Callinicum refight with Armati 2 take 2

As mentioned previously, I thought about an Armati re-fight with smaller forces.  So I've replayed it now.  Here is the force breakdown for each side:

Sassanian Persian CR: H:3; L:1; BP:4; Init:5
2 Sassanian Cavalry HC 5(1)0 +2 Lance/Bow
4 Sassanian Cavalry HC 4(1)0 +1 Lance/Bow
2 Lakhmid Cavalry LC 2(0)0 +1 Various

Byzantine CR: H:2; L:2; BP:4; Init:4
2 Skutatoi FT 5(1)1 +1 Spears/Bow
3 Heavy cavalry  HC 4(1)0 +1 Swords/Bow
1 Heavy cavalry HC 5(1)0 +1 Lance/Bow
1 Isaurian infantry  LI 4(1)2 +1 Javelin
2 Ghassanid cavalry LC 1(0)0 +1 Various

All are key but the Light Infantry.
Also, something I forgot to mention for both Armati replays is that no heavy cavalry is subject to obligatory charge.

Here is the set up - same as the last game but with smaller units.

 Set up - Persians on the left

 
Turn 1
Persians win initiative.  They move the Lakhmids light cavalry their full distance.  The FV5 heavy cavalry is wheels to the left and moved forward to support the Lakhmids.

The Byzantines moved up Ghassanid light cavalry to within javelin range of the Lakhmids.  The Isaurian light infantry is moved forwards the full distance.  The block of heavy cavalry is moved to within missile range of the Persian reserve cavalry (the only place the Byzantines may be able to gain an advantage of 3 cavalry stands vs 2).  The Skutatoi infantry is moved up their full distance.

End of turn 1

Turn 2

Missile fire was interesting - The Byzantines received 1 hit on each of the Ghassanid light cavalry, the Light infantry and one of the heavy cavalry; The Persians on one Lakhmid light cavalry, and 2 hits spread over the FV4 heavy cavalry.

Byzantines win the initiative and choose to move last.
The Persians move the Lakhmid light cavalry into contact with the Ghassanids.  Their only other move is to charge the FV5 heavy cavalry into the light infantry.

In non-intro scale, the Heavy Cavalry would receive a +1 against the Light Infantry as in that scale, Light Infantry have half the width of most other units. But in Intro this doesn't occur.  But two FV5 cavalry with impetus against one FV4 Light Infantry may not last long, even missing the +1 bonus for the cavalry.

The Byzantines move the Skutatoi heavy infantry up so if they want, they could charge (hah - as if they want to).  But it does pin the facing Persian Heavy Cavalry.
The Byzantines also move the unit of Heavy Cavalry directly forward the full distance.

For melee the Byzantines choose left to right. The Light Infantry inflicts a hit on one Heavy Cavalry stands and then is subsequently routed by combat with the next stand.  The Lakhmids rout both Ghassanid light cavalry stands for no damage to themselves.

End of turn 2

Note flesh rings used for hits, black rings for fatigue.

Turn 3
Missile fire results in a hit for each side for the line of heavy cavalry facing off in the centre.
Byzantines win initiative and choose to move first.  They move the heavy cavalry into contact and also move the infantry up further.
The Persians about face the Lakhmids, wheel and move full distance. The FV5 heavy cavalry about faces and is undressed (-1 in melee).  The General is moved to support one of the heavy cavalry.
Byzantines choose left to right for melee direction. One hit on each of the Persian HC and two hits in total in return.  The Persian general survives.

End of turn 3

Turn 4
Missile fire results in one hit from the Skutatoi heavy infantry onto the Persian heavy cavalry.

Persians win initiative and choose to move first.  The Lakhmids wheel 2 and contact the closest heavy
Byzantine heavy cavalry in the flank.  This will stop the Byzantine Heavy cavalry stand flanking the Persian heavy cavalry it is facing (which it would have been able to do and then the Persian heavy cavalry stand is fighting at 1 versus everyone).  The undressed FV5 heavy cavalry move their full distance towards the rear of the Byzantine Heavy cavalry but do not have the movement rate to make contact.

The Byzantines move the infantry to within 2 of the Persian Heavy Cavalry, again, in case they ever want to charge but they are good blockers.

Persians decide to melee from left to right.
The Persian Lakhmid light cavalry takes a hit (it was the LC 2 versus the HC 1).  The Persians lose one heavy cavalry and so does the Byzantines.  The Byzantines have reached their breakpoint.  Playing out the rest of the melee does not result in any more losses to either side.  The Persians win again.

End of turn 4 and the game

Something I forgot that I did mention after the first replay was making the Light Cavalry non-key as the Byzantines are almost certainly going to lose it, But making them key, maybe they should retreat a bit more and fight more defensively as to extend the turn when they are lost and give a possibility of the heavy cavalry in the middle making a difference.  Ah well.  Food for thought in future rules that make use key units.  I am leaning to the fact that for Armati they should be key and I should use them differently.

A view from the Persian side at the end of the game

Verdict
It is a much faster game but does not feel much like Armati.  Oh, the melee tactics are still the same but the command and control, which is the essence of Armati, is missing.  As there are no divisions with more than 3 stands, much of the tactics and decisions on divisional manoeuvring, splits etc isn't there.  I think that I prefer the last game which captured the flavour of Armati more.  With the reduced units, there was too much flexibility on movement.  I also think that at the scale I am playing that Phil has the right idea - ignore fatigue as it is unlikely to make a difference with this type of game.

Callicum refight with Armati 2

I'm going to keep this fairly Armati 2 heavy rather than a generic description.  This will allow a better comparison of the rules and how they play the scenario out.

Turn 1

Note: Armati turn sequence is:

• Simultaneous missile fire
• Roll for initiative - winner gets to choose which side moves first.
• first player moves
• second player moves
• Melee. Initiative winner gets to choose the direction of melee (left to right or right to left).  Melee directions is important for a number of reasons - the moment a side's breakpoint is reached, the games ends; also with multiple stands possibly attacking one stands, which way the melee occurs can provide advantages or disadvantages.
• Breakthrough movement - if routed an enemy can move 3.
• Rally.

No missile fire as all out of range.

Armati has quite long ranges compared to other rules.  for example, Heavy infantry move 6, Light Infantry move 9, Light and Heavy Cavalry move 15.  Foot Bows have a range of 24, Mounted bows 18, Foot javelins 9 and light cavalry javelins 6.

Persian Heavy Cavalry FV5 ready for action in the centre.

Persians win initiative and choose to move first.  Lakhmids move up and the heavy cavalry on their left (FV5) wheels and moves to be within bow range of the enemy units.  This also allows the reserve cavalry to move to the front line as well (with a wheel at the start). The right flank heavy cavalry is moved up as well.
The Persian cavalry are all in range to be able to fire next turn (within 18).

The Byzantines move the Ghassanids into javelin range - they won't last in combat so may inflict some missile damage.  The Heavy cavalry next to the Light infantry is moved forwards so the light infantry can't be contacted.

Turn 2

Missile fire results are that the Persians inflicted 5 hits and the Byzantines inflicted 1 hit on a FV5 cavalry unit.
This is unlucky for the Byantines as both sides have roughly the same missile units firing and the Persians have only a few PROT +2 units.

The Byzantines win initiative and choose to move first.

Initiative is important as the winner get to choose which side moves first and also melee direction.  Initiative also determines how many divisional splits may be performed - each split reduces initiative by 2.  And Initiative cannot be voluntarily reduced below 0.  So an army with an initiative of 6 can perform 3 divisional splits.  Not going into detail but a division can only be split either in melee (stands not in contact can split from the division)  or by missile fire (when a stand is eliminated in the middle of a division and the division is split into two).


The Byzantines move their right flank heavy cavalry and the FV5 cavalry into combat with the persian FV5 cavalry.  Due to the way the divisions line up only 2 Byzantine stands are actually touching.  In hindsight this move should have been done in turn 1.  The remaining heavy cavalry is moved forwards in support (no contact though) and the general is moved to be with one of the FV4 cavalry stands in contact with a Persan FV5.

The Persians move of f the FV4 stands of the heavy cavalry into the Byzantine FV5 (no split but a slide forwards).  The Lakhmids charge into the Ghassinids.

For melee the Byzantine's chooses right to left.
The Ghassanids almost gone - 3 hits and combined with previous missile hits has two of the stands routed. The  Lakhmids took no hits.

The number of hits a stand can take is based on the unit type.  Heavy Infantry can take 4 hits, Heavy cavalry 3, Light Infantry and Light Cavalry 2.  A unit routs when it reaches its hit limit and is removed.

In the centre the Byzantine stand with the general took a hit but general survived.  For the other two stands in contact, the Persians took a hit.  There is a Persian FV5 heavy cavalry unit with 2 hits in the centre of the board - one more hit to this unit and there will be a gap that could be exploited.

 The centre as seen from the Persians.  Flesh coloured rings are hits, black rings are fatigue.

The Ghassanids don't breakthrough - the split may be needed elsewhere.

 End of turn 2

Turn 3

Missile fire phase was poor for the Byzantines.  For roughly equal firing from both sides the Byzantines inflicted 2 (one on a Heavy Cavalry that already had a hit) and the Persians inflicted 3.

Byzantines win initiative and choose to move second.
The Persians move some stands of the units in the middle up to contact other enemy units. Not as split (as I used to think it ages ago) as the stands are still in contact. Also one of the cavalry has impetus against an enemy unit as it no longer has impetus as it is in contact with another unit.

 As there is no one around to teach me the rules, and no one else interested in reading them, I've gleaned these things from reading the Armati mailing list.  It is the subtlety of these things in the rules that I actually like as it expands the tactical options without special rules.  It would be nice if these sort of things were included as examples in the rules though as they are not obvious from reading (or  playing solo).

 My 3 year old daughter helps out - she rolled all the dice for me and also placed all the hits and fatigue markers. The board is setup in a set of map drawers.

Impetus is a core Armati rule. Various units have impetus against other types of units.  A unit that has impetus and outscores the enemy on the first melee, routs the enemy unit rather than inflicting one hit. For instance, Warbands have impetus against heavy infantry and Heavy Cavalry has impetus against all other units.  So if a FV4 cavalry unit contacts a FV6 infantry unit and outscored it in the first turn of combat (1/6 of a chance), the infantry rout rather than receiving one hit. Impetus doesn't happen for subsequent combats so it becomes a straight FV4 vs FV6 combat.  A unit contacting an enemy unit that receives impetus against it cancels out impetus for both sides (so in a HC vs HC first contact there is no impetus).  But in this latter case if a new HC unit contacts the enemy unit n the following turn the friendly unit does receive impetus, as units in melee lose the impetus bonus.  So keeping units in reserve to charge in with impetus while they are pinned from a previous turn is a key tactic. There are special rules to allow heavy infantry to deny impetus and elephants and camels but I'm not going to detail them here.

Byzantines move up the last of the Byzantines Heavy cavalry (their left).  Also moved the infantry up to cover the flank of the Cavalry to their right.

Byzantines choose melee direction of left to right.
The first melee combat - heavy cavalry Vs heavy cavalry sees the Byzantines win and the Persian stand rout.
The Persians manage to rout the heavy cavalry with the general (and so the general is lot too) and the last Ghassanid light cavalry is routed.  The Byzantines are at 5 key units lost for only 1 Persian .  Maybe the light cavalry should not be key for his battle...or maybe increase the breakpoint of the Byzantines by one.

Armati armies contain a number of key units (usually all heavy units but also including lights for later centuries).  A side loses the the instant the army loses a number of key units equal to its breakpoint.

 End of turn 3

Turn 4

Missile fire:  Nothing except for one hit on one of the Skutatoi - the same stand that has received two hits already!  Talk about unlucky.

Persians win the initiative and choose to move second.

The Byzantine Light infantry moves up to contact the Persian Light Cavalry.  The Skutatoi infantry move up to protect flank of the heavy cavalry to their right.

The Persian Light Cavalry not in contact with the light infantry split, about face and move.  The other Light Cavalry should delay the Light  Infantry for at least 2 turns (the number of hits the light cavalry can take). The heavy cavalry not in contact moves directly forwards (hopefully to about face and contact a Byzantine unit on the flank/rear.  We will see.


A unit flanked by another heavy unit uses its flank value against ALL other units and routs if outscored.  For cavalry, the flank value is normally a 0 or a 1. Being able to flank a unit is a very good thing indeed.

The Persians choose left to right for melee direction.
The Light Infantry loses but the Light cavalry is now fatigued so not so good for remaining turns.
The Persians lose a heavy cavalry on their right flank, leaving a hole for the Byzantines to exploit (which they do in the breakthough phase).  As this is the third turn of combat for a lot of the stands in the middle, there is a bit of fatigue on the middle stands.  Byzantines still a 5 key lost, Persians now at 2.


When a unit has been in melee for the number of turns equal to its breakpoint vaue, it is fatigued.  All fatigued Heavy and Cavalry stands fight at -2, light units at -1.

 End of turn 4

Turn 5

Missile fire: Each Byzantine Skutatoi infantry stand inflict one hit on each of the opposing heavy cavalry stand. The Persians inflict only one in return.


Due to the split, the Persians are now at a -1 disadvantage for the initiative roll.  The Byzantines win the initiative and choose to move first.  They move a heavy cavalry (a split) straight ahead.

The Persians wheel the Light Cavalry 6 (and are undressed) and move into the flank of a heavy cavalry stands  The Persian lone Heavy Cavalry about faces (and is undressed).

Byzantines choose a melee direction of left to right.
Byzantines lose a Heavy Cavalry early on, reaching their army breakpoint and so lose.
 
Playing out the rest of the melee, the Byzantines lose one more(a Heavy Cavalry FV5) and the Persians 3 Heavy Cavalry.  The middle is looking remarkably bare.

The Light Infantry won its combat.
I believe the Persians are better placed to re-organise and roll up the three remaining units in  the middle.

End of turn 5 (if continued melee)

Verdict

A fun and tense game.  It was played in two sessions and for one of those my 3 year old rolled all the dice but I would say the game lasted just over one hour (excluding note taking).  Adding up the points, the game was roughly core +60, so it was not going to play much faster, although the smaller number of control points would have helped.  Armati as it is doesn't give the < 1 hour game on a 2'x'2 board.  With mostly infantry, this game would have been slower. So the verdict is that Armati, while I think is a faster game than many other tournament type rules, doesn't meet my criteria.

 

I am tempted to play this again with less stands - the Persians being units of 2 cavalry each (8 stands in total) and the Byzantines having 2 stands on Skutatoi,  4 cavalry units, 1 light infantry and 2 light cavalry.  I would give each side a heavy control rating of 3 and reduce initiative by 2 to reduce the number of available splits . Hmm.  Without this reduction, Armati is not going to be as fast as I want it to be at this size.  But reductions to control ratings and initiative reduce the tactical complexity in the game.  Guess I can't have it all.

  

Callincum refight - deployment - with Armati 2

Did a refight using Armati 2 Intro rules. I do use some of the amendments proposed by the Armati yahoo group: +1 for rear firing and braced infantry denying impetus (the latter a lot more useful in Intro as you don't need to use 2 stands to deny impetus).  I use the original break-off rules.  The last change is that Armati Intro uses a ruler that is a 1/3 of the full scale game so 1" in the rules is really 1/3 of an inch.  I use centimetres instead of a 1/3 inch.  This is about a 20% increase for distance and wheels.  But makes the game easier.  I used to use special rulers but can't be bothered anymore.

Here is a photo of the board from the Persian side with the initial deployments  The line marking the start of the gentle hill is marked with black thread.

Callinicum deployment from Persian side

Persian units (right  to left flank):
Lakhmid Light cavalry
Heavy cavalry (FV5)
Heavy cavalry reserve (FV4)
Heavy cavalry (FV4)


Byzantine units (left to right as per the image above)
Ghassanid Light cavalry
Light infantry
Heavy cavalry (FV4)
Heavy cavalry (FV5)
Heavy cavalry (FV4)
Skutatoi Heavy infantry

I have a fair few armies and haven't painted anything in about 8 years.  The Sassanid Persians are Sassanid Persians, but the Byzantines will look like Late Romans.  Also, the Arab allies will look like Huns (for the Lakhmids) and Indians (for the Byzantines).  If I was more organised, I should have painted up the correct figures.  But my time is short and I would prefer the rules comparisons.  Maybe for the next scenario after Callinicum.  The painting quality of the figures varies and about half my figures were painted by someone else.

Straight after deployment, I realised that I may have been a little too generous in the divisions, so I reduced the Heavy Divisions allowance for the Persians to 3.  also in hindsight, I should have decreased the heavy division allowance of the Byzantines to 3 as well.  It is likely that the infantry would best have been served as an uncontrolled division.

Callinicum Armati 2 forces

I'll be playing in 15mm using 40mm frontage for bases.  Here are the force lists I will be using for the first replay:

Sassanian Persian CR: H:4; L:1; BP:6; Init:7
3 Sassanian Cavalry HC 5(1)0 +2 Lance/Bow
6 Sassanian Cavalry HC 4(1)0 +1 Lance/Bow
3 Lakhmid Cavalry LC 2(0)0 +1 Various

Byzantine CR: H:4; L:2; BP:6; Init:6
3 Skutatoi FT 5(1)1 +1 Spears/Bow
4 Heavy cavalry  HC 4(1)0 +1 Swords/Bow
2 Heavy cavalry HC 5(1)0 +1 Lance/Bow
1 Issaurian infantry  LI 4(1)2 +1 Javelin
3 Ghassanid cavalry LC 1(0)0 +1 Various

For interest here is the thinking behind the lists:

The Persian side should be easier to figure out.  With the battlefield being 60cm wide and each base being 4cm, this means end to end I could fit 15 bases.  With the map in the SOA battle pack showing 3 units in front and one in reserve, this means each unit could be 3 or 4 bases in width.  [There are gaps in the Persian a line and also the Byzantine force is wider than the Persian frontage so 5 bases per units fills up the table end to end which is no good.] At 4 bases per unit, this gives a total (including the reserve force) of 16 bases in 4 units.  This size of force is one that would be of sufficient point size to be deployed on a standard into board (32"x20").  So too large - and the idea is to produce a quicker game with Armati by reducing board AND force size.  So we will call it 3 bases per unit.  I will think on divisions and initiative after figuring out the Byzantine force.

The first cut for the Persian force (based on the Armati Sassanid Army List but works just as well with the Warflute Later Sassanid 531AD-622AD):

3 Sassanian Cavalry HC 5(1)0  +2  Lance/Bow
6 Sassanian Cavalry HC 4(1)0  +1 Lance/Bow
3 Lakhmid Cavalry LC 2(0)0  +1 Various

[Oh no - 12 elements - maybe I should rethink not looking at DBA ;-)]

The Byzantine force fills most of the frontage.  Based on the numbers of soldiers in each unit, my first cut -using the Early Byzantine list - is something like:

7,000 infantry: 3 FT 5(1)1 +1 Spears/Bow
4,000 heavy cavalry: 2 HC 4(1)0 +1 Swords/Bow
4,000 heavy cavalry - 3,000 as above and 1,000 well armoured heavy cavalry with spear, bow and sidearms: 2 HC 5(1)0 +1 Lance/Bow
4,000 heavy cavalry: 2 HC 4(1)0 +1 Swords/Bow
2,000 Issaurian light infantry: 1 LI 4(1)2 +1 Javelin
5,000 Ghassanid light cavalry: 3 LC 2(0)0 +1 Various

14 units which fills almost all the frontage.  For a first cut this is not too bad.  But there is an issue: the Ghassanid LC ran away from the more experienced Lakhmid LC.  Currently they are equal in number of units and quality.  While I could make a few of the Lakhmid veteran, a simpler option may be to downgrade the Ghassanid to 1(0)0.  So I'll do that.

For control ratings and initiative the Byzantines were on the poorer side for this battle (see the Battle pack for reasons).  A Sassanian CR of H:4, L:1 fits nicely with deployment and allows for one unit of heavy cavalry to be more maneuverable. An Initiative of 6 allows 3 splits and is the same Initiative rating as the army list from Warflute.  For the Byzantines, a CR of H:4 L:2 allows for a divisional split along unit lines.   A Byzantine initiative of 6 should reflect the poor command and control shown during the battle as what otherwise would be expected (They have an initiative of 8 in the army lists).

All units except the LI I will key.  Breakpoints will be the number of key units divided by 2.  This gives 6 for both sides.

Links to Armati rules reviews

There are a number of reviews that already exist for Armati 2 so rather than write another one, here are some links:

2006 TMP discussion on Armati 2: link
2005 TMP discssion when Armati 2 came out.  Includes a long description of the rule mechanisms: link
Boardgamegeek review: link
Farnborough Wargames Society review: link