Warhammer Ancient Battles Dark Ages Battle Report

[Stevo]

Hello

I have been away with lots of family stuff and work stuff but have returned and have taken up the challenge of entering the Peterborough Wargames Club Dark Games Tournament in November. Of course up until three weeks ago I didn't have a Dark Ages army so I had to get in touch with the boys (Mark and Andy and now Jonesy) at Footsore https://footsoreminiatures.co.uk/ to get some soldiers.

Last night I fought the first test game. Though I had painted 75 models this only equated to 250 points so my friend Tom loaned loads of models and ran the game for us. Here is a link to the full report https://stevossoldiers.wordpress.com/2017/09/14/dark-ages-test-battle/ but I have to say it was nice to see big units of toy soldiers clashing on a beautiful battle field again as it has been a while!

I think we are losing something as we move to smaller scale skirmish games and I ask you all to pull out your dusty units and try a big wargame again as it feels the whole hobby is heading towards a more skirmish based theme.

Sorry for the ranty bit at the end

Stevo

[Phil Robinson]

Splendid stuff indeed.

[Phil Portway]

Not all of us are going Skirmish. I only really play BIG battles 

http://leadadventureforum.com/index.php?topic=102814.0

[SteveBurt]

I regularly play big battles for Ancients, ECW, Napoleonic, ACW and WW2
I also play skirmish stuff.

[Stevo]

I know there are big battle players out there. Phil your post is truly awesome!

I may have been in a ranty mood! Sorry

[Phil Portway]

I know there are big battle players out there. Phil your post is truly awesome!

I may have been in a ranty mood! Sorry

It did look that way 

I know saga is big now and Swordpoint is becoming popular, but Big battles is much more enjoyable IMHO, and gives me the wow factor (and my painting production line a lease of life). I have played Saga and thought it was OK, but just that OK. It allows gamers who are building their armies a chance to play as they build I suppose!

[Harry Faversham]

Nope, good point, well made. I've got very wrapped up in skirmishing these days then other day when we had a BIG battle. I found myself somewhat intimidated by the size of mi forces...
Me intimidated, who's commanded, a cast of thousands!!!

[A Lot of Gaul]

Very nice looking Dark Age armies, Stevo! Like you, I much prefer 'big battle' ancients to skirmish games.

I know saga is big now and Swordpoint is becoming popular, but Big battles is much more enjoyable IMHO, and gives me the wow factor (and my painting production line a lease of life).

Swordpoint is in fact a 'big battle' ruleset, with a typical army comprising some 100-250 figures organized into 6-12 units. The rules were written by the author of WAB 2.0, and the two rulesets have a number of concepts and mechanics in common.

Cheers,
Scott

[mweaver]

Looks like it was a fun dust-up.

-Michael

[archiduque]

Excellent stuff!

[SteveBurt]

WAB works very well for Dark Age stuff. In fact, that's probably what it is best at. WAB is basically a 'big skrimish' set (just look at the missile ranges; in a big battle set bowshot should be about the same as the frontage of an average unit). I never found it very satisfactory for Classical era battles - doesn't feel like a big battle at all.

[A Lot of Gaul]

WAB works very well for Dark Age stuff. In fact, that's probably what it is best at. WAB is basically a 'big skrimish' set (just look at the missile ranges; in a big battle set bowshot should be about the same as the frontage of an average unit).

Let's grant for a moment the extremely narrow definition of a 'big battle' ruleset given above. It still begs the question of what an 'average' unit represents in a particular 'big battle' ruleset. For example, given a foot bow range of roughly 220m, the  definition given above would be true only for those rulesets that have an 'average' unit with a frontage roughly equivalent to that of a four-cohort wide Roman legion. On the other hand, if the foot bow range given is roughly 4 times the frontage of an 'average' unit, then the unit would occupy the frontage of a single Roman cohort.

WAB has a foot bow range that is 5 x the average unit frontage. And so the 'average' WAB unit would represent the rough equivalent of a Roman cohort. As a point of comparison, here is the same criterion applied to some other popular Ancients 'big battle' rulesets (all measurements assume the use of 25/28mm figures):

Ancient and Medieval Wargaming: foot bow range = 2 x average unit frontage;
Armati 2nd edition: foot bow range = 7.5 x average unit frontage;
Basic Impetus 2.0: foot bow range = 3 x average unit frontage;
Clash of Empires: foot bow range = 5 x average unit frontage;
DBA 3.0: foot bow range = 3 x average unit frontage;
DBMM 2.0: foot bow range = 3 x average unit frontage;
Field of Glory 2.0: foot bow range = 1.33 x average unit frontage;
Hail Caesar: foot bow range = 3 x average unit frontage;
Impetus: foot bow range = 5 x average unit frontage;
L'Art de la Guerre v3: foot bow range = 4 x average unit frontage;
Mortem et Gloriam 1.1: foot bow range = 2 x average unit frontage;
Scutarii 2nd edition: foot bow range = 2 x average unit frontage;
Swordpoint: foot bow range = 5 x average unit frontage;
To the Strongest!: foot bow range = 2 x average unit frontage;
War & Conquest: foot bow range = 3.33 x average unit frontage;
Warrior: foot bow range = 2 x average unit frontage;
WRG 6th: foot bow range = 3.33 x average unit frontage.

So none of the popular Ancients rulesets listed above has a 1:1 ratio of foot bow range to 'average' unit frontage. In fact, only one of them even comes close. So it is clear that other criteria, such as the ratio of movement distances to shooting ranges, are of much more importance to Ancients rules designers. Even so, all of the rule sets listed above that I have tried, play and 'feel' like 'big battles' to me. Naturally, YMMV.  

[SteveBurt]

220 *paces* is a reasonable foot bow range. That's about 150 metres.
Anyway, if you are happy with WAB as a big battle set, so with it.

[Harry Faversham]

Thinking about it, an ancient battle with a couple of thousand Greeks from two city states, could be done 1-to-1.

[A Lot of Gaul]

220 *paces* is a reasonable foot bow range. That's about 150 metres.
Anyway, if you are happy with WAB as a big battle set, so with it.

220m is perfectly reasonable as a conservative maximum range for composite foot bows.
150m is perfectly reasonable as a mid- or effective range for composite foot bows, or as a maximum range for weaker 'self' bows.
Some Ancients rulesets make these kinds of distinctions, while others do not. Either approach is eminently justifiable.

In any case, I am perfectly happy describing any of the rulesets listed in my previous post - including WAB - as a 'big battle' set.

And now to bring this thread back on track...

Stevo - thank you again for posting your battle report and pics!:)