Looking for an ancients mass battle ruleset

[aphillathehun]

I think you should take a look at L'art de la guerre.  We play it, and it's played in tournaments in the US, with 28mm figs on a 6'x4' table.  It typically uses 20-30 stands of figures, with 6 or 8 close order infantry per stand for close order infantry and 3 cavalry on a cavalry stand.

The thing I like about the rules is that there really aren't many rules ambiguities at this point in its history.

[Doom Beard 78]

ADLG is very much in the DBX model. I won't discuss it as I played it and it was not for me but it has managed to get the DBX/FOG crowd excited so it has something going for it.

It will not deliver a Warhammer experience if that is what you are after .  Clash of Empires might be worth exploring as it Warhammer by other means.

Discussion of rules is at times an academic exercise as you are constrained by what is being played in your locality

[wmyers]

That is one heavy book! 

I have most of the others, but not that one (Armies of Antiquity).

[aktr]

Thanks for the reply's everyone

I should probably clarify that it doesn't have to be an exact copy of WFB, just the feel of it - by which I mean blocks on infantry moving round the table in rank and file. With skirmishers flowing round them and cavalry trying to avoid the pointy sticks and get in the sides.

I've done some more digging myself and it looks like Hail Caesar, Clash of Empires and War and Conquest might all work. I do already have the swordpoint book but my opponent would prefer something with a bit more chrome. He is just in it for the cool models so if the book isn't clear on is something is infantry or cavalry then it puts him off

period wise I'm waiting for my opponent to pick something but he has said he ether likes the idea of something with plenty of Phalanx or 'Romans' (he has not specified what period of Roman). Personally I like Persia or Carthage

I did a search for clash of empires on here and found a thread from a few years ago which was the last time someone agreed to play ancients with me and I was asking about CoE vs WaC vs HC. sadly that fell through and no ancient gaming happened

Cheers

Andy

[Doom Beard 78]

The sad reality is finding a CoE player is quite difficult. I had a quick look on the Great Escape Games forum and their opponent finder, shows barely any activity in 6 years. 

Hopefully, your opponent will get an army and you get some gaming in

[Atheling]

The sad reality is finding a CoE player is quite difficult. I had a quick look on the Great Escape Games forum and their opponent finder, shows barely any activity in 6 years. 

It died a death quite quickly. I found it too derivative of WAB though I do have some pictures in the book.

Hopefully, your opponent will get an army and you get some gaming in

Amen to that.....

[Doom Beard 78]

CoE's arrival seemed timed to coincide with WAB's demise. Its derivative nature was no doubt intended to provide a successor system with "support". In principle, WAB players should have segued to CoE but, for whatever reason it did not seem to last.  Great Escape did provide lots of free army lists via thier website to support which should have addressed one of the gripes about WAB- the lack of army books.+
One of my issues was that whenever I played CoE I kept defaulting to WAB, so much so that I  wondered if I were not better off sticking with WAB.
Being derivative is by no means a bad thing- witness the success of A Derivative Little Game, which is heavily indebted to DBX. 
As they used to say in the Seleucid kingdom, " One man's Mead, is another's Persian

[Atheling]

Being derivative is by no means a bad thing

No, I wasn't suggesting that. There are traces of WAB in Swordpoint (far superior IMHO).

We still use WAB 1.5 at the club quite regularly (though seems like a while back now!).

[Norm]

Agree with much of what has been said, so will Just add a few more titles to throw into the mix.

Sword and Spear from Great Escape Games.

Ancient and Medieval Wargaming by Neil Thomas

Kings of War Historical from Mantic Games

[Fremitus Borealis]

So, newbie question for you guys: how difficult is it to switch back and forth between different games without building a whole new army? I've only started collecting/painting over the past few months and I've kind of defaulted to Hail Caesar, mostly because that's what seems most readily available on the web.

[Jjonas]

"As they used to say in the Seleucid kingdom, " One man's Mead, is another's Persian" Humor!!

Clash of Empires was much more complete than WAB since it had many 'solutions' that caused rancor in WAB games. Sadly I felt the  game added complexity where none was needed. The rules solutions seemed better to apply to WAB. Nobody in my area wanted to play it- because it was a bit more dense than WAB. So they preferred WAB until it all came crashing down.

War and Conquest is better IMO, but has issues with bowfire than can cripple games.

I reckon the curse happens when a rule set must cover all warfare from the stone age until gunpowder takes over- all over the planet so folks can have balanced games.
That does happen in very generic systems such as DBA where a blade is a blade and a Mede a Mede. But more complex systems with lots of fluff and period color really complicates the crossover of armies.

We cannot really know what a Chinese army of 200 AD would have done to Romans, we can only guess. But somehow gamers feel that rules designers can come up with a balanced game for that.  WAB always worked best when within their own periods. Vikings had a hard time with phalanxes. This pissed off Viking players. That argument is kind of like Mahdists had trouble with machine guns.

Really the answer to the question is what army and period are you planning to collect and play. Normally one has to build two armies- one you like and one you can get others to play against you with. If you like Persians and Rome then the late Roman armies vs. Sassanians are a great match. Achaemenid Persians are difficult to handle since they can be so shooty (and boring). Carthage is always a very flexible combined arms army, so it takes dexterity to win with them.

As for switching back and forth between games, it comes down to how flexible is your opponent. Is it more important that everything line up perfectly so they don't have a snit over it, or if one is at 25mm a figure and the other at 20mm you can figure it out? People with multi based figures can use casualty rings.

Fashion changes like the wind. Single based was all the rage, then multi based mini dioramas became the cats meow. Now skirmish scale games are bringing back single bases. Lucky for me I mostly have single based figures so sabots are my salvation. Hallelujah!

[Fremitus Borealis]

Really the answer to the question is what army and period are you planning to collect and play. Normally one has to build two armies- one you like and one you can get others to play against you with. If you like Persians and Rome then the late Roman armies vs. Sassanians are a great match. Achaemenid Persians are difficult to handle since they can be so shooty (and boring). Carthage is always a very flexible combined arms army, so it takes dexterity to win with them.

Ha, it's funny you say that, because I'd kind of assumed that's what I would be doing from the start. Right now I guess I'm kind of working on a "Super Successors" army--basically a combo Seleucid/Greco-Bactrian, especially since there's so much overlap, anyway. This is both because I've always been fascinated by both groups, but also because I don't actually *know* anyone in the hobby yet (since I started literally right before the COVID meltdown, so I figured at least at the start I might just be strong-arming house guests or family members into playing with me, so I'd need two armies for that  And this way I should be able to swap units back and forth between them to some extent, too.

As for switching back and forth between games, it comes down to how flexible is your opponent. Is it more important that everything line up perfectly so they don't have a snit over it, or if one is at 25mm a figure and the other at 20mm you can figure it out? People with multi based figures can use casualty rings.

Fashion changes like the wind. Single based was all the rage, then multi based mini dioramas became the cats meow. Now skirmish scale games are bringing back single bases. Lucky for me I mostly have single based figures so sabots are my salvation. Hallelujah!

Yeah I've been mostly doing single 20x20 bases and then doing the sabot tray thing, as well, just to be as flexible as possible and not get locked into any one thing, especially since I don't really feel like I know what I'm doing yet  I guess the (recent) exception is, I've begun a unit that will serve as Galatians and I've done them on 40x40 squares, largely because some of the sculpts would fall over if they were on 20x20

[nikgaukroger]

I'd suggest having a look at Mortem et Gloriam (MeG) - if only because I'm playing and really enjoying it  . A lot of the players using it use 15mm, however, it is perfectly usable with any figure size.

Shiny new rule book available from The Plastic Soldier Company - https://www.theplasticsoldiercompany.co.uk/shop/rulesets/mortem-et-gloriam-rules/ - released a few weeks ago.

[SJWi]

I’m a devotee of TTS but as you say you don’t like it I won’t push them.

Hail Caesar has never taken off in our club. What seems popular are “Sword and Spear v2” and Mortem et Gloriam.

 Sword and Spear are sold by Great Escape Games with army lists available free online.

[SteveBurt]

So, newbie question for you guys: how difficult is it to switch back and forth between different games without building a whole new army? I've only started collecting/painting over the past few months and I've kind of defaulted to Hail Caesar, mostly because that's what seems most readily available on the web.

You can use your figures for pretty much any game. My ancient armies were initially used for WRG 4th, then 5th, then 6th, then DBA, DBM, DBMM, Field of Glory, Sword & Spear and now To the Strongest. All with the same figures