extends Roman Special Abilities to 1 additional Region not in proximity to Caesar, or limits Roman Special Abilities to just Caesar’s Region and 1 adjacent (meaning that Caesar’s exclusive trust in Labienus is undermining Roman actions).  “Convictolitanis” represents either a worsening or resolution of the internal Aedui split between that leader and rival Cotus—either expanding or limiting the number Regions in which the Aedui may undertake their hardest hitting tactics.

A smaller change from previous volumes is that it is cheaper and easier to disperse a force than to concentrate it—representing the difficulty in the absence of radio communications of ordering dispersed forces to meet up, relative to sending detachments from a main army off in several directions.

With regard to the local goals of the Gallic tribes, the game portrays that by eschewing the usual regional count of populations and their sympathies as a measure of faction success.  Instead, players as the major factions are contending for the loyalties of individual tribes—showed by the presence or absence of tribal Ally discs—and these local allegiances thus will change constantly during the game.

I’m curious to know if and how battles of the time will be modeled compared to the other COIN games, given that armed conflict was a different beast in ancient times as compared to, say, modern Afghanistan.  How are pitched battles managed?

Volko:  As you note, pitched battles were a different and more critical aspect of ancient warfare than of modern counterinsurgencies dominated by guerrilla actions.  This is true even of ancient counterinsurgencies such as Caesar’s suppression of the Gallic revolts in the late 50s BC, which saw major field and siege battles at Avaricum, Gergovia, Alesia, and elsewhere.  While each modern-age tactical engagement with guerrillas might have great variance and uncertainty, the accumulation of many small encounters within a region-wide counter-guerrilla sweep or assault is more regular and predictable.  So we can represent the outcomes of “Sweep” and “Assault” in the modern COIN games with straightforward results.  Less so the chaos of ancient pitched battles!

Therefore, the “Battle” Command in Falling Sky is the most different of any action in the volumes on modern topics.  Battle represents the opportunity and effort—small-scale maneuvers within a region—to bring one’s massed forces in contact with those of an enemy.  The vagaries and dilemmas produced by the card deck, the core COIN Sequence of Play, and of course the players themselves ensure that whether or not battles will occur, where, and when will be hard to foresee.

Within that, Battle mechanics allow further chaos in enabling a defender either to stand his ground, defend local allied tribes and fortifications, and counterattack—or to reduce his losses by disengaging.  Gauls and Germans, if they have more hidden warbands than does the enemy, can ambush to prevent enemy counterattack or retreat.  When Caesar or Ambiorix initiate battle, they worsen the enemy’s losses.   And finally, particularly tough forces—legions and other crack troops, leaders, Roman forts, and Gallic citadels—roll a die when taking a loss and may either be removed or survive.

Battle remains simple enough to be listed within a box on the usual COIN Series faction foldout sheets.  But it is intricate enough that we have supplemented the usual sheets, rules, and examples of play with a visual, flow-chart-style playaid that playtesters called for in order to make this battle routine easier to learn.  As with most COIN Series actions, we have found that—once learned—Battle rarely requires reference to any of the charts. 

How will you handle sieges?

Andrew:  Sieges work almost identical to regular field battles, with one important difference.  That difference is that the force in either the citadel (if Gallic) or fort (if Roman) has their total losses halved. Forces retreating from contact similarly suffer only half losses; however, the defender standing with a citadel or fort still gets to battle back with his survivors, while retreating armies do not.  In addition to this, the citadel or fort piece itself is tough to destroy, as it requires a 1-3 on a die roll to remove instead of being removed automatically upon suffering a battle loss, as most pieces are.  Further, citadels and forts tend to be immune to the events and special abilities that can remove unfortified enemy allies or mobile forces.  The Romans, however, can use a “Besiege” special ability to avoid the otherwise required removal roll on Gallic citadels and ensure that it is removed with the first loss they cause in the battle.

We’ve chosen to represent sieges in this way both for simplicity at our strategic campaign scale, and to make it possible for them to last beyond a single card action.

Volko:  In addition to the base mechanics that Andrew described, we have—naturally—included several event cards that cover a variety of particular aspects or incidents of siegecraft in the period:  “Oppida”, “Sacking”, “Sappers”, and so on.  We have just redone one of them from scratch—“Circumvallation”—representing Caesar’s famous system of double walls encircling Vercingetorix in the besieged city of Alesia.  We think that we have come up with something quite fun, evocative, and different for this event! It is untested and subject to getting redone entirely once more, so we are not ready to detail it here.

How will you handle supply?  Also, transportation restrictions would be interesting.

Volko:  A key challenge for the Roman army operating in Gaul and Britannia was to obtain enough food (“corn” in Caesar’s Commentaries, as translated by Oxford), sometimes via foraging, sometimes via friendly tribes.  Similarly, a key challenge for the Gauls even in their own country was to provision large armies to enable them to stay massed over a campaign.  Therefore, the “resources” of this COIN volume represent principally corn, and only secondarily silver, Roman luxury goods, and so on.

This sets up a key aspect of diplomacy among the factions, as Caesar and the generally pro-Roman Aedui share a symbiotic relationship revolving around their resource needs.  The Romans’ actions are more expensive than the Gallic (2 Resources each, compared to 1 each), representing not only the above need to operate in foreign country, but also the general expense of their more articulated military machine.  The Romans’ essential “Build” special ability—to create their forts and placate tribes with public works and wine—is similarly expensive at 2 Resources per piece affected.  Winter quarters for Roman troops in Gaul cost yet more Resources.  All these expenses multiply when operating in regions that Vercingetorix’s forces have scorched with the Arverni “Devastate” ability.   Often, the Roman will have to turn to his Aeduan friends for corn to sustain their operations against the Aedui’s Gallic or Germanic enemies.

The Aedui, meanwhile, are militarily weak and so must make the most of their Roman connections.  Their “Trade” special ability can draw ample resources into the theater—more so if the Romans agree to the commerce.  The Aedui thereby can work with the Romans to earn the income to feed the Roman machine, and then hope to influence its operations to the Aedui’s benefit—as long as the Aedui and Romans have not turned upon one another, of course!

Supply and transportation aspects intersect in a “Supply Line” mechanic—the first such in the COIN Series.  For efficient Roman recruiting, building, or winter quartering in the south, and for Aedui trade, the Romans or Aedui must prevent hostile control of the pathways from the scene of action south to the vast resources of Rome’s Mediterranean empire.  This requirement adds to the significance of the regions near the Alps—often the locale of Aedui concentrations, giving the Aedui yet another lever on Caesar.  The Arverni and Germanic tribes, for their part, are wont to interrupt these Roman supply lines with their own depredations.

Resources as field provisions come into play in other ways as well.  Raid commands steal resources from field forces.  Numerous events influence the disposition of resources (that is, supplies) among the factions, including a “Baggage Trains” capability that can relieve a faction of spending resources for marching, or make forces even more vulnerable to raids, “River Commerce” that eases or complicates trade, “Drought” that cuts down everyone’s resources, and so on.

Lastly, transportation differences among the factions come into play in a simple difference for the March command:  The Romans can move 2 or 3 regions at a go, all other factions only 1 Region.  The difference reflects the Roman army’s greater efficiency in moving and supplying large bodies of troops.

Are there crack or elite troops that can only come from certain areas?

Andrew:  Well, there is the obvious example of the Roman legions, who are much more effective than both Roman Auxilia and the Gallic warbands, and especially when under Caesar’s command.  However, there are more specific or smaller-scale examples, which we have represented mostly through event cards.   These are often Capabilities—events that change a Faction’s characteristics for the remainder of a game.  A few of these event cards are, for example, “Vercingetorix’s Elite” and “Legio X”.  Many of them relate to certain areas beyond the map—“Numidians” or “Balearic Slingers”.

The event that perhaps most closely fits your question is one of the dual uses of “Aquitani”, which represents forces arriving from Aquitania to aid the Faction playing the card (usually Vercingetorix’s Arverni).  These forces can only be placed in the Regions in the southwest corner of the map.  Of these forces, the most notable part represented are the powerful cavalry from the Nitiobriges tribe.

It would be great to hear about some (or many) of the more interesting events that you’ve chosen.

Volko:  We have tried in this article to introduce the variety of event cards in the game within the context of the discussion.  Here are a few more of my favorites…

“Diviciacus” was an influential, pro-Roman leader of the Aedui.  (His anti-Roman brother Dumnorix was killed just before the period of our game, but his legacy is felt in another event card, “Dumnorix Loyalitsts”.)   The unshaded version of “Diviciacus”—“Caesar’s Druid”—is a lasting capability for Aedui warbands and Roman Auxilia when together to treat either as the other for command actions.  In other words, the two armies gain the organization to move and fight as one, to a degree.  The shaded version—“Pro-Roman succeeded”—bans Aedui resource transfers to one another.  It represents Diviciacus falling from influence within the Aedui tribe and an internal faction less likely to share grain with Caesar.  This can have a major impact on both players, as the Romans often must rely on local resources from friendly Gauls—typically the Aedui—while the Aedui rely on their influence over the Roman army to achieve their aims against Gallic competitors.

Another favorite capability event of mine is “Vercingetorix’s Elite”.  It represents an either successful or unsuccessful effort by the great rebel leader to instill discipline among his warriors, such as Vercingetorix himself observed of Roman soldiers during probable earlier contact with them.  The shaded version allows 2 warbands with the leader to battle as if legions.  The unshaded hinders raising new Arverni warbands due to the unpopularity of Vercingetorix’s harsh punishments—harshness which Caesar notes in his Commentaries.  The concept for this event (and several others), by the way, came from one of our most deeply involved testers, Marc Gouyon-Rety, who grew up in the region of France in which many of these campaigns occurred, and provided his expertise to our project as a self-described “argumentative Gaul”.

Finally I’ll mention “War Fleet”—an event representing the major coastal naval maneuvers or expeditions that occurred shortly before and short after the period the Great Revolt.  Whichever faction executes it gets to relocate any of its mobile forces along the Gallic coast and, if desired, to or from Britannia, then undertake an action in one region where its forces may have just landed.  The event typically results in an interesting shake up of board position.  Andrew’s Roman legions once used it to escape my tightening noose of Arverni devastation around his position on the northwest tip of Gaul (curses!).

Andrew:  Among my favorites are “Winter Campaign”, “Colony”, and “Optimates”.  The first of these, “Winter Campaign”, is a dual-sided capability that any of the four factions can receive.  The shaded capability—playable by any of the Gallic factions—I find particularly interesting.  It allows the owner to conduct any two command or special abilities in the middle of the winter (“Propaganda” or “Coup” phase in the earlier volumes).  This capability, unique in the Serices, can create some very powerful “one-twos” during a time when other factions are unable to response.   Perhaps the most famous example of such an action in the Gallic Wars was Ambiorix’s uprising in the winter of 54-53BC, which led to the destruction of 15 cohorts and an emergency response from Caesar.  Because of this, the Belgae have the first initiative on this event card.

The next card, “Colony”, is a one-time event that leads to a permanent alteration of the game board.  Whoever plays this event gets to place a colony marker in a space of their choosing, which in essence functions as a new tribe space added to the board (increasing the total from 30 to 31).  This new tribe starts as an ally of whoever plays the card, but it can be subdued, change allegiance, or even be dispersed by the Romans, like any other tribe.  It also counts towards the Belgic control victory condition when the Belgae control its region.  It is inspired by the Gallic tribes’ tendency to migrate large distances and establish new home territories or branches.   One particular instance of this happening was a chieftain of the Belgic Atrebates tribe (probably Commius) leading a large portion of it to settle in Britannia, shortly after the Gallic Wars.

The third card is “Optimates” (Caesar’s political opponents in Rome).  This event is unique in that it can alter victory conditions, in a way, and can cause an early game end, automatic victory or not.   It triggers a final victory check if the Romans are doing well enough, but also results, in that case, in the withdrawal of the legions from Gaul.  This can be beneficial to the Romans, as it can end the game early when they have a very good score.  However, it’s most often beneficial to the Arverni, as they have one half of their victory conditions (having a certain number of legions out of Gaul) automatically fulfilled if this early game end is triggered.  This event represents Caesar’s political conflict coming to a climax, initiating an earlier than historical Roman Civil War (and end to the Gallic War), as Caesar takes his forces from Gaul and departs for Italy.  However, this would only occur if Caesar is doing well enough in Gaul to concern his political opponents enough to press for his recall as governor.

What makes the design specifically (not the theme or setting) feel unique to you as designers out of the entire series to date?

Volko:  The design differences relate very much to the theme and setting, so it is hard to separate them.  But a few of the larger design choices did have to do with where we are in the COIN Series at least as much as with our views on the nature of the Gallic revolts.   In particular, we might have made this volume another full map extravaganza like Fire in the Lake.  But, not only did that seem unnecesary to capture the Caesar and Vercingetorix’s maneuvers in Gaul, going bigger and bigger with each new volume would soon result in bloated productions that might be fine to behold but certainly not to play.

With Gallic War, we have sought to get back to a Cuba Libre-like compactness that many players appreciated as an accessible entry to the Series.  And not only in size, but also in rules burden.  For example, Falling Sky’s tribal allies mechanic alone replaces both base placement and stacking and the accounting of population support and opposition in the modern-era volumes.  Overall, we have tried to learn from our experience with earlier designs to make this new volume’s mechanics as clean, clear, and easy as we can get them.

Now that you have covered 2,000+ years, what counterinsurgencies from other time periods leap out at you as candidate COIN topics?

Volko:  Part of the charm of adding to the COIN Series a volume that gazes all the way back to ancient times is that it swings open the door—we hope—to the greatest possible range of future topics.  Harold Buchanan’s Liberty or Death, covering the American Revolution and discussed in InsideGMT articles here [link:  https://insidegmt.com?tag=liberty-or-death]), was already well underway.  It depicts a case of “counterinsurrection” in the 18^th Century.  Naturally, we hope that the Series will continue to take on 20^th and 21^st Century insurgencies—and volumes set in the Philippines, Ireland, and Algeria all are in active work.  But we also hope that other designers will see the possibilities in the core system to model internal or other multi-party conflicts from all eras, especially those still less examined in our hobby.

A key to success for the COIN Series volumes beyond this one will be to ensure that each of them is a new experience and is worth exploring even if all previous volumes have been plumbed by the player.  Our plan to ensure that outcome is two-fold:  an ever wider array of topics and therefore new, unique stories that play differently; and a different designer or combination of co-designers for each.  Both are true for each of the projects mentioned above.

An exciting sign that new talent is already walking through the door that Falling Sky opens is that the future volume that is now closest to appearing on P500 (as far as I know, at least!) covers a little-gamed ancient epic and is by a new designer who has worked closely with us on the current volume.  If you are curious, we tell a little bit of that story here.

Thank you for joining us for this dip into COIN design, and especially to those of you who thought of the questions for us to take on.  Playtest and development of Falling Sky continues, and Andrew and I are even more excited about the design this year than we were last!  We hope you will enjoy the games.

---

Rendering Caesar’s Coin Part I

—