Post Callinicum: Which ruleset is the best?

Background

I believe I have had enough of Callinicum as a battle.  I managed to try out 10 different rulesets with this battle before wanting to try another battle. As a reminder, the goal was to look at rulesets that gave a good ancients game in under an hour on a 2'x2' table.  Some of the ones I used passed, some didn't.  The definition of best of course depends on the person.  These are my views but I have tried to throw in some objective points as well.

I am not a big solo wargamer.  I much prefer face to face.  But I love reading and figuring out rules.  I also love historical battles.  So this has been an interesting experience - I get to refight a historical battle, and I get to really discover how some of the rules I own work.  And solo seems ok for this. I am not sure I could ever solo play only for the sake of playing a game.  I think, and least for the near term, I will continue to need an ancillary aim - refights, rule discovery, writing my own rules etc. 

The 10 I tried were

• Armati
• Warrior Kings
• Justified Ancients
• Fantasy Rules!TCE
• Irregular Miniatures Ancients Rules
• Mighty Armies: Ancients
• Basic Impetus
• DBA
• DBM100
• Bill Bank's Ancients

I created a webpage with links to the various battle reports.

The rules to try first

The number one ruleset I would recommend for anyone to try is DBA.  Yes, I know I wrote I am not fond of DBA.  They fit the bill perfectly, which makes sense as they were designed to play a game in less than one hour on a 2'x'2' board.  The game has a large following, the rules (despite the issues some people have with Barkerese) are comprehensive and give a good and challenging game.   So, if you are looking for a quick small game ruleset, try DBA first.  I did try DBA with a Inferior superior modification to see if it made it better for me but it didn't really.  Stick to vanilla DBA.

Number one on my list

The rules I enjoyed the most and highly recommend is Warrior Kings. This is my ruleset of choice and am looking forward to playing lots more games with it. I did make one change to make it play on 2'x2' - I changed the distances from inches to centimetres.  It is about to be released imminently again as Rally Round the King.  Well, sort of re-release. [this next section has been updated based on feedback] Ownership of the rules was acquired by John P Kelly, who made the rules available on the Warrior Kings yahoo group and recently released the final version 2 of the rules (heavily updated from version 1).  Meanwhile, back at Two Hour Wargames, Warrior Heroes was the fantasy version of Warrior Kings, now also out of print.  Warrior Heroes, without the fantasy elements, was exactly Warrior Kings.  Rally Round the King is the re-release, and updated, version of Warrior Heroes.  Warrior Kings is fast, fun, matches my view of historical outcomes, and is also unpredictable enough it creates (for me) the friction of war and limited control over what your troops will do..  It is also the most suitable of all the rules I tried for solo play..  Love it.  If you are a control freak, don't play this ruleset - or actually any rules from Two Hour Wargames ;-)

The rest, all still good

The other rulesets were all fun to play.  The choice of which one to play is really down to personal choice.  There are good bits and bad bits to all of the rules.  Here they are in roughly the order of how I enjoyed them (best first).

Irregular Miniatures

Was the most fun after Warrior Kings.  Although it uses different die sizes (d6, d8, d10, d12) to represent troop grades, and I am not a fan of this, it was really fun.  It does have a point system but no army lists at all.  There are gaps in the rules, assumes some knowledge of ancients gaming but nevertheless, I would play this again and again.  I used system one (number of stands represents the unit size e.g. a 5 stand unit has 5 stands).  I think system 2 (units set size and track casualties, e.g. the 5 stand unit is made up of 1 stand that can take 5 hits) would have too many units to make the game last under one hour (only an assumption - maybe not).

 
Fantasy Rules!TCE

These were also surprising.  Although maybe not so much as the game is touted as being rooted in historical concepts with fantasy elements added. And it forms the basis for the historical Days of Knights  rules from the same company (Chipco Games).  I found it gave a great game.  There are no historical army lists as such, but in TCE these could be generated using the army creation system; just leave off the fantasy elements.  I would play these rules again too, but did prefer the Irregular Miniature rules.

Mighty Armies: Ancients

This was the fastest of all the games - combat always results in at least a stand being eliminated, and between groups of stands at least 1d6 stands being eliminated.  It seems to have very little support, few historical army lists and you should use the revised combat dice roll system from the forums (for combat use all front ranks values and all rear support values (rather than lead fighter values and rest support)).  But I got a lot of hits on the replay. There were tactical subtleties that came from playing that were not evident just reading the rules (most rules have this but I was pleasantly surprised by MAA).  Not a set to be underestimated to produce a fun and fast game.  I would play these again too.

DBM100

DBM100 produced a fine game, and as expected, it like playing a full size DBM game but you are only looking after one command.  It does play differently to DBA (as expected).  If you like DBA, you are unlikely to like DBM (and there is commentary scattered over the web that supports this).  I thought DBM100 was fine and I am sure if you like DBMM, DBMM100 would be a great fast game too.  However, since finding Armati in 1998, DBM just doesn't do it for me anymore.  For DBM players who are familiar with and love DBM, I would say give DBM100 a go first (over other rules mentioned) if you are looking to scale down time and board size to less than 1 hour and 2'x2'.

Justified Ancients

Not well written or a great layout, no terrain system, no points, no army lists.  Just the core of a rules system with some nice mechanics.  And I think it is improved with some houserules put together by John Davis. I had high hopes but I didn't enjoy the games as much as I thought I would.  With a few tweaks I could get a really good game system out of it that matched my ideal.  It is designed for 2'x2' and under 1 hour, and achieves this.  The core rules are fine and I think the house rules are a good add on (probably mandatory).  It is worth trying them out - there is a decent game in there.  If you like well written rules with no ambiguity and nice pictures, these rules are not for you.  I would be willing to try again, and even more so with just a couple more house rules.

The ones that didn't work

The three rulesets that I found did not lend themselves to less than one hour or 2'x'2' play were:

• Armati. This played too long on a 2'x'2' table, otherwise, still my favourite ruleset on a 3'x2' board using Intro rules.
• Basic Impetus.  This gave a game in under an hour, but really needs a board size of 3'x2' or 4'x2'.
• Bill Banks Ancients.  Better as a boardgame, it does need a little bit of work to translate to miniatures.

Rule mechanism comparisons
This was supposed be be a short section and got a bit long.  So documenting the various ruleset mechanisms is found in this post. Note this is more of a mechanics listing that a comparative study.



Popularity

Using Google Analytics, the most popular refight viewed was Basic Impetus by far.  This was followed, in order of views, by Mighty Armies:Ancients, Warrior Kings, Justified Ancients, Irregular Miniatures Ancient Rules and Fantasy Rules.  The other refights have only been up a short while and also have less hits than the ones listed.

 
What next?

As Callinicum was a mostly cavalry battle, I want to retry some of the rules (and try out some ones I didn't get around to with Callinicum) on an infantry battle.  Callinicum was the battle selected for the Society of Ancients 2009 Battle Day.  The 2010 Battle Day selection was Zama.   A classical battle from the 2nd Punic War.  Infantry, Romans, Elephants, less missile-armed troops (every unit in Callinicum is missile armed) and bit of cavalry on the flanks.  A change from Callinicum and a chance to try out other parts of the selected rules.  Zama it is.  We will see how I go and how many rulesets I get though with Zama.  The ones I will use again are Warrior Kings (or likely Rally Round the King -it should be out days after this post), Irregular Miniatures and Mighty Armies Ancients.  I may use Justified Ancients with a couple of the changes I suggested. Haven't thought about which other ones to use but I have a dozen of so in my list that I didn't use with Callinicum.  See you all in North Africa.

Callinicum refight with Bill Bank's Ancients

Background
I've always been fascinated with Bill Banks Ancients board game - it is designed to fast play numerous ancient and medieval battles.  I haven't played it as much as I would like.  I have done various tweaks to it over the last 10 years for so - mostly command and control and movement restrictions.  It has been available for free for several years from Mike Nagel's original website, which is now downloadable from the  Ancients Battle Deluxe website.

The other good place to look for information on the game is at boardgamegeek.

There are variants, notably the recent Ancients Battle Deluxe (and stuff at its predecessor site that can be found there) and Hex Command Ancients. Both, IMHO, change the game too much - adding in command and control (similar to DBA, the system of CnC  I like the least), more rules, and change the way combat works. Both are very unlike the original - based on the idea, but gone a long way from it. Both do seem like good, and possibly great, games in their own right - they just don't seem to capture the simplicity flavour of the original.   I actually like the original CRT - it is simple but it generates lots of tactical options. I have tried options to create more granular outcomes (more odds columns, using the d12 variant) but keep coming back to the original CRT - it really does drive lots of tactics.  The only other changes I had considered with was adding more Armati like Command and Control and movement restrictions.

For for information of the Battle of Callinicum see my previous post.

 

Overview

If you are new to the rules, and have no idea what they are, Bill Bank's Ancients is a boardgame allowing you to replay 64 ancient battles.  It is a hex and counter game. Each side will have about 10-20 counters and the game will be over is under a hour.

 

Here are about 10 unit types with a printed strength, movement distance and missile capability (A which is good, B which is ok, or none). Each unit has two values (front and back sides) - full strength and disordered.  A unit that is disordered twice is destroyed.   The strength of a disordered unit varies with unit type e.g. a phalanx is strength 6 but disordered is 2; a heavy infantry unit is strength 4, but disordered 3, heavy cavalry is strength 4 and disordered 2, light units are strength 2 and disordered 2.  Disordering happens a lot so the differing reduction is strength is an important consideration. 

 

High level turn sequence is:

Player A moves

Player B missile fires

Player A performs combat

Player A rallies

Player B now goes  and follows the same activity order as player A

 

There are 6 turns in a game.

 

Movement points varies from 1 for Phalanx, 2 for most heavy infantry, 3 for light infantry, 5 for heavy cavalry and 6 for light cavalry.  Movement restrictions are few - 1 point to turn 60 degrees.  Can about face for 1 movement point too.

 

Missile fire is deadly - an A class unit (heavy foot archers and camps) can fire out to 3 hexes. Chances to hit reduce with range.  Infantry is harder to hit than Cavalry.  A hit results in disordering the target; if already disordered it is destroyed.  A range 1, cavalry is hit on a 1-4!  B class (light infantry) has less of a chance to hit and only goes out 2 hexes.

 

Combat is optional and is between single units.  However, and enemy unit can be attacked many times if there are multiple units that can attack.  However, each combat is resolved individually.  Combat is simply to work out the ratio of attacker versus defender and roll a die on the CRT.  The CRT has only 4 columns - 1-2, 1-1, 2-1, 3-1.

There are only 3 results - Melee (M), Attacker Disordered (AD), Defender Disordered(DD) .  For AD and DD the appropriate unit is disordered, if already disordered, it is destroyed.  Melee is a little different - each of the two units in combat are disordered if not already.  So if disordered, just stay disordered - you are not destroyed.   There is no 'no effect' result (although if disordered, a Melee result is effectively no effect). on a 1-1, a 1 is AD, 2-5 is M and 6 is DD so even 1-1 will disorder an enemy if not already. And possibly reduce his strength, so another adjacent unit can attack at 2-1 and hope for a DD result. 

Even though simple, the CRT does reward tactical play and does create a simple game.  There are a few modifiers to a units strength which either double or half it.  These are cumulative so a strength 4 unit doubled twice is 64 (4x4x4).  The main modifiers are leader in combat (a double), phalanx Vs cavalry (a double for the phalanx) and terrain effects.

 

Which brings us to leaders - leaders are conceptually represented.  A side will have 1 to 3 leaders.  Leaders are removed at the start of movement, and then placed at the end of movement wherever you wish.  They stay there until the player has their move again.  So the other player gets to missile fire and melee against leaders.  Leaders double in combat.  Leaders will also automatically undisorder any unit they are with in the player's rally phase.  There is no other rally available.  So leaders are important to a) create advantages in combat and b) ger rid of critical disorder.  They are killed if the unit they are with is disordered and you subsequently roll a 1.  So they are a bit fragile.  Using leaders is a critical tactical part of the game. 

Rule conversion from hexes
The game is hex based.  I will not be playing with hexes.  I simply converted movement points into basewidths, so a move of 2 is 80cm. Units can wheel as much as they want but the distance wheeled is taken off the movement allowance.  A unit can about face for 1MP (as in the rules)  Units do not have to line up corner to corner for melee, contact is sufficient.  In the game, even if a unit was contacted (in the adjacent hex) it could still missile fire rather than melee.  I used optional rules 5.1 Zones of control (cannot leave ZOC and then combat another unit) and 5.12 missile units (missile units can move and fire).

Troops
I gave all the cavalry B missile capability if not disordered. This is based on the Byzantine scenarios in the game. This may make the game very missile focused, we will see. Note from after the game: it did slightly, but not enough I would not change it if playing again.

I also resisted implementing any house rules. I was tempted to make the elite cavalry 6-5 rather than 4-5 but this is changing the game's basic units.  It also means the non-elite cavalry would combat at 1-2 odds, which is not great.  The elite could be represented by putting the leader with them (although leaders do move).  So, I left all the cavalry as 4-5.  The Skutatoi is a 3A2, the light infantry a 2B3 and all light cavalry 2-6.

Persians
9x 4B5 (B only if not disordered)
3x 2B6
2x leaders

Panic:21

Byzantines
3x 3A2
6x 4B5 (B only if not disordered)
1x 2B3
3x 2B6
2x leaders

Panic: 21 

Based panic on the scenarios where it seems to be add up all combat values and divide by 2.

Deployment
As per other refights.  See here.

Deployment - Persians on the left

The extra unit behind a stand is a leader.

Turn 1

Persians
Advance the light cavalry and the central heavy cavalry, leave the right flank heavy cavalry in reserve.  Need to focus of this flank as it is the best chance to gain an advantage.

Byzantines
Advanced the Skutatoi and the heavy cavalry to their right in support.  This is where the Byzantines may be able to get an advantage.

Turn 2

Persians
Remembered that you don't have to move each stand in the group, so charged two heavy cavalry into the two heavy cavalry next the the Skutatoi and 2 Lakhmid light cavalry into 2 Ghassanid light cavalry. Made sure there were overlaps so the 2 stands could attack one stand.

Placed the leaders where these two combats would happen.

...and then I did the Byzantine missile fire.  Forgot how decisive it is. Against the Persian heavy cavalry with a leader, the first Byzantine heavy cavalry fire needs a 1-3! Hits and the heavy cavalry with the leader is disordered. Leader is ok.  Second heavy cavalry hits too.  Heavy cavalry is destroyed.  Leader rolls a 1 and is destroyed too.  There is no advance for the Byzantines as it is only missile fire.

On the other front, the two Ghassanids light cavalry can fire on the Lakhmids.  Also need a 1-3.  Both miss;  and thus the rolls balance themselves out.

In combat, the remaining heavy cavalry are both disordered (M on 1-1 column), a Ghassanid light cavalry is eliminated by firstly a M result on the 2-1 and then on a DD result.  The Lakhmid that caused the DD (not the one with the leader) should advance.

Found an issue with  the conversion from hexes to minis and not using front edge lineups - the light cavalry that should advance is also in front edge contact with another light cavalry.  In the hex game, a unit can have 3 units to its front (so can be attacked three times from the front) while in the minis game it will only be two. So far not to much of an issue.  But when a unit is destroyed, the unit that causes the elimination should advance.  In hexland, there other (up to) two units alongside do not block the advance. And neither do any opposing units neighbouring the destroyed unit.  But in minis, if you overlap, you are likely to have a enemy unit still in contact with you front if you destroy its neighbour.  So what to do about the advance?  Well, in this case I am going to advance the light cavalry with the leader.  This may work and seem ok for this combat, but I can imagine times it will not work.  Something to work on and keep unresolved for now.

The Persian left flank after advancing the light cavalry.

The CRT is very easy to remember, especially as I have been using this game for over 10 years.  Actually I believe the tables (melee and missile CRT) would be easier to remember than the DBA combat results.
In the rally phase, rallied the Lakhmid light cavalry with the general.

Byzantine
Byzantines do a general advance and a couple of flank of some cavalry.  The Isaurian infantry and a light cavalry gang up on a single Persian light cavalry.  Leaders are placed with the heavy cavalry in the middle.

 The clash of the heavy cavalry from the Byzantine side Disorder is represented by a green bush behind the unit.

Persians missile fire - any unit with missile fire capability can fire even if in contact.  Call it abstract or whatever but this is as per the boardgame - any missile fire can occur against opposing units.
There are a lot of opportunities for disorder - 6 B class at cavalry at range 1 will DD on a 1-3.  The Persians inflicted nothing.  The fortunes of war.

The trick for combat is to gang up on a unit - if you have two possible 1-1 attack, with the first one you are likely to both be disordered.  But the enemy unit will now be at 2-1 with the second attacker and will have a 2/3rds chance of a DD which will destroy the disordered unit.

Combat is optional so not to force units.

The Byzantine rolled a few ones and 2 which wasn't great but did manage to destroy two cavalry units.

Turn 3

Persians
The Persians moved units where possible to have a front facing unit, and a flank unit (that will be at 2-1).  The leader was placed with a cavalry unit in the centre, in case it was disordered during missile fire (of course, there is a chance the leader will die too).  The Persian cavalry facing the Skutatoi remained in place.  They are at range 3 of the Skutatoi which is a 1 in 6 chance of a hit.  If they moved up into contact, the Persians would suffer a DD on a 1-4.  Not good.

The clash in the centre again.  Things not looking good for the Persians.

Byzantine missile fire destroys a light cavalry (two DD results), the existing disordered cavalry in the centre, and the Skutatoi manage to disorder a unit.  The Persians are close to their panic score (currently 18) but luckily panic is determined at the start of a player turn.

Persians combat resulted in a destroyed heavy cavalry.

Byzantines
Losses are only a 6 for the panic check - much better than the Persians.  They are also in a much better position.
Wow!  forgot how much a unit can move.  A heavy cavalry has 5MP or 20 cm.  With unrestricted wheels.  Basically the Byzantines surround the Persian cavalry in the centre.  Leaders are placed with the heavy cavalry that could receive fire.

Persian missile fire scores two DD results on one of the heavy cavalry with the leader.  Leader saves both times, but now the leader is alone in front on the units.

In combat a Persian heavy cavalry is destroyed via two DD results.  A Lakhmid light cavalry is destroyed via a 2-1 attack in the rear and the Byzantines rolling a 6 (DE).

The centre again showing the Persians surrounded by Byzantine units.

Turn 4

Persians
Persians losses are 28 and so panic. All 4 (!) remaining are disordered if not already and move directly away from the enemy to the nearest map edge.  The light cavalry go off the map.  The heavy cavalry facing the Skutatoi are on the edge of the board.  The Byzantine leader on its own is safe as no unit can move and capture him.

I do not believe the Persians can recover enough to win any more victory points.  The Byzantines have 2 victory points so far - causing panic (1 victory point) and having 2x (and more) combat points on the map.  The Persians have 0 victory points.  I think playing for 2 more turns would not change the victory points.  We can call it a clear win for the Byzantines.


Verdict
A fun game, even if subjectively unhistorical.  Units move so fast. It is easier to picture on cardboard.  Anyway, I had a good time with the rules.  I think the CRT is brilliant - it is well balanced and not heavily weighed to one side.  The way the leaders are implemented is great,  and the simple halving and doubling for combat is easy to do.  If I had to convert it to a minis game, I would put in some sort of command and control, and reduce the movement distances. Otherwise, leave everything the way it is.

Callinicum refight with DBM

 Background
DBM was the leading ancient ruleset used in tournaments for about 15 years.  DBM has waned in the last few years as a) FOG has generally taken over around where I am as the main competition and club rules and b) the successor to DBM, DBMM, has been released.  I did play DBM back in the mid 90's for a few years, versions 1.1, 1.2, 2.0 and 2.1 and enjoyed them at the time, until I discovered Armati.

My dissatisfaction with the obvious DBx game for fast play, 2'x2' board, DBA, is the lack of grading of troop types. DBM obviously is the solution as it adds them in, as well as a whole bunch of additional rules.  But DBM is designed to be played on a 6'x4' table using around 350 points of troops.  DBM200 was a cut down version of DBM for 200 points for a faster and smaller game. I played a few games of this back in 1997 and it was as enjoyable as a full sized game.  DBM100 was another logical version, being designed for 100-150 point games on a 2'-3'x2' board.  Perfect for what I am looking for. DBM100 generals are slightly cheaper, no automatic PIP for the general and only 2 march moves max.

Note that I will be using DBM 2.1 for the replay.  I had stopped playing DBM by the time 3.0 came out, I don't have the DBM 3.0 rulebook, and there were some changes I am not familiar enough with (such as the change to how Superior works).  I probably could muddle through using a 3.1 reference sheet, but I'll stick with the rules I can easily look up.  For for information of the Battle of Callinicum see my previous post.


Troops

Persian
Based on book 2, army 69.

The Persians

From left to right
3 Nobles, Irr Cv(O) @7pts
1 Noble, Irr Cv(S) @9pts
1 General, Irr Cv(S) @12pts
1 Noble, Irr Cv(S) @9pts
3 Nobles, Irr Cv(O) @7pts

3 Lakhmid Allies, Irr LH(O) @5pts

TOTAL AP=87
Demoralised after 4 elements 

Byzantine
Based on book 3 army 4

The Byzantines

From left to right
3 Skutatoi, Reg Bd(I) @5pts
2 Kavallarioi, Reg Cv(O) @8pts
1 Boukellarioi, Reg Cv(S) @10pts
1 General, Reg Cv(S) @20pts
2 Kavallarioi, Reg Cv(O) @8pts
1 Isaurian, Irr Ax(O) @3pts
3 Ghassannids, Irr LH(I) @3pts

TOTAL AP=89
Demoralised after 5 elements  

Persians will have the first move

Turn 1

Persian
Moved up the Lakhmids, and also wheeled the Persian line and then moved it another (march) move.  Had to look up the rules to see if could move twice and yes, they can - all cavalry.

Byzantine
1 PIP. But the DBM100 rules have regular generals getting +1 to PIP roll, so 2 PIPS!  Moved the Skutatoi and cavalry line up to align with the Skutatoi

Turn 2

Persian
Moved up the Lakhmids up further but not enough to be flanked by the Isaurians. Split the Superior Nobles and moved them ahead of the main battle line.  Straightened up the remainder of the cavalry line.

View of the Byzantine right flank after the Persian move

Byzantine
Charged with the superior cavalry into opposing ordinary cavalry.  Moved up the other groups to prevent any flank attacks.
Lost a cavalry unit in the close combat.  The gamble did not pay off.

View of the Persian right flank

Turn 3

Persian
Charged in the superior cavalry and the Light Horse. One Byzantine light horse destroyed; otherwise, all Byzantine forces were recoiled.

Byzantine
Rolled a 1 for PIPS, again. Charged in the superior cavalry and also moved a single Skutatoi to protect the gap. Persians lost two cavalry units.  So the second gamble paid off!

The Persian right flank again, now missing two cavalry units

Turn 4

Persians
Superior cavalry charge in again.  A light horse moves in behind (not enough to rear contact the cavalry - could have reared the Auxilia) the Byzantine units to convert recoils into destruction.  Rereading the bit of the rules that were put in to limit the Buttocks of Death I have found a gem of Barkerese "Unless the recoilers are psiloi, this enemy is also destroyed if contacted on a rear corner only or a rear edge by the recoiling element's rear edge, or on a rear edge by its rear corner."  I had to read it a few times to figure out what it was saying!
Anyway, only one Byzantine cavalry destroyed.

Byzantine
With only a few PIPs, picked on the Persian end Cv(O) with a frontal and flank attack.  Also moved up a Skutatoi into combat with an overlapping unit so there would not be the -1 in support the the flanked combat unit.  It worked - outscored by 1 (it would have be a tie if I hadn't moved the Skutatoi up) and a Persian cavalry destroyed. But...the Skutatoi was destroyed too.  Not so good.  Especially not good as the Auxilia loses the combat with the Superior cavalry (it was a tie last combat), recoils into the Persian LH and is destroyed.  The Byzantines are demoralised and the game is over.  The Persians won.

The debacle that is the byzantine left flank

Verdict
I enjoyed this more than the the DBA games.  Not sure why - probably because this was the third game with the DBx rules and so was becoming more familiar with it.  I preferred the Superior/Inferior of DBM over that in E-BBDBA, although it did change in DBM v3.  While the rear support and tactical factors are mostly different than in DBA, most of them didn't apply in this game.  If I was ever to play a fast play DBx again, I think it would be DBM100.  These three games have not really convinced me that DBx is for me though - they are not high on my list of fast play ancient rules.

Why not try DBMM100? I have seen draft rules of DBMM about 5 years ago and read a bit about it since released so my reasons are not based on an actual play.  In DBM, there was one thing that irritated me far more than anything else.  Just one thing, and it was a small thing in DBM - that the grading factor for Fast depended on whether it was an enemy bound or not.  I really disliked this - factors depending on whose bound it was.  As I didn't mind the rest of the rules, happy to put up with it, but really wanted to play it as not dependent (and was the only rule change to DBM I contemplated).  Lo and behold, DBMM introduces...more factors and lots of outcomes dependent on whose bound it is!  Can't do it.  Call me unreasonable - really irritating in DBM, can't see past it in DBMM.  At least there are lots of other rules out there for me to try, and DBM is still around.

Callinicum refight with DBA slight mod

As mentioned in my refight with DBA, I am not keen on DBA due to the lack of differentiation of troop type as in many other rules.  Rather than go all the way to DBM, E-BBDBA (see files section of the DBA yahoo group) offers an alternative (and I quote the relevant paragraph):

Inferior (I) troops must re-roll a combat score of ‘5’ but don’t re-roll again if they score a second ‘5’.
Superior (S) troops can choose to re-roll a combat score of ‘2’; they can so choose after an (I) opponent re-rolls.  Where (S) troops oppose, the player whose turn it is can choose before the other side or after inviting him to re-roll first.  A second score of ‘2’ is not re-rolled.

I will use this to see if I think it improves what I am looking for.

For for information of the Battle of Callinicum see my previous post.

Troops


Persian
6xCv
3xCv(S)
3xLH

Byzantine
3xSp
4xCv
2xCv(S)
1xAx
3xLH(I)


Deployment
I deployed the same as in most refights, and the same as the DBA refight.

The Persians are in two groups, from their right to left: 6xCv, 3 Cv(S) and 3xLH.
The Byzantines are in three groups, from their left to right: 3xSp, 2 Cv, 2 Cv(S), 2 Cv, 1 Ax and 3xLH(I).

I have placed a general figure behind the general stand as a reminder.


Persian moves first.

Turn 1
Different tactics, slightly, to my previous DBA game, as the Persians will be attempting to overwhelm the Byzantine LH(I).  In the previous game I was aiming for their neighbours, the Ax.  So the Inferior/Superior has already modified the tactical options.
Low PIPs for both sides which gave a general advance to both battlelines.

Turn 2
Persians get low pips and advance their two groups.
Byzantines get worse (a 1) and move the Auxilia up to help protect the LH(I) slightly.  It will be a clash of almost the complete battleline.

The battlelines face off

 
Turn 3
High PIPs for the Persians.  Move the battle line up, flank a Cv on one edge and move the LH to the other flank for an overlap and out of the way of the LH for possible retaliation.  Two Byzantine Cavalry destroyed.  There was an option for a reroll when the Byzantine general rolled a 2.  The reroll was a 1!  Ah well.  Fortunes of war.
Byzantine roll high for PIPs, moves back into battle and brings up the LH.  A reroll by the Persian Cv(S) changed a destroyed to a 'remain in combat' on the reroll.  But the Persians lose another Cavalry and a LH.

View from the Persian side of the LHs on the left, and the heavy cavalry zig-zag in the centre.

Turn 4
Persian has 1 PIP and attacks a Cavalry on their right flank for no effect.  Byzantines also roll low for PIPS and attack on the other flank, bringing up the Ax and LH.  But they lost a LH (to a 1-5 roll).
Byzantines have lost 3, Persians 2.

Turn 5
Persians get a 6 for PIPs! and reform the battleline.  The dangerous combat for the Byzantines was going to the the one where a recoil for a cavalry would take it straight back into the generals element.

The centre front show the Byzantine cavalry in contact with the Persian cavalry.  If the former recoils, the General unit behind it will be destroyed.  It was.

It got a recoiled.  One cavalry and one general gone.  The other combat left was a draw.
Byzantines have lost 5 elements, including the general, Persians 2.  Persian victory.

Verdict
I thought having the Inferior and Superior helped differentiate the troops and give it a slightly better feeling for me of ancient combat.  It did help in a few instances and did change the tactics of the game.There are other things (the swing of the die for PIPs) I wouldn't mind changing.  But to me, vanilla DBA is king - it really works well as is.  By changing some of the rules around to get more of my historical feel, I think I am better off with other rules.  If I was to play DBA, I would still likely play as-is, the modifications only increased the historical feel slightly.

Callinicum refight with DBA

Rules
DBA is the primary and worldwide leader in fast play ancient rules that plays on a 2'x2' board in under an hour.  I have played about 8 games over the last 15 years and it doesn't move me.  I don't hate it, don't love it, would just prefer to play something else.  One of the things I don't like is the lack of difference between good and poor troops (unlike its big brother DBM).  I am also not fond of the PIP system - a range of 1 to 6 per turn for unit/group activation is just too much for me to rationalise.  I don't mind rolling for commands, but maybe if it was a range of 3-5 or 2-4.  There are lots of ways to change the PIP system (2d6 and best roll, 2d6/2, average die, die modifiers etc) but for this replay I will leave it as a d6.  For for information of the Battle of Callinicum see my previous post.

On the lack of poor/superior, I think after the DBA replay, I will do a quick run through with the E-BBDBA modifications for inferior and superior.  I will also, if I have the energy do a game of DBM100.

There are a lot of resources for DBA on the Net, and a good place to start is Fanacitus.

Unlike other replays, I'm not going into to much detail on the dice that was rolled etc - there is enough out there on how DBA plays.

Lastly, my concern is that the game is unlikely to go historically, in fact, the historical Callinicum tactics such as the veteran Light Cavalry chasing down the unreliable Light Cavalry isn't going to happen (or at least, won't happen without the dice going the right way).  Straight BBDBA would cure this as you can tweak the number of forces on each side to bring out the differences, as can be shown with this BBDBA refight of Callinicum.  DBA shines as a game, but maybe not as 'historical' (and it is in quotes as it is all very subjective) as BBDBA is.

Troops
One thing about DBA, troops are easy to figure out!

Persian
9xCv
3xLH

Byzantine
3xSp
6xCv
1xAx
3xLH

Deployment
Deployment is a bit harder.  Normally at the start of the game it seems to be good practice to only have a couple of groups in total so as to be able to move all units regardless of the PIP roll.  According to the scenario, there would be 4 distinct Persian groups and 6 distinct Byzantine groups.  Not great for DBA. With a minor compromise, I think there is a good case for smaller number of groups.  I have used this for deployment:

Deployment - Persians on the left, Byzantines on the right

The Persians are in two groups, from their right to left: 9xCv and 3xLH.
The Byzantines are in three groups, from their left to right: 1xSp and 6xCv+1Ax and 3xLH
Note: the Sp is by itself due to the way the original battle played out.
I have placed a general figure behind the stand with the general as a reminder.

The trick is to get some local superiority as all the Heavy Cavalry are the same.  The best place for the Persians is on their left flank where the Auxilia is a weak point.  For the Byzantines, it is their left flank with the Spear that provides the best bet.  So that will be my starting point for strategy.  Even though I said DBA didn't seem to lend itself to the historical battle, this is roughly how it went.  So much for my pre-game thoughts on standard DBA and historical scenarios!

Persian moves first.

Turn 1
Persians advance along the front and move the majority of the cavalry to the right flank.  The Byzantines roll 1 for PIPs and advances the spears.

Turn 2
Persians continue the advance.  The Byzantines get a decent PIP roll and move forwards.  It really is going to be a clash of battle lines for most of the board...

Byzantine battleline

Turn 3
Persian's advance with roughly the right half of their forces into contact - there are some slight advantages to overlaps, the Aux is a good target and some forces needs flank support.  The other half can wait - the Byzantine general hasn't been contacted yet - as can't get an advantage so did not do it.
Byzantines lose a LH, Persians lose a Cavalry (via a 1-6 roll).
Byzantines see the chance to destroy the general (it was the cavalry on the flank of the Persian general that was destroyed).  Rolled just enough PIPs to put two units on the Persian general, one on the flank.  Unbelievable - another 1-6,  but this time against the Byzantines.  Byzantine Cavalry destroyed, and now there is a Byzantine cavalry unit with a cavalry unit behind it, this seems like a target.

End of turn 3 carnage - left side shows the two Byzantine Cavalry at right angles

Turn 4
Low Pips for the Persian but manage to destroy a Cavalry.  But the LH combat, that has had 3 successive equal rolls, sees the Byzantine doubling the Persians. Each side has now lost 3 elements. (note that due the a number of stands hanging around the edge of the board from previous battles, I thought the Persians had lost 2 LHs when it was only one.  But I only realised this at the end of the game when I was setting up for the next one.)
Byzantines gets a high PIP roll and pick on the remaining Persian LH and also use the Byzantine General to get an advantage in the centre battle line...Persian LH destroyed.  Byzantine recoils in the centre.

End of game

Persians have lost 4 elements (really only lost 3 - see note for turn 3) and the Byzantines 3.  Games ends with a Byzantine victory.

Verdict
A very clean game.  I liked playing it.  I can see why so many people play it. There is tactical depth to the game and the rules are very complete, tight and fit well together. It meets the requirements of playing under one hour and using a 2'x'2' (as expected as the rules are specifically designed for this!).  However, it just doesn't met what I am looking for in the feel of a historical game. I like to see a bit of missile fire rather than it abstracted.  Every unit in the Callinicum battle had bows or javelins, and yet not one die roll for long range fire. And how to represent the inferiority of the Ghassanid light cavalry?  In BBDBA is could be done by having less of them but not practicable at this level.  Don't gt me wrong.  I do like DBA and would play it again.  It just isn't in my top few ancient miniature games.  But I would recommend them to anyone to try them as if you like them, they are complete, comprehensive and fun.

Callinicum refight using Basic Impetus

Rules
I've had a copy of Basic Impetus (BI) since early 2008 and pushed some units around soon after.  Thought it was a fantastic system and acquired Impetus as soon as it came out (but that story is for another day).  Tried playing it with DBA sized units but move rates are tiny.  It really plays well with recommended base sizes (naturally).  I did a couple of half-completed games solo two years ago.  So I am coming at them fairly fresh.

Basic Impetus, clarifications, armies lists etc can be found at the Dadi and Piombo Basic Impetus site.

There is an active forum, an active Impetus yahoo group and an Impetus news blog. While there are a few reviews of Impetus, the only one comprehensive Basic Impetus review I could find is a review at BoardGameGeek.

Basic Impetus is the free simplified version of Impetus.  Impetus adds in command and control, more interactions, more unit and combat differentiators (and more).  But at its heart, Basic Impetus is a cut-down Impetus (which is a good thing).

Note: I may play the full Impetus at a later date with Callinicum with everything halved - bases are halved and a U=5mm.  Halving the U in Impetus isn't so bad as in Impetus and units have opportunities to move more than once per activation so the total move distances are not as short as in Basic Impetus.Using single DBx type bases, I could reuse my existing deployment.  The forces would be about 360 points each and, while the game would play on a 2'x2', may take longer than a hour.  So full Impetus is still on my maybe play list.

Rule modifications used in the replay
The one main thing I was never keen on in BI was the charging unit got Impetus while the charged unit got no bonus.  The impetus bonus is quite important for combat.  Impetus has rules for counter-charging but not so in BI.  However, there is a Baroque free expansion for Basic Impetus.  This allows counter-charging for non-disordered units.  Somewhere on the forum or the yahoo mailing list the question came up whether the Baroque rules could be used for non-Baroque BI to which Lorenzo's (author) reply was something along the lines of "you could if you wanted to".  So here are the rules from Baroque (and I think there is one from Impetus) that I will be using in my refight:

• Counter-charging if the charged unit is not disordered.
• Units can about-face and be disordered.
• Light and Medium Cavalry that did not win melee versus infantry must retreat 5+d6U and are disordered.
• Infantry cannot pursue Light and Medium Cavalry that retreat due to not winning a melee versus infantry.

Troops
The main hurdle to overcome is that each Persian units fit nicely into 3 bases of 40mm wide on a 2'x2' board.  Impetus uses 80mm wide units.  So the deployments I have used for prevous replays will have to change to accommodate BI on 2'x2'.  Note BI plays fine on 3'x2' and could probably make the deployment look fine on 3'x2', but 3'x'2' is not in scope of the refights.

So I will go with the following units:

Persian VDT=13/7

2 CM(*) M=10, VBU=5, I=2, VD=3, Comp Bow B
2 CM M=10, VBU=4, I=2, VD=3, Comp Bow B
1CL Lakhmid M=12, VBU=4, I=1, VD =1, Javelins

Byzantine VDT=15/8

1 T Skutatoi, M=5, VBU=4, I=1 VD=3, Comp Bow A
1 CM(*) M=10, VBU=5, I=2, VD=3, Comp Bow B
2 CM M=10, VBU=4, I=2, VD=3, Comp Bow B
1 FL Isaurian M=8, VBU=4, I=1, VD=2, Javelins
1 CL Ghassanid M=12, VBU=3, I=1, VD =1, Javelins

Troop types based on the relevant lists.

The Byzantine has one extra unit but this is offset by the Persian having an edge in cavalry quality.

Deployment
Deployment will be similar to other refights.

Deployment - Persians on the left

Persians from their right to left:
CM VB4
CM VB4
CM VB4
[these two are one group)
CM VB5*
CL

Persians

Byzantines from their left to right:
T
CM VB4
CM VB5*
CM VB4
FL
CL

Byzantines

Not knowing how groups are going to pan out with less units and table than a normal BI game, I've opted to create one group on the Persian side, just to see.  They are easily split up if they don't work. I was tempted to put the 3 Byzantine's into one group as well but I had already taken setup pictures and feeling lazy to take them again ;-)

Markers: I use a little green bush behind a unit to indicate disorder, and use black casualty rings to mark losses.

Turn 1
As per other refights, i will automatically give the first turn initiative to the Persians.

Persian
Activate CL and move full distance ahead.

 Nadia, my 3 year old daughter, very excited to be helping to move the Lakhmids

Activate the CM VB5 and move them a little to the left full distance to support the CL.
Activate the CM VB4 reserve cavalry group and move directly ahead
Activate the rightmost CM and move 5 ahead.

Byzantine
The Byzantines best best it to try and gain an advantage on their left flank with the infantry and elite cavalry.
Activate infantry and move full ahead.
Activate the leftmost CM and move full distance ahead.
Activate the elite cavalry and move full distance ahead.
These units of cavalry are 15 away from the opposing Persian cavalry which is sort of in charge reach - charge distance for the CM is 10 +1d6 so there is a 2/3rd chance of not making it and being in disorder.
no other moves.

Note: as most of the units moved, no firing would have been effective.

End of turn 1

Turn 2
Persians win initiative

Persians
Activate elite cavalry, rally disorder.
Activate CL and move to 10 away from Ghassanid CL
Fire a CM at opposing elite CM: 4 -3 = 1d6. rolled 6!
Elite CM passes cohesion test (just - needed a 5-1 =4 and rolled a 4) but still disordered.
Other firing cavalry had no effect.

Byzantine
Move CL to the rear.
Rallied elite CM.
fired CM at opposing CM - 1 damage and Persian passed cohesion test so only disordered.
Fired Skutatoi with 3d6. No damage.

End of turn 2

Turn 3
Byzantines win initiative.

Byzantine
The Byzantines are actually in a great position - they can snipe at the Persians and are in a decent defensive line.  Without the normal flanks that you get on a larger board, there is not so much the Byzantine player needs to worry about.  Loathe as I am not to move anything, I will simply fire at the Persians.

Skutatoi 3d6 at opposing cavalry.  1 Damage that the Persian cavalry fail to pass the resulting cohesion test - first VBU loss of the game.
No other firing resulted in damage.

Persian
Really need to move!

Lakhmid CL move to within 12 of the opposing Ghassanid CL.
Elite CM with general moves ahead 10U.
CM in the middle with disorder move ahead to be within 11 of opposing CM.
CM in the middle that was in the group with the disordered CM moves up alongside.
I am tempted to move the cavalry opposite the Skutatoi infantry up as well....why not.  They move there full distance up (and end up 11U away from the Skutatoi).

Note: is was this turn I noticed that with less units, groups do not seem to play a big part of tactics, though they do with more units.  If the CM unit in the middle was not disordered, i may have been able to charge them as a group, but that would have been the case in a larger game too.  It is simply there are not as many units to make up groups...
it was also this turn that the board being side to side full of units means there are no flanks to cover like there normally are in BI on a larger table.

I didn't take a end of turn 3 picture, so here is Nadia during turn 3, helping out still.

Turn 4
Byzantines win initiative

Byzantine
Time to fight back!

Skutatoi fire at the opposing CM - no damage.

The CM next to the Skutatoi charge the disordered Persian CM.  The distance is 11 so they make contact.  Persian CM cannot counter-charge as it is disordered.
Byzantine have 4 (VBU) +2 (impetus bonus) = 6d6.  rolled 1 damage.  Persian's fail cohesion test and take 1 permanent loss. 
Persian have 4(VBU) -1 (disorder) =3d6. rolled 1 damage. Byzantine's pass cohesion test and are only disordered.
Persians retreat 1.
Now, the Byzantines could followup but would be 3d6 to 2d6 which isn't great odds. If the Persians manage to get two activations in a row they could remove disorder and charge with 5d6 to 3d6 (Byzantines would not have had a chance to remove their disorder).  Much the same if Persians remove disorder in the next turn and then the Byzantine turn - not worth charging with disorder, especially as I am using the counter-charging rule.  Maybe the Byzantine will followup after all.  The main aim was to remove the unit from the group so the other Byzantine CM can charge the other unit of the group and not contact both units (which it would have done).
I will charge, just to see how pursuit works.
Neither player scores any damage so are locked in melee.

The elite CM with the general charge the opposing CM.  Opposing CM countercharge and the troops are moved to meet halfway between them.
Byzantines roll 5 (VBU) + 2 (Impetus) = 7d6. 2 damage.  Persians critical number is 2. fails cohesion test (rolled a 6) and takes 4 losses which removes the unit.
Persians roll 4 (VBU) + 2(Impetus) = 6d6. 2 damage.  Byzantine critical number is 4 (including +1 for general). passes test and is disordered.
Fired other CM with no effect.

Persian
Charge the Ghassanid CL with the Lakhmid CL. No room for the Ghassanids to retreat so counter charge
Persian rolls 5d6.  1 damage. Byzantine rolls a 6 for cohesion test - fails and is routed.
Byzantine rolls 4d6. 2 damage.  Persian's critical number is 2.  Roll a 4 and receive 2 losses.

Elite CM charge the opposing CM and FL.  Distance is 13. roll a 5 for charge bonus so OK. Both opposing units counter charge.
Byzantines nominate the CM as the main unit.
Persians roll 7d6.  2 damage. CM critical number is 2.  rolls a 5.  3 losses.
Byzantines roll 9d6 (4+2 for the CM and (4+1)/2 for the FL).  1 damage.  CM critical number is 5.  Rolls a 4 so passes and is disordered.
CM retreats 1; FL retreats 2

Persian decides to pursue, no need to roll for pursuit bonus -  the Byzantine CM is only 1 away.  The Byzantine Cm can countercharge.
Persian elite CM rolls 4d6. no damage.
Byzantine CM rolls 3d6 (1 VBU + impetus of 2). 1 damage.  CM critical number is 4.  rolls a 2.  passes.  Already disordered so takes a loss.  Persian has to retreat and retreats 3.

Byzantine pursues (it will be 3d6 each so why not?). rolls a 5 for distance so makes it. Elite CM cannot countercharge.
Byzantine rolls 3d6. no damage.
Persian rolls 3d6. no damage.
Locked in melee.
Note: I have just realised the FL should have been the main unit at the start of this melee as it is the unit with most contacted edge.  Ah well.

The next activation is the carryover CM melee.
Persians roll 2d6. 1 damage. Byzantines critical number is 3 and roll a 4.  Fail and take 1 loss.
Byzantines roll 3d6. no damage.
Byzantines retreat 2.
Persians do not pursue.

Persian CM opposite the Skutatoi charge (else they will get whittled away with missiles).  Distance is 13.  Roll a 5 for charge bonus so OK.
Skutatoi countercharge.
Note that this would not occur in Impetus as infantry cannot countercharge cavalry.  If I play with the countercharge rule again, I would disallow infantry from countercharging cavalry.
Persians roll 5d6. 1 damage. Skutatoi critical number is 3. They roll 3 and pass, just disordered.
Skutatoi roll 5d6. 1 damage. Persian CM critical number is 2. They roll a 5.  3 loss which is all their remaining VBU and rout.  Skutatoi do not pursue.

VD status
Persians has lost 2 CM with a VD=3 for a total of 6 (7 is 50%)
Byzantines have lost a CL VD=1 for a total of 1 (8 is 50%)

End of turn 4

Turn 5
Byzantines win initiative.

Byzantine
Elite CM with general charge the Persians in melee with another Byzantine CM.  The main unit is the other Byzantine CM as it has more frontage in contact.
Byzantines roll 5d6 (3 for main unit, 4/2 for support). 2 damage.  Persian critical number is 1.  Rolls 5 which is 4 losses and routs.
Persian rolls 2d6. 1 damage. Byzantine critical number is 3.  rolls 6.  3 losses.

FL charge the elite CM in melee.  rolls a 1 for charge bonus which is not enough to gt there.  Oops.  disordered.

Activate the CM in melee.
Byzantine rolls 1d6. no damage.
Persian rolls 2d6. no damage.
Stay in melee.

I will not bother moving anything else as the Persians cannot move enough to affect any unit.  They only have once chance to destory a CM, which still will not be enough to reach the Byzantine VDU breakpoint.

Persian
I'll just do the melee to see if anything happens and nothing else.  Persians have lost and the end of the turn regardless.

Activate the CM in melee.
Byzantine rolls 1d6. no damage.
Persian rolls 2d6. no damage.
Stay in melee.

End of turn 5 and the game.

VD status
Persians has lost 3 CM with a VD=3 for a total of 9 (7 is 50%).  Army broken.
Byzantines have lost a CL VD=1 for a total of 1 (8 is 50%).

Verdict
Basic Impetus is a great game.  It has good mechanisms that tie nicely together.  It plays fast.  But...I do not think it is well suited to 2'x2'.  5-6 units a side is actually a lot different to the 7-10 normally for BI.  There is less flanking, less groups and generally even more random than BI normally is.  I didn't really feel like I was capturing the tactics used in the original battle.  I think I would have with a few more units on each side. So,  while I did enjoy BI, it needs to be played on a larger board (as it is designed to do!).

Callinicum refight with Mighty Armies Ancients

Rules
Mighty Armies:Ancients (MAA) is the ancients version of the fantasy rules Mighty Armies.  MAA was released in 2008 by Rebel Minis where it can be purchased as a PDF.   Mighty Armies Ancients is pitched as a fun fast game that is not aiming for historically accurate but containing the historical element.  I think it succeeds admirably at this.


Reviews of Mighty Armies (not MAA) can be found at RPG.Net and in a The Miniatures Page post.


There is a forum which does not have a lot of MAA action but does contain some useful info on rule changes (more on this below). There is a Mighty Armies: Dark Ages in the pipeline.  

Mighty Armies Versus Mighty Armies: Ancients

Here is a quick summary of the differences between MA and MAA:

• MA is played on 2'x'2' (standard is 40 point armies), MAA is 3'x2' (standard is 60 point armies).
• MAA has a point system within the rules and a selection of army lists. MA has army lists that contain definitive units with an associated point cost (these are not in the rules but are supplied with the boxed armies or can be downloaded from the forum site).
• MAA shooting phase is before combat, MA is after.  Possibly because of this, shooting range in MAA is 7" compared to the MA range of 5" (Long range in MAA is 9", in MA it is 8")
• MA has MPs can be spent on magic while MAA has commands; but these commands are equivalent to the magic effects in MA.
• MA difficult ground combat modifier is -2, MAA it is only -1.
• In MA, the general has a rally ability which is not in MAA.
• Some of the MAA special abilities have a different name to that in MA e.g. the MA Weak ability becomes MAA Slave ability.  Cavalry charge seems to be a new ability (+2 to charging rather than +1) in MAA that is not found in MA.
• MA has only one victory condition. MAA includes another one - destroy enemy general and more AP worth of units.

Forces
For information on the Callinicum battle see here.


Firstly,  I thought for quite a while on whether to create second support lines for the units.  This would give them maximum combat values.  But then I realised that this would make the Persian heavy cavalry groups contain 6 elements and move slower.  So I hit on what I think is a much better solution which is NOT to have second support units except where this would make the group too fragile.  The obvious one to provide a rear support unit to is the light infantry.  So the Light infantry group will be two units deep.  I also think making the infantry a 6 unit groups will make it harder to move (costing 2 MPs) which is not a bad thing given the way the battle went.  Will have to make sure this doesn't make them too strong.  I did this by classifying them as Archers rather than Heavy Infantry - the front fighting value is one less, and support is only 1 not 3.  So the total fighting value of the Skutatoi group is 12.  The heavy cavalry facing them will be 12 (but will get a charge bonus).


Lastly, in MAA, groups can form and reform with no penalty (except in MPs).  I want to make the groups sort of stay together as historically.  As the first thing the Byzantines may likely do is make the three 2 unit groups into two 3 unit groups, I will have a rule just for this scenario that the groups cannot split and reform.  Groups can split as per normal in MAA, but to attach a unit into a different group that originally will cost 2MP.  For my replay, I am unlikely to do this anyway, just to see how the 2 unit groups go up against the 3 unit groups.  I didn't split groups which was good, as some tactics I hadn't thought of came through.


I play with the rules suggested on the forum that replace the combat total from primary fighter and adjacent support values, with Front rank fighting value + rear rank support value.

Note: I will not be using the Strike fear command.  I will be using only those commands that effect the friendly side, not the enemy.

I will deploy the units similar to the First Game with Armati.


Persian
6 Seasoned Heavy Cavalry, Speed:6, Fight:4, Support:3, Shooting I, Cavalry Charge
2 Veteran Heavy Cavalry, Speed:6, Fight:5, Support:3, Shooting I, Cavalry Charge
1 General - Cavalry, Speed:5, Fight:6, Support:3, General, Shooting I, Cavalry Charge
3 Seasoned Light Cavalry, Speed:7, Fight:3, Support:2, Javelin


Byzantine
6 Seasoned Archers, Speed:3, Fight:3, Support:1,Shooting I
4 Seasoned Heavy Cavalry, Speed:6, Fight:4, Support:3, Shooting I, Cavalry Charge
1 Veteran Heavy Cavalry, Speed:6, Fight:5, Support:3, Shooting I, Cavalry Charge
1 General - Cavalry, Speed:5, Fight:6, Support:3, General, Shooting I, Cavalry Charge
2 Seasoned Light Infantry, Speed:4, Fight:3, Support:2, Javelin, Mobile
3 Light Cavalry, Speed:7, Fight:3, Support:2, Javelin

Army points are Persian 60 and Byzantine 53.  Note in hindsight the Archers would have been better as Shooting II and then the Byzantine AP would be 59.


Deployment

Just for comparison, I've included the total combat value of the unit by adding the front combat value and the support value of the rear unit.


Persian - from right flank to left
1 group of 3 seasoned Heavy Cavalry (combat value = 12)
1 group of 3 seasoned Heavy Cavalry (in reserve) (12)
1 group of 2 veteran Heavy Cavalry and 1 General (16)
1 group of 3 seasoned Light Cavalry (9)


Byzantine - from left flank to right
1 group of 6 seasoned Archers (12)
1 group of 2 seasoned Heavy Cavalry (8)
1 group of 1 veteran Heavy Cavalry and 1 General (11)
1 group of 2 seasoned Heavy Cavalry (8)
1 group of 2 seasoned Light Infantry (5)
1 group of 3 Light Cavalry (6)

Now if only I had a deployment picture to go with the above.  I thought I had taken one...but no.  Luckily, it would look very similar to all the other deployment pictures, the Fantasy Rules! being the closest.  Instead, it has given me an excuse to post a picture of Nadia, my 3 year old daughter, hepling me with the Persians in turn 1:

Nadia helping me in turn 1

Movement rates in MAA are faster than the other rulesets so I deployed as per MAA - no more than 6" from each side's rear edge.


The Persian side will move first.


Turn 1

Persian


Persian MP = 3


MOVE
Wheeled the Lakhmid light cavalry slightly and then moved their full distance.
Wheeled the Elite heavy cavalry slightly and then moved their full distance.
Wheeled the reserve heavy cavalry and then moved their full distance.


SHOOT
The 3 elite heavy cavalry is within 7" of the byzantine heavy cavalry.  Needs a 6 on each roll.  Result is no effect.

 End of Persian turn 1 (My daughter insisted of having her hand in the shot!  This is the least obscured shot)

Byzantine

MP = 6

Due to the lower values of the units, the Byzantines need to get a local advantage which really means a unit on the flank.  However,  even that will not be enough as a flank gives the opponent a -1.  Not really enough when you have a difference of 4 or more.  Oops - just figured it out - a flank attack will only have one unit opposing it - not 3 (in this case) - as a flanked stand has no supporting stands.

MOVE
And I've also realised if you move one unit into another so the stands from one are offset against the other, you can gain superiority if your stand has a greater score.  This may not make much sense in reading but the first move for the Byzantines is to move the elite heavy cavalry into contact with the Persian elite heavy cavalry with the Byzantine general contacting a Persian veteran heavy cavalry. Each only getting one support (with the same support value) and so the Byzantine will get not only the charging bonus but starts with a greater group score.  See the picture for what I mean:

Byzantines at the bottom hit the Persian unit offset and get a local advantage

Moved infantry up full distance (note this cost 2 MP).
Moved up the heavy cavalry between infantry and general to protect the gap.

Note: weird being able to wheel before and after movement - no other ruleset so far does it this way!

Wheeled the heavy cavalry next to the light infantry so it can shoot at the Persian light cavalry.
No other moves

SHOOT
The Skutatoi infantry fire on the Persian reserve heavy cavalry.  Need a 6 (on each of 3 shots). Got one and one stand is destroyed.
Byzantine Heavy Cavalry also fire at this group (2 shots).  Need a 6.  Got one as well and another stand is destroyed.
Heavy Cavalry on the other flank fire on the Persian light cavalry.  Need a 6 (with 2 shots). Got one and one stand is destroyed.

So shooting has accounted for 3 stands.  Deadly.  Also good rolling - 7 rolls and 3 sixes!

...and I forgot about commands! The Byzantines had 2 unused MPs.  Could have given two stands +1 shooting with the unused MPs.  I actually didn't roll any 5's so it would have made no difference.  Must remember commands.  Must remember commands.

COMBAT
Byzantines: 6 (general unit FV) + 3 (support) + 2 (cavalry charge) = 11 + d6 of 5 = 16
Persians: 5 (veteran heavy cavalry FV) + 3 (support) = 8 + d6 of 4 = 12.
Persians lose - one unit destroyed.  Rest driven back.

Persians are 4 units down already to 0 loss to the Byzantines.

 End of turn 1

Turn 2

Persian

MP = 5

MOVE
Turned around the elite heavy cavalry that were driven back.
Charged the light cavalry into the opposing light cavalry.
Both are armed with javelins so need to declare their use.  Assume simultaneous.  Each stand needs a 6 to inflict a loss. Persians succeed in destroying the middle light cavalry, splitting the group.
Moved the heavy cavalry on the Persian right flank up to try and support the lone heavy cavalry in the middle of the board.
No other moves.  Will save the 2 MPs for commands - one for a shot and the other for the light cavalry combat.

SHOOT
Heavy Cavalry group and the single heavy cavalry unit on the right flank shoot at the byzantine heavy cavalry in the middle.  4 shots at the heavy cavalry.

Note: The elite heavy cavalry can't be destroyed by shooting (they are FV5 which cannot be affected by shooting I units) or I would shoot at them.

I will add one command to the 4th shot.  rolls are: 1,1,2,6.  one Byzantine heavy cavalry destroyed.

COMBAT
Persian: 3 (seasoned light cavalry) + 2 (support) +1 charging + 1 (command point) = 6 + d6 of 4 = 10
Byzantine: 2 (light cavalry) = 2 + d6 of 1 =3.  Unit destroyed.

Byzantines have now lost 3 units (Persians still at 4).

End of Persian turn 2 (looking from Byzantine side at the Byzantine right flank)

Byzantine

MP=6


MOVE
Can only straight line move into a charge so options to charge are limited.



The Elite heavy cavalry charge into the single Persian heavy cavalry.
On the right flank, wheeled the heavy cavalry to face the light cavalry for better shots.
The heavy cavalry in the middle is a goner and will bring the Persian losses to 5.  All the Byzantines need is to destroy at least 1 Persian unit by shooting and the Persians will have lost 6 units.  This is the breakpoint for the Persians and then the Byzantines win.

So 2 MPs used.  The rest will be spend as commands on shooting.

SHOOT
How to proportion the commands over the shots? I will make the first 4 shots have a command applied and so will be a 5+ (all the targets are FV3-4).

Won't go into detail of who targets who but results are : The Persian heavy cavalry group of three units on the Persian right flank is entirely gone.  The first four shots from the infantry and lone heavy cavalry were 6,1,6,5!

COMBAT
Byzantine: 4 (seasoned heavy cavalry) + 3 (support) +2 (cavalry charging) = 9 + d6 of 4 = 13
Persian: 4 (seasoned heavy cavalry) = 4 + d6 of 4 = 8.
Persian heavy cavalry destroyed.

Persians have lost 8, Byzantines 3.  Byzantines have broken at least 1/2 of the Persian units and therefore have won.

 End of turn 2 (and the game)

Verdict
Two turns and the game is over!  That is what I call a fast game. Including setup, playing and taking notes took an hour.  I think the game itself lasted around 10 minutes.  I also think with average shooting results it would have gone to 3 or 4 turns.   All infantry I expect would take longer than 15 minutes but not much more.
It may be more suited, with the number of points, to a 3'x'2' board to have a bit more room to move but it played perfectly well on 2'x2' for this scenario.  I thought it would be a little 'gamey' in that the big veteran units with high FV would dominate but by careful manoeuvres.  That wasn't the case here - the lower FV units can hit on the flank or one edge of larger units to gain an advantage.  Not to sure about commands with unused MPs, especially for shooting.  Making a normal 6+ attack on a 5+ means you are actually doubling the chance of a hit.  That is quite significant.  I do think commands have a place to increase the fighting value of a unit to gain a local advantage.  I would play this again.  Any combat will result in a least one unit destroyed (ok, except for when the outcome scores are equal) - this certainly helps it be fast.  It does lend itself to tweaking - pikes I know are already one thing on the forum and are expected to be in the MA: dark ages.  I thought about changing the shooting distance for the cavalry but maybe next time I would make the Skutatoi Long Range (which means they fire out to 9" and also increase their AP and therefore the two side would have just about an equivalent score).   I would possibly restrict movement flexibility a little, but that is just me.  In summary, I liked it - it was fast, it was fun, it played fine on a 2'x2' and it even had a historical feel to it.