Asymmetrical Battles

A place to discuss historical battles, scenarios and campaigns
Post Reply
User avatar
Greyhawk Grognard
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2018 6:15 pm
Location: New Jersey

Asymmetrical Battles

Post by Greyhawk Grognard » Wed Jul 29, 2020 10:17 pm

I was wondering if anyone had experimented with battles with uneven sized armies.

I realize that Triumph! was originally designed for tournament play with identically-sized armies, but especially in a campaign setting, unevenly-matched battles are going to be common.

I was thinking about tinkering with the victory conditions, and making the points required for victory proportional in some way, but honestly haven't played around with the math enough yet to see if it's workable.

Has anyone else done anything in this direction?


Joe / GG
Joe / GG

Visit my "Greyhawk Grognard" blog!
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2020 7:51 am

Re: Asymmetrical Battles

Post by chris6 » Thu Jul 30, 2020 8:19 am

Up to now we did not tried uneven point armies.

My guessing would be, that if you go for proportional point values to get for winning this will increase the chances of the smaller army to win just on a lucky blow or 2.

With uneven armies I would prefer to go for scenarios like defend or proper retreat or maybe get to the other side to the playingfield. Or simply one ot the nice scenarios from the book: One hour wargaming
User avatar
Posts: 60
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2017 1:00 am
Location: Columbia, MD (USA)

Re: Asymmetrical Battles

Post by FanatiChris » Fri Jul 31, 2020 8:47 pm

Asymmetrical battles would be typical of campaign-style gaming, where armies carry losses from preceding battles, can add allies, and/or recruit up loses between battles, depending on how much territory you still controlled. You can also end up with slightly asymmetrical armies through several of the Battle Card options. For one off gaming, I could see developing a scenario based system combining uneven armies, specified objectives or victory conditions and turn-based time limits in order to provide reasonable balance.

Manufactured scenarios could include things like:

1) a 48 point army against a 24 point army defending a ford or bridge on an impassible river for at least x turns.
2) a rearguard type action with uneven forces and a turn-based time limit.
3) An advance guard type action, where lesser forces have to establish their position against a strong enemy while they wait for their vanguard to come up (rolling each turn for arrival).
4) A strong defensive position that must be held, where attacker has numerical advantages to offset the disadvantages posed by the defensive position.
5) A free for all meeting engagement, where each side only deploys 1/3 of its force and then rolls for random arrival of the balance of its force (entering on a roadway to the rear). Arrivals could be individual elements or small groups of elements or perhaps the entire balance of the force depending on how you want to set up the arrival options.

Not quite asymmetrical, but I once pondered a scenaro for an Aztec vs. Otomi "Flower War" in which each Otomi casualty resulted in removal of its Aztec antagonist based on the concept that the Aztec warriors were done for the day and engaged in leading their sacrificial captives to the rear.
Post Reply