Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Age of Myths, Gods and Empires => Topic started by: Westbury on May 21, 2020, 08:26:37 PM
-
Having a socially distanced chat in the garden today and we got round to the project we've abandoned twice, namely the wars of the successors, mainly abandoned because of the size of the armies and the cost of doing it in 28mm metal. But now with the appearance of so much plastic maybe it's possible again?
Thoughts would be appreciated. The going in point is 28mm and armies (not the large skirmishes which seem to be flavour of the day at present).
Thoughts on rules, new and past but not the DBA/M stable, would be appreciated also.
-
Perfectly doable, mostly in plastic but it will probably require some metals for the missing pieces. Victrix are your first point of call followed by Warlord. They have most of the pike units, hoplites and some generic cavalry as well as elephants. For metals I would recommend Aventine but there are a lot of other good manufacturers out there.
As to rules, we are fighting the Punic Wars via Hail Ceasar. Very adaptable rules, easy to pick up and have the added bonus of having Army Lists to get you started on the collection.
Hope that helps. I am sure there will other advice coming your way.
-
I think Hu Rhu nailed it perfectly, so I second his suggestions.
Victrix miniatures are very detailed and have successor phalangites too, with the option of having asiatic trousers instead of bare legs and greaves. The greek cavalry kits are versatile too, easily converted to companions and prodromoi.
Hail Caesar is a good ruleset, my favourite for ancient 'massed' battles. Unit size is based on frontage, many go for multi-basing though standard individual sqaure bases can also be used. Army lists are easily adapted with rules to add extra special rules and/or profile modification to represents elite warriors or else unwilling troops.
-
If you focus on core generic units to start, then most units will be easily crossed over to other Successor era armies. The key is to focus on completion of a typical combined arms force that is game able. One can add in extras that are more specific to identity armies. The Successor era has a lot of scope even if it does not encompass a huge time period. How one approaches how one would like to have their Early Successors differ from later kingdoms is really a personal decision. Later armies were often more uniform in appearance and had specific troop types that might not appear in any other kingdom's army. Earlier armies were more generic as the Generals recruited troops in their own regions, as well as absorbing enemy forces that surrendered to them. But earlier armies do not have the sexy troop types like armored elephants or cataphract cavalry that later Seleucid and Bactrian armies contained.
Most of the generic troops are available in plastic. So the formula is based on building an Imperial Macedonian list- then you can morph most of it into an Early Successor army of your choice, or an Epirote army against Rome. The generic units can be the bulk of an empire army, with the specific extras added in to give them their special flavor. So a Ptolemaic army may have some different looking phalangites to represent Egyptian recruits, and African elephants. The Seleucids can add in a super fancy silver shields phalanx, and cataphracts, and scythed chariots. An Antigonid army can have the later shielded cavalry and lots of Thracians.
It is all about how much effort one wants to put into their army- how generic of how specific they wish to be.
-
Those armies were BIG. You're brave to be taking it on, but I'd think carefully before committing to 28mm armies in that period. My 10mm Seleucids take up a fair bit of storage space.
-
Back in the days when shows and demo games were "a thing" Simon Miller regularly put on huge 28mm Successor battles with his To The Strongest rules - they've been covered in loads of places and Simon has a great blog so with a bit of google-fu I'm sure you could find some inspiration online from this source for both figures and setup options.
Given TTS uses a grid system, you could also kinda do whatever basing you like, so you could build an army for Hail Caesar (say) and give it a try with both sets?
-
28mm! I have been working 6mm and that has been a big chore! I can't imagine 28mm! You must have a mammoth table if you want to maneuver at all.
Victrix is a good start, but keep in mind if you build the successor variants of the Pike units you have to chop of most the legs and replace them with the trouser wearing ones (if you want the variants from the Alexander versions) I love my Victrix Pikemen.
-
Hi, for what its worth my personal favourite ruleset is Simon Miller's "To the Strongest", but you do need to invest in a gridded mat plus other peripherals to play. His army lists are available as free downloads from his BigRedBat online shop.
I am just completing a Seleucid/Generic Successor army much as described by one of the earlier correspondents. I mainly used the superb Aventine range, plus extras from Gripping Beast, Wargames Foundry and even 1st Corps.
The Victrix pike, cavalry and elephants look very nice, but you will probably need light infantry, cataphract cavalry and maybe scythed chariots. I think Gripping Beast are the only manufacturer of a 28mm scythed chariot and it is in their Polemarch range.
Worth checking out a variety of manufacturers. In metal Aventine, Gripping Beast and Foundry mix well together. 1st Corps are on the small side.
Warlord also do a decent-looking range but I have only seen them on their website. They sell a "Successor Starter Army" with 100 plastic phalangites, 8 metal cavalry plus an elephant and crew and shield decals for £75 which is pretty good value.
-
Big thanks to all who have replied so far and some useful tips. I feel fairly knowledgeable on the period from researching a while back but the exact point to dip in is more important than I originally thought.
Rules suggestions are welcome, no fixed view at the moment so happy to receive suggestions for new sets and old.
We've realised we are probably going to have to use some metal and the Aventine figures do look nice but maybe for command and 'special' units.
All ideas gratefully received :)
-
Personally, I'd go metal and go Aventine.
why?
i/ There miniatures are cheaper when compared to most other companies.
ii/ The depth of research is top notch.
iii/ Their Successor range is huge. The only thing it lacks is scythed chariots.
iv/ The quality of the sculpting and casting, not to mention the metal is excellent.
Obviously, metal is more expensive then plastic so feel free to disregard my feeling on the subject :)
-
Big thanks to all who have replied so far and some useful tips. I feel fairly knowledgeable on the period from researching a while back but the exact point to dip in is more important than I originally thought.
Rules suggestions are welcome, no fixed view at the moment so happy to receive suggestions for new sets and old.
We've realised we are probably going to have to use some metal and the Aventine figures do look nice but maybe for command and 'special' units.
All ideas gratefully received :)
What are some elements of rules you have liked in the past?
For example:
Model removal? Yes or No
Command as a Resource? Yes or No
Lot's of Modifiers? Yes or No
Just give us a general idea of what you have of haven't liked in other games.
-
There was a great magazine article in Practical Wargaming (?) a long time ago that went through the basics of a Successor army and then how it could be added to, to gradually transform it into a plethora of different armies and choosing the one that suited your own preferences. From memory the basis was 96 pikemen, 48 peltasts and a couple of dozen cavalry. That gave you a viable small Macedonian Early Successor army (to coin WRG parlance.) I was lucky as a schoolboy to have a friend (Nick) collecting Successors at the same time as me, so we were able to get them on the tabletop twice as fast as either of us individually. There weren't any plastics available (well except a few bags of veteran Rospacks) so metal was the only option back then...
-
Whilst on the subject of articles; the two Montvert books at the bottom of this post were invaluable when I painted up some examples of the Polemarch/Gripping Beast Successor range many years ago:
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KL26dbW8MYc/Xr3Ix_6FVlI/AAAAAAABDhg/rUQwYG_wXn4I7wkIdDwqyg6UHJ5QEw9MgCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/SUCCESSORS%2B13.jpg)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BNHALAkRHJo/Xr3I2JP3ZWI/AAAAAAABDhs/bpZ3f7yyBLMywpiVqLBz76Flhn3yXzL0gCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/SUCCESSORS%2B11.jpg)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-G1NjX1w2cSk/Xr3I23LtK0I/AAAAAAABDh4/kc2VXCqTQ_QJfmVpHeS4KkDklgeHzy9KACLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/SUCCESSORS%2B5.jpg)
-
Rules: Armati II. I love them and they do not require gallons of units.
I have a fairly large 15mm 'Successor' collection that morphs between 323 (and before) to 150 BC with a big basic core army and relevant additions.
-
I’m doing this in 15mm.
Alexandrian core, plenty of Thracians and hoplites, Indians, then special successor-specific units e.g. catas, trousered pike, chariots, eles, LH bow, personality generals... I’m nearly at a place where I can do 200-300 point (ADLG) for most Greek, Mac, successor, asia minor, bactrian, indian... so covering a lot of list possibilities.
There’s good stuff in 15 between Xyston, MuseumZ, Chariot and FIB.
-
Might I suggest taking a look at Triumph!
http://www.wgcwar.com/
Available as a PDF from Wargame Vault, or a hardcopy from Scale Creep Miniatures or On Military Matters
-
After about 30 years you will be able to put on a battle like Paraitecenae. Over 400 infantry, 100 cavalry and 20 elephants on the table...
(https://myalbum.com/photo/hggPP7gbGLKP/540.jpg)
-
Ref, comments so far:-
Atheling. Thanks for reminding me about Nick Sekunda I've actually got the Selecid book but had completely forgot about it until I went hunting amongst the book shelves! Now reading :D.
Rules. What do I like? Well I was brought up on WRG 5th and it's competitors and have no problem saying I enjoyed them; probably don't need the same amount of detail this time around as I'm a lot older! That said the current fad for groups of singly based figures mounted on sabot bases or movement trays being called armies and buckets of dice being thrown is definitely not for me. I like blocks of figures (call them elements) anywhere between 4 to 6 figures per base put together to make a unit - we were going to use Legio last time around. I don't mind book keeping or casualty counters, I like factors, I like ranking of commanders and that making a difference. A big no to random movement - patently nonsense and not that keen on silly random cards - Lucius Cretinous has the flu, no advance for 3 turns, etc.
Have heard of Hail Caesar and To The Strongest but not seen them in action, didn't know there was an Armati II but do remember playing the original years ago and quite liking, how do these play?
Figures. The group is still on for plastic from a cost point of view - is there a height difference between Victrix and Warlord? I think some Aventine metal might sneak in but the web site is a bit crap.
-
Ref, comments so far:-
Atheling. Thanks for reminding me about Nick Sekunda I've actually got the Selecid book but had completely forgot about it until I went hunting amongst the book shelves! Now reading :D.
Rules. What do I like? Well I was brought up on WRG 5th and it's competitors and have no problem saying I enjoyed them; probably don't need the same amount of detail this time around as I'm a lot older! That said the current fad for groups of singly based figures mounted on sabot bases or movement trays being called armies and buckets of dice being thrown is definitely not for me. I like blocks of figures (call them elements) anywhere between 4 to 6 figures per base put together to make a unit - we were going to use Legio last time around. I don't mind book keeping or casualty counters, I like factors, I like ranking of commanders and that making a difference. A big no to random movement - patently nonsense and not that keen on silly random cards - Lucius Cretinous has the flu, no advance for 3 turns, etc.
Have heard of Hail Caesar and To The Strongest but not seen them in action, didn't know there was an Armati II but do remember playing the original years ago and quite liking, how do these play?
Figures. The group is still on for plastic from a cost point of view - is there a height difference between Victrix and Warlord? I think some Aventine metal might sneak in but the web site is a bit crap.
For me it choosing a rules set usually comes down to two things:
i/ Do the units look authentic when based up on the tabletop? I've seen a load of games where a small stand with perhaps four mini's based on it represents a large number of men. This just doesn't do it for me personally. I like larger units. so, that's something you're going to have to ponder :)
ii/ Do the rules have the right feel for the 'period'. This is a tricky one as sometimes we just don't know how some wars were fought and only have snippets of information. So, with that in mind, the real question is; does it feel right according to your interpretation? If it's any solace, I've been looking for a suitable set of Late Medieval rules for twenty years and have yet to find the perfect set, if such a thing exists :)
-
Mr Westbury sir it just occurred to me, could the scythed chariots be 3d printed? That would cut down the cost considerable, like.
-
Mr Westbury sir it just occurred to me, could the scythed chariots be 3d printed? That would cut down the cost considerable, like.
Does this depend on already having the 3D printer? I don’t and I haven’t had much luck tracking down a place with reasonable prices to get prints done.
-
Ref, comments so far:-
Atheling. Thanks for reminding me about Nick Sekunda I've actually got the Selecid book but had completely forgot about it until I went hunting amongst the book shelves! Now reading :D.
Rules. What do I like? Well I was brought up on WRG 5th and it's competitors and have no problem saying I enjoyed them; probably don't need the same amount of detail this time around as I'm a lot older! That said the current fad for groups of singly based figures mounted on sabot bases or movement trays being called armies and buckets of dice being thrown is definitely not for me. I like blocks of figures (call them elements) anywhere between 4 to 6 figures per base put together to make a unit - we were going to use Legio last time around. I don't mind book keeping or casualty counters, I like factors, I like ranking of commanders and that making a difference. A big no to random movement - patently nonsense and not that keen on silly random cards - Lucius Cretinous has the flu, no advance for 3 turns, etc.
Have heard of Hail Caesar and To The Strongest but not seen them in action, didn't know there was an Armati II but do remember playing the original years ago and quite liking, how do these play?
Figures. The group is still on for plastic from a cost point of view - is there a height difference between Victrix and Warlord? I think some Aventine metal might sneak in but the web site is a bit crap.
Am fairly sure To The Strongest has that same activation mechanic as your Spectre rules, but could be wrong.....years ago my very first wargames were 15mm Ancients using Vis Bellica rules.....I have a feeling that might just fit your bill. Don't know if I still have the rules but for sure I have the army lists. They were elements of 12 figures on a 60 x 30 base, and looked great on the table.
-
Ref, comments so far:-
Atheling. Thanks for reminding me about Nick Sekunda I've actually got the Selecid book but had completely forgot about it until I went hunting amongst the book shelves! Now reading :D.
Rules. What do I like? Well I was brought up on WRG 5th and it's competitors and have no problem saying I enjoyed them; probably don't need the same amount of detail this time around as I'm a lot older! That said the current fad for groups of singly based figures mounted on sabot bases or movement trays being called armies and buckets of dice being thrown is definitely not for me. I like blocks of figures (call them elements) anywhere between 4 to 6 figures per base put together to make a unit - we were going to use Legio last time around. I don't mind book keeping or casualty counters, I like factors, I like ranking of commanders and that making a difference. A big no to random movement - patently nonsense and not that keen on silly random cards - Lucius Cretinous has the flu, no advance for 3 turns, etc.
Have heard of Hail Caesar and To The Strongest but not seen them in action, didn't know there was an Armati II but do remember playing the original years ago and quite liking, how do these play?
Figures. The group is still on for plastic from a cost point of view - is there a height difference between Victrix and Warlord? I think some Aventine metal might sneak in but the web site is a bit crap.
You speak much sense, Sir.
-
i/ Do the units look authentic when based up on the tabletop? I've seen a load of games where a small stand with perhaps four mini's based on it represents a large number of men. This just doesn't do it for me personally. I like larger units. so, that's something you're going to have to ponder
That is somewhat relative. In this picture you see three different representations of a unit of Horse Bow in Triumph. The recommendation is to use two per stand to allow people to play with fewer figures. but you can just as easily add more figures to the standard base and create the crowded look. you can also increase the size of the armies (scale up the points deployed) which has a similar impact of creating a crowded table with a lot more maneuver elements.
That is why we don't state a "scale" for troops in Triumph, because it is adjusted to the battle you want to represent. This video helps explain it a little better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1w1mbxWLvKw
-
For me it choosing a rules set usually comes down to two things:
i/ Do the units look authentic when based up on the tabletop? I've seen a load of games where a small stand with perhaps four mini's based on it represents a large number of men. This just doesn't do it for me personally. I like larger units. so, that's something you're going to have to ponder :)
ii/ Do the rules have the right feel for the 'period'. This is a tricky one as sometimes we just don't know how some wars were fought and only have snippets of information. So, with that in mind, the real question is; does it feel right according to your interpretation? If it's any solace, I've been looking for a suitable set of Late Medieval rules for twenty years and have yet to find the perfect set, if such a thing exists :)
I think there’s a bit more to these questions than is answered by “it doesn’t have a scale.” More pertinent is what level of abstraction do tge rules work to? To take a Roman Army as the example. Is it at the DBA end of the scale, a short step away from playing chess, where you accept that an element of 3 or 4 figures represents an entire Legion? Or do you want to be able to see a Legion as having multiple components that you have to make the choices about how they will manoeuvre and support each other? You might even want to see your Roman Legion with every cohort/maniple represented separately and be personally in charge of the whole line replacement process. These different levels of abstraction or command and control will really require different approaches to the way the rule mechanisms are designed. They should give a very different feel to a game and I would be dubious about any set that claimed to do the entire span.
-
I think there’s a bit more to these questions than is answered by “it doesn’t have a scale.” More pertinent is what level of abstraction do tge rules work to? To take a Roman Army as the example. Is it at the DBA end of the scale, a short step away from playing chess, where you accept that an element of 3 or 4 figures represents an entire Legion? Or do you want to be able to see a Legion as having multiple components that you have to make the choices about how they will manoeuvre and support each other? You might even want to see your Roman Legion with every cohort/maniple represented separately and be personally in charge of the whole line replacement process. These different levels of abstraction or command and control will really require different approaches to the way the rule mechanisms are designed. They should give a very different feel to a game and I would be dubious about any set that claimed to do the entire span.
Multiple components making a choice. DBA looks rubbish IMHO. Your chess analogy is very apt though in terms of game mechanics and aesthetics.
Also, you're spot on about Ancients/Medieval rules that claim to cover a huge span of history. Take the pike Phalanx; despite wielding the same weapon, the phalanx of Alexander behaved in a very different way to that of say the Swiss in the Late Medieval/Early Renaissance time frame. They had very different problems to over come. That's just one example, there are hundreds.
-
Good luck with this endeavour.
You have already sparked interest & responses.
Keep us all informed of developments, please.
-
The group is still on for plastic from a cost point of view - is there a height difference between Victrix and Warlord? I think some Aventine metal might sneak in but the web site is a bit crap.
I have some of the Victrix plastic Republican Romans, great figures. If you are looking for plastics, I can recommend them.
The warlord stuff tends to be smaller. I am looking at Aventine comparisons, I would say they will mix with the Victrix plastics, but I have only seen picture comparisons.
-
I've just noticed that 1st Corps army packs for the Successors are currently on sale at a 20% discount. These figures are smaller than the other ranges mentioned ( eg Aventine, Gripping Beast) but the range is pretty complete so you can make up any Successor army using just 1st Corps. They are nice figures if a little caricatured.
Might be worth a look?
-
I have a Seleucid and Ptolemaic armies made with Xyston 15mm figures. The armies are based on Raphia and number nearly 3000 figures.
Check my blog
www.warrenswargamerantings.blogspot.com
-
The latest Wargames Soldiers and Strategy Magazine # 108 has an article that attempts to summarize how to build elements of an Early Successors army for games.
The focus is on "Crossover Troops" that can be used in many different flavors of Successor armies. It is brief but hopefully a helpful start. I often see this kind of question asked online (as here on this board) and directly to me, so I felt it was worth the self plug :)
More info at:
https://www.karwansaraypublishers.com/wss-issue-108.html
-
I've just finished reading that very article Jeff. I like the table at the end- makes planning an army for the various successor states an easier job :)
-
Good tip on the article. I bought the mag. But... it's pretty thin and not rule-specific. And the rest of the mag is very 20th century-orientated, so YMMV. The mag is brilliantly formatted though - nice to see ads! - just wish it was for ancients - and yes, I already subscribe to Ancient Warfare from the same publisher;)
At least I am quite happy that I have been through a load of lists from the rules I want to play more (ADLG) and used some army list spreadsheets to check on unit numbers etc.
On one hand there's no problem having an even bigger lead mountain (!) but it's so easy to get the numbers of units way off (I have some old WRG-age Greek-related light troops and only 1/3 of them will see the table under ADLG).
Chariot, camel, elephant and commander numbers are also really important as that's where the cash rapidly disappears!
My logic was to plan ahead to be able to field 2 massive (ish) armies head-to-head for Bactrian-Indian and Alexandrian Macedonian (at 400 points in ADLG speak) and then check those troops off against the different Successor options and all the classical Greek and Asia Minor lists. I'm maybe 60% there after getting into it at Xmas. I have left off the Ptolemaic list is it's probably the outlier, though (in ADLG) it only takes a few optional Nubian/Bedouin lights to swing it... hmm...
That said, the article did remind that Thureophoroi are the one troop I don't have in the mountain that would help for some Greek lists and I must commit to some Galatians.
Happy painting!
-
I've just finished reading that very article Jeff. I like the table at the end- makes planning an army for the various successor states an easier job :)
Thanks. That table was the reason why I fleshed it out with text. My thought experiment as a former educational/games software person was that tables can impart much more information than words, and with greater retention value. A table similar this was originally in the original WAB Armies of Antiquity book, and I felt it was a great asset for answering questions. Visually one coudl find that the armies that had the most possible historical opponents intersected and were Nomads and Alexander.
There were a couple of other tables that did not make it into the Magazine (which the web version will have eventually):
-
Good tip on the article. I bought the mag. But... it's pretty thin and not rule-specific. And the rest of the mag is very 20th century-orientated, so YMMV. The mag is brilliantly formatted though - nice to see ads! - just wish it was for ancients - and yes, I already subscribe to Ancient Warfare from the same publisher;)
------> Yes, I really did not know where the article would land. The editor likes to have some articles that are not related to the theme.
Chariot, camel, elephant and commander numbers are also really important as that's where the cash rapidly disappears!
------> I agree. I did try to stay rules agnostic
My logic was to plan ahead to be able to field 2 massive (ish) armies head-to-head for Bactrian-Indian and Alexandrian Macedonian.
------> Good choices as these offer many interchangeable units and can be the core units of a Nomad or Indian army.
-
Hope you get to write more on this!
-
That crossover is part of what I love about the period!
-
Sorry, been away a while, real life and all that :(
Thanks again for the inputs.
Yes I did read the Soldiers and Strategy article - I get it delivered! Actually it came at just the right time as I was floundering a bit on which troops would be best for the two of us doing the project to concentrate on so we could get the best bang for our buck! Thanks Jeff.
Also ploughing through all my old copies of Slingshot - maybe I'll rejoin Society of Ancients ???
Still no further forward on rules, going to play through the several sets I've got this week using cardboard templates. Will keep you posted. ADLG?
-
Glad it was of help at the right time!
The key focus was to allow folks to see at a glance a shopping list of units so they could get the kind of personal feedback that we get from our miniature game armies. It's disappointing if you buy a whole Antigonid army and then decided that suddenly you love scythed chariots. Of course that is what "Crossover" is all about- you are not high and dry and can mix and match. But if you wanted to start with Seleucids then at least this kind of info gives you a head start.
As for rules, that is such a personal choice. I feel "To The Strongest" is tailored to Successors very well. "Hail Caesar" also. I don't currently have a favorite popular rules set for massed battles.
-
Have started play testing the various sets of rules I have around the house as well as those I have borrowed off colleagues - trying to avoid spending multiples of £20+ and then end up with a pile of rules I don't want/can't use so reviews are going to be super important here.
First on the table was To The Strongest and I have to confess I absolutely hated it - apologies to those who like the rules but they just were not for me. I'll post my in depth thoughts on the blog next week sometime but for now I'll just draw a veil over the experience :-[
-
Westbury, I love TTS but can understand why you don't. I have sane, rational mates who will tolerate them just to play a game but don't like them. Equally another bunch play all the Two Fat Lardies games and have rushed to pre-order "Infamy, Infamy", whilst others think they have lost their marbles! I am just about to buy Simon McDowell's "Comitatus" which are specifically aimed at the Late Roman/Early Byzantine period.
-
SJWi.
Don't get me started on the TFL cult :o
I like Simon's work and in fact have just recently downloaded and printed off his Civitates Bellantes which are aimed at the classical period so I'll see how they go - might try them next in fact :)
-
I fully understand that TTS is not for everybody. I cannot get folks to play it myself. But I will say it is an great display or convention rules set where it is easier to get novices into the swing of things quickly. That seems to be the point nowadays. I reckon I like TTS because it is one of the rule sets that presentation is fantastic especially for the early Successors.
Here is a set of photos- some from the WSS article and some that did not make it in:
http://www.ancientbattles.com/Early_Successors_Armies_JJonas/Early_Successor_Armies_AncientBattles_2020.html
-
This is a newer page on Cretan archers. Agrianians to come shortly.
http://www.ancientbattles.com/Cretan_Archers/Cretan_Archers_AncientBattles_2020.html
-
Jjonas
You haven't convinced me on the rules, but great link, thank you.
-
I ran a TTS game of Thracians vs Hoplite Greek via Zoom last night. 6 players linked by video with myself moving all the figures and pulling the chits. The “boardgame” aspect of the game makes it eminently suitable for distance gaming.Everyone thoroughly enjoyed it but I can well appreciate why it isn’t everybody’s cup of tea.
-
I don't have anything productive to add, other than to say that I'm a total n00b (started collecting/painting models literally like 3 weeks before the Corona lockdowns started), but I too have chosen to go the Successors route, so I will be following this thread very closely :)
First post too, btw :D I've been lurking for most of this year, but have put off starting any threads of my own yet, if only because I don't want to be "that guy" who can't use the search function and starts new threads that have been re-hashed 1000 times already!
-
One thing I find helpful is to not get hung up too much on nationality names in units and focus instead on what they do. For example, what is the difference really between Thessalian Heavy Cavalry versus Epiliektoi Heavy cavalry from military colonies? Not much!
As wargamers, we sometimes get hung up on troops from a specific place, even if they really fight almost the same as a generic, similar unit type.
-
Time and distance do matter for Successor armies. Equipment and fighting style changes over time and within empires.
We are talking about a period that starts in 356 BC with a poor kingdom that overcomes its enemies, and spreads militarily, conquering Persia, and spreading from India to Italy in a period of eighty years.
Then the formed empires Succeeded the Alexandrian collapse, and ruled for a couple hundred years- although they were knocked off one at a time by Rome, and absorbed.
Offshoot empires in hide away places such as Bactria survived in various formats as well.
This means Successor armies are very diverse and troop types matter in many regards, if one wishes to do a detailed presentation of an army. Often troops are interchangeable. Xystophoroi cavalry such as Thessalians could be used as other types in various armies. But styles changed. Some say the Thessalians that went with Pyrrhus adopted the shield and light spears of the Romans, and also copied Tarentine tactics. In Alexander's army, and the Lamian War, the Thesalians seem to be lance armed heavy cavalry. But they shift to a different style later.
Tarentines in early armies would look Italian in make up with round hoplite shields, but later on in Ptolemaic armies are depicted in state supplied gear and small square shields. This is after a space of time that covers 320 BC to 44 BC so fashion does change.
The Seleucid development of the cataphract does not occur until after the battle of Raphia in 217 BC. So cataphracts are a unit type that determines the time frame of the army. Cataphracts are common in some off shoots of Successor armies, such as later Parthian, Armenian, and Commagene armies, even some in the far eastern kingdoms. But they are not readily useable except in late Seleucid Successor armies.
The Companion cavalry of Alexander was a common component of the Successors but they too changed their styles from army to army. In the Antigonid army in Macedonia the Companions gave up the xyston (lance) in favor of the large shield and lighter spears/javelins. Other agema cavalry became more heavily armored and still used xystons, but became more rare over time. The Thessalian and Macedonian and Thracian cavalry of the Roman Civil Wars is hard to pinpoint but my guess is they had all gone to the shield and spear style as they progressed to the "auxiliary" cavalry role of the Roman Empire.
The basic idea with Successors is whether you wish to collect an Early army or a Successor empire army. The Early armies can mix and match with one another easily - since their gear and troops were pulled from the same pools. Defeated troops joined winners. Local levies dressed the same whether they were ex-Persians or now with Seleucus at Ipsus. Generally early armies might have less uniformity, except for those specific units such as the 'silver shields' that became famous in the wars of the Diadochi.
A lot of the early units can also be core units in a later army. Most phalanxes are generic enough- although many point out that the sarissa length got longer. Arguments for more uniformity in the empire armies make sense. Allied troops suchs as Cretans work for Greeks, Successors, and Romans.
This is a source for unit choices of the period, all you need to do is piece together the DBM code and you can figure out the percentages for various troop types in a great selection of Successor armies.
http://lukeuedasarson.com/AlternativeDBMLists.html
Thessalian cavalry are indeed useful units for Successor armies- but they differ from the Thessalians of the Greek Wars. Below a Successor general leads some Thessalians with lances.
-
Jeff, really enjoyed that last post, good to have someone talk up the differences and how they change at points in time rather than settle for the generic 'well they're all cavalry anyway', particularly good points made on the Thessalians and Companions. For our project the desire for interchangeability seems to be pushing us towards the earlier rather than the later period and the Daidochi Wars do have plenty of action!
The rules quest continues but I am finding that the current crop are all a bit draw a coloured card/dice/playing card and this is who will randomly move while at the same time tending towards generic troop types rather than specifics which does tend to neutralise any period flavour. Also what's with the 'figures don't matter' mindset? I'm struggling to see the point of painting nice minis if they have no relevance on the base (some of which are really quite large) in terms of counting casualties or even representing a scaled up formation - one figure represents a century or whatever. I'm still nowhere near writing my own though and for this project that's a good thing :)
-
For our project the desire for interchangeability seems to be pushing us towards the earlier rather than the later period and the Daidochi Wars do have plenty of action!
It also has variety going for it. At the Society of Ancients Battle Day we fought Paraitecene from 317BC and the two armies had a plethora of different units units in their armies apart from the core of phalangites. There were: Cretans, Tarentines, Lykians and Pamphyllians, Medes. Thracians and Indians. As well as a bunch of less well described contingents. The Battle Day is a very good place to see how different sets of rules deal with the same scenario.
Our small group always take along Piquet and for the Successor period Archon 2 is the specific supplement. These are a card driven set of rules, but it is the standard turn sequence (move, shoot, charge, melee, rally etc.) that the cards are used to represent. This provides a lot of fog-of-war and edge of the seat action but leave the decisions of which units and where firmly in the players' hands. The "official" scale is that a four stand infantry unit (usually 12 figures) represents 500-700 men. A cavalry unit of 8 figures about half that. We of course tinker to our hearts content with all aspects including figure scale and the rules are resilient enough to cope! We have also found that it is possible to have a good game with just 6 units a side or 20.
(https://cf.geekdo-images.com/imagepage/img/xhUgHIWGCwKqJ3fOAQ2F_Klj7RE=/fit-in/900x600/filters:no_upscale()/pic108851.jpg)
-
Jeff, really enjoyed that last post, good to have someone talk up the differences and how they change at points in time rather than settle for the generic 'well they're all cavalry anyway', particularly good points made on the Thessalians and Companions. For our project the desire for interchangeability seems to be pushing us towards the earlier rather than the later period and the Daidochi Wars do have plenty of action!
The rules quest continues but I am finding that the current crop are all a bit draw a coloured card/dice/playing card and this is who will randomly move while at the same time tending towards generic troop types rather than specifics which does tend to neutralise any period flavour. Also what's with the 'figures don't matter' mindset? I'm struggling to see the point of painting nice minis if they have no relevance on the base (some of which are really quite large) in terms of counting casualties or even representing a scaled up formation - one figure represents a century or whatever. I'm still nowhere near writing my own though and for this project that's a good thing :)
It is good you have a relatively clear idea of what you want from your game. That will make picking out the rules and models you want much easier.
-
Kind of intrigued about the Piquet rules - looked them up, some positive comments about them. Have I got this right; you need to buy the core rules and then the period specific supplement?
-
Impetus 2nd Edition.
-
Kind of intrigued about the Piquet rules - looked them up, some positive comments about them. Have I got this right; you need to buy the core rules and then the period specific supplement?
I haven't played Piquet, which is a bit of a shame as everything I've read seems to point to the rules being a decent 'simulation' of the fog of war.
I'm quite sure that you need the core rules and the relevant supplement.
-
Kind of intrigued about the Piquet rules - looked them up, some positive comments about them. Have I got this right; you need to buy the core rules and then the period specific supplement?
That’s right. The basic rules are a fairly generic horse and musket but the supplements have all the period specific rules, card decks and army lists.
-
Also been watching YouTube clips of Swordpoint, thoughts anyone?
-
Now play tested Vis Bellica, didn't hate them but equally didn't love them.
I think I have convinced myself that the one big base approach doesn't do it for me, I'm not convinced by the 'make each base a vignette' argument particularly where densely packed troops like pike are concerned - so the bulk of most Hellenistic armies and there is no sense of attrition, one minute the base is there the next it's not - this was certainly the case with VB.
But the whole point of going through this exercise was to find what I liked, so tick in the box there. Going to try Simon's Civtates Bellantes next.
-
Also been watching YouTube clips of Swordpoint, thoughts anyone?
There used to be quite an in depth vid by Medieval Warrior but I noticed that it's been removed. MW does have a quick run through but it's not as good as the former vid.
Also, look for Bob Stradling's videos as they explain the basic mechanism in detail but don't show a game being played, at least the last time I looked :)
-
Good luck with this project Ian. Certainly a huge undertaking to go from scratch, particularly in 28mm. With some of these unit is there / unit is not there type rules, you could elect to remove a rank or a stand of figures to represent the "attritional" aspect. Have you an idea of how many units you want a side to fit on your wargames table and give room for manoeuvre ? How deep would you like your phalanxes from the aesthetic point of view ? 4 seems common. Do you want your phalanx in sub units eg groups of 4 by 4 or a bigger formation ? I don't get the impression that there was a lot of manoeuvre by the phalanx as a whole, and Pete's experience with the Sealed Knot would speak against a ballet of the spears.
I look forward to seeing how this develops.
-
Gregor, thanks for the best wishes!
The number of units is a bit in the air which is fine at this stage, I'm going to take my time and not rush. I'm thinking 4 ranks for the pike, should give a sense of depth; had a discussion with my co adventurer into this madness today and we were talking 40mm square bases with 4 figures 2x2 and then 8 bases for a 'unit', alternatively bases of 80x40mm to make moving easier. He nearly persuaded me to write my own rules but I'm resisting so far.
I'm sure you are remembering a phone conversation we had pre lockdown when I was firmly saying no more big 28mm projects! lol :) :D
-
Ian it has been said that if you want to hear God laugh...
tell him YOUR plans for the future.
-
Ian it has been said that if you want to hear God laugh...
tell him YOUR plans for the future.
Excellent advice!
-
So, played out Civtates Bellantes; ok I suppose but didn't ignite my passion and didn't feel anymore like an ancient battle than the other two. Got hold of a copy of FoG so will give that a go next.
The only consolation to all this very boring playing a game solo with bits of card is that if I end up writing my own I'll have plenty of ideas to borrow!
-
So, finished my solo play through of FoG and although there are some really innovative ideas it struck me as an opportunity missed for the sake of being the ultimate tournament set.
The base sizes are just the DBA/DBM standard and pikes on 60x20 just don't do it no matter how many of them you put together, so the visual didn't work.
The sequence I liked and thought was a step out of the box but ultimately not enough for me. How you get the initiative I obviously missed (I just diced) but the impact of a charge being one fight and then prolonged melee a bit later in the same turn I did like.
The movement was so so slow! Even on a 6x4 it was slow; one side had cataphracts, oh what a waste, they may as well have got off and walked.
Shooting per base worked fine; the lumping in of virtually all weapons jarred a bit but hey. The PoA was obviously meant to make it all a bit different but it hardly seemed to make any difference.
Melee much the same as shooting so same comments but the results did seem to vary quite wildly.
Casualties or hit points. So when is a hit point a casualty and do they accumulate and what is the point of the death roll? This seemed just a bit too clever for it's own good.
Commanders being on a unit sized base (well almost) of 60x40 so that you could slot them into a unit and show them actually fighting in the front rank I really liked. made quite the change from the usual round base and declaring them to be with a unit.
For what we wanted just too many rules and qualifications and if, buts and maybe's which for the tournament style game it is aimed at I absolutely get and hundreds of players love it so fair enough.
That just leaves Swordpoint and Hail Caesar to try out now.
-
i am looking forward to your final verdict!
-
Ian, you are inching (Centimetre-ing?) towards doing your own set, aren't you?
-
So, finished my solo play through of FoG and although there are some really innovative ideas it struck me as an opportunity missed for the sake of being the ultimate tournament set.
The base sizes are just the DBA/DBM standard and pikes on 60x20 just don't do it no matter how many of them you put together, so the visual didn't work.
The sequence I liked and thought was a step out of the box but ultimately not enough for me. How you get the initiative I obviously missed (I just diced) but the impact of a charge being one fight and then prolonged melee a bit later in the same turn I did like.
The movement was so so slow! Even on a 6x4 it was slow; one side had cataphracts, oh what a waste, they may as well have got off and walked.
Shooting per base worked fine; the lumping in of virtually all weapons jarred a bit but hey. The PoA was obviously meant to make it all a bit different but it hardly seemed to make any difference.
Melee much the same as shooting so same comments but the results did seem to vary quite wildly.
Casualties or hit points. So when is a hit point a casualty and do they accumulate and what is the point of the death roll? This seemed just a bit too clever for it's own good.
Commanders being on a unit sized base (well almost) of 60x40 so that you could slot them into a unit and show them actually fighting in the front rank I really liked. made quite the change from the usual round base and declaring them to be with a unit.
For what we wanted just too many rules and qualifications and if, buts and maybe's which for the tournament style game it is aimed at I absolutely get and hundreds of players love it so fair enough.
That just leaves Swordpoint and Hail Caesar to try out now.
Can't wait to hear your thoughts on Hail Caesar! It's the rule system I've defaulted to, but I'm new enough to the hobby that all I've done so far is collect/paint models, and read rules! Hopefully I've picked the "right" one :D
-
Pete, I think you're right although that was never the intent, I was sure i would find something :)
That said I have now started writing up draft notes for, sequence, movement, shooting etc on an A4 pad - damm :-[
-
If you are VERY quiet... you can probably hear some gentle laughing from on high.
-
I am not surprised Ian - had a feeling for a while you would end up doing your own thing - I look forward to seeing the final result and how you tackle it and what your design criteria are.
-
Hate being predictable lol
-
I knew you would say that Ian.
Can we start the suggestions for the title of YOUR Successors rules?
Phalangite's Lament (someone has already used Pikeman's Lament).
Writer's block, sorry should read 'Pike block'.
'To the strongest' (sorry again, that one is already taken)
"Generals! generals, we are under-achieving in the 'togetherness' department"
(From a TV News room comedy, I forget its title).
'I ain't been piked mum'
Wars of the Successors by WRG (Wilson's Research Group).
Gaming, Selucid, Antigonid, Ptolmey. (Gee SAP!).
Post Alexander (Oops, 'PA' already in use).
The Generals who would be Kings (Too close to TMWWBK ?)
I feel sure Ian that you will come up with a much better/serious title.
-
Dividing The Spoils because that's the title of the book that's currently inspiring me Pete.
-
Better than my suggestions.
Wonder what it would be in Greek.
-
" Sons And Lovers" ah no wait I think that title's been had by somebody.... lol
-
Thank you for input James lol lol
-
Have you looked at Advanced Impetus 2?
I returned to ancients after a long absence after playing the original Impetus rules at a club game in 2012. I found it excellent, I have built 10 armies for it since then including mithradatic successors.
Cheers
Matt
-
So, did my play test of Hail Caesar, standard frontage, 300 points. Well it was quick and strangely that was a problem, but more later.
I liked the formed unit basing, 40mm square for infantry and 50mm square for cavalry, suited my vision and multiple bases to a unit was also a plus, the single basing for skirmishers I didn't like, it was like someone else's skirmish game had spilled onto my battle game, it looked rubbish and as game mechanic they really were a waste of time. What did strike me as strange was the double ranking of cavalry; firstly why? and secondly they end up deeper than a four figure rank pike phalanx ???
The sequence I could live with but didn't actually fire me up, Blue then Red, then Blue :`.
Divisions? Felt all a bit artificial and I'm not sure that the history we have supports the idea either but again liveable with.
The stats. Too much really;Clash, Sustained, Morale Save, Stamina, SR & LR - even Agema cavalry have an SR?, oh and they might be Drilled or Elite or Stubborn or Tough - just too many to flick back to, many of which could have been included in the main body, some of which were pointless - Slings. When I used the lists for my trial game of Seleucid v Ptolemaic most of the stats are the same anyway (as where many of the other armies in the book) and the generals are the same thus making the whole thing a bit pointless. Also the range of generals, Genius to Unfit for Duty, really? The ancient world was a pretty unforgiving place, yes there are a couple of excellent generals and the odd crap consular general but this was needless I thought.
The command and movement was pretty straight forward and I'd live with it but testing every time you want to move (yes I know about Initiative) was tiresome and then varying the test for distance from the general unnecessary. The variance that success could bring of moving up to 3 times in a single turn was too much and irrational, a gimmick that didn't need to be there.
The shooting and fighting worked well enough given the need to use the variety of stats but I have to say I hate saving throws, all that says to me is you couldn't get the kill ratio right the first time and it slows the game. I found skirmishing completely pointless and maybe there's an argument that says there was little effect of such in the ancient world but why then did commanders recruit such troops by the thousand? The melees ground themselves out OK and the idea of going Shaken once you'd hit the Stamina threshold I got but the brutality of failing the Break Test was too extreme; of the nine possible test results, two would see your unit break and that means removable from the board (the board game analogy is deliberate), another three see your unit retreat which in almost all example means getting kicked up the arse in the next turn and breaking. The actual mechanism of a score giving a result for different troop types is fine but if you've painted up and based 32+ figures and after a couple of rounds of melee the whole thing is picked up and discarded you might be a little aggrieved especially when the 8 bases of figures don't reduce in any way, why not just do what other rules do and have one big base?
Generals in combat worked well enough and the risk is quite low so bang them in I say, the extra dice you get is worth the risk.
The inclusion of victory conditions is driven by the idea of having divisions which I've already said is a bit artificial; if you are playing a game and your opponent doesn't want to acknowledge he's beaten you're playing the wrong person.
There are a lot of pages to the rules (it's a book!) so you get a lot of bang for your buck but equally a lot of fluff, overlong and over detailed explanations of the blindingly obvious and stuff that just doesn't need to be there. If someone offered me a game however I'd play, the mechanisms are straight forward and easy to pick up and would be 'fun' a much used adjective which somehow gives a seal of approval to wargaming products these days but they aren't the set for me.
Only Swordpoint left to trial now.
-
Ian, they sound fun.....sorry couldn’t resist. :o
-
Thanks for the detailed like at HC. I admit I was wondering the same thing when it comes to skirmishers/light troops.
-
With all this waffling on about rules I'd kind of lost sight of the original starting point which was the relative cheapness of doing this in the Victrix plastic - all metal in 28mm would be an expensive hit for the two of us who are interested in doing it. So I had another look at the figures and the few metal samples I've bought to maybe do as officers, generals and, now I've looked at the Victrix cavalry again, maybe the cavalry. This is where it gets a bit tricky and I'd value anyone else's input; the Victrix are definitely 'heroic' 28mm especially the cavalry and so matching in from other ranges is going to be more of a challenge than I envisaged. Someone suggested Aventine would fit in well and the sample infantry I've got hold of would seem to do that - any other manufacturers that people might suggest? The cavalry however are a whole other question; the Victrix are massive which has an immediate impact on unit base sizing - 40mm x 40mm has no chance of working, got to be 50mm x 50mm, but the Aventine metal don't mix - it's the horses really, and even as a side by side unit or command stand they look significantly smaller, I also got some A&A Miniatures cavalry and they look even worse - don't get me wrong both Aventine and A&A do some lovely figures and extensive ranges, it's definitely a size thing lol
The question is do we just crack on with all plastic and the relative restriction that gives or do all the cavalry in a large stature metal range? Suggestions most gratefully received :)
-
I don’t think any other ranges will match up with Victrix cavalry even if you swap out the horses. The Warrior metal figures are all quite slight, if nicely detailed. Foundry Successors are pretty chunky, might work okay with Aventine. Crusader Miniatures cavalry are again similar IIRC, although their Ebob horses are smaller (and better.) I will fish out some figures and try to get some comparison pics done.
-
Thanks Adam :)
-
I have a few options shown here- but not really a side by side.
The Victrix and Crusader Horses are in a league of their own. I too find the Victrix horse out of scale (and the horses too well bred) for most ancients. They are well sculpted- but huge and difficult to fit on 'standard' cavalry bases - mine are on 25x75mm and fairly well go nose to tail.
Some of the older figures can ride along but I am not putting them together with Victrix in the same unit. Aventine are nice and fit in with Foundry and *Polemarch (Gripping Beast), as well as my older Newline figures. The Vendels are big and thick but but their horses are smaller in proportions and probably more in scale than the massive Cuirassier horses of the Victrix. Crusader figures have large horses, but the riders are often a bit tiny - as metal cast figure makers often cheat on the rider scale. Old Glory are smallish now compared to the big plastics.
*Polemarch have a nice variety range, but their riders are often 'pig sticking" and have a forward lean on the horses that I always have to saw down. Definitely something to look at for variety.
Ultimately with Victrix cavalry I have relegated to "Lion Rampant" style scenarios where they don't rank up or touch.
http://www.ancientbattles.com/Early_Successors_Armies_JJonas/Early_Successor_Armies_AncientBattles_2020.html
-
Cheers Jeff.
This has become a bit of a tangle.
Given that the Victrix infantry are going to be the core it's down to what will fit with/alongside them. I've convinced myself the Aventine would go with them as command figures etc, are you suggesting the Crusader/Gripping Beast would also work?
The cavalry thing is a real quandary;not only is it what could go alongside/with the Victrix but also what could look 'realistic' facing off to the Victrix foot if we junked the idea of using the Victrix cavalry. I've got figures from the Gripping Beast Arthurian and Timurid ranges and they are fairly chunky but are they chunky enough lol
-
Yeah I suppose I'll join the chorus about the Victrix cavalry. I mean, they're beautiful, but huge. For what it's worth, the one Aventine cavalry figure I have (a Successor general you can see in my own Successors thread) seems like it looks okay next to Victrix infantry, whereas the Victrix cavalry are like part elephant lol
-
I can only offer this as an example.
-
Ian - you could use skirmishers to seize / occupy / contest forward terrain during deployment
-
Nice idea Gregor, just written it down in my 'draft rules for ancients' book which is just as well as I've just junked the whole first draft of my own rules and started again, I'd strayed too far from my original mandate - Lin thinks I'm mad lol
-
Lin doesn't think you are mad, she knows you are a wargamer.
Therefore she KNOWS you are mad.
-
Ian The size problem with Victrix does seem intractable. What if you went 15mm? Think of the cost saving then!! ;)
-
Ian The size problem with Victrix does seem intractable. What if you went 15mm? Think of the cost saving then!! ;)
OR 10mm ????
Or better yet 2mm. Just think of the wonderful (on table) flank marches!
But Ian likes 28mm, so we will not go there.
-
Thank you James and Pete for your scale suggestions but Pete is right I'm a 28mm man so lets not go there. My one foray into a different scale is my large 10mm Franco Prussian forces which now need to be sold to help fund this project.
-
Yup, I thing you are right to stick to 28mm.....some of the models out there are lovely.....besides...I still want to paint a unit of Successor Cavalry! With my eyesight, I can’t see anything that’s any smaller!
-
With my eyesight shall we say, 'Not as good as it used to be' how about we
'sight proof ' our projects? 2mm 6mm 10mm 15mm are all too small. I suggest
we miss out 28mm & move on to 40mm!!!!
Stop laughing at the back & think about it for a while. Pike phalanxes of 60 plus
figures in 40mm, not to mention the cavalry, elephants & scythed chariots... WOW!
Now all I need is a blooming large lottery win.
That would pay for:-
Commissioning a new range of figures,
Paying for (at least) two armies,
Getting a (large) team of painters involved &
Building a wargames room big enough.
-
At the rate we are becoming decrepit, I suggest you do it using action men!
-
I would have countered that with 1:1 scale wargames, but you are already in the Sealed Knot.
-
At the rate we are becoming decrepit, I suggest you do it using action men!
These are an option :)
http://www.expeditionaryforce.com.sg/Catalogue/60-GRK-20-R-Philips-Companion-Cavalry-p-200.html
-
Like it Jeff lol
-
http://www.expeditionaryforce.com.sg/Catalogue/60-GRK-20-R-Philips-Companion-Cavalry-p-200.html
Figures look nice. Would cost a packet to field a full phalanx though.
-
Like it Jeff lol
Just noticed that! 60mm Macedonians! :o lol
-
The 60mm Spartans by Conte Collectibles are fun.
-
http://plasticsoldiers.co.uk/index.php/period/pirates-robin-hood-ancients/
and various other ranges - UK supplier.
-
Successors is a great period, I have about 3000 figures in 15mm Xyston, to cover most options. The armies were collect for the Battle of Raphia.
I have played a couple of good sized games with Hail Caesar, which is my favorite ancient rules. Basing wise I use the case sizes and conventions for Imptvs which, in m opinion, look very good
-
Mr Westbury how is this going? Any progress?
-
Progress? In a pandemic!
The last set of commercial rules (Swordpoint) is laid out on the table ready for me to solo but I'm just not feeling it at the moment, too many real world distractions.
On the positive side, first draft of my own efforts is done and printed for me and Dave to discuss - already noticed a sequencing thing that doesn't work - I'm better when it's on paper.
-
Look forward to see how you tackle this to get the feel you are looking for.
-
So, playthrough of Swordpoint done - just in time for 2nd edition lol
Like HC the basics suited my ambitions; figures on 'proper' bases (40mm square or 50mm square essentially), removal of said bases (eventually) from casualties, individual generals, recognisable phases of play - movement, shooting, melee, etc.
The creating of two forces to play test (Seleucid & Ptolemaic) I had to wing it a little as the sample lists started at Carthaginian and I didn't want to be forced into buying army lists as well - and I have to say the list supplied and the stuff about points on page 8 of the rules wasn't terribly clear. Like several other sets the units have arbitrary values to showcase their effectiveness (in this case Defence and Cohesion) which of course you need the army lists for your particular army but on going through the lists supplied their really wasn't a hell of a lot of difference - most Cohesion was across 6,7,8 and Defence across 3,5,6; why bother?
The sequence is billed as not being 'I go, you go' as if there is something terribly wrong with that idea (I have no preference either way as long as it works), but in fact when it came to the movement phase it was exactly that, based on a dice throw for Initiative, no modifiers, pure luck; it all seemed a bit counter intuitive. Much has been made of Shooting being the first phase of the game (I don't count the housekeeping phase) but for me it really didn't matter, it just meant the skirmishers were less effective having had one less turn of movement for them to get into range or a target get close enough.
Unfortunately the shooting and close combat suffer from that Warhammer hold over of inflict casualties then roll to save - WHY?! The mechanisms are simple enough yes, but why do it twice with the now expected 4 on a D6 to hit (plus or minus a few modifiers) then rolling against the Defence value for an actual casualty? It just makes the process longer and when there is a lot going on the count can get lost - I even confused myself! Both ultimately result in a Cohesion test (morale), with a combat result calculation in between for melees, which is a key decider in losing units - on average you are more likely to fail than succeed.
What I did like about the casualty calculation however was that casualties are counted in figures (eventually ;)), whole bases are removed but 'left overs' are discarded at the end of the phase. I think I might do it slightly differently but a good idea that kept things simple.
I did rather like the Momentum tokens idea; you start with a fixed number and add to your pile from success and use the pile for adding to your Initiative roll in movement and as bonuses in melee, I don't think it entirely worked, the rewards system favours the mobile aggressor overly significantly leaving defensive armies (Harold and the Saxons) at a disadvantage.
Command figures are quite useful for melees (extra dice) and rallying (command radius) and had a value which I didn't quite understand or could work out where it came from so I kept all mine at a neutral value, they are pretty hard to kill however even when in a melee.
The Line of Battle idea where you can spread casualties between the unit fighting and those either side was innovative I thought, it did get a bit messy when I had four pike blocks per side all in melee and it does tend to make the fight into a bit of a grind but maybe that's a good thing for the period I'm trying to do :)
What I did find irritating was all the 'special rules' and important other bits were at the back of the rules and not interlaced with the main rules where they were applicable which meant an awful lot of flicking back and forward. I get why it was done this way, to keep it all together but I don't think it worked.
Overall I got a result fairly quickly with some reasonable sized armies - 4 pike blocks per side with attached skirmishers, a couple of elephants and 6 small units of cavalry per side and nothing stood out too much as being 'unhistorical'.
Would I play them again? Yes, I think so. Are they THE rules? Not completely convinced but this can't go on forever.
So, in terms of the process, we are down to these, Hail Caesar and my own (obviously!). Next stage is play the three sets back to back with a real opponent and make a decision - thank god we're in a pandemic lol lol
-
These rules seemed like they have done the best so far Ian! As you say you could easily just delete the saving throws to streamline things.
I came across a ruleset in my bookshelf: Crusader Ancient rules. Have you heard of these? I hesitate to say they will tick your boxes, because I mistakenly thought Vis Bellica would do that, but they seem very flexible.
-
Good morning, for some reason haven't tracked this correspondence before. I too have been building a Successor/Seleucid army for the past two years. After a lot of deliberation I eventually went metal. Mainly Aventine with some Foundry javelinmen as for some reason Aventine don't produce them, plus Gripping Beast scythed charioyr from their Polemarch range. These all match very nicely.
For rules my go-to set is Simon Miller's "To The Strongest". I guess not everybody's cup of tea, but works well for us. Also perfect for running a game on Zoom.
-
I hear rumours that you are looking to continue putting ideas together. I am happy to read through / try a few solo games out.
-
James, I would say 'bring along those rules and I'll take a look next time we game' but no chance of that happening :( Sorry about Vis Bellica, I did try :)
Gregor, get Pete to include you in our fledgling e mail chat and I'll send you a pdf once I've finished the army lists.
-
So, with the end of the year of infection approaching I've finished the first draft of my rules set and sent it out to a few local players to get their input - quite nervous about this :) Going to read up a bit more over the holiday and then maybe play a couple of solo games based on the same criteria as the various commercial sets I tried.
In the meantime, Happy Christmas 8)
-
That's my Christmas holiday reading sorted then.
-
So, Zingara has played a game with the rules and sent me some feedback - this is getting serious lol
-
Lots of elephants - so what's not to like. I thought I had too many in my collection - but can happily field them all here. lol
Had a couple more games, and they certainly give an impressive looking phalanx, none of this little block in the middle of nowhere. Would be nice to try them out against an opponent of course.
Looking forward to the views of others.
-
More feedback from Zingara and some proper thinking for me to do.
We seem to be on the right track but the fine tuning will take a while and not helped by being unable to physically play and chat with anyone.
-
It has started a tiny candle of enthusiasm for Ancients for me, so long as I can do it as cheaply as possible in between other things....the thing that amazes me is what these Bronze Age people thought was so important to fight about. After all everybody's life was basically the same, you either kept animals or grew your food in the ground, or caught fish if you lived on the coast; tried not to die of disease or injury...put food by for the winter... that must have took up most of their energy...no toilets or plumbing, writing only just invented no printing or books...plenty of space for everyone so what does it matter who is in charge? And yet they flock together to go to different countries and kill each other.
-
It has started a tiny candle of enthusiasm for Ancients for me, so long as I can do it as cheaply as possible in between other things....
I've gone and ordered some 20mm Seleucid Phalangites from New Line Designs. More Painting to do!! At least I can morph most of the other troops from my collection.
-
I've gone and ordered some 20mm Seleucid Phalangites from New Line Designs. More Painting to do!! At least I can morph most of the other troops from my collection.
20mm? Do you already have a collection in that scale? I would have thought it would be a bit limited apart from plastic box sets?
-
I already have a load of 1/72nd plastics - mainly HAT, but Italieri etc thrown in. 20mm will be a little shorter, but in separate units won't notice much.
-
Feeling the weight of responsibility now Gregor :)
-
So, played a 2nd game of my rules with the amendments from the 1st and Gregors considerable input. Very pleased, game had a better flow, some of the original issues seem to be resolved or at least on their way to being resolved. The unit size changes will improve the visuals I think - difficult to tell with cardboard cut outs :) and some of the tactical problems I wanted to create are there. Still a way to go but at least this time I only had half an A4 sheet of issues rather than several lol
-
So 3rd game played as has Gregor and its coming along nicely, moving into the fine tuning stage now rather than the "shit, that doesn't work!" phase.
Going to spend a bit of time consolidating the various changes into some kind of errata sheet we can all use rather than "didn't we agree to change......?" before the next play through.
The time is also fast approaching of agreeing on how many boxes of plastics we are going to buy and then getting into the painting cycle but the important decision is going to be whose metal cavalry to use - I did a bit of a data sheet on what is available, at what price and that was quite revealing.
-
From what you said you wanted in the rules, you went a different route than I would have. However, I am still really interested in hearing more about the high-level mechanics you came up with and why you are using them.
It is the wargame designer in me!
-
So, the rules are in a decent enough state to play without too much "what I meant was....! which means I can now concentrate on the army lists - everyone loves an army list!
Original plan was to do a matrix style spread sheet and list all the troop types down one side and then have the different protagonists across the top and just tick the boxes. Well that failed and it looked crap so now doing 'proper' lists and the more I read the more I feel the need to do another army list! What was originally the usual culprits, Imperial, Seleucid, Ptolemaic, Pyrrhic, etc has now grown somewhat but I'm having great fun doing it.
Also the painting slog has begun, 3 units of Greek mercenaries are done and an elephant, just need Victrix to get their act together and restock the pikemen!!
More detail on the blog at westburywargamers.com
-
It will be impressive when finished, as are all of the projects
you and Dave do.
-
Thank you Pete, how very kind.
-
Yup, looking forward to seeing the game in progress with all those minis!
-
So, rules and lists done as well as they can be until fully fledged painted armies can get stuck in and break them lol
If anyone is interested in a pdf to have a go with or just critique then get in touch at our email westburywargaming@outlook.com
-
All that is needed now is the armies !! How long are you figuring on that taking Ian?? Certainly look forward to an interesting panoply. If not going to get them all done at once may be worth having some games with smaller points totals - see some progress :-).
-
All that is needed now is the armies !! How long are you figuring on that taking Ian?? Certainly look forward to an interesting panoply. If not going to get them all done at once may be worth having some games with smaller points totals - see some progress :-).
I am sure my army for this is going to take a year even at full speed :(
-
Good point on doing smaller games with whatever gets done first Gregor; so far there are 4 units of Greek mercenaries and an elephant so not quite enough yet but by end of June we should have most of the skirmishers plus some peltasts and a goodly number of cavalry done so the summer could see us doing some smaller encounters.
-
Sounds like you are making good headway. I'll be having to book some time off work to come and see :-).
-
You'll be most welcome :)
-
I've gone and ordered some 20mm Seleucid Phalangites from New Line Designs. More Painting to do!! At least I can morph most of the other troops from my collection.
20mm? Do you already have a collection in that scale? I would have thought it would be a bit limited apart from plastic box sets?
That's what I did Newline has a good selection of miniatures for this period in 20mm that you can supplement with 1/72 plastics. Here is my army split into imaginatively named Eastern successor and Western successor
(https://jonsotherwargamesblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/wp_20180417_20_03_25_rich-2.jpg?w=640&h=480)
(https://jonsotherwargamesblog.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/wp_20180417_19_49_24_rich.jpg?w=640)
(https://jonsotherwargamesblog.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/wp_20171217_19_51_48_pro.jpg?w=640)
(https://jonsotherwargamesblog.files.wordpress.com/2017/12/wp_20171124_19_25_17_pro.jpg?w=640)
-
Nice set up Diablo. You even have Cantabrian circles, & I haven't
seen their like in many a year.
-
Nice set up Diablo. You even have Cantabrian circles, & I haven't
seen their like in many a year.
It was all the rage back when I played WRG 6th edition in 1980 something :D. But mostly blame to many hours playing Rome Total war lol
-
Your rendition looks believable on the table-top.
I remember too many games where a bird's eye
view would have looked like the Olympic flag lol lol lol
-
Amazing what can be done with 20mm, good on you Diablo.
-
These look very good. You get to use them much? What rules are you using with them? Those cantabrian circles are a nice touch - and not seen them since, well the 80's I guess :-).
Those phalangites I ordered in January I am just starting to paint now - the last of the 20mm figures to be done to join my 1/72nd - mainly HAT.
-
These look very good. You get to use them much? What rules are you using with them? Those cantabrian circles are a nice touch - and not seen them since, well the 80's I guess :-).
Those phalangites I ordered in January I am just starting to paint now - the last of the 20mm figures to be done to join my 1/72nd - mainly HAT.
Only in solo games. I based them up to use with either Hail Caesar rules (though my 5x4 foot table feels to small for these rules to work well) or Crusader ancients rules https://crusaderpublishing.com/crusader-ancients-rules/ (https://crusaderpublishing.com/crusader-ancients-rules/). I have been wondering about trying the To the Strongest rules though which I'm hearing good things about.
-
Diablo Jon, I can heartily recommend TTS. I’ve now used them for about 5 years and they work very well. They do require some investment as you need a gridded mat plus plus chits, but it is relative peanuts compared to the cost of a pair of 28mm armies. I have run about 20 games via Zoom during the COVID lockdown and indeed am running a Greek vs Achaemenid Persian game on my 6 x 4’ table tonight.
-
Diablo, TTS is a bit like marmite, some people love it - SJWi :) and some people really dislike it - me lol
If you can find someone who already has it and understands it that could be a way forward; of the other commercial sets both Hail Caesar and Swordpoint have got a lot to offer (and your basing style would fit both), they just didn't quite do it for me.
-
Westbury, I can see that TTS could be marmite. I've just finished my weekly game which this week was Hoplite Greek vs Achaemenid Persian and can see why some people would not have enjoyed it. Other rules that seem to have good reviews are "Sword and Spear" sold by Great Escape Games and "Mortem et Gloriam" sold by Plastic Soldier Company. I've never played them myself but I know they have their devotees.
-
A lot of folks also like L'Arte de Guerre as well.
-
20mm Seleucid Pikemen. Newline Designs. No matter how I rotate - seems to come up contrarily.
-
I thought my ability to load photos was crap Gregor but now ...... lol
-
When I stand on my head they look nice.
What did you end up using for the pikes?
-
I thought my ability to load photos was crap Gregor but now ...... lol
Ach - truly irritating. The upside down ones I rotated 180 degrees, still upside down, and rotated them back again - still upside down. I think it is playing with me.
Pete - florists wire - certainly thin - I put some gold and red near the spear tips just to give me a faint chance of seeing them !
-
Pete - florists wire - certainly thin - I put some gold and red near the spear tips just to give me a faint chance of seeing them !
Beware the kinks! & I don't mean the 60s Pop group.
I still think the plastic bristles from a new broom head would be better.
-
No Kink shaming! I think the unit looks splendid, once I figured out what it was..... lol
I think it is a right of passage for any successor player to find themselves on the wrong end of a unit of pikes.
-
Beware the kinks! & I don't mean the 60s Pop group.
I still think the plastic bristles from a new broom head would be better.
This is what I've started doing for spears/sarissas. Going and buying a new pushbroom head from the hardware store costs the same as a bag of 40 premade metal spears, and you get like a thousand :D It takes a little work to make them look "sarissa-y", but you can sort of zone out and do them in batches. And they don't break as soon as you breathe on them like plastic spears do!
-
Several people here and on Twitter extoling the virtues of the good old broom head - must remember when it all goes badly wrong with the Victrix pies :D
-
Several people here and on Twitter extoling the virtues of the good old broom head - must remember when it all goes badly wrong with the Victrix pies :D
You'll never go back once you do. Or, you'll be like me, and be working on a unit you started before your "conversion" and course yourself that you didn't start worshipping at the Altar of the Broom sooner! lol
-
The Victrix Successors pikemen are in (as opposed to the Macedonians), looks like I'll have to get another 5 boxes (maximum discount) lol lol
I've thought about whether to be bounded by the tyranny of who had trousers and who didn't - like we really know ;) but have decided that by our time so many guys were changing sides as their generals were defeated that it really doesn't matter. I guess I could do each 4 man block 'the same' and then mix and match the blocks - might work?
Anyway, with these that'll be 8 blocks, plus the 4 hoplite blocks, sundry lights, 6 elephants and 8 units of cavalry, so well on the way I reckon - when they're painted lol
Mercenary Galatians under consideration :o
-
Anyway, with these that'll be 8 blocks, plus the 4 hoplite blocks, sundry lights, 6 elephants and 8 units of cavalry, so well on the way I reckon - when they're painted lol
I really must introduce you to Skirmish wargaming Ian. lol lol lol
-
You did Pete, it was called Fistful of Lead, but then it became Bigger Battles lol lol
-
Ian there is a good old Scottish saying,
'Many a mickle makes a muckle'
i.e. lots of little bits = a big bit.
I first came across this 'system' when I
was still at school (as a pupil, not a member
of staff). We played Lammings Medieval Rules.
You could start with A (one) Knight & a unit of ten Infantry.
Not too long to get that onto the table. Your opponent had
a unit of longbow & you didn't, no matter 10 longbows it is,
ready for next battle. He then had some spearmen, 'Gunna
get me some of dem!' ... and so on. Before long I had more
figures in my 'Skirmish' force than Pete Duckworth had in
his Medieval army. lol
-
The Victrix Successors pikemen are in (as opposed to the Macedonians), looks like I'll have to get another 5 boxes (maximum discount) lol lol
I've thought about whether to be bounded by the tyranny of who had trousers and who didn't - like we really know ;) but have decided that by our time so many guys were changing sides as their generals were defeated that it really doesn't matter. I guess I could do each 4 man block 'the same' and then mix and match the blocks - might work?
Anyway, with these that'll be 8 blocks, plus the 4 hoplite blocks, sundry lights, 6 elephants and 8 units of cavalry, so well on the way I reckon - when they're painted lol
Mercenary Galatians under consideration :o
This is why I can not hang with you guys! I was excited when I painted three units of 15 pikemen from Victrix!
-
One line shout out to those individuals kind enough to give me some feedback on the rules. Thank you :)
-
Stuff actually getting painted and based.
Greek mercenaries, a staple of every Successors army.
-
First of the phalanx and elephants
-
Eumenes' Cappadocian cavalry.
-
Very pretty hoplites! The early period of the Successors has a great advantage in the sheer variety of different types of troops from across Asia.
-
Good Looking troops and units. Progress being made !!
-
So it begins!
Those are looking like a good start, and could be the core of an whole other period to boot!
-
Great progress fella!
-
What's the status a month down the line? Many left the training depot this month?
-
Some psiloi, peltasts and generals done.
Slowly does it.
-
Looking great!
-
The basing works very well.
-
Nice! Who make the generals in the third photo?
-
The Generals are 1st Corps.
-
Looking great Ian. Are you coming to the end of the also rans now and closing in on the phalanx?
-
Gregor, run out of excuses now :D lol
-
At least you have got paint on some of yours. I do think the Macedonians had the coolest ancient hats with the side plumes. Although the Thracian Smurf hats also look good.
-
How is the phalanx training schedule going? I look forward to seeing this project on the table top, should be a feast for the eyes.
-
Phalanx training starts in the new year - have finally run out of excuses.
Some elephants and more cavalry done - hoping to get them based over the festivities.
-
What's wrong with this picture?
-
So, 1st Corps elephant to the left and Victrix elephant to the right, allegedly both 28mm scale. I don't think so :o
This rather buggered up plan A of going Victrix.
Compare also the cavalry. These are the Victrix Companions, way too big when compared to their own elephants.
The 'plastic are cheaper' argument rather fell down with the elephants anyway, because if you buy the 1st Corps 'army pack' of 3 the price per piece is only marginally more than that of Victrix and they actually look like something that would scare the hell out of your cavalry - no matter how big the cavalry are lol
Plastic pikes does however pass the cheap as chips argument so cracking on with them. Yes we do know about flimsy pikes :)
-
I wouldn't like even the small one standing on my foot
if I was a 28mm Successor. :D :D :D
-
Whilst I must admit I personally think the 1st Corps elephants are too large, according to Duncan Head's Macedonian and Punic Wars book we do see two species of elephants used in classical times. North African armies such as the Carthaginians and Numidians would use the smaller African bush elephant, and the Seleucids and Indians the larger Indian elephant. Thus it is wrong to use a common elephant model for all armies.
-
Whilst I must admit I personally think the 1st Corps elephants are too large, according to Duncan Head's Macedonian and Punic Wars book we do see two species of elephants used in classical times. North African armies such as the Carthaginians and Numidians would use the smaller African bush elephant, and the Seleucids and Indians the larger Indian elephant. Thus it is wrong to use a common elephant model for all armies.
I thought this as well.
It really depends on where your Elephants have come from I guess.
-
I hereby stand corrected :)
I'll go with my 1st Corps as Indian and the Victrix as African.
-
I still think the 1st Corps model is huge even by Indian Elephant standards! I can recommend the A&A Miniatures Carthaginian elephant as a very nice model and excellent value-for-money.
-
Westbury
I would carefully reconsider the Victrix Option.
For a few reasons two reasons.
1 The PIKES , they are more than a bit fragile ..... lol lol lol lol lol
2 The figures all require a Transfer ( nightmare to apply ) + cost , and they do look ( to my mind ) far to uniform and incorrect to use.
Overall there is Probably only one reason to use them .. cost .. that it .
Cheers
-
Westbury
Ps Foundry have 25% off and free postage for large orders currently ... lol
Forgot to ask , how many units ?, and how many pike per unit? , also how deep ?
Im thinking of doing 6 x 60 figs , and 10 x 6 deep ( frontage 200mm )
Your thoughts ?
-
Which game system are they for ?
-
Been reading up about the wars of the Diadochi a bit lately. It's devilishly complicated, so many names to remember, and like bloody Game of Thrones with all the betrayals and side-changing, ignominious ends and such.
In the past I had generally skipped things after Alexander and gone straight on to Romans, but I think the decades after Alexander are endlessly fascinating, and very few of that lot around at the time come out of it looking well, to be honest. Would make a great TV show that all falls apart and turns to dogshit in the last couple of seasons, I think.
-
I have all Victrix pikeman and have never had a pike break after a decent amount of play.
-
What's wrong with this picture?
The 1st Corps elephants are not compatible with my 28mm figures.
Here it is next to a relatively medium sized Newline Designs sculpt (from link below*):
https://ancientbattles.com/seleucid_games/SyrianWars/3rd_scenario/raw/elephants_01.jpg
The largest older models were the Vendels which towered above the rest. They were first (and smart) to experiment with resin.
https://ancientbattles.com/Vendel_elephants/epirote_elephants_01.htm
Vendel miniatures were big and thick and might fit that 1st Corps beast. But I never ordered one to try.
Victrix so far has stubby fat African elephants, we will see what they do with Asians. I hope a bit trimmer and less flabby. Elephants have folds not flab.
link:
https://ancientbattles.com/seleucid_games/SyrianWars/syrian_campaign_04.htm
-
Plynkes. I've always thought the period could make a great TV show and in my reading of late am absolutely convinced of it lol
-
Which game system are they for ?
Westbury is writing his own set, I believe the working title is "Spears Won Land". I was interested enough to commit myself to an army!
-
Plynkes. I've always thought the period could make a great TV show and in my reading of late am absolutely convinced of it lol
Absolutely agree, i read Ghost on the Throne a few years ago and since then I always wanted to get more into the details of that epoch but i guess time, as always, comes at a premium.
-
I received my Kickstarter version of Phalanx games Successors reprint.
It is fabulous and just so opulently produced. No better place to start, and even if you just use the game board it is very useful.
I have felt that schematic campaign "box" games work best for the period because there are so many nuances and details.
But the miniatures and markers for the game are fun too, and the women are included as well as Alexander's bier, which might find its way into miniature games!
https://phalanxgames.co.uk/project/sukcesorzy-2/
-
:o Where's the "shut up and take my money!" button???
I'll have to save the link for when it's shipping. Looks amazing.
-
Could make a good campaign game to generate battles
-
I received my Kickstarter version of Phalanx games Successors reprint.
It is fabulous and just so opulently produced. No better place to start, and even if you just use the game board it is very useful.
I have felt that schematic campaign "box" games work best for the period because there are so many nuances and details.
But the miniatures and markers for the game are fun too, and the women are included as well as Alexander's bier, which might find its way into miniature games!
https://phalanxgames.co.uk/project/sukcesorzy-2/
Nice! What sort of time scale does it involve? Could the campaign rules provide a framework for a miniatures campaign, or are battles (and armies) too abstracted?
-
More on components:
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/325348/successors-fourth-edition
Reviews:
Third edition
https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/361814/killing-people-getting-married-organizing-funerals
https://therewillbe.games/articles-boardgame-reviews/2273-successors-3rd-edition-review
-
So, Dave and I had our first 'live' game with the new rules using actual figures rather than pieces of card. Even though there shouldn't be, there is a real difference between the 2D of the card armies and the 3D of figures, same rules, different feel.
We used the points system of the rules to create a Eumenid and Antigonid army and as we were light on pikemen (very light) we justified it as task forces from the main armies ;)
-
I'll do an AAR on the blog but the main take away points were:-
The rules worked - phew :)
Dave hadn't played them at all, even the card versions, but by game end had a reasonable grasp on what was going on lol
Infantry bit went well; slow into contact, skirmishers in front doing their thing, but once they clashed it was fairly bloody - the Antigonid pikes broke the Eumenid hoplites after two rounds of combat with fairly average dice.
Generals in melee's can die - one Antigonid cavalry general bit the dust - a good result rules wise
Cavalry needs some tweaking but I have a cunning plan ;)
Unit morale and overall morale mechanisms stood the test of being used in anger
Some wording needs tightening up - was ok for us but wider play might be an issue
-
Because I've done a different sequence of play to what we're used to we occasionally lapsed into 'standard play' which cocked the game up a bit so going to have to be focussed for the next few games.
We did however get an elephant melee - great fun, and elephants panicking - one Antigonid elephant panicked into it's own hoplites who were then stuck fighting it and not fighting the enemy lol Both were results I was after so pleased with that :)
-
So, a good start, just need to get all those pikes done ::)
Of course in the age old wargames tradition of going down a rabbit hole Dave has decided he'll do 'a few Galatians', why do I know it's going to be more than just a 'few' lol lol
-
Very well done Ian. As is usual, with the games you
& Dave put on, it is very pretty. :-*
I don't think I would ever again go for armies of that size.
-
I don't think I would ever again go for armies of that size.
If they're not that size they're not armies!
;)
-
Abstraction has its place... but there is something really visually appealing about big armies.
I am glad the rules are working as intended!
-
Pete, this really, really, is the last big period we'll do lol lol
-
If they're not that size they're not armies!
I was once told that under Anglo Saxon Law, more than
12 warriors WAS an Army. I do believe there was an
'invasion' of Yorkshire with 22 men. :o :o :o
I'll go with 'Armies' of that order. lol
Pete, this really, really, is the last big period we'll do lol lol
Until the next time. :D
-
Spears Won Land - "Allow you to play the elephants NOT the rules" lol (borrowed +slightly modified from the Lardies)
-
Good to have you're input James, I thought we'd lost you ::)
-
I'm still in ;D just mired down with real life.
-
Lovely looking game Ian, now we just need to see the enlarged phalanx in all its glory. You are well and truly covering this particular interest of yours - is there anything else out there lurking in the background that you would like to cover ?
-
After Successors, you will naturally move to Romans, Indian armies, Classical Greeks, and soon that will morph to the entire Ancient world and then the Medieval, and then Renaissance until you eventually have a project for every period!
:o :o o_o o_olol lol
-
Gregor, thanks for the comment, desperately trying not to have other projects 'lurking' I have run out of shelf space lol
Easy E, Renaissance covered and I've already done classical Greek, but thanks for trying to steer me down the path of madness lol
-
but thanks for trying to steer me down the path of madness lol
If you ever do take that path Ian...
I'm here waiting for you. ;D ;D ;D
-
I just went back and looked at the date of the first posting - May 2020 !! So nearing the two year mark for tracking this project on this thread. Be nice to get the phalanxes rolled out before the two year mark is passed. Rules written and hundreds of figures painted - impressive. Keep up the good work and I certainly look forward to the completed "opus".
-
No pressure there then.😂🤣😅
-
Gregor, yeah but that was two years of pandemic lol
Anyway, quality takes time :)
-
Got side-tracked by Galatian mercenaries.
-
Nice, very nice. :-*
-
Westbury, as has been pointed out you started this nearly two years ago. I've looked back at some of my early posts commenting on figure choices and rules. Your armies look most impressive. I will confess that the Seleucid I finished back in 2020 was much smaller. I normally buy armies sized to fit my normal 6' x 4 ' gaming table plus a few extra units for variety and choice. Just starting a Marian-Caesarian Roman force of a mere 160 figures.
-
SJWi - I think I'm being bullied lol lol
-
Westbury, no bullying just admiration "for a job well done". I am currently yo-yoying between ECW, Caesarian Roman and modern French, with a smatter of 1980s 1/300 thrown in for good measure. I like your single minded determination!
-
I like your single minded determination!
Yup. Our Ian is not easily distracted, unlike the rest of...
Ooooooh SHINEY !!!!
lol lol lol
-
Nice looking fellas…very colourful!
-
In my defence Pete, it was Dave that got distracted but who am I to complain lol
-
Gorgeous looking troops. Is Dave back on track now or are other distractions on the way?
-
No more distractions! lol lol
-
Those Galatians are sumptuous. :-* :-* :-*
-
2nd lot of Galatians done.
-
Also casualty markers as part of our cunning plan when using movement trays.
-
Both units to frighten the non existent pikemen lol :(
-
Dave has done a good job on those Galations,
even if he does think they are Gauls. lol lol lol
-
Very nice.
I feel that people get a little bit boring with Galatians because of the Pergamene statues.
Unfortunately we don’t have an unbiased source of how they actually appeared in battle.
Since they were Celts, and made up of various tribes it seems highly likely that different groups would have different looks.
At least one source describes a Galatian shield wall comprised of armored front rankers. As they settled along the Black Sea and Anatolia, no doubt that also changed their appearances.
The war where the Thracians eradicated the Galatian Kingdom of Tylis sounds like tremendous struggle, hardly mentioned in sources.
-
Thanks JJ, was getting a bit concerned we'd screwed up.
-
Great looking troops as always. Bring on the phalanx !! I look forward to seeing all these on the table.
-
So, with the Galatians done, we thought we'd have another playtest of the rules. This time, Achaean League v Middle Imperial Seleucid - a purely wargaming conceit for the period 281-223 :)
The Achaeans were the more numerous, featuring 4 blocks of mercenary hoplites, 3 lots of peltasts, 5 groups of psiloi, 2 units of Tarentine skirmish cavalry, a unit of League armoured horse and a unit of Greek mercenary horse.
The Seleucids were better quality with, a single unit of Hetairoi, 3 units of Xystophoroi, 1 unit f Tarentine skirmish cavalry, 3 elephants, 2 units of Galatians, a single unit of Cretan archers and a lonely only pike block.
The Achaeans deployed their infantry across the table width, alternating peltasts with hoplites, covering the front with slingers & archers and protecting the flanks with javelin men. The plan was to edge forward and hope their width would prevent the Seleucids from turning their flanks.
The Seleucids deployed all their cavalry on the right hoping to bulldoze their way through and get into the rear, the elephants were the sole centre tasked with just messing up the hoplites, the Galatians on the left were tasked with turning the Achaean right by pivoting on the pike unit to their own right.
-
Once deployment was revealed and both sides started moving the Achaean cavalry reserve knew where it needed to go, the left! Forgot to say, the savvy Achaean player deployed his cavalry at the rear so as to be able to respond to where the Seleucid cavalry were :D
-
The opening couple of turns was quite naturally occupied by the skirmishers and elephants exchanging fire but, as per the plan, the Seleucid cavalry homed in on the Achaean left.
-
Over the next couple of turns things seemed to go the way of the Seleucids; they cleared off the javelin men protecting the most left hoplite unit, and 2 of the elephants crashed into the 2 centre hoplite blocks - there was never any hope of defeating the hoplites but it tied up those units for quite a while.
The one down side for the Seleucids was that one of the Xystophoroi had a failure of morale from missile fire and stood in place making an even better target :(
For their part the Achaeans were scrambling their cavalry to meet the Seleucids.
-
Now it started to get interesting.
Two of the elephants died :'(
The Seleucid pike mixed it up with one of the peltast units and kicked them into touch, one of the Galatians got into it with one of the hoplites but were pushed off - timely intervention of their commander to steady morale and the other Galatians mashed the javelin supports.
The Hetairoi charged into the left hoplites and nearly did enough damage to force them back but not quite so this settled down into how long it would take for the hoplites to finish off the arrogant nobles - they didn't lol
-
The next couple of turns was the Achaean cavalry trying to prevent the turning of their flank - this didn't go well :-[
In a couple of hard fought melee's the Achaean cavalry were essentially destroyed, their shattered remnants exiting the battlefield leaving 2 of the 3 Xystophoroi free to roam although to balance this it must be said that the 3rd unit had been reduced to a few remnants by continuous missile fire from slingers and peltasts and the remaining elephant was routing off into the distance - disappointingly we didn't have any rampaging elephants in this game :-[
Out on the other flank the one Galatian unit was also free to roam.
-
With both Achaean flanks turned we called it. The Achaeans were still in pretty good shape but their (invisible) camp was now easy prey and ancient armies didn't like to lose their camp :D Note to self, we need to make a couple of camps.
Rules wise it went well if a little slow. The units seemed to perform in an historic fashion and the feel seemed about right. A couple of ongoing rules clarifications and actually remembering my own rules on a couple of occasions would have helped the speed but still early days. Overall going in the right direction.
For those who are bound to comment, two more pike units are painted but they aren't based :'(
-
Note to self, we need to make a couple of camps.
What sort of thing/size are you thinking of Ian?
Let me know, & give me a budget I can work with & I'll do it.
-
What about using Dave’s/Pete wooden palisade as a base ?
-
Well, that seems like a pretty historically accurate outcome to me!
-
Thank you EasyE
-
looks great!
cheers
Matt
-
Another feast for the eyes Ian. Thanks for posting. Look forward to seeing even more eye candy on the table when the phalanx is complete.
-
when the phalanx is complete.
What's missing from this battle?
"Don't tell him Pike!" lol lol lol
(Dad's Army)
-
"For those who are bound to comment...."
-
Great looking armies fellas! Very colourful and nicely painted.
-
Two pike blocks awaiting basing - see we are doing pikes lol
-
we are doing pikes lol
Ian, I see your point, point, point, point etc. etc.
Well you get the point. :D
-
Ian, I see your point, point, point, point etc. etc.
Well you get the point. :D
Pete.
Pointless remark. lol
-
Pete.
Pointless remark. lol
Way to stick it to him!
-
How many more pike blocks are you planning on Ian ?
-
3 are done so 5 more to go :o
-
The end is in sight !!! Nearly half way there on the home straight.
-
This is starting to look better now :)
-
Oh yeah! Those look the part!
-
So, another game trialling the rules, this time Eumenid v Antigonid and with more pikes.
Eumenes had the Argyraspides and a levy pike plus hoplites in the centre with the right flank comprising Cappadocian cavalry and one unit of Xystophoroi and the left flank a couple of elephants.
Antigonus had one unit of pike flanked by a couple of hoplites in the centre and was relying on his cavalry heavy flanks to win the day for him; Xystophoroi and elephants on the right and Medians and an elephant on the left.
-
Early moves were all about the cavalry.
The Cappadocians and Medians clashed and spent most of the game fighting back and forth which eventually saw the defeat of the Cappadocians. On a rules note, this still needs a bit of work, nearly there but not quite.
On the Antigonid right flank the Xystophoroi made hard work of getting past the Eumenid elephants and supporting lights and although they did eventually turn the flank it was too late.
On the fun side we had an Antigonid elephant go into panic mode and after running through both sides light troops end up impaled on the levy pikes effectively pinning them. From a rules perspective this worked just how I wanted, not every elephant will panic but when it does it can be a bit of a mess and quite fun.
-
The centre was of course the long slog to a clash of pikes.
The Eumenid levy were rather derailed by the elephant and so spent most of their time killing it - well them really given that one model represents a 'squadron'
One wing of hoplites were first in and given that it was an even match this swung back and forth until the Antigonids broke. An interesting side bar was that both players committed generals to steady their men and both had a brush with death but survived.
The big deal was of course the Argyraspides committing for the first time and ultimately prevailing - well worth the outsourced paint job lol
It all got a bit historical after that, the Antigonid centre was busted but they did have what was left of their cavalry roaming about which meant the Eumenid baggage was vulnerable - good job we haven't got round to modelling it yet lol lol
-
Overall it worked. We had an enjoyable game, it felt fairly historical and the rules are working well for us.
Along the way we had two elephants killed, one due to pikes and one from skirmish shooting, we had a Eumenid elephant successfully charge the flank of a hoplites unit - this was what finished the Antigonid centre and the work done on the 'extras' like the casualty bases paid off visually.
Going to pause for a month or so now to get some more pikes done and then have a purely pike clash and see where that takes us.
-
Super cool!
-
Great looking game. I'm a fan of casualty bases, although the extra prep and cost is always an issue.
-
That’s a very impressive looking game!
-
Another elephant joins the ranks
-
Stunning gorgeous spectacle Ian. Thanks for posting.
-
On a whim we had another game. Seleucid v Achaean League again but this time the Seleucids had more pikes.
-
The Seleucids went against tradition and deployed with their Galatian mercenaries on the right and their good cavalry on the left with the 3 pike blocks and 3 elephants in the centre covered by minimal psiloi.
The Greeks deployed in one long line of hoplites across the table interspersed with peltasts and covered by significant numbers of psiloi with the cavalry in reserve.
Once deployment was revealed both sides began a general advance and the Greeks started redeploying their cavalry to match the Seleucid cavalry wing with the veteran Tarentines out pacing the Greek formed horse.
-
On the Greek right the Tarentines did a sterling job of holding up the opposing cavalry and things stalemated here for a couple of turns.
The more exciting action was on the Greek left where the much vaunted Galatians had a bit of a bad day. Taunted by the psiloi the lead unit attempted a charge and failed :-[ which rather stymied the one behind - by trying to avoid the one bit of significant terrain on the table the units had ended up one behind the other so couldn't bring their weight to bare.
To sum up much to and fro both Galatian units left the field having had minimal effect, one in retreat and one in rout :-[ :'(
-
On the cavalry wing things eventually came good for the Seleucids with the Hetairoi doing the heavy lifting and the Greeks being sent packing either back to their camp or off the table, helped somewhat by the death of their commander in a desperate melee.
-
It was the centre however that sealed the fate of the Greeks.
The elephants weren't so effective this time round and two of them got held up by the peltasts but the Seleucid pikes ground on; the silver shields routed their opponent and one of the others chased another hoplite unit off a hill where it thought it was safe lol
And then it was over, the remaining two hoplite units withdrew, leaving the field to the Seleucids.
-
I just realised I got a couple of the pictures in the wrong narrative, apologies :o lol
As a game it played well. I thought it might have been a bit long but Dave disagreed. Again nothing major just some minor tweaks so that was good.
-
Another feast for the eyes. Thanks for posting. Have you worked out the tweaks you would like to test ?
-
Three more pike units and the Hypaspists based up and ready to go. Project nearly finished now.
-
Wow! Impressive stands!
-
Very colorful! Must have been a joy to paint.
The shields on the Hypaspists are great!
-
That is a very impressive collection!
-
New units means time for another game :)
This time, Perdiccas v Attalus, in other words the Imperial army v one of the break away satraps.
The Imperial force had all the good stuff and made good use of it. The Hypaspists were deployed on the left of a line that occupied the centre of the battle field; next was a unit of Pantodapoi (Persian pike), then the Argyraspides, a couple of elephants smack in the centre, another unit of Pantodapoi, then the veteran Pezhetairoi and 3 units of of Hetairoi.
The Satrapal force was more numerous so extended past the Imperial line but was more variable. Their right wing comprised all the cavalry, 3 units of satrapal cavalry screened by 3 units of skirmish cavalry and backed by a lone unit of Xystophoroi; the centre then extended across the field with a unit of peltasts, 2 units of hoplites, 2 units of phalangites sandwiching another unit of peltasts and then the last peltast unit on the end, all screened by a various psiloi units.
-
Once the armies were deployed the orders for both sides were the usual 'advance and get stuck in' except that Attalus has positioned himself with the cavalry wing and planned to lead it in a sweeping move around the Imperial left flank >:D Seeing the deployment, Perdiccas realised what was goin to happen so spent the first couple of turn countermanding the orders of his cavalry and sent them on a long gallop across the back of his lines. Tension already!
-
In the opening moves the Satrap centre trundled forward while the cavalry headed for the flank while the Imperials essentially split about the centre, the 2 right hand pike heading for their opposite numbers while the left 2 plus the Hypaspists and the elephants wheeled left to try and shut off the route round, which meant the loose order Hypaspists got out in front and the faster elephants veered towards the peltasts on the Satrap right.
-
The bulk of the early action took place on the threatened Imperial left. In trying to avoid the fast approaching Hypaspists the satrap cavalry wheeled past and presented their flank to a volley of arrows which shook one of the units and pinned it in place creating a bit of a road block :-[
With the clock ticking another cavalry unit got into it with the Hypaspists and that didn't go well :'( The great outflanking move was not going well.
The skirmish cavalry were doing a decent job of getting in the way of the pikes although the arrival of the elephants spooked the horses, fortunately the peltasts started doing some damage to the grey beasts.
-
Over on the other side of the battle the slow advance was favouring Attalus as the more numerous skirmishers were annoying the Imperial pike and creating a level of caution in the Persian pikemen.
Ultimately we got into a clash of pikes which after several rounds featuring several opponents - one unit of peltasts deserves special mention for briefly duking it out with a pike block before being completely crushed lol The upshot was that the Persian pikes broke and fled to the camp, pursued slowly by their opponents and several skirmish units hoping for some loot, the Argyraspides punched through their opponents line but this just created the situation of of it and it and the other opposing pike just circling each other like two dreadnoughts trying to get into position to fire.
-
Back with the cavalry, it continued going horribly wrong; the Hypaspists essentially chewed up 2 units and a 3rd was on it's way to the camp to lick it's wounds - rallying at the camp is a one shot deal, it didn't :'(
The elephant/pike advance continued, forcing the skirmish cavalry back and unhinging the peltasts from the main infantry line, the only consolation was that the peltasts killed their elephant but this was all a bit 'so what'
-
Attalus now got a bit desperate; he could see the enemy cavalry finally arriving, so trusting to the gods he rallied his one companion unit and led it straight at the lead enemy unit gambling that a good result would affect the morale of the other two.
Alas it was not to be and Attalus died with his men when the unit was wiped out :( :'(
-
The death of Attalus sealed the game. We could have played some more but it seemed a little redundant.
As a game it played out well enough but on reflection we shouldn't have used the bigger table, with slow moving troops it can tend to make the game a bit ponderous and the extra width encourages players to deploy very linear and with no depth. With more figures of course.......... lol
The rules are playing fine, a couple of niggles but nothing to worry about and we did completely forget a couple of things that unfortunately skewed several test results. I did have a couple of "well I'm not sure about...." moments but then gave myself a bit of a slap and reminded myself that the alleged worries were exactly what I had written in my original plan!
Another one soon I think.
-
Looking good and a nice spectacle of a battle!
-
The pike blocks look very impressive Ian.
-
Cheers guys.
-
That is a very impressive collection and battle! So many well painted figures to look at!
-
A great collection and a great battle!
-
Ian, is this the project completed or are there more units to do up ?
-
Gregor, 3 more pike blocks in progress along with the command stands then that's it. James has made me a deal on a couple of Thracian units which will be suplemental down the line.
-
It is spectacular Ian. Have you been using the bribe / treachery aspect of the rules ?
-
Been concentrating on the boring mechanics Gregor but good reminder!
-
Pictures of the completed collection - yes I know it is dangerous for a wargamer to say a collection is complete lol lol
-
Bravo and well-done! Nothing like finishing a project!
Now, I look forward to more battle reports.
-
That is a very impressive collection! Looks great!
-
A great looking collection, whether or not it is completed.
-
A great collection. It’s hard to be complete since there always is a moving target, and occasionally new evidence that might change the look of how armies are depicted. Never really finished when new sculpts come out that lure you back in.
-
I would describe it as a mature collection- it has reached the point where it is self contained and has everything needed for most scenarios, and you can work on other projects without guilt, but it may continue to grow a bit over time as you add a unit here or there.
Few of my collections reach maturity, the attrition among juveniles is fierce.
-
I like the idea of a "mature collection" rather like me! lol
-
Well done for completing / maturing the collection. Look forward to seeing them in action one day. So - what is the next project on the horizon?
-
Gregor - No More Projects! lol lol
-
I like your mature collection Ian!
Can you explain the single horseman sharing his base with a big rock? What's going on there?
-
James; ran out of figures lol
-
James; ran out of figures lol
Ian do you mean it should have been another pike block? ??? lol
-
Having "finished" the project, Dave and I had a set to with the rules proper, spending time choosing armies to an agreed points value and scouting for terrain. The armies were a Ptolemaic and Eastern Satrap army of the early Diadochi period.
The Ptolemaic force was a hard core of 4 pikes and 2 hoplites covered by Cretans, Rhodians and some javelin men, the pikes comprising 1 guard regiment and 3 veteran regiments; the cavalry comprised a right wing of 2 Hetairoi units and a left of 3 settler units.
The Satrap army was more eclectic; the infantry comprised 2 levy pike, 2 'normal' pike, 2 hoplites and 1 unit of peltasts all covered by Cretans plus Greek slingers and javelin men plus a couple of elephants out on the edges; the right wing cavalry was 1 unit of Xystophoroi, 2 units of satrap horse and a supporting unit of javelin armed skirmish cavalry, the left wing cavalry was 1 satrap unit and 2 units of skirmishing horse archers.
-
Oh boy! I am looking forward to this battle.
-
In the tradition of Successors battles it was all about the cavalry wings to start.
The Ptolemaic right wing surged forward trusting to it's superior class to sweep away the opposition and then get into the rear of the pikes. So much for the plan lol The horse archers were very effective and the single elephant (representing a squadron) was an annoyance. resulting in the destruction of one Hetairoi unit along with the commander of that wing, the other unit did get through but was Shaken and unable to rally due to it's dead leader.
The Satrap right wing fared better in a fairly evenly matched contest and by game end had seen off the opposition settler cavalry and were pursuing them toward the Ptolemaic camp.
Rules wise it all played out rather well; getting the initiative is a key decision and adding leaders to small units is a high risk strategy.
-
File size thing stopping me loading :(
-
As the cavalry struggles wound down the infantry masses trundled forward.
The Ptolemaics got the initiative at the crucial point and launched their line forward except that several units failed to charge :( >:( lol
3 units failed to charge and a potential disaster was facing Ptolemy as the initiative passed to the other side who experienced a similar failure with 2 of their units.
There then followed a scampering of leaders as they attached themselves to reluctant units and eventually everyone who could get in was in.
From a rules perspective I was initially a bit concerned but within another turn all was as I envisaged which was a more staggered set of fights rather than one long solid mass.
-
As the push of pike settled down, the left wing satrap elephant got spooked from javelin fire and stampeded through it's own skirmishers and across the ground separating the pike lines to wind up in front of the Ptolemaic guard who charged in and cut it/them down.
-
The battle of the pikes finally resolved itself decisively in favour of the Ptolemaic's; both the opposing hoplite units routed and 2 of the pikes, one of which was being encouraged by the army general (Peithon) who fell gloriously :o
This was the decisive point, regardless of cavalry success, the scale losses on the routing units varied between 12 and 30% with no hope of rallying with their general dead. The remaining pikes straightened their weapons and swapped sides.
-
Overall the game played well. It looked good and the mechanisms worked. I'm sure we'll do a bit of tinkering around the edges with both the rules and the collection - cataphract cavalry and scythed chariots have been discussed lol but we're done and so now can look forward to doing different iterations to see how they play out - Galatians, Thracians, etc.
As a side bar note, the other elephant eventually got shot down by the Cretans and the Thracians did nothing >:(
-
That looked glorious! So many beautifully painted figures beating the crap out of each other! It sounds like the game was fun and generated a number of unexpected events, while producing a plausible outcome. I’m looking forward to more battle reports and hearing about the rules as you develop them.
-
Camps completed, ready for rallying and looting
-
Ian - good looking bases - is that it for camps or will there be another 2 bases ?
-
Very lived in and evocative.
-
Gregor. Two camps of two bases each, so in theory if we did a game of multiple armies a side like Ipsus we could have a base per army. It's a dream.
-
Refought the Battle of Paraitacene recently which took up virtually the whole collection which was nice and served as a dry run for Partizan in May.
I wont do a report just a selection of shots.
-
Early action
-
Later action
-
No elephants were harmed during the making of this post ;) lol
-
Must just be taking a nap then. 😏
Looking pretty cool Ian!
-
Wow! :o Lovely armies.
-
Those are great looking battle scenes.
-
Nice and big phalanx units.
-
Big pike-based ancient armies always look so great. I keep getting tempted to start one . . .
-
Great looking battle! Poor elephant though... :(
-
Great looking game Ian. Presumably a write up on your blog at some point?
-
Messenger figures about to be based, painting by Dave.
-
Nice one Dave.
Just can’t make out the writing on the messages. lol lol
-
Just can’t make out the writing on the messages. lol lol
Urgent rule amendments Bob. lol lol lol
-
They're carrying the army lists lol
-
They're carrying the army lists lol
Come on Ian! They would fill a couple of wagons! lol
-
So cruel Pete :'(
-
So cruel Pete :'(
Well Ian if you followed my example & only wrote Quick Reference Sheets instead
of detailed rules, like you do. The joke would not work. :D
-
Project Creep? Are there rules for messengers? Or pretty figures to place around the camps?
-
There are rules for messengers Gregor but only as a means to deliver changes to orders. Essentially eye candy rather than using markers.
-
Another run at Paraetacene. Victory to the Eumenids.
-
Later on.....
-
Closing stages
-
Ouch elephants hitting cavalry. Looks so impressive! A really big smash up. One thing rules have a difficulty with is the elephant screen, which seems to have been withdrawn to the flanks. Probably because neither commander wanted to have his precious phalangites exposed to the kind of carnage that haunted Alexander's army after the Hydaspes. The elephants seem to spar with skirmishers and each other before the main event, then are pulled away like a curtain to wrap around the flanks. Very difficult to simulate- and who would want to after painting so many nice elephants.
One thing about the Successors, they were ruthless but did not wholesale slaughter each other's troops. Instead they absorbed the losers. The troops were constantly moving from one side to another. Antigonus' army in Egypt melted away to join the Ptolemies with their offers of higher pay, since many of them had been captured at Salamis earlier in an Antigonid victory.
The story of how Seleucus (much later) rode up to Demetrias' phalanx and just pleaded with them to surrender is an interesting anecdote, which reveals that Seleucus knew that he would recognize the phalangites by face and even names, and they him. I think that is why elephants were not launched into the Macedonian infantry or cavalry ranks because that would have caused a grudge that few would be able to erase with money.
Thanks for the super massive display!
-
very nice
-
I think you guys are a little beyond starting successors now! lol Very impressive.
Interesting thoughts on elephants there Jeff.
-
Ouch elephants hitting cavalry. Looks so impressive! A really big smash up. One thing rules have a difficulty with is the elephant screen, which seems to have been withdrawn to the flanks. Probably because neither commander wanted to have his precious phalangites exposed to the kind of carnage that haunted Alexander's army after the Hydaspes. The elephants seem to spar with skirmishers and each other before the main event, then are pulled away like a curtain to wrap around the flanks. Very difficult to simulate- and who would want to after painting so many nice elephants.
One thing about the Successors, they were ruthless but did not wholesale slaughter each other's troops. Instead they absorbed the losers. The troops were constantly moving from one side to another. Antigonus' army in Egypt melted away to join the Ptolemies with their offers of higher pay, since many of them had been captured at Salamis earlier in an Antigonid victory.
The story of how Seleucus (much later) rode up to Demetrias' phalanx and just pleaded with them to surrender is an interesting anecdote, which reveals that Seleucus knew that he would recognize the phalangites by face and even names, and they him. I think that is why elephants were not launched into the Macedonian infantry or cavalry ranks because that would have caused a grudge that few would be able to erase with money.
Thanks for the super massive display!
Great point! The Successor's (especially early on) fetishized Macedonian phalangites specifically. They were a rare and important resource not to be squandered. They also thought that the decisive combat was between the Phalanx, and the elephants, light troops, and cavalry were more of a side show. Therefore, your theory about their reluctance to use some of these other troops directly against the rare resources they wished to recruit makes a ton of sense.
I had never really considered it that way before.
-
Interesting points Jeff and a conversation we had during the game and also about the skirmishers. At Paraetacene there are 179 elephants and at Gabene around 90; that's a lot of big beasts and in both cases strung across the front of the battle line. Added to them are all the skirmishers, at Paraetacene Eumenes had around 17,000 and Antigonus not much less; again, a lot of men spread over the battlefield.
So where did they all go? I acknowledge the precious resource argument but equally you could argue the 'well they knew the risks going in' and where is there to go but forward if you are lumbering beasts or sneak off backwards if you are skirmishers and the long pointy sticks are getting a bit close. The Ipsus example of the elephant screen preventing Demetrius getting back to help his dad could support the argument of pulling off to the flanks or it could have just been dumb luck.
The whole elephant thing also informs the disordering cavalry rules tenant, was it only those cavalry who weren't used to elephants or was it all cavalry at all times and the skill was to deploy away from them hence why they are deployed forward with the skirmishers?
I don't know, I'm just a gamer who has done a fair amount of secondary sources research but that's it.
-
No one really knows, and we never really will.
That's the joy and curse of ancients.
-
The sources say the elephants are withdrawn at Ipsus. At Gabiene and Paraitacene elephants engaged along the front and flanks. The elephant barrier was something Antigonid cavalry had to ride around.
The elephant battle in the center was interspersed with skirmishers.
Again the lack of any description of any elephant vs heavy infantry clash seems to point to the elephants being withdrawn through the gaps in units. Which seems by mutual consent of both armies. One reason is elephants do get tired so maybe both sides decide that it’s a good point to water and stand down than to risk nervous or panicking.
We do not get much info of what was the point of the skirmisher and elephant first line dual as nothing seems to come of it. The elephants part and the phalanx engagement ensues with no more mention of elephant help.
A nice but older source A. M. Devine’s OOB and descriptions of Paraitacene and Gabiene.
-
It's a conundrum Jeff. From a gaming perspective I'm happy for players to deploy historically but then (like in virtually every other wargames period engagement) it's all down to them. In all the games we've played so far with elephants the beasts have effectively acted as road blocks, never powerful enough to overthrow a pike/hoplite block but strong enough to delay a unit while it kills them thus breaking up the nice neat lines; seems to work and I'm happy to go with that. I don't think I'll get much buy in to the rule that says "after 3 turns all elephants must withdraw to be watered" lol lol
-
It is not just elephants that tire.
The big advantage of the Roman legion was the rotation of soldiers.
Fresh Romans against tired Barbarians = victory!
Wot av de Romans ever given us? lol lol lol
-
“Where did they go” that being the light infantry and elephants in front of the phalanx.
Just about everybody avoids this issue.
Bob Bennett & Mike Roberts* at least imply that lanes must have been formed to allow the beasts and skirmishers to retire through the advancing phalanxes. On the flanks of Eumenes and Antigonid battles the mix of elephants and cavalry is given note. Even the detail that Eumenes superior numbers were routed by the lead elephant being killed and causing a rout of the rest. This is an uncommon revelation about the herd leader being a prominent loss- like the general dying that often causes army wide morale tests.
But most sources simply don’t ask the question above because it involves speculation. The Bob Bennett Mike Roberts speculation is simply based on the idea that Alexander’s phalanx was drilled enough to let scythed chariots pass through it- and skirmishers as well.
Joseph Pietrykowski in his Great Battles of the Hellenistic World does not even ask the question. The phalanxes engage and no mention of the elephant screen occurs- except details on the flanks as above.
Jeff Champion in his Antigonus the One-Eyed is most clear about the dangers of the elephants to both sides:
Page 57
"At the same time, the fighting in the centre between the infantry phalanxes had also begun. There are no details recorded of any fighting involving the elephants positioned in front of their infantry. The most likely conclusion is that neither side was prepared to risk the dangers involved and withdrew their elephants prior to the start of the fighting."
Does not answer: Why an elephant screen. How were they withdrawn?
My answers. Why? I reckon an elephant screen precludes a side with elephants from messing with your deployment. The screens seem to cancel each other out. At Raphia the decisive combat on the Seleucid right is not mirrored on the left flank, where the Seleucid screen and Ptolemaic cancelled each other out. Neither side put an elephant screen in front of their phalanx. Why not? Probably because both sides had less well trained phalanxes and the Seleucids had a lot of ad hoc allies forced to serve as heavy infantry. It is clear that at Raphia only the victorious right wing Seleucid elephants encountered Ptolemaic heavy infantry during the rout of the Ptolemaic left wing.
In other actions as the phalanxes reach the decisive distance the elephants are withdrawn.
How? I agree that this is a trained maneuver that the phalanx was ready to implement by quickly side stepping, letting friendlies through and then filling the gaps. The two sides must have simply felt this was the sporting thing to do, and thus there is no real commentary on where and how. Obviously as described at Magnesia having the elephants too close while under combat stress can break this ordered lane situation up cause total collapse. Obviously as gamers we tend to be less sporting about things like this and prefer to try to thread a needle to gain any advantage. So I can agree with "The most likely conclusion is that neither side was prepared to risk the dangers involved." Is the real reason, as doing the opposite risked mutually assured destruction of the precious phalanx and elephants.
*The Wars of Alexander’s Successors 323-281 bc
Volume II: Battles and leaders.
-
No argument from me Jeff and some points to ponder for rules writing.
For my own rules, when the skirmishers are driven off or evade they go back through the pikes by measurement but are assumed to have flowed around so no detrimental effects and experience has shown that, a) this works and b) the skirmishers play no real part in the remainder of the game. With the elephants the rules allow for them to be panicked by the death of the mahout and rampage randomly across the board - 100% historical? I don't think we can ever know, but seems to capture the unpredictability and pure bloody nuisance enough for a game.
Nice to see Bennett & Roberts quoted, have used their two books extensively, very useful.
-
I gather that in late Successor battles, they held back a bit because there was always another day to fight. Very few battles were of an existential nature where the Victor was swept away completely and their forces destroyed. Therefore, you had to keep your forces a "threat in being" even if you lost tactically.
If you lost tactically and all your key Elephants and Phalanxes were crushed, you risked losing your whole kingdom. Better to hold some back, lose a bit, and still be a kingdom-in-being than risk it all and lose everything. You typically only see that happen when the Successor himself is killed.
Therefore, this "campaign" aspect should be present in a wargame for the period if we want players to model similar decisions that the actual Successor's had to face. In a single stand-alone battle players will gladly risk it all for a tactical victory. However, when you layer in a campaign element to the game, players suddenly become much more conservative in their tactics.
-
Therefore, this "campaign" aspect should be present in a wargame for the period if we want players to model similar decisions that the actual Successor's had to face. In a single stand-alone battle players will gladly risk it all for a tactical victory. However, when you layer in a campaign element to the game, players suddenly become much more conservative in their tactics.
Yes, the old scenario, 'The game pack up time is soon. One last move, so I'll throw everything
in, including the kitchen sink. Why not, it might just work & if it doesn't I can try again next
time with all the same figures.
A bit difficult to include the "campaign" aspect without a lot of extra rules, or...a campaign.
AK47 does greatly reduce the 'It is the last move' effect by having a run down 'clock'. AFTER
each move has finished the defender throws a D6 & takes the score of the 'run down figure'
Let us say the score (at the start of THIS move) is at six. If AFTER the move the defender
throws a six, then this was the last move, BUT he could end up throwing all ones (I manage
that quite a lot!) in which case the game would end up lasting six more moves.
In various AK47 games I have launched 'last move' type attacks only for the dice to score
low & give my opponent plenty of time to punish me.
Another nice bit of 'Chrome' in AK47 is the post battle system. Some points scoring (enemy
units destroyed, objectives held etc.) coupled with some random dice, then you look on a
table of results. It is possible to 'lose' the game, but get something from the post battle.
NOT as good or satisfying as a full campaign, but with limited playing time it is better than
a completely stand alone/ one off game.
Sorry Ian for ranting on over your excellent & very impressive thread.
-
Another set to, this time Antipatrid v Eumenid with two of us per side - which made for some interesting tactical decisions ::)
Both sides deployed with their left wings against the table edge and so had their right "in the air" which made the Eumenids in particular vulnerable to having their flank rolled up.
Antipater fielded, one wing of cavalry on the right comprising a single unit of Hetairoi, and two Thessalians; the line then extended across the plain comprising a single unit of veteran Pezhetairoi, two mercenary hoplite units covered by their own psiloi, four blocks of levied phalangites covered by Agrianians and Cretans, and then two units of mercenary Thracians on the left.
Eumenes had enough horse to deploy two wings of cavalry, the right featured a single unit of Xystophoroi and a single Cappadocian unit while the left had two Cappadocian units; like the Antipatrids, the line extended from the left comprising two units of Pisidians screened by an elephant, two mercenary hoplites covered by their own psiloi, two levied pantodapoi pike blocks , the Argyraspides and the Hypaspists screened by three elephants.
-
Seeing that his way forward on the right was blocked Eumenes opted to lead his cavalry across the the front of the army to add weight to the attack on the left - serious mistake! They never got there and wound up trapped in the inevitable centre infantry clash and left the right flank completely vulnerable ::)
The first proper clash however was on the Antipatrid right where their cavalry closed with their Eumenid opposite numbers. In theory this clash should have favoured the Antipatrids, there was more of them and they had opted for attack mode whereas the Eumenids had opted to stand off and throw javelins. Unfortunately the disordering effect of the elephant (which is actually a squadron scale wise) and some nifty javelin volleys saw the remnants of the Thessalians head for the baggage and the Hetairoi got bogged down fighting the elephant. This action occupied most of the game but did mean that by game end the Eumenid cavalry were heading for the baggage.
-
The infantry clash was delayed by the foolishness of Eumenes who managed to not only slow up and disrupt the advance of his infantry but also lose the Xystophoroi in a brave charge against one of the enemy pike who at least were distracted by the fun of killing nobles lol
The elephants were the first in and two of them mixed it up with the Pezhetairoi and one of the hoplite units, ultimately dying but slowing the Antipatrid advance. The third panicked (we love it when they panic ;) ) and ran into the Argyraspides who then missed the battle while they tried to kill their own elephant >:(
-
With the death of the elephants :'( the real fighting could get going and it was here that Antipater was let down by his subordinate and Eumenes had some luck.
The let down was not closing the infantry jaws around the Eumenid neck. By now the Eumenid hoplites and pantodapoi had advanced to engage their opponents but the Argyraspides were stuck fighting their elephant so a gap had appeared which the Hypaspists were desperately redeploying to protect. The Antipatrid commander however was too concerned with getting lined up just right and extracting his skirmishers ("too hell with the skirmishers, no one cares!") and the partly reorganised Hypaspists hurled themselves into the lead Thracian unit and just smashed it up, The ensuing rout bounced them into one of the levied pike who then received the pursuing Hypaspists in a disorganised state and their low morale meant they too headed for a better place along with the uncommitted Thracians who didn't like the idea of their mates running off.
The luck was that the Cappadocian cavalry unit stuck in the infantry mess had a brief moment when the plain was open in front of them and a disorganised hoplite unit that hadn't quite recovered from slaying elephants was just begging to be charged, so led by their commander they got stuck in and forced the Greeks to retreat leaving a hole in the Antipatrid line.
-
It wasn't all wine and roses for the Eumenids as one of their Pantodapoi retreated in the face of the Pezhetairoi advance but the hoplites protecting the flank of that advance fell victim to its opponent so any further advance was unadvisable.
Pausing for a cup of tea we surveyed the field and called it. On the Antipatrid right there was a big open space that the Eumenid cavalry were galloping through in their haste to get to the baggage; the Hetairoi unit had finally seen off it's elephant opponent but really was in no position to do anything useful so the long ride home was probably the best cause.
In the centre it looked bad for Antipater; the Pezhetairoi were still healthy but the hoplites to either side were gone along with their supports so flanks were vulnerable. Over on the left the Thracians had headed for the hills and the four levied pike had failed morale checks, they weren't going to run but they weren't going to advance either, time to walk over to the other side.
-
All in all a good game. Two of the players were complete noobs but still managed to handle the rules ok so that was good and the newness probably contributed to the cautious play.
For me this is done now. I'll continue to post pics of games and any new stuff - scythed chariots under way :) but continually messing with the rules is a road to nowhere and something I'm very guilty of so I've put the file into a print shop for a couple of bound copies and that's it.
Thanks to all those who've contributed ideas and play tested along the way and those who painted the wonderful looking figures.
-
Excellent and proper big battle there!
Where are your scythed Chariots going to be from? I would like to pick a few up myself.
-
Another mightily impressive wargame Ian. Well done.
-
Easy E
The scythed chariots are from Newline Design who have a decent ancients range which doesn't get noticed much.
-
Panicky elephants are about the only thing that has the nerve to tackle the Argyraspids!
-
Ian this is spectacular, well done to both of you!
-
Ian - a project essentially done - well done. Try to resist the temptation to continually add troops. You have put the rules to bed, don't do much more with figures - you can fill the table :). As has been said elsewhere a spectacular array - thanks for posting.
-
Another foray played recently, later Ptolemaics and Seleucids, mainly to see how some additions worked out.
Alongside the usual Kleruchoi cavalry and pike battalions the Ptolemaics featured some Bedouin camelry, some Tarentines and a battalion of Thureophoroi.
The Seleucids had the bare minimum of 'standard' troops, leaning heavily into the more exotic types; Thracians, Galatians (foot & horse), Bedouin and scythed chariots.
I won't bore you with the AAR, suffice to say the rules coped well with the non standard types - phew lol
-
That’s quite the impressive spectacle!
-
Love it!
-
Lovely looking figures. How much project creep is there still to come?
-
Just the cataphract cavalry now Gregor......
-
This thread has been an exceptional resources for someone (me) wanting to start a Ptolemaic army!
-
PineyPhantom
Pleased that the thread has been of some use.
-
this thread is the devil's doo-daahs
makes you want to go 'ooooh shiny'
-
Macsen
More shiny for you :)
-
Your Phalanx certainly looks like a proper Phalanx Ian.
Impressive sight!
-
Agreed! Lovely work :D
-
fabalaba-ding-dong
to quote Leslie Phillips