On the table now is The Fall of Rome, the SPI game included with Strategy & Tactics 39 back in 1973. It is a solitaire game pitting you (as the Romans) against those threatening to bring down the empire. Designed by John Young, it has an area movement map and counters representing legions, militia, barbarians, and raiding parties. Each turn represents one year. There are five scenarios: 67 A.D, 247 A.D. 260 A.D., 332 A.D, and 420 A.D.
First, the perspective here is very high-level. Although each scenario attempts to recreate the situation facing a particular emperor, there is no distinction in the game between the differing leaders and their respective strengths and weaknesses. Instead, you are cast in the role and it will be your skill, judgement, and luck that will determine if you can keep the empire from falling.
In a similar vein, each legion strength point is the same as any other – no troop quality here – and, indeed, the respective military forces of legions, militia, and barbarians may break down and build up like money.
The components are perfectly serviceable, though basic. The map is clean, clear, and easy to follow. The counters are OK, but are not backprinted. The rules are deficient in several key areas, so ensure you have the errata before starting out.
Game Turn
- Internal Revolution Phase
- Non-Roman & Non-Loyal Roman Movement Phase
- Non-Roman & Non-Loyal Roman Combat Phase
- Barbarian Creation Phase
- Loyal Roman Movement Phase
- Loyal Roman Combat Phase
- Legion Rebellion Phase
- Control Determination Phase
- Barbarian Attrition Phase
- Tax Collection & Disbursement Phase
- Roman/Persian Replacement Phase
- Barbarian Bribe Phase
- Game Turn Record Phase
The game turn begins with a check to see if there is any internal revolution. If so, a subsequent die roll determines where the trouble starts and how big it is (how many Roman militia are revolting). For example, in the first scenario (67 A.D.), only a roll of 6 in the appropriate phase would generate an internal revolution. This is where some of the limited color is on show because each scenario has its own column on the table. So, a roll of 4-6 in the second scenario (247 A.D.) would mean there was a revolution. The subsequent die roll will typically generate revolts in various locations of various strengths.
At this point, you should be able to guess if the game will be to your liking because that phase replicates much of what goes on in a turn: you roll the die and chaos ensues. This is not a criticism, just me emphasizing that there’s a large luck factor involved. In other words, you can play well and the game may still beat you.
Next up in the game turn, any at-loose Barbarian and non-loyal Roman type forces move in a preordered sequence. Roughly one-third of the post-publication errata was about this part of the game, and it’s easy to see why. The system tries to have the enemy forces move in a way that makes sense. For the Persians, for example, there is a priority list of areas they must try to control. (Persia is top of the list, followed by Mesopotamia, Armenia, Syria, and Asia, in descending order.) The Barbarians try to move to the nearest, richest, Roman-controlled Province, unless they are a raiding party, in which case it’s simply the nearest Province*. You roll a die each time a Barbarian force tries to move into a new Area, with 1-2 resulting on the move being canceled and the barbarians staying put. Note that Roman-controlled – and other scenario-specified – Provinces have Militia that pop up to fight the invaders.
In general, after these moves, combat takes place. (Barbarians etc. encountering barbarians fight immediately during movement.) Attacking is odds-based, requiring a minimum of 1:1 odds. So, if the Persian force of 15 strength points is on the march into Syria, a force of 6 strength points of legions, backed up by the 10 strength points of milita, will be safe. At times, these gamey tactics are essential. However, massing the right forces at the right place is not always so easy. Combat results are a combination of the usual eliminations and exchanges topped up with 1/2De – meaning half the defending force is eliminated – and 1/2Ex -meaning the defending force is eliminated and the attacker loses half the number of strength points the defender lost.
Then you must face the possibility of new Barbarian forces. In the first scenario (67 A.D.) you roll for this every second turn. In the second scenario (247 A.D.) you roll twice per game turn. In scenario five (420 A.D.) you roll four times a turn! Not every roll is guaranteed to bring about new Barbaraian forces – it’s about a 50% chance – meaning you once again face the vagaries of fate.
After this, the loyal Romans get to move and fight. This is straightforward, though you need to be wary of having too many legions in the one Area as that increases the chances of a rebellion. And that’s what you check for next. Rebelling Roman legions may march on Rome or try to form an independent state.
Following this, you determine control for the Provinces, work out the effects of attrition on Barbarian forces, collect and spend taxes, bribe Barbarians, and finally advance the game turn marker.
Treasury
The Roman legions are there to do the fighting, but you need tax revenue – determined by the Provinces you control – to keep them in the field and to rebuild losses. Further, you can stave off Barbarian incursions by bribing them. So, your financial resources are key. You must repeat the bribes every game turn if they are to remain effective. If you are lucky enough, you can bring the bribes to an end when attrition has taken its toll and you have collected enough loyal legions to wipe the remnants out.
Game Play
Although the game turn sequence looks long, it’s largely self-explanatory and easily followed. This means you can quickly focus on working out what you need to do to survive and win. However, the game lacks any meaningful play aids – for example, to track the treasury amounts, to track Province control, and so on. So, if you try to play it as it is, you will quickly be reaching for pen and paper and may well find yourself drowning in crap. I solved this by creating my own handmade control and treasury counters, as well as markers to note the starting strength of the legions and the Persians (because you cannot rebuild beyond these starting strengths). Thereafter, play proceeded quite smoothly. I did spend a fair bit of time checking the rules out – especially when moving the Roman foes – in the first few turns, but that petered out.
Game play can be summarised thus: the baddies appear and you have to work out how to deal with them – military action or bribery. You put your plan into action and, inevitably, not all of it works. Then more baddies appear. Rinse, and repeat. In between it all, if you are fortunate, you can try and grab some extra territory (and tax revenue). There’s a reasonable game narrative and, if you win, a sense of achievement.
I played the first two scenarios. I won the first one quite easily. It took me several attempts before I won the second scenario.
It’s a fun game. It’s not a serious study of the subject, but it assuredly gives you a (high-level) flavor. It’s also a great example of game design, an opportunity to see, at this stage, what the state of the hobby was in solitaire gaming, and how the designer tackled the issues. For the time, it was pretty novel. It’s been suggested, but I don’t know for sure, that it was the first proper solitaire wargame. Quite a landmark. Incidentally, the supporting article in Strategy & Tactics 39 is well done.
I enjoyed my time with Fall of Rome.
*Provinces are named groups of one or more Areas on the map. For example, the Province of Persia has three Areas. However, Cyprus is a single Area Province. Rather unhelpfully, the rules sometimes refer to a Region, an undefined term that appears to be an alternative name for Provinces. I assume that at some point the game used Regions before it used Provinces and the change wasn’t universally implemented by the editorial team.
James Dunnigan famously described wargames as “paper time machines”. (It’s one of the fundamental pillars of my wargaming life.) The quote came to mind as I realized that by playing this game now, in 2025, I was not only travelling back in time to that of the Roman Empire, but also to 1973 when I first bought and played the game. (It was probably 1973 when I last played the game!) Fall of Rome triggered lots of happy and some wistful memories. The latter time-travel experience is indulgent nostalgia – and I love it.