Crepusculum Imperii: Adapting Lion Rampant to the Late Roman period

As I related in an earlier post, I've been considering what to do with my 3rd c. Romans. They've languished in a box for ever so long and it's time I did something with them. Though what to do is still an inchoate notion, but the leading contender is to adapt them to Daniel Mersey's Lion Rampant skirmish rules. This solution would keep my army at home, which is a good thing. I've been getting back into the period more and recently purchased a new book on the 3rd c. Roman army, Paul Elliot's Legions in Crisis.

So, to get the project rolling, I need to revisit Mersey's unit profiles and retrofit troops types from the later Roman to early Byzantine period, basically 3rd c. to 5th c., to Lion Rampant.

The Lion Rampant (LR) rules are what I've elsewhere defined as "false skirmish" rules. That means that although the figures are based singly, they function in groups/units rather than as individual figures. It is, however, possible to have some mixed-weapon units, so the later Roman practice of backing up legionarii with archers can be represented.

I found while going through the unit profiles, that a lot of what I thought I'd need to invent was already there as an option. But I did need to invent a few things. I added a special rule for pilum because it was intrinsic to Roman legionary tactics to heave a pilum in your opponent's face just before contact. Even after the pilum was replaced by a long spear (hasta), Roman soldiers used the plumbata (or martiobarbulum) as an effective pre-contact hand-hurled missile.

Not as nasty as a pilum, but it will still ruin your day

I'm not sure if the pilum rule will prove too powerful, or if I need to up the points for the unit. It's already at 6 points, which is as much as mounted men at arms in LR. We'll have to test it and see. I made the shooting 6+/6, so it wouldn't be too powerful. The upgrade to include archers, just extends the range to 12" for a cost of one point. I also added shield-wall as a special rule. For this I pretty much took the shiltron rule, but allowed the +1 armor to apply against shooting as well.

I also had to define some unit profiles for things that aren't there in LR, such as the Sassanid Asvārān and the war elephants. The former is a kind of mash-up between mounted men at arms and horse archers. The latter is, so far, just a guess.

The following profiles give each unit type along with some guidelines for which armies you'd find them in. It's not exhaustive and I used the figures I actually have (painted or not) as guidelines into what I should include.

The Sassanids overthrew the Parthians in the early 3rd c. and pretty much took over their space and continued their role as Rome's #1 pain in the tuchis in the east and continued in that role into the Byzantine period until the Arab conquests wiped them out in the 7th c. Germanic is pretty much a catch-all for everything nasty on the other side of the Rhine and above the Danube. In this period the Goths and Alemanni were the main problems, but Franks and Saxons get into it later on. The Palmyrans were Rome's best ally in the east until Zenobia thought she could snatch it all away for herself. Aurelian had to go and take it back and put Zenobia in chains.

Well, shoot. That didn't go so well...

Sarmatians were around for a long time and lasted into the 4th c., mostly acting along with Germanic tribes. Trajan depicts their cataphracts on his column. Huns come onto the scene in the 4th c. and make a real nuisance later in the 5th. Romans gave way to Byzantines in the eastern empire by the 5th c. In Britain, the Picts north of Hardian's Wall were a menace and remained on the scene after the Romans were gone until the Scots supplanted them.

Mounted units

Cataphracts (Roman, Sassanid, Palmyran, Byzantine, Sarmatian)
Cataphracts are fully armored horsemen decked out cap-à-pie in mail, scale, or horn armor, and mounted on horses similarly protected. Cataphracts are typically armed with a kind of lance called a kontos (a Greek word that literally means "barge pole"), although some cataphracts might carry a club, too.

Cataphracts mostly correspond to mounted men at arms in LR. However, I think they would be slower and less enthusiastic, so I've lowered their courage, attack, and attack value. Cataphracts were envisioned back in Seleucid days as a mounted phalanx whose full protection made them pretty impervious to fire. I took away the wild charge special rule, too. Cataphracts didn't use a wild charge (or even a tame one, really) because their attack relied on cohesion, a tight formation, and a bristling phalanx of "barge poles."

Unit Name: Cataphracts		Points: 6
Attack	6+	Attack Value	4+
Move	7+	Defence Value	5+
Shoot	-	Shoot Value	-
Courage	4+	Max. Movement	8"
Armor	4	Special Rules	Counter-charge

• Models per unit: 6

Special rules:

• Counter-charge: Same as in the LR rules.

The armored wall on hooves

Asvārān (Sassanid)
Asvārān are armored cavalry who are primarily armed with a bow, but might also include a kontos. The riders are typically armored like cataphracts, but the horses would be less well armored, even unarmored. The Sassanids used these troops as mounted archers who shot en masse rather than as skirmishers.

Asvārān mostly correspond to mounted sergeants armed with bows. I also give them a "4" armor to account for the near-cataphract nature of their protection, but I reduce their move to 10" maximum to account for being heavier than normal horse. I've also made their attack 7+ and attack value 5+ to account for the fact that they were not primarily intended as shock troops.

Unit Name: Asvārān		Points: 4
Attack	7+	Attack Value	5+
Move	7+	Defense Value	5+
Shoot	6+	Shoot Value	5+ / 12"
Courage	4+	Max. Movement	10"
Armor	4	Special Rules	Counter-charge

• Models per unit: 6

Special rules:

• Counter-charge: Same as in the LR rules.

Upgrades:

• Kontos @ 2pts. per unit: Asvārān can be additionally armed with the kontos. Increase their attack to 6+ and their attack value to 4+.

Equites/noble horsemen (Roman, Germanic, Huns)
Equites are the standard armored cavalry. They can be line of battle cavalry, but they tended to be used as much for skirmishing as for shock. The riders typically wear chain, scale, or horn armor and might also be protected by a shield and helmet. The horses are unarmored. Weapons would be a sword, shield, and a short spear. Javelins might also be carried, giving the units a shirt-range missile option.

Equites/noble horsemen basically correspond to mounted sergeants in LR, but with the option of having javelins.

Unit Name: Equites		Points: 4
Attack	5+	Attack Value	5+
Move	5+	Defense Value	5+
Shoot	-	Shoot Value	-
Courage	4+	Max. Movement	10"
Armor	3	Special Rules	Counter-charge

• Models per unit: 6

Special rules:

• Counter-charge: Same as in the LR rules.

Light horse (Roman, Sassanid, Palmyran, Byzantine, Scythian, Huns)
Light horsemen have no significant armor protection. They rely on speed and shooting as their main tactics/weapons. Not good in hand to hand combat, but can easily harass and inflict loss on foot and slower horse.

Horse archers correspond to mounted yeomen in LR, but with less armor.

Unit Name: Light horse		Points: 3
Attack	7+	Attack Value	5+
Move	5+	Defense Value	6
Shoot	6+	Shoot Value	5+ / 12"
Courage	5+	Max. Movement	12"
Armor	2	Special Rules	Skirmish; Evade

• Models per unit: 6

Special rules:

• Skirmish: Same as in the LR rules.
• Evade: Same as in LR rules.

Upgrades:

• Javelins only @ -1 per unit: Reduce shooting range to 6".
• Expert @ 2pts. per unit: Skirmish without the -1 shooting penalty.

Horsemen (Romans, Byzantines, Germanic, Huns)
These are the general mass of unarmored (or poorly armored) horsemen that were typically found in Germanic armies, like the Goths, Alemanni, etc. They could also be found as poorly armored equites in Roman/Byzantine armies.

These troops correspond to mounted yeoman in LR.

Unit Name: Horsemen		Points: 3
Attack	7+	Attack Value	5+
Move	5+	Defense Value	6
Shoot	-	Shoot Value	-
Courage	5+	Max. Movement	12"
Armor	2	Special Rules	Counter-charge

• Models per unit: 6

Special rules:

• Counter-charge: Same as in the LR rules.

Upgrades:

• Javelins @ 1pts. per unit: Shoot at 6+ with shooting value / range of 5+ / 6".

War elephants (Sassanid)
War elephants were used by Sassanid armies throughout the period. They could be as much a danger to their own side as to the enemy.

They don't conform to anything in LR, so I've made up what I think makes sense for elephants.

Unit Name: War elephants		Points: 8
Attack	7+	Attack Value	3
Move	7+	Defence Value	4+
Shoot	6+	Shoot Value	6 / 12"
Courage	5+	Max. Movement	8"
Armor	4	Special Rules	Hard to kill; Berserk; Smelly

• Models per unit: 1

Special rules:

• Hard to kill: Although only represented by 1 model, an elephant unit can take 6 hits before it disappears.
• Berserk: When an elephant fails a courage test with a result that is less than 0, instead of fleeing in rout, it goes berserk and attacks friend or foe, whoever is in its path. Immediately roll a D6 and determine the direction as follows: 1=forward, 2=60° right, 3=120° right, 4=180° (rear), 5=120° left, 6=60° left. (It's basically going clock-wise by 60° increments.) Move the model a full 8" move in the direction indicated. If the move results in contact with any unit, whether friend or foe, conduct an an immediate attack. Every turn after, continue to roll for direction, move, and conduct any attacks until the elephant is dead or has moved off the table.
• Smelly: Elephants are terrifying to horses. Horse=mounted troops may not attack elephants. If elephants attack horse-mounted, the horse-mounted may not counter-charge. Horse-mounted troops in combat with elephants have a -1 to their defense value.

Dromedarii (Roman, Parthian, Palmyran)
Dromedarii are camel-mounted troops who were used mainly for scouting in the desert areas of Syria and the border-lands of the Parthian and Sassanid empires.

Like elephants, these really have no corresponding troop type in LR, so I'm winging it.

Unit Name: Dromedarii		Points: 3
Attack	7+	Attack Value	6
Move	5+	Defence Value	6
Shoot	6+	Shoot Value	6 / 6"
Courage	5+	Max. Movement	10"
Armor	2	Special Rules	Spitters

• Models per unit: 6

Special rules:

• Spitters: Horses didn't like camels any better than elephants. The stink and strangeness spooked them—not to mention the awful spitting. Horse-mounted troops in combat with camels have a -1 penalty to their attack value and defense value.

Cataphract camels (Parthian, Palmyran)
Cataphract camels—armored men and armored camels—were a rare thing, but might be fielded by Parthians and Palmyras.

Like elephants and dromedarii (the lesser camels), these really have no corresponding troop type in LR, so I'm winging it.

Unit Name: Cataphract camels		Points: 6
Attack	6+	Attack Value	4+
Move	6+	Defence Value	5+
Shoot	-	Shoot Value	-
Courage	4+	Max. Movement	8"
Armor	4	Special Rules	Spitters

• Models per unit: 6

Special rules:

• Spitters: Horses didn't like camels any better than elephants. The stink and strangeness spooked them—not to mention the awful spitting. Horse-mounted troops in combat with camels have a -1 penalty to their attack value and defense value.

Foot units

Legionarii (Roman)
These are the classic heavy infantry of the Roman army. Typically well armored, well armed, and well disciplined. They might be armed with short range missile weapons, such as the pilum (until the late 3rd c.), javelins, and plumbatae. From the late 3rd c. on, these would have a long spear and spatha rather than the classic sword and pilum. Shields are large and legionarii can form shield wall.

These troops correspond mostly to foot sergeants, but with better courage and short-range missile ability.

Unit Name: Legionarii		Points: 6
Attack	6+	Attack Value	5+
Move	5+	Defence Value	4+
Shoot	6+	Shoot Value	6 / 6"
Courage	3+	Max. Movement	6"
Armor	3	Special Rules	Shield-wall; Pilum

• Models per unit: 12

Special rules:

• Pilum: The unit can attempt shoot, using pila, javelins, or plumbatae, before resolving attack combat, whether they are attacking or defending. Roll for shooting as normal. Losses due to pre-combat shooting count towards resolving the outcome of the attack, when comparing losses.
• Shield-wall: On a Move order, unit forms in two ranks with bases touching. Cannot form in rough terrain or in cover. Adds +1 armor against attacks and shooting. Must be at least 6 figures remaining in the unit. Cannot move in this position. If a combat ends with the attacker still in contact, the attacker must retreat. If the unit becomes battered in this formation, the shield-wall formation is lost.

Upgrades:

• Mixed weapons @ 1pts. per unit: The unit has archers mixed into the formation (typically in later 3rd c. onwards). Shooting is still 6+ with a shooting value of 6, but range is extended to 12". Does not negate shield-wall or pilum.

Auxilia (Romans, Palmyrans)
These are typically lighter troops than the legionarii, but they could be as well armed and armored. The difference was typically in how they were employed.

Unit Name: Auxilia		Points: 4
Attack	6+	Attack Value	5+
Move	5+	Defence Value	4+
Shoot	6+	Shoot Value	6 / 6"
Courage	4+	Max. Movement	8"
Armor	2	Special Rules	Shield-wall; Fleet footed

• Models per unit: 12

Special rules:

• Shield-wall: On a Move order, unit forms in two ranks with bases touching. Cannot form in rough terrain or in cover. Adds +1 armor against attacks and shooting. Must be at least 6 figures remaining in the unit. Cannot move in this position. If a combat ends with the attacker still in contact, the attacker must retreat. If the unit becomes battered in this formation, the shield-wall formation is lost.
• Fleet footed: Same as in LR rules.

Upgrades:

• Mixed weapons @ 1pts per unit: The unit has archers mixed into the formation (typically in later 3rd c. onwards). Shooting is still 6+ with a shooting value of 6, but range is extended to 12". Does not negate shield-wall.
• Armored @ 1pts. per unit: Increase armor to 3, decrease max. movemet to 6".

Archers (Roman, Byzantine, Germanic, Palmyran)
Missile troops are any foot units that form mostly in mass and shoot weapons like bows and crossbows. They are not skirmishers.

Archers correspond to the same type in LR.

Unit Name: Missile troops		Points: 4
Attack	7+	Attack Value	6
Move	6+	Defence Value	5+
Shoot	6+	Shoot Value	5+ / 18"
Courage	4+	Max. Movement	6"
Armor	2	Special Rules	-

• Models per unit: 12

Upgrades:

• Armored @ 2pts. per unit: Increase the armor value to 3.
• Elite shooters @ 2pts. per unit: Increase the shoot to 5+ and the shooting value to 4+.

Levy infantry (Sassanid)
Despite their reputation, these troops were a bit more than the sweepings of the gaols and taverns they're made out to be—but not too much more. In Sassanid armies that were predominantly mounted, levy infantry formed a solid base to hold a position that the horsemen could rally on.

Unit Name: Levy infantry		Points: 3
Attack	7+	Attack Value	6
Move	6+	Defence Value	5+
Shoot	-	Shoot Value	-
Courage	4+	Max. Movement	6"
Armor	4	Special Rules	Schiltron

• Models per unit: 12

Special rules:

• Schiltron: The same as in the LR rules.

Warriors (Germanic, Pictish)
The mass of Gothic, Alemannic, Saxon, etc. forces relied on a fierce charge of massed infantry. Not well protected, though leaders might have armor.

Warriors correspond to fierce foot in LR.

Unit Name: Warriors		Points: 4
Attack	5+	Attack Value	3+
Move	6+	Defence Value	6
Shoot	-	Shoot Value	-
Courage	4+	Max. Movement	8"
Armor	2	Special Rules	Ferocious; Wild charge; Counter-charge vs. foot; Fleet footed

• Models per unit: 12

Special rules:

• Ferocious: The same as in the LR rules.
• Wild charge: The same as in the LR rules.
• Counter-charge: The same as in the LR rules.
• Fleet-footed: The same as in the LR rules.

Foot skirmishers (Roman, Byzantine, Sassanid, Germanic, Pictish, Palmyran, Parthian)
Foot skirmishers are javelin men, slingers, skirmishing bowmen (rather than massed bow-shooters). These troops kept their distance and harassed the enemy, avoiding close combat.

Foot skirmishers correspond to bidders in the LR rules.

Unit Name: Foot skirmishers		Points: 2
Attack	7+	Attack Value	6
Move	5+	Defence Value	6
Shoot	5+	Shoot Value	5+ / 12"
Courage	4+	Max. Movement	8"
Armor	1	Special Rules	Hard to target; Skirmish; Evade; Fleet footed

• Models per unit: 6

Special rules:

• Hard to target: The same as in the LR rules.
• Skirmish: The same as in the LR rules.
• Evade: The same as in the LR rules.
• Fleet-footed: The same as in the LR rules.

Word doc of unit types
Click the icon below to get the unit types listed in a MS Word doc:

Restitutor Orbis: Rethinking My 3rd c. Romans

Back somewhere in the dawn of time (2005, I think), I started a 28mm ancients project with Kevin Smyth in an attempt to get some WRG ancients play going. Kevin and I managed to have a few games and Bill Stewart and I ran a few games also in 2010, but it never caught on (alas) and my predilection for the WRG rules has caused the local gentry to regarded me as being dangerously insane.

I had been painting some of the excellent 28mm A&A 3rd century Romans. I also have a bucket o' unpainted A&A Sassanid Persians. The project has languished for quite a while. Kevin long since sold off the army he painted for the project. I attempted to do the same with mine at our recent Drumbeat event, but I got no buyers. I'm starting to see that as a good thing and I'm wondering what next to do to restore the world of my Middle Imperial Romans.

Why the 3rd century?

The 3rd century is an intriguing period. It's the background of Harry Sidebottom's excellent Warrior of Rome series and his new Throne of the Caesars series. Rome fought pretty much everyone in this period, especially itself, as rival emperors and break-away allies caused all kinds of trouble. The empire neared collapse and might have broken up except for the brief, but salutary, efforts of Aurelian.

Like most of his predecessors, Aurelian was murdered. A corrupt official, fearing retribution, used forged documents to snooker some officers of the Praetorian Guard to kill him in 275. He may have been briefly succeeded by his wife, Ulpia Severina. In any case, the Senate put Tacitus on the throne, but a year later, Tacitus went crazy and died (or was assassinated—or went crazy and was assassinated) and Florianus came to the throne; in a matter of months, Florianus was murdered by his own troops and Probus became emperor; Probus hung on to the crown for six years, but then he was assassinated by the Praetorian Guard and the army proclaimed Carus emperor; Carus was, apparently, struck by lightning within a year and succeeded by his brother Numerian; Numerian was assassinated and succeeded by Carinus, who was Carus' son. There wasn't a lot of job security in wearing the purple. Finally, in 284, Carinus was defeated and killed by Diocletian, who established the dominate and reigned for two decades, bringing in a degree of stability.

3rd c. Romans dominating the lesser peoples

So, things started, slowly, to get better for the empire and it was due largely to Aurelian's work in reuniting the fragments. For defeating a Alemmanic invasion, a Gothic invasion, and restoring the western empire, Aurelian was named Germanicus Maximus and Gothicus Maximus. For defeating Zenobia's rebellion, he was named Parthicus Maximus and Restitutor Orientis (Restorer of the East); shortly after that, he was named by the senate Restitutor Orbis, Restorer of the World.

Back to the minis

So, back to restoring the orbis for my wee, near-orphaned legionarii. I'll have to re-base them, it seems, which I am loath to do. I'm not quite sure how I'll re-base them, that will depend on what I want to do with them. Maybe one clue to what I'm thinking is that I placed an order for a lot of single-figure bases from Litko, which arrived just this weekend.

Lion Rampant

I've given some thought to adapting Daniel Mersey's excellent Lion Rampant skirmish rules (Osprey) for playing ancients. The mechanics of the rules are simple enough and it's just a matter of fiddling with the types Mersey defines for Medievals in Lion Rampant. Cataphracts, for example, would be like mounted men-at-arms, legionaries would be like foot sergeants, lanciarii like bidowers, etc. There may need to be some creative variations to capture the full flavor of the troop types in this period, although Lion Rampant does have some variations already that would work for things like Sassanid Asvārān (mounted sergeants with bows, basically).

I have a lot of figures, especially foot, so the project would require a lot of single-based figures. I'm not against that, and as I've noted, I have a lot of Litko bases coming. Single basing the figures would also give me a lot of options for skirmish gaming. It's tempting. There's also the issue that I have many more figures than I need for a Lion Rampant project. I have enough legionaries painted to make four 12-figure units, plus auxilia, plus several cavalry units, plus bowmen, lanciarii, and dromedaries. That doesn't touch the mass of unpainted stuff...

Hail Caesar!

I've played a few games of Hail Caesar from Warlord Games. I like it pretty much, but Warlord's offerings like Hail Caesar, Black Powder, and Pike & Shotte typically require buckets of figures and I would need to buy more cavalry from A&A in order to flesh out my Roman units. I have a lot of unpainted Sassanid cavalry, but at 12 figures per unit, I have only enough for maybe four units of clibanarii and one of cataphracts. I also have a couple elephants and a lot of dismal levy spearmen.

Because Hail Caesar has somewhat agnostic basing requirements, it's likely that any multi-figure basing I use for HC will work for most other rules that use multi-figure basing, except WRG, and skirmish gaming, and Field of Glory. One clever thought would be to mount them for Field of Glory. The bases would easily work for Hail Caesar as well. But that might be too clever. Any multi-figure basing tends to lock you into games that require it. If I want to get away from projects that require a lot of figures, I have to eschew multi-figure basing.

Damn the torpedoes, full WRG ahead!

I could also just stay the course and get enough Sassanids painted and based for WRG to play a game against my Romans. That way I wouldn't need to re-base anything (which is a happy thought). This course of action might only confirm my insanity with those already inclined toward that opinion—I might even think myself insane. In my own defense, I wouldn't have to re-base anything, as I mentioned (there must be some sanity in that). I also wouldn't have to buy more figures.

Various skirmish projects

This sort of ties in with Lion Rampant. As individually-mounted figures, I can use them for any of the skirmish games I favor. The bases for infantry are 25mm x 30mm and for cavalry are 25mm x 50mm. These are the same sizes I use for the figures I have mounted for De Bellis Velitum.

The number of figures I have is a bit much for "true skirmish" gaming, which I define in my post Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short: The skirmish game (part un)—part deux is coming, I promise. However, having figures to spare gives me the option to use the non-standard mountings required by some skirmish rules, such as the diamond-shaped bases for infantry figures in Milgamex' Sword and Spear.

I can also modify some other "false skirmish" type rules, Like Pig Wars, that use larger numbers of single-mounted figures. For all I know, Saga may come up with a variant that applies to the Later Roman Empire, which would be ironic since I just sold my copy of the rules.

Sell 'em

There's also staying the course and selling them later in the year at Enfilade! between painted and unpainted figures, I might get $1000.00 for the lot, which is a lot to sink into other projects.

Whither now?

At this point, every option is just a potentiality. I have about 150 25mm x 30mm bases and maybe 70 25mm x 50mm bases to work with. I also have boxes of Litko bases to use for multi-figure basing. I have yet to decide which way to go, but some day soon, I may just start popping my wee legionarii off their custom bases and putting them on some other basing. Stay tuned.

Persia triumphant

Today we held a Field of Glory game day at The Panzer Depot in Kirkland, WA. Every time I host a game, I think of the old 60's slogan, "What if they gave a war and nobody came?" When I arrived at The Panzer Depot just past 11:30 this morning, I wasn't sure anyone else would come. By just after noon, we had eight players, three of whom were new players, so we're generating more interest in FoG.

With all the new players, we broke into two multiplayer games. I ran and played in a game that pitted my Sassanid Persians against my Dominate Romans. We had two brand new players, Chris and Rick, as well as Mike Garcia, my antagonist from last week's Germans v. Romans game. Rick and I ran the Persians and Mike and Chris ran the Romans.

I walked Rick and Chris through initiative, terrain setup, and deployment. We fought in agricultural terrain with some open and closed fields on the Roman left (Persian right),  a vineyard pretty much in the center, a steep hill about in the middle of the Persian deployment area, and a gentle hill off on the Roman right.

The Romans deployed with most of their cavalry on their right commanded by Mike. Chris took the Roman infantry and a unit of Huns on the left.

The Roman deployment

The Persians deployed with the cataphracts, two units of asavaran, the light horse archers and the daylami infantry on the right, commanded by Rick; the remaining asavaran, elephants, and the levy infantry on the left commanded by me.

The Persian deployment

The Romans advanced across their front toward the center of the field. On their right, Mike aggressively pushed forward with the Roman cavalry hoping to strike a blow with his better-armed catafractarii and equites. Chris pushed his infantry forward and moved the Huns around the left side of the vineyard.

I moved my asavaran up to engage the Roman horse with bowfire. On my left, I used the elephants to counter and neutralize Mike's equites sagittarii, which spent the whole game shooting at the elephants without effect. Rick, meanwhile, ran his two units of asavaran against the Huns, who were outgunned (outbowed?) and outmatched by the asavaran, so it wasn't long until Rick chased them off.

In the center, Rick charged his cataphracts against the Roman legionarii, who held up against the onslaught more than once. Each charge, the cataphracts and the legionarii scored the same number of hits or the legionarii won by a single hit more. Mike's cataphracts fell in cohesion once, but were soon bolstered. However, he lost two of six bases, while the legionarii remained unscathed.

The Persian cataphracts smash into the Roman heavy infantry, to no avail

On the Persian left, I engaged Mike's equites Illyricani with bowfire from my asavaran. I managed to kill one stand and reduce his cohesion to disrupted status without any loss of my own. I charged the Illyricani with one unit of asavaran and later brought another up to support it in melee. I expanded another unit of asavaran into a single rank so I could skirmish with Mike's catafractarii. I knew I couldn't take them in a straight-up fight, so I had to get clever.

Cavalry action on the flank

Mike charged his equites against the asavaran unit that was supporting my fight against his Illyricani and charged his catafractarii against my skirmishing asavaran, which evaded. In the ensuing combats, my asavaran managed to rout the Illyricani, but Mike's equites routed the asavaran unit they were facing. 

Mike's catafractarii, continued to press the third asavaran unit, which evaded again and drew the catafractraii deep into the Persian left. Meanwhile, I had another cavalry unit that I had positioned on my far left, which was now in position to threaten the flank of the catafractarii. Also, the first unit of asavaran had broken off its pursuit of the Illyricani, who kept running until they were off the field, and turned back to threaten the rear of the catafractarii.

Impending doom for the Roman catafractarii

I finally managed a good turn of shooting against the heavily-armored catafractarii with my three units with the result that its cohesion dropped to disrupted status and they lost one base. Unable to back out, Mike opted to charge ahead instead, but I intercepted his charge with a charge to his flank and rear. The fight didn't last long. In the impact and melee, the catafractarii were routed and eliminated.

Catafractarii's last stand

Mike's victorius equites had smacked into the Persian levy, which managed to hold on and even inflict a base loss on the much-superior Romans. Meanwhile, Rick's asavaran, had routed Chris' Huns and were banging away at a unit of auxilia palatina that Chris put up to guard his exposed flank. They weren't having much luck, but a second unit was coming up to help in the fight.

Action on the Persian right flank

With his legionarii engaged against the Persian cataphracts, Chris didn't have much else to counter the threat to his left flank. By this time, the Romans had lost three units and the Persians one. On the Roman right, their cavalry was nearly gone. The equites, down to three bases, were stuck into the Persian levy and soon to be taken in the rear by the Persian cavalry that had destroyed the Roman catafractarii. The writing was on the wall and the Romans threw in the towel. Yet another emperor to serve as a Persian footstool!

Dear dice, all is forgiven

On Saturday, I played Field of Glory (FoG) at The Game Matrix with Chris Rivers (son of Al). I used my Dominate Romans against his Early Achaemenid Persians. The game started with a miracle: I won the initiative roll. I chose "developed" as the terrain type and we wound up with a village and a plantation on my left and an enclosed field on my far right. Otherwise, the field was wide open, perfect ground for lots of cavalry.

Chris set up widely scattered across the width of the board. Having an army of mainly "shooty cavalry" including a lot of light horse, he wanted to be in position to harass my open flanks. His center consisted of his three heavy cavalry units, one of which was his elite guards, controlled by his inspired commander. In front of these were two units of bow-armed skirmishers. On his left, were two units of bow-armed light horse. On his right were three units of bow-armed light horse and his three medium foot units, including the vaunted Immortals, who were on his far right.

I set up using the plantation on my left as an anchor. I put the larger of my two auxilia palatina units in front of the plantation with the idea of running it into the rough terrain to hold it against all comers. To the right of that were my two units of legionarii, a unit of auxiliary bowmen, and the smaller of my auxilia palatina units. In the center were my heavy cavalry, the equites on the left and the equites catafractarii to their right. On my right, I put all the light horse: the equites Illyricani, the equites sagittarii, and the Hunnic mercenaries.

Chris started the game by using double-moves to get his skirmishers as far out as possible to engage me on my side of the table. On my right, I outnumbered his light horse with mine, so I turned the whole battleline towards his horse with the intent of smashing it. In the center, I advanced my heavy cavalry toward the skirmishing infantry that covered his cavalry. I figured they'd be a pestiferous nuisance and I wanted to chase them off as soon as possible. On my left, I moved the legionarii, bowmen, and auxilia steadily forward against Chris' light horse.

Chris' intention with these light horse was to try and plaster the legionarii with arrows and soften them up for his foot, or at least to render them ineffectual through cohesion loss. However, the shooting of the light horse was far from withering. I kept advancing or charging against the light horse and pushed them steadily back. In addition, my bowmen consistently put the hurt on one of his light horse units, rendering it pretty useless as a missile force.

Chris pressed his heavy cavalry into the center and his left, but without mutually supporting each other. He originally deployed them formed in a single rank so they could skirmish. This formation maximized his firepower and allowed him to evade with them, but made them less effective in close combat. One unit bore towards my light cavalry. This forced me to peel off the equites Illyricani to face them. Chris veered his elite guard cavalry towards my left and the remaining cavalry unit went up against my catafractarii.

On my right, the dice favored. In an exchange of shooting between his 10 bases of light horse and my 10 bases, I disrupted one of his units and later put it to a fragmented cohesion state with no loss to myself.



This forced Chris to move his now fragile light horse back in order to bolster its cohesion back to steady. His heavy cavalry had been aggressively forcing back my equites Illyricani and now, with his light horse retreating, I could move my equites sagittarii against the exposed rear of this cavalry.

In an exchange of missile fire, my 12 light horse managed to reduce his cohesion to disrupted without ill effect to themselves. The stage was now set for me to attack. I passed the test that let the Illyricani charge home against heavies and the sagittarii struck on the flank. In the ensuing impact and melee phases, I managed to reduce his cavalry to fragmented cohesion and eliminated one of his four bases, but at the cost of my Illyricani also being disrupted; however, they were later bolstered back to steady.

In the same turn, I charged Chris' elite guard cavalry with my equites and a unit of auxilia palatina. It was a bit of a gamble for me. My equites had been disrupted by the guard's bowfire and pitting medium foot against mounted is pretty brash. However, I counted on greater numbers to prevail; also, both my units were superior. Even with the points of advantage (POAs) against me, the auxilia did yeoman's service and inflicted serious pain on the guards. The equites also held steady. Even though reduced to fragmented cohesion status, they still meted out punishment.

Chris' problem was that, even though his quality was superior to mine by a notch, he had to split his combat between two units who together outnumbered him by more than 2:1. Because he was in a single rank and I was in double rank, in the melee I rolled twice as many dice at first until his losses reduced his dice further. In the final combat before the guards disintegrated, he was throwing one die against my seven. Still, my rolling was very good. The auxilia, needing 5's or 6's to hit, inflicted two or three hits each round out of four dice. The equites, although fragmented and reduced to two dice, still scored at least a hit each round and sometimes two. Although losing every round of melee, the guard cavalry never lost a cohesion step. Even after losing bases and taking catastrophic loss in a melee round, they still held on until they were reduced to one stand and auto-broken.

On my left came the only reverse of the day. Chris' intention was to run his Immortals against the my auxilia palatina in the plantation, smash them, and then turn my flank. He started by trying to reduce the auxilia's cohesion through bowfire--every single unit in Chris' army had bows. However, as with almost all of his bowfire in this game, the immortals couldn't do any damage at a distance, so he decided to close in. In the initial impact, I got a respectable four hits out of six dice rolled. However, Chris rolled six for six, an automatic stand loss for me. In the ensuing cohesion test, I failed by one and went down to disrupted. The bright side was that Chris failed his death roll and lost a stand himself. In the melee rounds that followed, the auxilia got beat up some more and soon broke. In a game of miserable dice rolling for Chris, all his luck focused on this one combat.

Although not entirely.

In the initial break move, the Immortals caught up with the auxilia and inflicted another stand loss. In the ensuing rout moves, I rolled 1's for my variable distance, which meant a rout move of only two inches. His attempts to pass a test to cease pursuing failed several times in succession and his victorious Immortals were drawn deeper toward my table edge and away from any effect on the other fighting.

The fight between my light horse and Chris' heavy cavalry on my right continued for several turns. Like the fight against his guard cavalry, I kept inflicting grievous loss, but the cavalry wouldn't break. Reduced to fragmented status and down to two bases, they still rolled boxcars for their cohesion test, the only roll that would have saved them from breaking.

Chris' attempt to turn his light horse back against my light horse as it was beating up his heavies was foiled by mu Huns. Extending them out to a single rank, I figured I would sacrifice them in order to hold off a rear attack that would disrupt my attempts to break his heavies. It didn't work as I thought. Chris' 10 stands of light horse, in two ranks, charged my Hun's single rank of four bases. My combat dice were split evenly between his two units. two dice against each, with 10 dice coming back at me. When the bones were done rolling, I had inflicted four hits against him to no hits back on me. In the ensuing melee round, Chris rolls continued to be pathetic.

In the center, my catafractarii continued to advance against Chris' remaining heavy cavalry unit. He opted for skirmishing and managed to cause a cohesion loss to the catafractarii. He finally decided to stand against a charge and, although disrupted, the catafractarii inflicted a base loss and cohesion loss against the heavies in the impact and melee rounds with no loss to themselves.

Eventually, the heavies my lights were fighting died the same turn the guard cavalry did. With two of his heavy cavalry units lost and the third dangerously on the ropes, Chris threw in the towel. He may well have fought and still inflicted some harm on me, but his only effective unit was his Immortals, who were off by my side of the table edge working their way back. The units I had fighting his heavy cavalry were now released to run roughshod over the light units that remained. His other two foot units were only protected medium foot with spears in the front rank and bows behind. They couldn't have held up against the legionarii and the best Chris could hope for was that the Immortals would get there in time to attack one legionarii unit from the rear.

]

Analysis

I'm not sure how I might have deployed better than I did. I got the terrain I wanted, which allowed me to anchor my infantry on a secure flank and put all of my cavalry on one side. Chris outnumbered me in mounted units, but I managed to have the local superiority against him on my flank. The three light horse units that he used against my legionarii accomplished nothing. He would have done better to use his light foot skirmishers on that flank and release the light horse to operate against the cavalry in my center and right. The foot skirmishers would still have held up a rapid advance by the legionarii, and I would have been hard-pressed by the increased threat to my cavalry's flanks.

Chris was failed spectacularly by his dice while my dice were surprisingly good. Apparently, they don't hate me or my Romans--at least not consistently. As much as I carped about the six hits with six dice he scored against my auxilia, his failure to inflict a single hit with 10 dice against my Huns was disproportionately unfortunate.

As I mentioned above, every unit in Chris' army was armed with bows. It's the shootiest army I've ever faced. Nevertheless, he made almost no impact against me at all with his bowfire. I had only three units with bows and one with javelins out of 10 units total, but I did more damage to him with my fire than he did to me. That's due to better dice rolling on my shooting, better dice rolling on my cohesion tests, and poor rolling on his shooting and cohesion.

One other thing that worked in my favor was the support I worked between my units. The loss of his elite guard cavalry and the other heavy cavalry unit could not have happened if I didn't have two units to his one in each combat. Ironically, that lesson was drummed home to me in my game against his father. In that game, I was superior to Al in cavalry and yet lost badly in the combat because I failed to support my cavalry.

My dice hate Romans!

After last week's sorry showing in my Field of Glory game--for which I blame my dice--I wasn't too sure what to expect from said dice when I played this Saturday. I used my Sassanids against a local player named Eric, who used my Dominate Romans. We used the same dice, my very cool, and sort of expensive, Ancient Dice. 

I've amassed 14 of them and use them for playing Field of Glory, which qualifies in my book as a "bucket o' dice" game. You may find yourself throwing 14--or more--dice in a single combat.

The upshot is that I rolled well with these dice and Eric rolled poorly with them. So, my suspicion about last week's game is correct, the dice were to blame. Except that that don't hate me, they hate my Romans. I might feel good about that, but I plan to play with the Romans often. I need better dice mojo or, heave forbid, different dice.

Today's game was played on a very busy field. Eric won the initiative and chose to fight on woodlands. The area was choked with four forest areas, two scrub areas, and two gentle hills. The forests were off to the sides, which narrowed the center area. That's what Eric was hoping for, but there were gaps in the forest areas on my right. I deployed my light horse archers followed by two units of asavaran (Sassanid heavy cavalry with bows, a.k.a. "shooty" cavalry). I ran my horse archers through the gap on turn one and in Eric's second turn, he charged them with twice my numbers of light cavalry. In an amazing display of dice-fu, I beat both of them thanks to my good rolling and Eric's lamentablty poor rolling. By turn 3, both Eric's light horse units were routing off the field and my horse archers and the shooty cavalry were advancing against Eric's wide open flank.

On the other side of the woods, I moved another unit of asavaran up against Eric's equites, backed by my cataphracts. I got one shot at him that caused his cohesion to go down one level. After that he charged into me, but again, I had the better rolls and in a few rounds of combat, he was routing off the field, chased by one of his generals unsuccessfully trying to rally them.

On my left, Eric had advanced his bowmen and a unit of Huns against my daylami infantry and elephants. After a few turns of ineffective shooting, I charged his Huns with my daylami and his bowmen with my elephants. All the advantages were on my side. Eric chose to stand with his Huns rather than evade, a.k.a., skedaddle. In the initial impact, the daylami put the hurt on the Huns, but the elephants and bowmen came to a draw. As the melee continued next round, the Daylami broke the Huns, but the bowmen killed the elephants, my first dice failure in the game. 

In the center, I advanced cautiously, but I wasn't going to get my remaining asavaran entangled with Eric's legionarii and catafractarii (yes, the legendary ones). However, I did advance my cataphracts against the auxilia palatina (superior medium infantry) that was at the left end of Eric's center. Eric moved the other auxilia palatina unit up on a hill to hold off the four units I had coming at his open flank.

I moved up against Eric's auxilia on the hill with all my shooty cavalry and started a devastating barrage against him. He lost a base in the unit and went down a cohesion level. On my left, Eric's super bowmen, flush with élan from killing my elephants, decided to take on the horde of levy scum that made up the last line in my array. He first tried to shoot them, but he wasn't successful in inflicting enough hits. They're a execrable mob, but they can absorb a lot of arrows before it hurts. So he decided to do the next best thing and charge them. Maybe he thought his bowmen were all like Legolas from Lord of the Rings.

Alas for him, they weren't. After a couple turns of drawn combats, the horde finally hit back hard, mostly due to superior numbers, but also due to superior protection. His bowmen were fragmented and destined soon for destruction.

On my right, Eric feared that he would be shot to pieces by my asavaran and horse archers, so he charged down the hill at them. In a few rounds of fighting, the auxilia palatina were crushed. Just next to them, my cataphracts broke the other auxilia palatina unit. That was game.

In the center, Eric finally got his catfractarii and legionarii into action, to my dismay, but they were too late to save him. He had only two steady units left. Four had routed off the field, another one had just broken, another two were fragmented, and a eighth was disrupted. For my part, I lost the elephants, always a hit-or-miss proposition in FoG, and had two units fragmented (nearly routed) in the center.

The biggest factor for Eric was the initial combats on my right. Poor luck on his part and good luck on mine settled the issue. With his flank blown out, it was just a matter of time...

I blame my dice

Today's Field of Glory (FoG) game was a fiasco from just after the start. I can own up to some poor generalship, but--honestly--my dice failed me miserably. We played at The Game Matrix in Lakewood, WA as part of the monthly "historical miniatures day" there.

The game was between my Dominate Romans (ca. 390 AD) and Al Rivers' Carthaginians (Hannibal in Italy ca. 218 BC). So, not an historical matchup. Al had a center of superior African spearmen upgraded with captured Roman armor. On his left were a Gallic warband, some Campanians, and a light foot unit of Numidian javelinmen. On his right was the cavalry and elephants.

My deployment was flawed from the start. I had a village in my deployment area about 1/4 of the way in from the right edge. I intended to use it as the anchor of my line, but I have no light foot in my army, and every other troop type is disordered in the village. So I deployed on both sides of the village and left some of my best units out of the fight. I had my legionaries and archers in the center:

On my left were the cavalry, except a unit of Huns, who were on the far right with the auxilia palatina. In the dead center of the line were my legendary catafractarii. 

However, they are only legendary because in my DBM playing days, they sucked rotten eggs in almost every game. The jury is still out about their performance in FoG. This game, as events will show, did nothing to polish their lustre.

The game started sort of well for me. My equites illyricani (light horsemen) were putting the smackdown on some Numidian light horse on my far left. The illyricani were "supported" by a unit of equites sagittarii (horse archers) on their right. Al charged in another unit of Numidians plus some heavy cavalry towards my sagittarii and I decided to evade rather than even try to stand. But this exposed my almost victorious illyricani to a flank attack by the Numidians and in short order the illyricani were running back to Illyrium.

The equites sagittarii made a brief stand against the victorious Numidians, but before long, they too were routing off the field. The only cavalry left were my equites (heavy cavalry) and the legendary catafractarii. It was looking grim. I moved the archers over to the right of my catafractarii and moved the equites over to counter the Carthaginian heavies. 

In a straight up fight, my heavies were crushed by their Carthaginian opponents. This left my left flank wide open. Al's Numidians and heavy cavalry were reforming for an attack on my center. Meanwhile, the elephants were coming up to meet my catafractarii. I was successful in getting my archers moved up against the elephants. After a couple turns firing, I managed to disrupt them. This made the fight between them and my catafractarii more even for me because the disruption of the elephants balanced out my disorder caused by facing the elephants. When the crunch came, my catafractarii were hit simultaneously by Al's elephants and a unit of heavy spearmen. In the initial impact, the catafractarii held on, but failed to do any damage to their opponents.

The catafractarii continued to hold until the game's end, although in a fragile state. The clash of heavy infantry lines in the center was initially a draw. The melee lasted a couple turns, but my penchant for rolling snake-eyes on my dice did me in. The right-hand unit of legionaries was at near-broken status, while the left-hand legionaries were broken.

On my right, I had advanced the larger of my two auxilia palatina units and it got it caught between Al's Gauls and Campanians. Attacked in the flank by the Campanians when they attempted to charge the Gauls, the auxilia was slowly ground down and in a state of near-rout. Meanwhile, Al's victorious Numidians and heavy cavalry were poised to strike at my exposed left flank.

That was game. Al lost two stands and had one or two units in disrupted status. I had four units broken and another two fragmented (almost broken). Technically, this was one attrition point shy of an official loss, but even my eternal optimism had to bow to the inevitability of destruction. There was nothing left to do but pick up the pieces as I viewed the carnage of lost units off to the side of the table (in Elysium?).