Clash of Spears - Small Actions rules for Ancients/Medieval

[seldon]

fantastic material !

[Arrigo]

PM sent...

I am interested too!

[guitarheroandy]

I am interested too!

PM on its way...

[wmyers]

PM sent...

Hey!  I'd be interested too!

[wmyers]

That is very interesting, I would love to know what you’ve been reading.

Clash plays pretty much like that, heavies get tired so you don’t go doing lots of stuff with them. You use them as anchors or to hit enemies in arms reach..

Your mediums and lights are use to push the enemy, accomplish objectives etc..

We have tried to restrict the efficiency of missile weapons a lot, we want player to play and maneuver, not sit back and shoot..  We break up point throwing sticks in javelins and throwing spears, but that is just a convention... a pilum can be called a javelin but is clearly heavier than a peltast javelin, and we don’t want to have too many types of javelins so: javelins include the ones that you throw when you are troops that are trying to stay a step away.. throwing spears are the ones that you throw usually preceding an attempt to engage en melee..

Because of that, there are lots of interesting interactions and decisions in how you execute the skirmishing combat...

I know you are doing a lot of play testing, which is awesome.  Did you try pilum with separate rules?

I ask this because I think they are quite unique compared to a much lighter javelin?

I know you want to streamline and keep simple, that is good, too.


In addition, since you mentioned missile weapons, how effective are slings?

[seldon]

Missile weapons are toned down compared to other rules.. for example bows and slings have a +1 save modifier so even troops with shields will save on 5+ ... we are not saying that they don't have good penetration, we all have read about how slings were pretty effective, but we want to focus the game more in close actions and not have it become a sit down far back and shoot...

The pilum is treated as other heavy javelins, which we group under the "throwing spear category", however troops that specialized in using weapons like pilum to disrupt enemy formations get a special trait called Impulsum, that only counts when you have a pilum or soliferrum or similar...  troops with this trait have an advantage when trying to disrupt enemies that are overlapping their shields ( due to the known concept of how they worked )... However this allows us later to build "imitation legionnaires" that will be equipped similarly but might not get the impulsum trait since they are not really as good as legionnaires who trained extensively.. the concept being, you have the weapon but mastering the timing of how to use it is another thing..

hope it makes sense..

Francisco

[guitarheroandy]

Ok, seeing as a few of you are interested, and it'll be easier than sending lots of PMs...

For those interested in the latest thoughts on the early Republican Roman army, head for: http://www.academia.edu

Search out the following articles:

(i) Ante Bella Punica: Western Mediterranean Military Development 350-264BC by Alistair Richard Lumsden

(ii) Roman Military Development in the 4th Century BC by Alistair Richard Lumsden (a bit of a companion to the above article)

(iii) Not So Different - Individual Fighting Techniques and Small Unit Tactics of Roman and Iberian Armies by Fernando Quesada Sanz

You'll find a wide range of other articles as well. Some mix older and more traditional ideas in with some newer thinking, but ultimately, go with what you resonate with.

Also, check out Warfare in early Rome - The Regal Period to the First Punic War by Jeremy Armstrong. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Early-Roman-Warfare-Regal-Period/dp/1781592543/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=jeremy+armstrong&qid=1564831380&s=gateway&sr=8-1
This is a really interesting book that looks at the bigger picture of warfare in the early Roman Republic, taking into account socio-economic factors. It debunks the traditional theory of Rome's manipular system evolving from a hoplite phalanx (a common view among modern historians.) Although a scholarly tome, it's not a difficult read.

I hope that you find these interesting. I've certainly got a very different view of what a mid 4th - early 3rd century BC Roman army might look like and am preparing my Victrix models with those new views in mind.

[Ethelred the Almost Ready]

Thanks for those references.  I have started looking at similar articles in JSTOR. 

[wmyers]

Missile weapons are toned down compared to other rules.. for example bows and slings have a +1 save modifier so even troops with shields will save on 5+ ... we are not saying that they don't have good penetration, we all have read about how slings were pretty effective, but we want to focus the game more in close actions and not have it become a sit down far back and shoot...

The pilum is treated as other heavy javelins, which we group under the "throwing spear category", however troops that specialized in using weapons like pilum to disrupt enemy formations get a special trait called Impulsum, that only counts when you have a pilum or soliferrum or similar...  troops with this trait have an advantage when trying to disrupt enemies that are overlapping their shields ( due to the known concept of how they worked )... However this allows us later to build "imitation legionnaires" that will be equipped similarly but might not get the impulsum trait since they are not really as good as legionnaires who trained extensively.. the concept being, you have the weapon but mastering the timing of how to use it is another thing..

hope it makes sense..

Francisco

It not only makes sense, it's exciting!  (This is FAR better than SPQR and I think your timing for a Christmas release is excellent as I'm sure by then any initial interest in the SPQR rules will have died off and you won't have the competition or comparisons to dilute your game's interest.)

While this rule set is only for skirmishes, any thoughts/plans to incorporate your concepts into a larger force rules set?

[Arrigo]

It not only makes sense, it's exciting!  (This is FAR better than SPQR and I think your timing for a Christmas release is excellent as I'm sure by then any initial interest in the SPQR rules will have died off and you won't have the competition or comparisons to dilute your game's interest.)

While this rule set is only for skirmishes, any thoughts/plans to incorporate your concepts into a larger force rules set?

what a sad gaming world, where people wish ill to a ruleset only for another to 'prevail'.     I hope both rules will find their niche, as it should. And then people wonder why I prefer play map and counter games to miniatures...

[seldon]

there is no need to wish ill to any rules.

in fact we’ve seen a lot of interest pick up on CLASH coming from SPQR..

I have the book myself, “hello, my name is francisco and I like to buy rules”


leaving aside issues with faq and editing I think SPQR works for slightly smaller actions than CLASH.. maybe closer to Mortal Gods. Games are supposed to last 30 minutes ..

I think there is room for both. Since neither rules require special basing or special minis you can build an army and play both. Eventually SAGA ancients will come out as well.. again you will hopefully be able tomuse the same armies, just different gameplay experience.

I understand complains about editing and such, but if those problems get solved all these rules can coexist peacefully..

As long as you guys buy CLASH 

SPQR looks more at characters like heroes, our characters are more looked at like low level commanders leading patrols... an Optio, a Decanus, a Tagmatarchis... they fight well but not that far from a veteran soldier.. their traits are functionsl to command, and our skill trees in the future supplement follow the same line skills that help you command..

So there is room for both.. you can have your army and play one or the other depending on who you are playing with..

I think it is good that with Mortal Gods , SPQR and soon CLASH we are expanding the universe of small actions in ancients.

Another example, I love FOG, but I also have Men of Bronze, they both allow to play big classical historical battles, they are just. different..

Regarding at expanding CLASH for big battle, it could be in the future but not i line of sight now.. we need to release CLASH and initial expansions will be all around that.. campaigns, more lists, more scenarios etc..

[seldon]

A 600 points Spanish for for CLASH of Spears

This force is built around the lowland Iberian tribes, the lists also allow for hill tribes, lusitanians, celtiberians..

This is a force that will try to specialize in ambushes.. it is made of:

Civis:

7 Tribesmen
8 Scutarii
8 Caetrati

Milites:
6 Iberian large shield cavalry

Rare:
6 mercenary balearic slingers

It is lead by a mounted Lord ( Lvl 5 Character )
and a Lvel 2 Veteran Warrior

[seldon]

a quick example of a Carthaginian force for CLASH

Civis:
8 numidian javelinmen
6 Scutarii
8 African infantry hoplites

Milites:
6 veteran infantry with captured roman equipment
6 numidian light horse

1 Lvl 4 character
1 Lvl 3 character

the character level also indicates their command points, given that this force has 5 units we have found out through many games that it is a good idea to have close 50% extra CP..

points: 600pts

[seldon]

Syracusan patrol, 600 pts for CLASH

Civis:
7 slingers
6 peltasts
6 peltasts
6 hoplites
6 hoplites

Milites:
6 heavily armored veteran hoplites

Lvl 4 character
Lvl 4 character

hopefully you’ll notice on the sample forces I’ve been posting that it is important to have a good amount of light and medium troops supporting a couple of heavy units..

The heavies serve as anchor points to hold ground but you need lights and mediums to maneuver and to achieve critcal tactical objectives. This is because lights can endure longer suffering less fatigue and that gives them valuable flexibility in the game.

[pallard]

I'll buy these rules as soon as they are available for sure!

 I love this kind of simulation of ancient warfare: for instance the prevalence awarded to trained professional skirmishers like Cretan archers or Balearic slingers, rare and precious. That is really appropriate at this level.

 I'm quite happy also with what you say about cavalry. This is a very tricky element of warfare to simulate and I have never been fully satisfied with any try, be it large battle rules or skirmish games. Still, I was probably one of the first to introduce skirmish gaming in a french club, back in early eighties, and I've seen a lot of rules since, and of many flavors.
Most have been dealing with horses as if they were some some kind of bikes. The late Jean-Michel Hautefort, one of our Jeu de guerre with miniatures founding fathers in France, used to speak of "pedestrian imagination", with a full horseman smile. I must say that I am one of these pedestrians, but I try to imagine accurately.
  Horses have their own psychology, they deal with normal environment in their own specific ways, not to mention a violent and noisy atmosphere! To me there are some fundamental elements to be respected in any level of simulation:

- first, horses should never be approached easily while moving in groups by any infantry with the intention of going into contact: you can only catch one while trapping it in a confined place with odds such as four infantrymen to one mounted,

-second, a horse is equivalent to a flashy sports car for anybody, from back wood barbarian to educated patrician, so it is much much more tempting to get hands on one in good shape rather than shoot or kill it, even tribal horse-stabbers and horse-hewers know that!

-third, they say  you just cannot persuade a horse to gallop into some kind of frightening and solid obstacle like a line of steady and noisy human beings, this is well known- BUT herds of wild horses can well be led into mad acts by stampeding, and a panicky steed shall try to force a barbed wire fence and get maimed while  cows will deal with it much more cleverly: so I let the question of warhorses charging head-on fully open,

-fourth, how you can move your horse depends on training for both, equipment (bareback, saddle and stirrup options, controls with reins-thighs-spurs) and tactical horsemanship doctrine available- but the least to consider is when you let your horse loose in full gallop there is trouble ahead when you need getting it back into control if you are an average cavalryman,

-fifth, horses vary according to breed: I would think of three classes, the common ones which can be used for simple riding from standing point to standing point (ancient Greek cavalry), the ponies mostly trained for hunting or hunting-like tactics (central Asian, imperial roman or dark age ones for instance) and therefore quite manoeuverable, and the huge warhorses (say Nisaian Persian, late roman Burgundian or medieval destrier breeds) who would support heavy equipment and rider and with specific shock tactics with limited dexterity otherwise.

I would love to read other gamers' opinions and comments on these points. I do think that they can be considered simply and efficiently in a rule set,  and it looks like you have done just that with Clash of Spears. My compliments.
I'll buy these rules definitely!
Philippe