Introduction
I develop some rules for 3x2 games (similar is scope to Dominion of the Spear but using my own rules), do a little playtesting. Then quickly move on to modifying them for a 6x6 gridded table for a subsequent move to 10x10 grids and larger. Hopefully to then get back to playing through the Peter Sides’ historical battle scenarios.
This post was quite long and stretched out over 7+ battle reports (I am still going). So I have split it into logical parts. This post is a few 3x2 and 6x6 gridded battle reports and playtesting notes.
Background
I have been here before on what to play and use. But this is different again :-)
The 3x2 Rules
The rules are a combination of my own Ancient Battlelines Clash recent rules and Dominion of the Spear (DotS). They are not as nuanced as DotS as I use a one D6 for combat while DotS uses 2d6 (1d6 for each combat unit). But in summary:
Generally setup like DotS. Reserves are allocated to a zone and can move only to that or adjacent zone.
Basically each unit has a Combat Value (CV), normally 2 to 4. Combat is resolved by rolling 1d6 + Attacker value - Defender Value. Shooters do the same but CV is always 2 for shooting and ignore adverse results, and if shooting fails by a lot the defender charge into melee, else the defender does nothing.
The base combat table, and modifiers are
2- Attacker destroyed
3 if Attacker CV > Defender CV, Attacker destroyed, else nothing
4 if Defender CV > Attacker CV, Defender destroyed, else nothing
5+ Defender Destroyed
+1 to CV if flank attacking, (+2 infantry Vs mounted), flanking attacking is combat with an adjacent zone that also has a friendly unit there.
A unit attacked on gentle hill, or a unit with a general, ignores a modified ‘5’ result.
note only the attacker or defender can be destroyed, there is no mutual destruction.
A friendly unit will move sideways if there is no enemy in their zone, and the adjacent enemy unit has no friendly unit in that zone.
So I managed to get it down to 2 modifiers. But I did cheat as some units have special CV values - e.g. warbands are 3CV, except 5CV vs mounted in melee, Elephants are 4CV, except 6CV Vs mounted.
Change Log
But here is the possibly slightly interesting bit to a couple of people. I wrote the rules down, played a few games and every time I made a change, I logged the change. A small insight into playtesting.
After a few playtests:
- I had mounted CV one less than the equivalent infantry and a +1 Mounted Vs infantry. I increased Mounted CV by 1 and removed +1 Vs infantry. There were also a couple of unit specific modifiers removed. This did require an overall modifier to increase shooting to +1 Vs mounted (but this was removed in a second set of playtests - noted this below) and flank attack by infantry Vs mounted to +2, rather than +1.
- Deceased shooting to actual CV (basically went from CV3 to CV2) but modified combat table from the 3-4 result being n/a to if 3: A CV > D CV, A KO, else n/a and 4: D CV > A CV, D KO else n/a. The game will be faster but balances out shooting, and to a lesser extent melee.
- Change PX from CV5, CV3 shot at, 2 hits if shot at, -1 with a hit, extra -1 flank attack to CV5, shot at CV4, flank attack extra +1
- Clarified a flank attack is only if a friendly unit is also in the adjacent zone.
- Clarified that if no friendly unit in an adjacent zone when attacking, then move the attacking unit to that zone . With a friendly unit in the zone, an attacking unit receives no adverse result (this was missing).
- Really was concerned Medium Infantry underpowered Vs shooting. Ran some numbers. Yep. Made them CV4 Vs shooting but realising heading down the path of all non-missile being CV4 Vs shooting. Changed melee values for LI and LC to 1 instead. But that then throws out all the missile Vs missile unit combat, so then more crunching - LI are CV1 in melee Vs infantry, CV3 Vs mounted in melee (CV2 shooting). Seems to give a decent balance and also differeentiation. Also while crunching it highlighted the +1 for shooting Vs cavalry no longer seems required so removed it (needs more testing so still in as a possibility).
- EL was CV4, made them CV5 (think it was an error anyway having them CV4) but CV4 Vs shooting. Elephants were CV3 Vs LI/MI but removed it (elephants had a >50% chance of being destroyed), especially now LI are CV3 Vs Mounted in melee. EL are now the same as CAT, maybe not a bad thing, but should be +1 Vs mounted. Currently now making them CV4 but CV6(!) Vs cavalry in melee. playtesting required.
- CAT are CV 4 shot at, really only to give LI/LC a 1 in 6 chance of routing them. May remove it after further testing - CATs were very tolerant of missiles.
- CH are identical to HA (except infantry will shoot at them better. Thinking of increasing to CV4 Vs mounted and leaving CV3 Vs infantry. This makes them the same as HC Vs mounted and leaves them the same as HA (CV3) Vs infantry. Maybe vice versa - CV4 Vs infantry in melee (as shock) and CV3 Vs cavalry (equal to MC).
- Had to think about terrain and how to make it work for larger games (if I ever get to them!). And most terrain is a gentle hill. Rather than +1/-1 to CV, ignore an end result of 5. The terrain is removed if the unit occupying it charges to a flank attack etc (i.e. attacks that would cause it to move off the terrain).
Anyway, onto some battle reports.
Game 1 Marathon
I have found Marathon is such a great game for playtesting, even with only a few units per side. Shooters Vs Phalanx. Every game is different. For this and my most recent playtests I have cavalry present for the Persians. This is actually the fourth of about 6 games I played. Outcomes varied from an extreme of Persians losing badly to Greeks losing badly. On balance the Greeks won more games and lost a few units themselves.
Greek: 2xPX, 2xHI; Persian: 2xHA, 3xLI, 1xMC
HI represent the shallow phalanx units.
 |
| Setup, Greeks at the top |
The Greek right phalanx charges the Light Persian Archers but rout in the face of the missiles. A poorer phalanx fills the gap.
 |
| Greek phalanx charges the Light Archers |
The centre Sparabara fires at the opposing poorer hoplites. It has no effect and the hoplites charge into melee, eliminating the Sparabara.
 |
| Sparabara and hoplites clash in the centre |
The left flank phalanx charges the Light archers. The missiles do not deter their charge and the subsequent melee sees off the Persian light archers.
 |
| Phalanx does away with the opposing archers |
The centre Sparabara fires at the opposing hoplites. To escape further arrows, the hoplites charge and rout the Sparabara. The cavalry fill the gap.
 |
| The centre Sparabara fires at the hoplites; the Sparabara subsequently rout |
The left flank phalanx charges the light archers that replaced the previous light archers the Greek unit routed. In a repetition of the predecessors, the light archers fire for no effect at the chargers. The Greek hoplites rout the light archers.
 |
| Again, the phalanx does away with the opposing archers |
The best bet is for the Persian archers on the left flank to try and rout the hoplites with arrows. It was not to be and the archers are routed by a charge of the hoplites.
 |
| The Persian’s last hope, the left flank archers |
The Persians are down to one unit and the Greeks have won!
 |
| End |
Moving to 6x6
So I added some simplest movement and activation rules I was happy with to play on a 6x6 grid. I knew it was going to double the length of the rules, and I have not tested them a lot. They are rough and succinct and may have some stuff that is inferred but I have been using them fine :-). If I keep using them past 2026 (as I want to used them for larger games as well) I will put them in a better formatted document with more explanation.
Game 2 - Marathon (6x6)
Greek: 2xPX, 2xHI; Persian: 2xHA, 3xLI, 1xMC
(I actually played this twice as I forgot to take a bunch of pictures for the first game)
 |
Setup; Persians on the left and the Greek thinned out phalanx in the centre |
The centre Sparabara fire t the hoplites, only is hit, the other shrugs off the hits and continues to charge forwards.
 |
| First fire from the Sparabara |
The right phalanx advances into missile fire for no effect so continues to advance on the Light Archers. They archers survive (Greeks rolled a 1) and manage to evade (now out of melee, means they can fire next turn).
The centre hoplites advance into the Sparabara. One gets into melee but nothing happens, the other it hit prior to contact and slows down their advance (not in melee),
The left flank phalanx charges the Light Archers and the archers are destroyed.
 |
| The Greeks contact the Persians |
The right flank archer turns to fire at the phalanx. The latter turns to face. The fire is ineffective and the Phalanx rout the light archers in the melee.
The Sparabara not in melee fires missiles but to no effect. The hoplites charge into contact but the melee sees the hoplites hit. They are already hit and so are routed.
The light archers fire at the phalanx, who are hit. No melee.
The cavalry will do nothing, if the light archers survive a melee they could flank attack the phalanx.
 |
| The battleline with a few less units |
The right Greek phalanx once again charges the light archers and this time make it into melee. The light archers are destroyed!
The hoplites in contact with the Sparabara do better this round of melee and destroy the Persian Sparabara.
The left flank phalanx charges the other Sparabara but the heavy bowfire prevents them from contact, and they are also hit in the process.
 |
| A few more Persian losses |
The cavalry charges the hoplites who are hit, it is their second hit so destroyed.
 |
| Persian success with the cavalry |
The hoplite turns to face the cavalry and inflicts a hit.
The left phalanx destroys the opposing Sparabara.
 |
| End - the phalanx routs the remaining Sparabara |
The Greeks have won!
Verdict
That was interesting and fun. Usually the cavalry either does not have chance for much involvement, or routs. This game they actually routed something!
Let us try another random scenario from my archives as I think I have played Marathon at this small scale about 10-15 times already.
Game 3 - Allia River (6x6) 387BC Gauls Vs Early Romans
I have played this before on a 12”x12” table as part of a 30 battles in 30 days a few years ago https://shaun-wargaming-minis.blogspot.com/2023/12/30-ancient-games-in-30-days-games-11-to.html
Gauls: 2xMC, 3xWB; Roman: 2xPX, 1xMC, 1xLI, 1 hill
The Gallic Chariot is not really a missile armed unit so I am treating it as Medium Cavalry.
 |
| Setup |
The Gauls advance, the Light infantry fire on the Chariot, causing a hit. Next activation, the chariot charges the light infantry.
 |
| Light infantry firing on the chariot |
The Light infantry fail to stop the chariot charge and are destroyed in melee.
 |
| Light Infantry in melee with the Chariots |
The Gauls continue to advance, the left flank chariots advance up the hill to melee with the Roman cavalry. The Gallic chariot suffers a hit.
 |
| Gauls advancing |
The Gallic warbands contact the Roman phalanxes. The right flank chariots turns to assist the battleline.
 |
| Contact! |
One Warband is routed, as it a Roman phalanx.
 |
| The battleline is thinning |
The remaining Roman phalanx melees with a warband but the phalanx routs. The Gauls win!
 |
| Last Roman Phalanx destroyed |
Verdict
That was a bit dull, as it was originally in 2023. Surprising as Marathon is just two battlelines clashing. I think in Marathon it is more interesting as the shooting breaks up the line. I (foreshadowing) redid this battle force and the deployment for later games and it was more interesting.
Interim Verdict
Not sure exactly where I am going with this sequence of games. I have played the next four (all Allia River based games) but with variations of the rules. It is playtesting, and the rules are holding up well with just minor clarifications added. I guess in this sequence I am also looking at:
- What rules to use to play out the battles in a simple campaign (don't know)
- What rules to use for the 10x10 historical battle scenarios that I want to get back to doing (probably these)
- What size battlefield, gridded or non-gridded, do I like to play; may be more than one answer to this (don't know)
I do not think I will get a definitive answer, but will get an answer that fits late-2026 that is subject to change at a later date :-)
.jpg)
