Battle of Ctesiphon, 363 AD using Ancients Battlelines Clash

Introduction

This is game 76 in play testing my ancient rules by replaying historical battles.   This current significant revision goes back to ABC version 2.5 from years ago (the one I played the most) It also combines the missile and melee table and units rout more easily than the original ABC. It is on a grid and still has reactions to enemy moves/combat results, so it solo friendly once again. I did away with disorder (so no markers on the table) and played about 20 games like that.  They were too fast!  So I made two changes: 1) every unit has 2 “hits” 2) a unit charged by a shock unit (mainly cavalry, and warbands Vs infantry) may be destroyed outright rather than hit. ABC is designed to finish in less than 30 minutes on a 2’x2’ or smaller table; currently using a 10x10 grid on 40cmx40cm table.

Battle of Ctesiphon, 363 AD

Battle of Julian’s invasion of Sassanian Persia fought outside the Persian capital.

Scenario source: Bill Banks Ancients.

Link(s):

Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ctesiphon_(363)

Troops

Romans, Julian

1 Leader

1 HC, Heavy Cavalry

1 MC, Medium Cavalry

1 LC, Light Cavalry

2 HI, Elite Heavy Infantry

1 LI, Light Infantry

1 BW, Bowmen

Breakpoint: 2

Sassanids, Merena

1 Leader

1 CAT, Cataphracts

1 ELE, Elephant

1 HC, Heavy Cavalry

1 LC, Light Cavalry

2 MI, Medium Infantry

1 BW, Bowmen

Breakpoint: 2.5

Deployment

Deployment, Romans on the left

Romans, Julian (left to right)

LC HC* LI HI+ HI+ BW MC

Sassanids, Merena (left to right)

EL BW KN* MI MI HC LC

* = leader; + = elite

Game

Julian advances obliquely with the centre infantry advancing and the left flank also advancing.  The Persian Heavy Cavalry opposing Julian charges Julian (Heavy Cavalry must do a mandatory change if enemy in range).  The Persian Heavy Cavalry is depleted and in the next round of combat they rout.  Julian advances into the vacated spot.

Julian forces opposing cavalry to charge

The Persian advance their centre and left flank.

Persians advance

The Roman right flank is weak and so continues to hold back.  The Roman infantry is slightly worse than the Cataphracts but otherwise they could take on any other Persian unit. The Roman’s split their centre infantry with the leftmost one advancing to attack the weak Persian infantry.  The rightmost stands to receive the charge of the Cataphracts in a later turn.

Julian and his heavy cavalry attack the Persian infantry but the latter stand fast and the Roman Heavy Cavalry is depleted.

Julian attacking the Persian infantry

The Persian cataphracts charge into the elite Roman heavy infantry.  The cataphracts are slightly better and plough right through the Romans (roll a 6).  The Persian left flank continues to advance.

Persian cataphracts attacking the Roman infantry

The remaining Roman heavy infantry charges the Persian infantry but they remain locked in melee. Julian’s Heavy Cavalry routs their opposing Persian infantry and advances into the other Persian infantry. Amazingly the Persian infantry survives its round of melee (rolled a 6).

Persian infantry attacked from two sides

The Cataphracts attack the Roman bowmen (the bowmen can turn to face) that shoot and force the Cataphracts to stand off (i.e. no melee).

Bowmen Vs the Cataphracts in a standoff

The Persian left flank advances.  The Persian bowmen are in range of the roman bowmen that turn to face the Persians (the Roman bowmen are not in melee with the cataphracts so turn to face the missiles).  Mutual shooting occurs that see the Persian bowmen depleted.  Next turn the Roman bowmen are depleted by shooting.

Bowmen shooting at each other

The Roman light infantry advance to the Persian bowmen and the latter turn to face.  Mutual missiles fly and the already depleted Persian bowmen are routed.

Roman light infantry about to rout the Persian bows

The Roman heavy infantry take out the medium infantry.

Persian medium infantry routed

The Persians have only two non-light units left and flee.  The Romans have won!

End

Verdict

The Persian need to be aggressive on their left flank to win.  I think they should have withdrawn the centre so it would last an extra turn and give the left flank a chance to break the army.

A great outing for the 2 hits variation.  I do like that the game lasts longer.  I feel there is a bit more tactics, or a least a more interesting narrative from the longer game.  It is not much longer in time to play.  For now, this version of rules gets a big tick.  Of course, I said that about the last few versions as well 😊  At least I am still happy with using 1d6 for all resolutions that has been there since the beginning!

Battle of Argentoratum, 357 AD using Ancients Battlelines Clash

Introduction

This is game 75 in play testing my ancient rules by replaying historical battles.  My last few games was using a revision of my own Ancient Battlelines Clash rules and I do like them.  This current significant revision goes back to ABC version 2.5 from years ago (the one I played the most) and does away with disorder, so no markers on the table.  It also combines the missile and melee table and units rout more easily than the original ABC. It is on a grid and still has reactions to enemy moves/combat results, so it solo friendly once again. I have played this version about 10 times already with Chariot period armies and it has worked fine, just some minor tweaks and clarifications added. ABC is designed to finish in less than 30 minutes on a 2’x2’ or smaller table; currently using a 10x10 grid on 40cmx40cm table.

Battle of Argentoratum, 357 AD

Julian repels a Gothic barbarian invasion.

Scenario source: Bill Banks Ancients, Peter Sides Ancient Historical Battles Volume 1.

Link(s):

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

Troops

Julian (Rome)

*p

1 LDR, 1 KN (Cataphracts), 1 LC, 2 HI (Legions) with one elite, 2 MI (Auxilia) with 1 elite.

Breakpoint: 2.5

Chnodomar, Chief of the Allemani

1 LDR, 6WB (Warbands)

Breakpoint: 3

Scenario

Map: Open with a wood in Chnodomar right flank deployment zone (1/3 in from deployment edge) and 2BW wide.

Special rules: None.

Deployment

Julian (Rome): MI MI+ (1BW gap) HI+ HI (1BW gap) KN* LC

Chnodomar, Chief of the Allemani: WB (1BW gap) WB WB* WB WB (1BW gap) WB (in the woods).

BW=basewidth or 1 square

Game

The warbands advance, except the unit in the woods that was going a bit slow.  Julian responds by advancing centre and right flank.  The Auxilia at the woods also is being a bit slow (i.e. failed to activate).

First moves

The warbands continue to advance, except the unit in the woods that is still finding it slow going.  The Auxilia move right to protect the centre.  The Cataphracts charge the warband while the light cavalry also advances for support if required.  The Cataphracts, unsurprisingly, rout the warbands and advance.

The Cataphracts making short work of that flank

The warbands advance into the legions. One routs, the other is still in melee.  In the subsequent melee (in the Roman turn) the remaining Legions unit routs.

Warbands Vs Legions

Julian and his Cataphracts move to assist in the now collapsed centre.

Some warbands charge the Auxilia but they stand fast.

Warbands Vs Auxilia with the Cataphracts closing in

An Auxilia is subsequently destroyed and the Cataphracts hit the warbands, the latter routing

Cataphracts Vs a warband

The Romans have reached their breakpoint and flee the battle.  It was a close game.  Could have easily see defeat for the Goths.

End

Verdict

A short simple, straightforward game.  Fairly equal sides could easily see one or the other win.  In this case, history was not repeated.  I did play one more turn that saw another Roman unit routed, definitely a Goth win this time.  It took me a week to get around to playing this after setting it up (other things got priority).  It was fairly quick, I should have just played it earlier!  And no changes to the rules.

Battle of Mursa, 351 AD using Ancients Battlelines Clash

Introduction

This is game 74 in play testing my ancient rules by replaying historical battles.  My last few games was using a revision of my own Ancient Battlelines Clash rules and I do like them.  I felt I had strayed a bit too far from what I was really looking for.  This current revision goes back to ABC version 2.5 from years ago (the one I played the most) and then updates it with all the learnings from the last year on.  It differs from ABC 2.5, but similar to recent versions, as does away with disorder, so no markers on the table.  It combines the missile and melee table and units rout more easily than the original ABC. It is on a grid and still has reactions to enemy moves/combat results (unlike recent versions), so it solo friendly once again. I have played this version about ten times already with Chariot period armies and it has worked fine, just some minor tweaks and clarifications added. ABC is designed to finish in less than 30 minutes on a 2’x2’ or smaller table; currently using a 10x10 grid on 40cmx40cm table.

Battle of Mursa, 351 AD

The Eastern Roman Empire vs. Western Roman Empire.

Scenario source: Peter Sides Ancient Historical Battles Volume 2.

Link(s):

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

Troops

Romans (Constantius)

1 LDR, 2 KN (Cataphracts), 1 MC, 1 LC, 1 HI (legions), 2 MI (Auxilia), 1 LA.

Breakpoint: 3

Romans (Magnentius)

1 LDR, 3 MC, 2 LC, 2 HI (legions), 2 MI (Auxilia), 1 LA.

Breakpoint: 3.5

Scenario

Map: A hill 2BW (basewidths) wide on Magentius right flank to Constantius baseline.  On hill aligned with Magnentius deployment is a 1BW stadium (town).

Special rules: Ambush is known to Constantius

Deployment

Constantius on the left, Magnentius on the right.

Deployment (left to right):

Romans (Constantius):

KN MC HI HI MI KN* LC.  1 MI and 1 LA in front of the Stadium.

Romans (Magnentius):

LC MC MC MI HI MI MC* LC.  1 HI in stadium, LA in front of battleline HI.

Game

Constantius advances the right flank cavalry to the right to attack that flank.

The centre advances to provide support for both flanks.  The left flank advances.  The archers and Auxilia advance to hopefully engage with the infantry in the “ambush”.  Missiles fail to dislodge the stadium infantry.

Constantius advances

The Magnentius light archers in the centre fires on the Auxilia and it is routed.  This leaves a hole in Constantius’s centre.

Light archers routs the Constantius medium infantry

Magnentius advances his right flank as the Light Cavalry may be able to rout the knights and Magnentius has a better chance against the directly opposing Medium Cavalry.  The Light Cavalry rout and Magnentius (and cavalry) is locked in melee with the opposing cavalry.

Magnentius right flank cavalry attack

The Magnentius Light archers move to fire at the Constantius Legions but fail to do anything.  But the Legions is at least prevented from advancing.

The Magnentius centre advances and the left flank Light Cavalry moves in front of the heavier cavalry to protect the latter.

Magnentius centre and left flank manoeuvring

Constantius charges in to Magnentius left flank hoping to disrupt it enough that can turn to face the remaining opposition as required. 

Constantius right flank cavalry charges in

Constantius Light Cavalry routed but Magnentius Medium Cavalry is routed.

Constantius centre Legions charges the Light archers.  Anything but a 1 (that will rout the Legions).  Rolled a 1.  Constantius Legions routed.  This is bad.

The Legions charges the Light archers but is routed

Magnentius Medium Cavalry Vs Constantius Medium Cavalry is indecisive but the Cataphracts flank attack Magnentius Medium Cavalry, and his cavalry is routed.

Cataphracts flanking Magnentius

Stadium missile firing inconclusive.

The centre Light archers must turn to face the Cataphracts, does so but is routed in a subsequent melee after the missiles fail to do anything (not surprising Vs Cataphracts).

Light archers Vs Cataphracts

The Cataphracts then proceed to rout the Legions, the Auxilia but then is routed themselves by the Magnentius Light Cavalry.

Cataphracts Vs Legions

Cataphracts Vs Auxilia

Cataphracts Vs Light Cavalry (the Light Cavalry wins!)

Both sides have reached their army breakpoint but Magnentius has lost more and so Constantius wins!

End

Verdict

I did not think Constantius was going to win this one – there was too much facing him, although “point-wise” they were about equal. The Cataphracts ruled the field in this one.  The rules are also working quite well. My hope was realised that the playtest games (with ancient middle east armies) would also translate fine into these later period games.  No issues or clarifications required.  A few more games and I may even put them onto the ABC webpage.

Battle of Heraclea 280 BC scenario - deployment and forces (update) and some background

Introduction

A update to a my post in 2011 detailing the Battle of Heraclea scenario. The aim is to continue (ok, it has been awhile, may restart is a better term) replaying it with different rules.

Background

I started this blog in April 2010 to compare different rules using the same battle.  I used seven rules replaying Callinicum. One year later I set out my deployment for Heraclea and played about 12 more rulesets over the next couple of years with that battle.  I did think about doing another battle – Zama and Bibracte got a look in but both just did not inspire me.  I have always meant to choose another battle an replay it with some more rulesets.  I chose Sentinum back in 2017 but it languished for ages as I did not see to have the motivation to try out new rules.  I may post my deployment one day but it is still a possibility to use for replaying.

I did get my ancients fix by playtesting my own rules, either by replaying historical battles or just playing historical matchups.

Back in late 2024 did a replay of Megiddo with a couple of rules.  I really love Megiddo and have played it at least a dozen times.  But I got sidetracked into Dominion of the Spear and redoing my own rules and Megiddo just did not seem capture my interest enough to replay with new rules.

I recently came across some rules – Pilums and Peltasts - from Gauntlet #12 magazine and thought they looked interesting.  And then I seemed to remember that Gauntlet was in the MagWeb repository.  I searched my rules and found I had downloaded the rules from MagWeb, and also created a better formatted Word document for the rules in 2015.  I then realised it was about 12 years since I did a replay with different rulesets (I have occasionally played FTF with some ancient rules in those 12 years).  This is too long! I really thought it was 5-6 years ago.  And then also forgetting about rules I wanted to use as well.  I need to get back to it and select a battle to use.

So I did some looking at battles I had played, there were a few good contenders.  And I chose…Heraclea.  Partly as I never really go sick of replaying Heraclea but also I found it was a good test of rules

But slightly different.  I came across a few articles recently about potential army deployments for Heraclea and compared it to the one I generally use.  One issue I always had is that the Pyrrhus’ left flank and Roman right were the same – one light infantry and light cavalry.  This meant they were evenly matched and nothing every happened. Rereading I saw that a possible more historical deployment may not have this issue. For force composition I used these:

Ancient Warfare article

A Lost Battles replay

A WAB scenario

I then used the Peter Sides scenario that I did not really follow last time to create the following forces and deployment suitable for a 2’x2’ table to replay with different rulesets.

Forces

Epirot bases

3 Pike (Phalangites)

1 Hoplites, poor (Tarantine hoplites)

1 Light infantry, archers (mainly skirmishers with bow and slings)

1 Heavy Cavalry or Elite Medium Cavalry (plus Pyrrhus) Agema with thrusting spear, shield;  Heavy Cavalry due to heavy armour

1 Medium Cavalry (Thessalian), shield, spear, javelins

1 Light Cavalry, spear, javelins, shield (Tarantine)

1 Elephant (Indian) with skirmisher support

I am tempted to make one of the Pike bases into elite pikes to represent the 3000 Hypaspists but the numbers are about seventh of the actual number of phalangites (3000 out of 21,000).  If I was playing with more forces I would definitely add in a based of elite pikes.

Rome

2 Heavy Infantry, representing 4 legions.  Represent as legions, maybe swordsmen. (plus Lavinus)

2 Heavy Infantry, represent 4 Allied legions.  Probably represent as Spearmen.

1 Medium Infantry, javelins (Bruttians)

1 Light Infantry, javelins (Apulians)

4 Medium Cavalry (1 Roman, 2 Allied, 1 Southern Italy), shield, spear, javelins.

Deployment

For a 2'x2' table:

Deployment, Pyrrhus at the top, Romans at the bottom.

I mostly followed Peter Sides, although the Roman cavalry is evenly split (possibly it should not be with more on the Allied side of the line), and there is a medium cavalry unit on Pyrrhus’s left flank.

I do wonder if the light and medium infantry on the Roman left flank is going to skew the game a little but I can always tweak that if it seems like it will be a problem.

 The Epirot have a slightly stronger right flank (taking into account the Elephant) and weaker left flank.  Also they are stronger in the centre battleline.  While in my old deployment Pyrrhus would rush with his Agema and elephants into the poorer Roman cavalry, this may no longer be the best option and maybe try and pin and win the centre, hold his left and hope to overcome the right flank.  Hoping this deployment leads to more interesting tactical choices.  

Postscript

I hope to start the first battle in the next few weeks.  I may peter out after one battle but we shall see. 

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.