More Dominion of the Spear - battle reports, 6x6 grid proposal and ramblings

Introduction

I played some Dominion of the Spear back in /January and got sidetracked in playing the Battle of Megiddo a few times.  But Dominion of the Spear continues to intrigue and so I play some more games.  This post is a scatter of notes, a couple of battle reports, optional rules, possible unit changes and general rambling.

Background

Two things have led to this post:

My fascination with Dominion of the Spear as fast play rules for ancient battles to resolve campaign battles and historical battles.

My ongoing playing of Peter Sides’ ancient historical battles using my own rules.

I wanted to see if the rules could be played on a larger grid, e.g. 6x6 and replace my own rules if replaying the historical battles.  I am more interested in the battle research and a high-level playthrough of them rather than a detailed long game.  The reason I wrote my own rules, ABC, in the first place was to have rules that played quickly – DotS plays even more quickly and gives similar high-level results.  I also wanted to minimise changes to DotS to those that best reflected my own view of how units in the historical battles performed.

Notes on Nomenclature

I converted my own rules Ancient Battlelines Clash (ABC) unit types into those of DotS.  They all translated fairly easily into DotS. I do this as it is easier shorthand for referring to the units. The only exception is Light infantry is the same as Light Archers.  I can feel a house rule coming...

Ancient Battlelines Clash (ABC) unit conversion

LI        Light Infantry, Infantry Missile

LA       Light Archers (Bowmen), Infantry Missile

MI       Medium Infantry, Infantry Melee

WB      Warbands, Infantry Melee Ferocious

HA      Heavy Archers, Infantry Missile Elite

HI        Heavy Infantry, Infantry Melee Elite (blades) or Armoured (spearmen)

PK       Pike Phalanx, Infantry Melee Armoured Elite

LC       Light Cavalry, Mounted Missile

MC      Medium Cavalry, Mounted Melee

HC      Shock/Heavy Cavalry, Mounted Melee Elite or Ferocious

CAT    Cataphracts, Mounted Melee Armoured (bow armed are Missile)

KN      Knights, Mounted Melee Armoured Elite

CH      Chariots, Mounted Missile Elite

ELE     Elephants, Mounted Melee Armoured Elite

Leader: Elite to unit

Of course there will be exceptions I am sure :-)

 

Battle of Heraclea

Converting from ABC to DotS and 12 points gives the following:

Epirote Pyrrhus

1x Agema, HC, Mounted Melee Ferocious

1x EL, Elephant

1x PK, Pike Phalanxes

1x LC, Light Cavalry

Rome

2x MC, Medium Cavalry

2x HI, Legions (blades)

1x LC, Light Cavalry

Setup

Pyrrhus (Attacker)

Reserve: EL

HC PK LC

---------------

MC HI LC

Reserve: MC, HI

Rome

I played the game with it RAW and then played it about a dozen times to test out some potential optional rules.  Note when I saw RAW I did add the optional activation rule from the 36 ancient battle expansion – when each side only activates one sector per turn. 

What I do like about these games it most are quite close with only a unit or two difference and both sides have a goo chance of winning.  Although I did find that my version of Marathon (below) was mostly won by the Greeks and only one of 6 games won by the Persians.

Heraclea game (rules as written)

Setup

Companions Vs Roman Cavalry – Companions routed and Elephants replace them

The Legions attack the Phalanx in the centre for no result

The Elephants attack the Roman Cavalry and the cavalry is routed, the other Roman Cavalry replaces them

The Legions attack the Phalanx in the centre and rout the Phalanx

The Elephants attack the remaining Roman Cavalry and rout them, a legion replaces the cavalry

The legion outflanks the Elephants in attack but fails

The Elephants attack the opposing Legions and the Legions rout

The legion outflanks the Elephants in attack but fails

The Pyrrhic Light Cavalry attack the Roman Light Cavalry but the Pyrrhic Light Cavalry rout under a haul of missiles

The Pyrrhic army is down to one unit and flees the field

Intermission (optional rules and grids)

I did play around with some optional rules, with an aim to have rules that would be able to be used on a 3x3 and 6x6 grid.  I did think 3x3 may be useful but found it does not add much in tactical decisions.  But I have a plan to use the rules on 6x6 or 8x8 grids.  A larger grid will make the battle seem a bit more like an ancient battleline and will be trivial to translate the historical scenarios into a game.  I like the combat and activation mechanism and thin it would work fine on a larger grid.

The optional rules I tested and now play with all the time are these two:

1. Reserve units are pre-allocated to a sector (max one reserve unit per sector)

When a sector is activated, as well as combat a reserve unit can be moved to an adjacent sector with no reserve.  Also, when all a sector’s units are destroyed, it can be immediately replaced with an adjacent reserve unit. This is to just add a little structure to reserve units to better mirror ancient battlelines and what units were actually on the flanks/centre.  Does make you think a little more on what sector to deploy reserves.  It does greatly reduce reserve decisions during the game a lot, but increases it at deployment. 

2. Melee Infantry Vs Melee Infantry no mutual destruction

If in combat between two Melee Infantry would result in both being destroyed, then neither is destroyed, unless at least one is Ferocious.  I can rationalise Missile units forcing each other to rout.  Also, Mounted both being destroyed can be rationalised as one pursues the other and so is no longer available for combat.  Ditto for Mounted in combat with melee infantry (the mounted unit pursues the routed infantry).  Just found it hard to rationalise battleline infantry both being destroyed/routed/no longer both being in battle at the same time.  I could imagine warbands pursuing though and no longer being in the battle.  This will also play better I think on larger gridded battles.  For some matchups, the chance to hit are similar when I do it in my head, but I have not done a complete breakdown of the different melee infantry combat result chances using base rules compared to my changes.

The optional rules I also playtested but ended up not thinking they were that useful:

1. Differentiate Elite from Ferocious

Only Elite Vs non-elite gets the +1 modifier. Ferocious always gets the +1 modifier.  The rationale is simply to make combats between elites last just as long as those between non-elites (instead of faster is both getting +1), and also differentiates Elite from Ferocious.  I find the difference what not that great and I kept forgetting it.  I do differentiate on the grid with Ferocious forced to advance if defeat the enemy.

2. Speed up Armoured Vs Armoured combat

Armoured units only receive the -1 if being attacked by non-armoured units.   These speeds up armoured Vs armoured conflict, particularly Armoured Melee Infantry where I had games where the last 2 units are both these and waiting for one to roll a 6.  Do not really need this as use the 4+ to hit in melee with Melee Infantry, and also the 6 to hit between armoured unit did not come up very much. 

More games

I did play some more games to playtest the optional rules but realised later I took no pictures!

Marathon (about 6 times)

Persian:2xHA, 3xLA

Greek: 2xSpearmen, 2xMI (to represent thinning the line) 

Callinicum (about 3 times)

Persian: 1xCAT (elite), 2xCAT, 1xLC

Byzantine: 1xHC,2xMC,1xHA,1xLC

Hydaspes (twice)

Macedonian: 1xHC,1xPK,1xSpearmen (other pikes),1xLI

Indian: 1xEL, 1xHA, 1xCH,1xMC

3x3

Can I make simple 3x3 variant with the same 12 point armies?  And is it worth playing anyway?

Here is the 3x3 rules extensions I used.  I played about 3-4 games with it and they worked fine, but really wanted to try out 6x6 so have not playtested them further.  No terrain rules yet but no hard to incorporate e.g. units on a hill/in a wood count as armoured in not already.

All DotS rules apply unless superseded here. 2 units max in a square.  All units may move in any direction 1 square horizontally or vertically if square selected.  May change facing after move.  May only face a square edge.  If an enemy unit in facing square may attack.  If enemy unit already under attack then attack the enemy reserve first (if exists).  Once being attacked or attacking, cannot move until no enemy in other square. If defeat an enemy in melee and they are not replaced with a reserve, then may (ferocious must, missile cannot) move into that square, not changing face.

6x6 rules and example with Heraclea

If it works for 3x3, why not a 6x6 square grid with 12 point armies with 1 unit in one square?  I played a few games with them, using the melee infantry Vs Melee infantry 4+ and no mutual destruction.  They have promise and I am considering replacing my Ancient Battlelines Clash rules with these ones (with only a few extra rules I may need and maybe expand to 8x8) to continue replaying the Peter Sides historical battle scenarios. e.g. units on a hill/in a wood count as armoured in not already.

All DotS rules apply unless superseded here.

1 unit max in a square.  All units may move in any direction horizontally or vertically if square selected.  Elephants move 1 square, other mounted move 2 (and may change direction after 1^st square).  All infantry move 1. May change facing after move. May only face a square edge.  If an enemy unit in facing square may attack.  Once being attacked or attacking, cannot move until no enemy in other square.

If attacked in flank and no unit in front, may immediately turn to face flanking unit before combat.  Replace outflanking bonus with a +1 if attacking the flank of an enemy unit.

A unit lost may be replaced with another adjacent unit facing same direction and is not in combat.

If defeat an enemy in melee and they are not replaced with another enemy unit then may (ferocious must, missile cannot) move into that square, not changing face.

Yes, only one square activation on each side’s turn.  I was thinking about maybe 2 activations per side but must be in different sectors.  For 8x8 I think this would be fine, not sure with 6x6 – there are 4-6 units a side and so one activation seemed to work ok.  No need to coordinate group moves (aka DBx type groups) either – with one activation and enemy units fairly close, it is easy to react to an enemy move by moving one of your own up.  I thought doing a single unit activation per turn would bother me but it did not at all.  

Some simple extensions I am thinking about is missiles fire 2 directly ahead but the target can advance one square and then melee (so ends up like the RAW rules) but of course if the target is not facing the right way they cannot advance.  Maybe also if mounted ferocious wins Vs mounted then pursue 1-3 squares (not just one)?

Battle of Heraclea

Same 12 point armies as previous battle. 

Setup

Companions move and attack the Roman Cavalry. The Romans flee and the Companions pursue them off the field of battle.

Roman right flank legions advance

Elephants advance

Roman right flank legions advance again

Elephants advance and attack the Roman cavalry, the cavalry flee

The Roman legions move to attack the Pike phalanx but they remain locked in melee

The Elephants attack the other legions (that turn to face the Elephants).  The Elephants shatter the legions but the Elephants are so disordered they are no longer an effective fighting force.

The Roman light cavalry attack the Pyrrhic light cavalry but the Romans flee.

Pyrrhus has won the day!

Unit changes I am thinking about

These following unit changes came about as I wanted to better represent these units as I think they were.  It does complicate the rules and does break the elegant mirroring in the combat system but then, it is only for these units.  And really only thinking about using them in the larger gridded games and have not really tested them much – although I plan to do so sometime.

Possible Warband representation

Warbands as Melee Infantry Ferocious are quite good against Mounted and historically did not seem to that special against Mounted.  I am thinking of making Warband as Melee Infantry Fierce, 3 points, where Fierce is +1 Vs any infantry, and also count as Armoured Vs all melee infantry.  The latter on the assumption the Warband units are huge and so can take a bit of damage, and also to justify why they are 3 points.

Possible Elephant representation

I like to think of Elephants as Melee Mounted Elite Ferocious.  But I also have Knights classed the same.  To differentiate Elephants I am thinking of make them still 4 points and still Melee Mounted Elite Ferocious but some minor hit chance changes: Missile Mounted base to hit Elephants is 4+ (not 5+) and Elephants are base 4+ (not 3+) to hit Missile Mounted. Also, Elephants ignore the armour of a target in combat.  Hopefully these changes better align to how Elephants operated.

Possible Light Infantry representation

ABC, and other rules, have Light infantry (peltasts) differentiated from Light Archers (bowmen).  Some rules (for examples Rally Round the King) do not. In DotS I have made these both Infantry Missile.  While it is probably not needed as at a high level they were a bit similar, I am thinking of changing Light Infantry to 4+ in attacked by Melee Infantry (currently 5+) to represent the ability to evade/flee from the infantry that Light Archers do not have. For balance, Missile Mounted would be 4+ Vs Light Infantry (rather than 5+) to represent the greater range and speed of Mounted Vs Infantry. 

Verdict

Well, after all these changes I am in the middle of playing the 36 Ancient battles in the expansion.  I am using the two optional rules of allocating reserves to a sector and melee infantry hit on a 4+ with no mutual destruction Vs other melee infantry.  So that post (or posts) will come along soon.  And then I am 90% certain I will expand the 6x6 rules a little and play some Peter Sides scenarios on an 8x8 gridded battle.  More on why I would replace my own rules with these ones will get discussed in its own blog post, but basically I went in my rules with 1d6 to avoid opposed rolls with 2d6 (not that fond).  But happy for each side to roll 1d6 +/- some mods without any comparison. Another ruleset that does this (each side simultaneously does missile fire, 1 die each side, then simultaneous melee, 1 die each side) that I really like and keep meaning to play again is the Irregular Miniatures Ancient Rules.