Fabius Maximus keeps his command; no Cannae

[DominusNovus]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabius_Maximus

So, in the Second Punic War, the Roman strategy is usually described as avoiding Hannibal in open battle, and wearing him down, while striking where he wasn't. Thats all due to Fabius Maximus.

Of course, there's little glory in this strategy, and when Fabius' term as dictator ran out, the consuls immeadiately took over, and promptly got themselves defeated at Cannae. People had taken to insutling Fabius, calling him the "Delayer." After Cannae, this became an honorific, as everyone realized that Fabius had been right. The Fabian strategy (employed by Washington) is named after him.

So, what if, the Romans are a bit more intelligent, and don't abandon the Fabian strategy? They continue to sap at Hannibal, with no major battles for either side. This strategy might actually allow for Scipio (or maybe Fabius?) to attack Carthage itself earlier, as the Romans wouldn't have suffered the horrid losses at Cannae.

[Max Sinister]

I like that idea. Have always been fond of Fabius.

Even if Hannibal manages to prevent a revolt (because his men can't fight but have to suffer from diseases which let their numbers shrink), the Romans have the opportunity to defeat their enemies in other places (Syracus, Spain - Scipio was quite famous at that time already -, the Balcans) and could defeat Carthage earlier, as you said.

Now it's getting itneresting: Since they hadn't to suffer at Cannae, they'll have a bit of mercy and won't force the Carthaginians to make such a harsh peace. Maybe they'd even allow Carthage to defend them against Masinissa (Numidian king who repeatedly took land from Carthage after the PW2 - they weren't allowed to defend against him).

[aktarian]

Originally Posted by Max Sinister

Now it's getting itneresting: Since they hadn't to suffer at Cannae, they'll have a bit of mercy and won't force the Carthaginians to make such a harsh peace. Maybe they'd even allow Carthage to defend them against Masinissa (Numidian king who repeatedly took land from Carthage after the PW2 - they weren't allowed to defend against him).

Doesn't this go against Roamns trategy? Other side is either totaly defeated or reduced to such impotency they never, ever pose a threat. And Carthage being what they were I'd say Romans would opt for first option.