Tuesday, 25 April 2023

Battle of Pharsalus 48BC using When Warriors Collide

 Introduction

This is game 59 in play testing my ancient rules by replaying historical battles.  I have gone back to free form movement on a 60cmx60cm table, compared to a 12x12 grid.  No other changes to the rules other than now using a ruler.  I don’t know whether I will go back to gridded for ancients or not.  Who knows?  This is the third time I have gone to gridded and back out again. (Spoiler: I did for Game 63 onwards)

Update: After the first melee, I changed the results table for melee and missile and added back in disorder (hits) and some reactive moves.  So it reintroduces some of my older mechanisms back in but the results table is cleaner (it looked more like DBA with each unit type having their own results – now it is a single table with limited unit types referenced.   I could not help myself but adding in reactions for solo play.

This is the 4th last game I played using rules loosely based on Ancients Battlelines Clash.  It is posted a year after I played it. 


Battle of Pharsalus

In the midst of the Roman civil war, the two opposing generals face off in Greece.


Troops

Roman (Caesar)

Caesarean Roman line


4 HI (swords) elite

1 HI (swords) (represents the cohorts with the cavalry on the right flank)

2 LI

1 MC elite

1 Elite Leader

1 leader

Breakpoint: 10

 

Roman (Pompey)

Pompeian Roman line


8 HI (swords)

2 LI

4 MC

1 poor leader

Breakpoint: 13


Scenario changes

Mainly reduced the number of bases to fit onto a small table.  I used a normal HI (swords) to represent the 3000 (or thereabouts) legionaries Caesar had placed with the cavalry.

 

Deployment

Deployment, Caesar on the left, Pompey on the right


Game

End of first move of both sides see them closing quickly.

The battlelines close in.

Caesar, the cohorts and his cavalry charge the light infantry and rout them.  They then pursue into the Pompeian cavalry.  A few depletions.

Caesar in melee with the opposing cavalry


Another round of melee sees a Pompeian cavalry routed, and the accompanying Caesarean light infantry retire.

The opposing Roman legions meet.  Caesar’s legions roll badly, but then so does Pompey’s and it evens out.  Caesar’s legions are elite so may hold out longer.  The cavalry melee continues.

Legions melee in the centre

Two Pompeian legion is lost but the Caesarean legions are being depleted.    On the cavalry melee, two Pompeian cavalry are routed.  Caesar pursues one of them.  The remaining Pompeian cavalry unit wheels and charges the reduced legion in the flank but both remain in melee.

Cavalry flank now has less of Pompey’s units.

Another legion of Pompey’s lost in the centre.  The cavalry on the flank of Caesar’s heavy infantry rolls badly and routs.

Pompey’s side is broken.

This breaks the army of Pompey and Caesar has won.   

 

Rule changes

I updated the movement rules to work without grids.  I added in some reaction moves when fired at or an enemy moves into a Zone of Control.   While most units can take two hits, heavy infantry can take three.  I have wanted to do this for a long time and it really works here showing the grind of heavy infantry melees.

 

Verdict

I really liked the way the game played out and the interactions.  I did play about a dozen games previous to this game with the 12x12 grid and no “hits” (mostly with 6mm figures), 

3 comments:

  1. With “The Portable Wargame” by Bob Cordery and subsequent books grids seem very much en vogue at the moment.
    With no arguments about movement or range it certainly does simplify things - and makes any remote gaming easy (a grid square is a grid square is a grid square).
    When you amended your rules to be without grids, what do you think it added?
    Cheers,
    Geoff

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hello Geoff,

      Grids make movement and range easy as you say. But units can only face in four directions, unless you want to complicate rules with the ability to face corners). With free form movement units can face in any direction. My rules have never have any reason for units to align (e.g. the DBx series of rules) and when you contact, no matter what the angle, you stop and are in contact. Without grids it allows for two units to contact one unit to the front (and my home rules are geared to this being a advantage). With grids, it is eithe rone or 3 to the front (3 if allowing diagonals). Also without grids allows units to block units going past them better compared to grids.
      Most of this is preference - if the rules start as a gridded set they will work better on a grid. My own rules started non gridded and so work better on a non-grid (due to all the stuff above being assumed as part of the tactics). Note I have recently created some rules that are designed to work on grids from the get go. So there is no downside to gridded compared to non-gridded rules. And the rules would not work as well on a non-grid!

      Delete
    2. Thanks for the clarification Shaun.
      I suspect it may well be a case of po-tay-toe po-tah-toe - i.e./ you pay your money and you take your choice. At the moment I’m building mostly 2mm armies with DBx basing and, as long as they fit my tabletop, it doesn’t matter whether gridded or not (although, as I mentioned previously, TPW is sending me down the gridded path.
      Cheers,
      Geoff

      Delete