Saturday, 30 August 2025

Battle of Cibalae, 316 AD using Ancients Battlelines Clash

Introduction

This is game 73 in play testing my ancient rules by replaying historical battles.  My last game was using a revision of my own Ancient Battlelines Clash rules and I do like them.  During that time though I have played a lot of Dominion of the Spear.  After a while I decided to try and combine ABC with DotS.  Then went to a gridded game. And finally thought I should keep playing these historical scenarios. ABC is still designed to finish in less than 30 minutes on a 2’x2’ or smaller table; currently using a 6x10 grid on 40cmx40cm table (while the grid on the board is10x10 I am only using 6 rows).

See this post of a bit more detail on the rules and changed since last time.

Battle of Cibalae, 316 AD

The Eastern Roman Empire vs. Western Roman Empire.

Scenario source: Bill Banks Ancients.

Link(s):

Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cibalae

Troops

Lucinius, Augustus of Byzantium


1 LDR, 1 HC, 1 MC, 3 HI, 2 MI, 1 LA

Breakpoint: 3.5

Constantine, Caesar of Rome


1 LDR, 1 HC, 1 MC, 3 HI, 1 MI, 2 LA.

Breakpoint: 3

Scenario

Map: Open.  There is a hill on the deployment edge of Constantine.

Special rules: None.

Deployment

Lucinius, Augustus of Byzantium:

HC* LA MI HI HI HI MI MC.

Constantine, Caesar of Rome:

MC LA MI HI HI HI LA HC*.

This produces:

Deployment, Constantine on the left, Lucinus on the right

Game

Very similar units of both sides so tactically not easy to figure out what to do.  Lucinus’s centre legions are facing slightly weaker units so advance, Constantine advances is legions in response.  Note that activation alternates between units (or groups of up to 3).  Can activate unit/group that was activated the previous turn. 

Both sides advance their legions

Constantine advances his left flank in support of the battleline, as does Lucinus.

One flank see both advancing in support of the battleline

Lucinus advances two legions against an opposing Auxilia and Legion.  They advance only two and not three to leave a legion to protect their flank on the left.  The Auxilia is routed and the Constantine Light archers move to take their place.  Combat is the same as previous versions - roll 1d6 add attacker value, subtract defender values.  1 or less sees attacker routed, 6 or more sees defender routed.  The difference now is a natural 1 is also attacker routed and a natural 6 is defender routed. And on a 2 or 5, both a re routed.  Makes for a fast game.

A clash in the centre

The centre Constantine legion moves to the flank of one of Lucinus’s legions, the other legion advances to protect the flank.  The Lucinus’s legion is routed!

Constantine centre attack!

The leftmost Lucinus legion is in danger of being flanked so attacks the legion in front of it.  This legion is not in melee so turns to face the attacking legion.  The Lucinus legion wins the melee!

Lucinus legion Vs Constantine legion

The leftmost Constantine legion advances to the flank of the Lucinus legion in combat with the Light Archer.  As the Lucinus legion is combat to its front, the attacking legion will not take adverse results.  Note I am torn up whether should put in the shooting units to front do not stop the defender from turning to a flank attack, but choose to keep the rules as they are and simple.  The Lucinus legion survives!

Constantine legion flank attacks a Lucinus legion

The remaining Lucinus legion attacks to the rear of the Constantine legion and routs it.

The Lucinus legion now flank attacks!

Note that while it looks messy it is mainly due to the grid.  I can imagine the various opposing legions finding a gap in the defences of the other side.

The Constantine Light Archers fires at the opposing legion.  Fails to hit and the legion advances into melee and routs the Light Archers.

The Constantine Light Archers and legion

Constantine advances his right flank as this is the only slightly superior place on the battlefield.  The Lucinus legion in the centre attacks the legion on the Constantine right to prevent it being used here.  They are locked in melee.

Lucinus and Heavy Cavalry charges Constantine (the rules mandate this) and Constantine and his Heavy Cavalry is routed.

Lucinus and Constantine in combat

The Constantine light archer moves to protect the remaining legion by attacking Lucinus.  Fails to rout them by shooting but the subsequent melee sees both routed.  So the shooting must have weakened the Heavy Cavalry.

Constantine Light Archers Vs Lucinus

Constantine only has two units left.  Like Dominion of the Spear, games ends when one side down to 1 or zero units. The Lucinus Auxilia moves to the flank of the legion but fails to inflict any casualties. The Constantine legion melees with the Lucinus legion to its front and both are destroyed!

Auxilia moves into melee with the remaining Constantine legion 

Constantine is down to only one unit and flees the field.

End


Verdict

There was a lot of 6s rolled in this game that are automatic defender routed. And Lucinus rolled more of these than Constantine!  The game could have easily gone the other way.  It was very close.  Overall the first outing of these latest rules with my 15mm figures was fun.  

Wednesday, 27 August 2025

Ancient Battlelines Clash – new direction on my ancient rules (again) + latest rules included

Introduction

Time for the yearly (or feels that way) change of direction for my own ancient rules – Ancient Battlelines Clash.  A post to document where I am at.  Latest version included at the end of the post.

Background

So last year I was streamlining my rules - again as they are now version 6 :-)

I started by using my own rules Ancients BattlelinesClash (ABC) back in 2012 to replay chronologically the Peter Sides ancient and medieval historical scenarios.  After about 50 of those battles and another hundred or so non-historical games I changed them.  Then changed them again.  Went to grids, came back from grids.  Still 1d6, mostly using the same broad mechanisms, still fast play on a 60cmx60cm board (or a bit less these days).  I seem to change them every few games.  Never quite happy.  I am sure this latest iteration will be the same.

Back in December 2024 I was happy playing out the odd Ancient Battlelines Clash battle with the latest version. ABC was not that remarkable different to previous, just a bit more streamlined.  Then Steve Parker released Dominion of the Spear (DoTS). This is played of a 3x2 grid, no movement, no markers, 4-6 units a side.  Not a lot of tactical decisions post setup but such a great ruleset for very fast games that really capture the essence of mass ancient battles (there are more rulesets for later periods).  Such a great set of rules.  I played all the ancient historical games, did a few house rules, even tried it on a 6x6grid.  This latter led me to a revelation on how to reasonably convert my ABC over to a grid (this game was the outcome).  Still much the same as before, except for the movement rules, but now on a 10x10 grid rather than a 40x40cm table.  

Around April 2025 a friend was looking for a fast game (for when we did not have time to play Armati 2).

Armati 2 Intro, using 15mm figures on a 3'x2' board

I went back to where it all began - ABC was originally based on Bill Banks Ancients (BBA). I started with BBA and then judiciously added some of the ABC mods from over the years: converted the CRT to 1d6, tweaked some of the combat values, shooting using same table as melee, grid based movement, more detailed pursuit and mandatory charging for impetuous units.  No reaction moves, no rolling for activation. I played these ABC rules a few times as recently as June 2025 and quite liked it.

Then came July 2025.  This is when I decided to try and combine ABC with DotS. Or rather, could I make ABC work with just three sectors like DotS?  The big difference between the two is ABC is a 1d6 for combat and has 2 hits per unit (well, disorder and destroyed status), DoTS combat is 2d6 with each side rolling a hit die and single kill.  The no markers is something I have tried before with ABC without success and also without success tried Phalanx and the original DBSA (precursor to DBA) as both are markerless.  I do come back to DBSA every year or two, as recently as 6 months ago so I am assuming I will go back to DBSA again sometime! I have also tried a 3x3 version with ABC a few years ago without success either.  I managed to get something I was happy with, and setup next to my computer with some 6mm figures.  I found I wanted some movement.  I created a small 6”x6” green grid for next to my computer and played a lot more with it on that 6x6 grid, basing it on the 6x6 rules I used for DotS. 

 6x6, using 6mm figures on on a 6"x6" board

I was thinking of expanding the 6x6 grid rules for WW2 and skirmish but then instead went to a to 6x9 grid.  This allowed me to directly use the historical scenarios I have for ABC that work on a 10x10 grid. Why 6x9?  I think at the time I was trying to keep the proportions of a 4’x6’ table so could recreate various ww2 scenarios, if I ever got that far with the rules.

 6x9 using 6mm figures on on a 6"x9" board

I even played twice on a 3’x2’ table that I setup for some Armati games.  My friend could not make it over so I played the game but using these latest rules.  Worked fine. But then, hey if I am playing 6x9 grid when not ust go back to playing the historical scenarios on a 10x10 grid? The whole idea of playing the Peter Sides scenarios was to test out my rules.  I can setup the forces closer so it starts off as 10x6 but there is more depth if needed. So now I am playing the next scenario in my ABC list with these rules on a 10x6 grid.

Sneak peak of Battle of Cibalae, 316 AD, 15mm figures on a 10x10 grid, 40cmx40cm board 

Verdict

So gridded rules, no markers, no pursuits or retreats, not many reactions to opposing moves. But fast, which was the whole idea.  And a great (even if quick!) narrative.  But I still see the essence of ABC in there.  I am also fairly certain there will be sequel with a return of the disorder state for units (so one marker) and pursuit/retreat rather than both units being destroyed.  But that is for the next iteration :-)

DoTS is still a much better game with more nuances for the 3 sector game.  But I feel I have got an ABC version that would work on a 2'x2' table if (when?) I get back to that table size with my next iteration of ABC.   

Playtest scenario

For interest, here is the scenario I played a dozen or so games for playtesting.  Bronze age game with chariots and lots of missiles so only a small portion of units types units.  But will continue to play with other battles.

Battle of SURMARRITI, 1089BC

The Battle of Surmarriti, 1089BC is listed in WRG Armies of the Ancient Near East 3000BC to 539BC.  Tiglath-Pileser I, King of Assyria, marched for the second year against  Marduk-nadin-ahhe, King of Babylonia and met them at Surmarriti.

I can’t find any other information on the internet but all I was looking for was an excuse to use some Assyrian and opposing forces (The Babylonians at this time were under Isin Dynasty and so could have different forces – I used Aramean lists as a basis).  The forces I used were from various army lists as I have no idea of the actual participating forces.

Links

Some starter links on the Middle Assyrian Empire and the leaders involved.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_Assyrian_Empire

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiglath-Pileser_I

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marduk-nadin-ahhe

Middle Assyrian Empire

1 leader, Tiglath-Pileser I (in one of the chariots)

2 Chariots, bow

2 Ashsharittu, Heavy Archers, spears and bows

1 Light Archers, bows

The above is for 3x2 and 6x6 grids, for 6x9 add 1 Light Archer 

Babylonian (4th Dynasty)

1 leader, Marduk-nadin-ahhe (in the Chariot)

1 Chariots, bow

1 Spearmen, Heavy foot

2 Militia, medium infantry, javelins

1 Light Archers, bows

1 Light Infantry, javelins/slings

The above is for 3x2 and 6x6 grids, for 6x9 add 1 Militia 

I played this scenario about 12 times on 3x2, 6x6 and 6x9.  All were fun.  I did not take pictures of the battles.  A lot of non-work time is currently spent renovating and gardening so gaming time is short and recording of actual battles has been a casualty of that.

Rules

These rules are not in the greatest format. I use Google Keep and store them as a Note.  Makes them trivial to update no matter where I am.  I want to play a few more games before I actually copy them into Word and baseline them. So consider them a work in progress and the three people that may be interested in them can see where I am currently :-)

3 sector version 9 July 2025, 6x6 1 August 2025, 9x6/10x6 21 August 2025

3 SECTOR

DEPLOY

One unit deployed to each sector as primary.

Other units can be deployed as a reserve into a sector.  Maximum 1 reserve unit per sector.  Remaining units (if any) go into a reserve area behind the sectors.

TURN SEQUENCE

Attacker activates a sector.

Defender activates a sector.

Determine victory, if no victor then do another turn.

Cannot activate a sector if previous side activation contained a destroyed EL or SCH.

VICTORY

If a side has 0 or 1 unit and the other side has more units then the other side wins.

ACTIVATION

The primary unit attacks.  This is the primary unit in the facing sector, or if no unit in that sector then the adjacent sector, if none then the unit in the remaining sector. An attack not into the facing sector is a flank attack unless no friendly unit in that sector.

If a unit is routed, the reserve unit becomes the primary in that sector.  If no reserve unit in that sector, move a unit from the reserve area.  If no unit in the reserve area, then move a reserve unit from an adjacent sector.  If no reserve unit in an adjacent sector then the sector remains empty of friendly units.

If flank attack with shoot and both units in other sector in melee then need to use melee value, not shoot. If melee flanking and friendly other is shooter then could swap to indicate melee is on front as other flank unit has turned.

ATTACK

If missile armed, shoot. If target is missile armed, roll on combat as if in melee for result.

If target not missile armed, then roll on combat table but ignore adverse results (AE or 2-both, but 5-both is DE). AE/2-both mean target can now try a melee. n/a = target cannot melee back.

If not missile armed then charge target.  If target not missile armed, then melee with charger as attacker.  If target missile armed, the missile unit will shoot first as attacker.

If trying to melee against shooter and failed, then treat this as failed to contact this activation.

A flank attack and the target enemy unit has an opposing unit in the same sector then the target unit cannot charge nor shoot back and the attacker will not receive any adverse results. 

UNITS

LC (Light Cavalry), CM (Camelry), LCH (Light Chariots), CH (Chariots), MC (Medium Cavalry), HC (Heavy Cavalry), EL (Elephants), CAT (Cataphracts), LA (Light Archers), LI (Light Infantry), CAMP (Camp), MI (Medium Infantry), WB (Warbands), HA (Heavy Archers), HI (Heavy Infantry), PX (Phalanx), BD (Swordsmen, Axemen etc), SCH (Scythed Chariots), SK (Skirmishers)

Combat Value (CV):

Mounted: LC*/CM*/LCH* 0, CH* 1, MC 1, HC 2, EL 2, CAT 3

Infantry: LA* 1, LI* 0, CAMP 1, MI/WB 2, HA* 2, HI 3, PX 4

* = missile unit

Shooting is always with combat value 0, except LI/LC/LCH vs infantry is CV2 

Points: CV, +1 if missile-armed, +1 mounted, + if EL/LEADER/LI/WB +1 

Optional units:

BD = HI with +1 Vs infantry to front in melee; -1 Vs mounted in melee

Leader = 1 point, attached to a unit for the game,+1 cv in melee or mutual shooting 

SCH =cv2, 1 point, if do not destroy enemy then they are destroyed.

SK = cv1, 1 point, any both result is SK routed only unless facing another SK (note I don't play with Skirmisher units but here in case I ever want to do so)

COMBAT

To attack, add attack CV + mods and subtract target CV + mods.  

Melee & mutual shooting / shooting

1            and natural 1 AE / target may advance and may melee

2            both / target may advance and may melee

3            n/a

4            n/a

5            both / DE

6            and natural 6 DE

+1 melee to front or flank attack: mounted (not LC/CM/LCH) vs any but CM/EL

+1 melee/shooting flank attack (applies to all attacks on flanked unit if target in melee) +2 if target is PX

+2 WB to front in melee vs infantry

+1 leader with unit in melee or mutual shooting

+1 Infantry uphill of all attackers/defending terrain in melee

+1 LI/LA/MI/WB attacking in/into/out diff

+2 LI/SK vs EL

LC/LCH/LI can retreat after any melee or shooting survival and swap with reserve.

Results:

xE = routed.

both = both are routed

n/a = no effect other than a melee unit cannot perform a melee if shot at.

AE and both do not affect an attacker in a flank attack

AE and 2 (both) do not affect an attacking shooter (do if mutual shooting)

TERRAIN

If on a hill: infantry +1 to CV in melee

To ponder:

Shock units with missile (e.g. Persian HC).  Maybe shoot once then charge? or just add * to unit.  What about HC with full armour - HC 2 (3 Vs shooting)?

Elite/Poor +1/-1 to CV in melee or mutual shooting. +1/-1 to points, min. 1 point

*6x6 CHANGES*

Set up one or two in from edge.  All infantry move 1, all mounted moved 2.

When a side is activated, may activate one square or a group.  A group is 2 units adjacent and facing same direction and are defined at the start of the battle. If the group's units are ever split (not adjacent and having same direction), that may no longer be activated as a group and each unit must be activated separately.

Each square move is either change face and move 1 square or move 1 square and change face. No diagonal moves. If in the front square of an enemy cannot change face or move.

When activated may move and/or attack. If move and square in front is occupied by an enemy unit must attack.  If enemy unit has no attacking unit in front square then may turn to face attacker.

Flank attack is when attacking an enemy not on its front facing square and not itself flank attacked.

If a unit is routed, an adjacent unit facing in the same direction as routed unit may move into the vacant square if it is not in an attack. If attacked square is not filled, and routed unit was not LI/LA/EL/SCH, then an attacking non-bow HC, EL, SCH or WB must advance into the square.

LA/HA range 2 directly ahead.  May move and shoot. May be mutual shooting if target is LA/HA 2 away and able to fire back.

If not mutual shooting and do not receive a n/a: all targets will advance one square if shot to front and immediately attack (melee if not missile armed, mutual shooting if missile-armed).

Non-bow HC, CAT that have an enemy 3 squares away directly in front will move 2 squares and immediately attack (not Vs LC/LI/LA); WB and EL will do same against infantry (not LI/LA) 2 squares away.

Possible group change: Instead of a group being 2 units predefined at start: 3 groups are predefined at start.  Largest group is 3 units. 

*> 6x6 e.g. 10x6, 20x6/20x8 *

10x6 fits in really well with other current ABC army sizes.  For 10x6 a group is up to 3 units and must define 3 at start (optional: 2 for poor commanded army and 4 for great command structure).  At 20 wide getting in Armati Intro size units and define 5-6 groups, max 6 units per group but can be any size really.  Go by Armati limits.  Also, at this size may twice split any group and the two smaller groups still count as groups.  

Monday, 30 June 2025

Battle of Milvian Bridge, 312 AD using Ancients Battlelines Clash

Introduction

This is game 72 in play testing my ancient rules by replaying historical battles.  I started by using my own rules Ancients Battlelines Clash (ABC).  A friend is looking for a fast game an so I went back to where it all began - ABC was originally based on Bill Banks Ancients (BBA). So started with BBA and then judiciously added some of the ABC mods from over the years: converted the CRT to 1d6, tweaked some of the combat values, shooting using same table as melee, grid based movement, more detailed pursuit and mandatory charging for impetuous units.  No reaction moves, no rolling for activation.  I may add these later.  ABC is designed to finish in around 30 minutes on a 2’x2’ or smaller table; I am currently using a 40cmx40cm table.

Battle of Milvian Bridge, 312 AD

After the death of Constantius his son Constantine invades Italy to overcome the usurper Maxentius.

Scenario source: Peter Sides Ancient Historical Battles Volume 1.

Link(s):

Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Milvian_Bridge

Troops

Romans (Constantine)

2 LDR, 1 HC, 1 MC, 2 LC, 3 HI, 2 LA.  

Breakpoint: 3

Romans (Maxentius)

1 LDR, 2 HC, 1 MC, 2 LC, 2 HI, 4 LI.

Breakpoint: 5.5

Scenario

Map: Open.  There is an unfordable river on Maxentius's deployment edge.

Special rules: None

This scenario was setup and unplayed for several weeks.  I just could not bring myself to play it as I could not see any way Constantine could win historically - he won on the right flank using  cavalry superiority.  The older scenario I had drawn up had parity of cavalry, in fact one less Light Cavalry for Constantine.  The issues with using so few units and scaling down the scenario!  I added a Light Cavalry to Constantine’s right flank, and also moved the “leader” that was with the legions (aka made them elite) to the medium cavalry.  This gives Constantine just a slight edge on the flank but at least means the historical result is more likely than not.  

Deployment

Romans (Constantine):

LC LA HI HI HI LA. MC* HC* LC in front of right LA

Romans (Maxentius):

LC MC HC*HI HI HC LC. LI split behind Cavalry on both flanks

Deployment (Constantine on the left)

Game

Constantine’s immediately advances his right flank into melee where possible.  Worked out ok for Constantine.  A few disorders but most importantly Constantine and his heavy cavalry does not get one.  Constantine’s cavalry is still stronger on this flank.

The centre legions advance but Constantine withholds his weak left flank.

Constantine’s aggressive right flank

Maxentius quickly advances his strong right flank.  He does not do much else but on his left flank he does engage the enemy light cavalry with his own and disorders them in the arrow exchange.  Note: in these rules melee is optional unless or charged or have an advantage.

Maxentius advancing his right flank

Missile fire continues into the next round and Constantine’s Light Cavalry routs.  Heavy Cavalry combats continue but with no change.

Maxentius continues to advance his right flank and disorders the Light Cavalry.  The heavier cavalry does not advance in fear of being flanked by the legions.  M moves his light infantry up to harass Constantine’s legions.

Maxentius continues the right flank advance

On Maxentius’s left flank, the Light Cavalry advance to the flank of the Constantine’s Medium Cavalry.  This helps the Maxentius cavalry drive home the attack and rout the opposing Cavalry.  Oh dear (for Constantine).

Constantine’s Medium Cavalry about to be routed

Constantine manages to rout Maxentius and his Heavy Cavalry!  The Constantine Light Archers move up to plug the gap from the previous turn’s cavalry rout.  A rebel legion moves into the spot where Maxentius was.   Note this sliding across to plug a gap is what brought me back to grids.  Never happy with gaps appearing that units then just charged through.  Worked on various options – zones of control extending to the side etc.  Not sure where I came across this but think it was when playtesting Dominion of the Spear on a grid and I already had the house rule for reserves being allocated to a sector but able to slide into  adjacent sector to plug a gap.  Anyway, grids are back in my life.

Constantine routs Maxentius and his Heavy Cavalry

Constantine advances the legions, the Light Archers pushes back the cavalry on the left flank.  But Constantine’s left flank Light Cavalry routs under missile fire from the enemy cavalry.

Constantine’s left flank not going well (as expected).

On the rebel left flank the cavalry advances to the flank of Constantine and his cavalry.  The resulting melee see Constantine and the cavalry rout.

Constantine surrounded

The rebels win!

End (Constantine still on the table – forgot to take the unit off)

And I realised when writing this up that I finished the game one unit too early - Constantine needs to lose one more heavy unit to lose.  Luckily I still had it setup so played a couple more turns (no pictures).  The rebels lose a legion in the centre but then the rebel cavalry arrive in the centre as well and Constantine loses a legion and then exceeds their army breakpoint. It made it a much closer game as Maxentius was close to losing as well.

Verdict

I should have advanced Constantine’s legions at the same time as the cavalry and possibly held Constantine’s Light Cavalry back so they would not be engaged so early.  If Constantine’s Light Cavalry had survived, the game would have seen Constantine’s likely win, or at least not lose so quickly!

Oh, and for the second outing with the rules, quite liking the feel of them still. 

Wednesday, 18 June 2025

Battle of Immae, 272 AD (take 2) using Ancient Battlelines Clash

Introduction

This is game 71 in play testing my ancient rules by replaying historical battles. It is a replay of my last battle of Immae but with different unit types – the last game was based on an internet scenario with bow armed cataphracts and lots of camels.  Gone are the camels and bows, and also the Palmyrene’s have a little more infantry weight in the centre.

I started by using my own rules Ancients Battlelines Clash (ABC).  A friend is looking for a fast game an so I went back to where it all began - ABC was originally based on Bill Banks Ancients (BBA). So started with BBA and then judiciously added some of the ABC mods from over the years: converted the CRT to 1d6, tweaked some of the combat values, shooting using same table as melee, grid based movement, more detailed pursuit and mandatory charging for impetuous units.  No reaction moves, no rolling for activation.  I may add these later.  ABC is designed to finish in around 30 minutes on a 2’x2’ or smaller table; I am currently using a 40cmx40cm table.

Battle of Immae, 272 AD

Aurelian's veteran legions reconquest of Palmyra from Queen Zenobia's mixed forces.

Links:

World History: https://www.worldhistory.org/Battle_of_Immae/

Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Immae

Troops

Romans (Aurelian)


 
2 LDR, 2 HC, 2 LC, 2 HI, 2 MI.

Breakpoint: 3

Palmyra (Zenobia)



1 LDR, 2 KN, 4 LC, 1 HI, 3 LA.

Breakpoint: 5

Scenario

Map: Open.

Deployment

Romans (Aurelian):

Deploy: LC HC* MI HI HI* MI HC LC

Palmyra (Zenobia):

Deploy: LC LC KN LA HI LA KN* LC LC.  LA in front of HI

This translates to:

Deployment, Romans on the left

Game

The Romans move first.  I have changed from rolling for group activation to just moving groups from right to left. And a group can be as large as you want.  I have done some testing with smaller forces on a 6x6 grids and seems to work fine without restricting movement.  As units split up with melee and shooting over the game it is hard enough to get units where you want them to go!

Romans all advance

Light Cavalry have a shooting range of 2. The Palmyrene have twice the Light Cavalry of the Roman on both flanks.  On the Palmyrene right they move up and to the side and in range of the Roman Light Cavalry.  In these rules, if you move into range, the opposing side will fire.  If both can fire, then just roll as if in melee.  So the Light Cavalry exchange fire.  The Palmyrene Light Cavalry are disordered.

Palmyrene right flank advances

The Palmyrene left flank sees a similar movement.  The Roman Light Cavalry and Palmyrene Light Cavalry exchange fire and both are disordered.

Palmyrene left flank

Note that the centre spread out slightly and advanced so the Archers are in range.  This forces the Roman to either advance or sit there and take multiple rounds of missile fire.

If you can fire you must fire.  The Roman Light Cavalry don’t move so the Palmyrene Light Cavalry exchanges fire with them.  Neither impacted.

The right flank Roman leader and Heavy Cavalry must charge the opposing Cataphracts.  Both disordered.

Roman right flank - clash of the cavalry

The Roman centre advances and the Archers responds with arrows. None of the fire does anything.  It makes me recall this lines from the Justified Ancients ruleset I do remember the line “don’t get too excited by missile fire, in this period it was pants.”

Roman centre advances in the hail of missiles, none doing any damage

The left flank Roman Heavy Cavalry must charge the opposing Cataphracts.  The Roman Heavy Cavalry is disordered. The Palmyrene Light Cavalry exchanges bowfire with the Roman Light Cavalry.  The Roman Light Cavalry is disordered.

Roman left flank

A Palmyrene Light Cavalry moves to flank the Roman Light Cavalry.  The Roman Light Cavalry fires at the Palmyrene Light Cavalry that did not move, but no effect.  The Cataphracts melees with the Heavy Cavalry and the Roman Heavy Cavalry routs.  In these rules, missile fire is mandatory and melee is only mandatory if you have a larger combat value than the opposition.  This way you can take chances, or let the melee go on longer if you are likely to lose, but melee will still mostly happen as so lead to a result.  Just make take a turn or two longer to do so.

The Roman left flank with the Roman Light Cavalry being surround and the Cataphracts rout the Heavy Cavalry

On the Roman right flank the Cataphracts rout the Roman Heavy Cavalry (and leader) as well!   The Palmyrene Light Cavalry also moves to flank the lone Roman Light Cavalry.

Roman right flank going the same way as the left, badly

The Roman right Light Cavalry moves away from the Light Cavalry.

The Roman centre advances.  The missiles again have no effect at all.  In melee, two Archer units rout and the other two units are disordered.  The Roman are unharmed.

The centre, as expected, not going well for the Palmyrenes

The Roman left flank Light Cavalry also moves out of range of the Palmyrene Light Cavalry.

The Palmyrene right flank sees the Palmyrene Light Cavalry surround the Roman Light Cavalry but fail to rout it (very unlucky!)

The Roman Light Cavalry surrounded but not out

The Palmyrene Cataphracts flank attacks the Roman Auxilia but again,  unlucky and only disorders the Auxilia.

Cataphracts on the flank of the Roman Auxilia

The Palmyrene left flank sees the 2 Palmyrene Light Cavalry surround the Roman Light Cavalry and this time they are successful in routing the Light Cavalry.

Palmyrene left flank will see the surrounded Light Cavalry rout

The centre see the Roman flank attack the Palmyrene and they are routed.

The Romans have destroyed the Palmyrene battleline

The Cataphracts both are in melee and the Palmyrene right flank Cataphracts manages to rout the Roman Auxilia.  The Romans have lost the majority of their non-light units so flee the field.  The Palmyrenes win!

End


Verdict

History was reversed!  The Palmyrene Light Cavalry and Cataphracts really carried the day.  The Roman Heavy Cavalry should have lasted a bit longer but they were unlucky.  The Palmyrene were unlucky mid-game with some of their rolls to make up for it though.  It was a close game and could have seen the Roman win with some better die rolling.  I have updated the scenario to reduce the Palmyrene by 2 Light Cavalry.  They did lose the battle and have noted they have the stronger force in this game.  Rules see to be fine and give a quick game.

Aside on rules

Regarding rules: I started this set of rules played above to be able to play a fast ancients game with a friend.  We have been playing Amarti II but we recently get to chatting so end up not having the 1.5 hours to play.  So looking for something 30 minutes or less.  I looked at others I do like - Justified Ancients, DBA (although not that fond), pure Bill Banks Ancients, Irregular Miniatures Ancients rules, Mighty Armies Ancients, Fantasy rules TCE, Rally Round the King and my own ABC versions.  Narrowed down to Justified Ancients (original version), Fantasy Rules and Bill Banks Ancients, mainly as they are fast and can be played in less than 30 minutes. Finally went with Bill Bank's as they are the fastest and I like them the most anyway! Justified Ancients was very tempting too (with my modifications).  But needed to modify them a little to streamline the mechanics.  Did this based on the 100s of games I have played with my own ABC.  So the rules are a work in progress.  As ABC was based on BBA, the rules are fairly similar.  I will likely continue developing from these rules as a basis and just add in a few solo friendly rules to add some uncertainty.  But maybe not.  Happy so far with my one 10x10 grid play and half a dozen 6x6 grid plays.