|
Post by stevie on Feb 26, 2019 1:29:26 GMT
Funny too, no one seems to want to make the Spartan 4Sp "better" than the Athenians in the DBA system. Yet apparently there was some considerable trepidation among the hoplite states to face Sparta in open battle. Oooo, please sir, I do sir! fanaticus.boards.net/post/11067/ (see the last paragraph at the bottom of that post)
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Feb 26, 2019 1:48:37 GMT
8Bw +1 v Sp play test.
It’s a nice sunny morning in 490 BC, and the Greeks have decided to spend the day on Marathon beach. But those pesky Persians have got up early and placed their towels in all the prime spots. If the Greeks want to build sandcastles that day, they are going to have to fight for it.
Forces: I/52f Later Athens against I/60c Early Persians. The Persians won the aggression roll so the Greeks are the defenders. Rules: 8Bw +1 in close combat with Bd/Sp/supported Pk, and ignore the ‘Threat Zone shooting priority’ rule. But I shall also be applying Joe Collins suggestion to add ‘+1 PIP to contact Bows’. Terrain: just a 1 BW deep waterway...other terrain was small and 1 BW from the table edges so out of the way. Placement: both sides deploy as far forwards as possible, 3 BW from the centre-line. (All my heavy Sp infantry are on 20mm and not 15mm deep bases, while the Persian 7Hd is 30mm deep) (Note that the only troops that pursue are the Persian Hordes) : : : S2 J1 J2 : : S1 S10: : S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S8 S9 : (J = Ps javelinmen, underlined shows generals) W : : S -+-> N : : (the dotted line shows the deployment zone) E : : C1 3A : Hd B1 B2 B3 B4 Sp C2 : C3 (B = 8Bw, 3A = fast auxiliaries, P = Psiloi) : : P1 : P2 : : : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 BW deep Waterway
The Persians, as the invaders, have deliberately chosen to deploy with their backs to the sea. This is so that their fleeing cavalry will halt at the waterway instead of running for a long distance, which might take them off the table. And their Psiloi are off to one side instead of directly behind their 8Bws. This is because out in front they would block shooting, plus the left wing only has 3Ax and 7Hd, so may need reserve replacements.
The Greeks, as the defenders, deploy first. They plan on first expanding their wing columns, with S2 moving 1 BW left (i.e .south) then 1 BW east to align with S3, while S1 moves 2 BW south (and will have to align with S2 at a later date).
The Battle Both side’s skirmishers were soon chased off by shooting and close combat, and concentrated bow-fire recoiled S5. Because of Joe’s rule the Greeks needed 2 PIP’s to contact any bows, but rolled and only got 3 PIP’s. So group S6-S10 charged B3-C3 (2 PIP’s) and advanced the recoiled S5 enough to protect S6’s flank from attack. B1 and B2 were free to shoot, and their concentrated fire made S5 recoil again, but its TZ still protected S6’s flank. Fighting forced the Persian right wing back (one Cav being doubled, which fled back to the beach for some ice-cream). But S6, overlapped by B2, recoiled.
The Persians tried to re-dress their line, and concentrated close range shooting, CF 2 v CF 2 (with 4 chances in 36 (11%) of a double) again managed to recoil one spear, but couldn’t kill it. There was no close combat as no-one pursued.
The Greeks then got a better PIP roll of 5, and both Greek wings slammed into the Persians, with S5 again moving-up to use its TZ to protect its neighbours from being attacked in the flanks. Only B2 was free to shoot and had no effect. In the close combat 3A was overlapped and doubled, while on the Persian right Sp was double overlapped and destroyed (CF 2 v CF 5, 12 chances (33%) out of 36), while all the other Persians contacted recoiled...apart from the Hd.
The Persians trted to use their Psiloi Threat Zones to cover the gaps, but couldn’t get to the right wing in time. Their concentrated close range shooting did get a lucky double result against S6, but J2 was in position to cover the gap. From then on it looked like Cannae...B4 was hard flanked by S8 and as the first 8Bw destroyed counts as two elements lost it was all over. Score 1-4 to the Greeks after 7 bounds.
Conclusion Without Joe’s ‘+1 PIP to contact Bows’ I think the Greeks would have had a slightly easier time, but then they did roll low dice on the Persian right wing and missed some doubling opportunities. On the other hand, had the Greeks rolled lower PIPs, the Persians would have lasted longer. The victory was won on the wings, while the Persian centre acquitted itself quite well.
In fact it’s hard to see how the Persians could win this engagement. Then again, that’s what re-fighting an historical battle is all about... ...with the right rules, the right elements, in the right positions, the historical outcome should be the most likely result.
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Feb 26, 2019 7:05:45 GMT
I played exactly the same setup as Stevie (same forces, same battlemap, same invader). It was a slog.
Forces: - Later Athenians I/52f - EAP I/60c
Rules: - No restrictions on bowfire distance - 8Bw +1 vs HI
Result: Greeks win 2-4, but man was it slow. My wife finished an episode of Chef's Table in the time it took me finish the game.
The Persians lost a 7Hd, which didn't matter, but what did them in was losing a 8Bw at the end for +2 hits. Prior to that, lots of shoving, and pushing. Since the Greeks made themselves into a wall (President Trump would be proud), there was lots of TZ that prevented troops from hitting many flanks. My great use of light troops (3Ax + 2x2Ps) on the Persian left flank did tie up 3 Spears, so quite proud of myself since I've not done that before, but even there not much happened after the Cv was killed. PIPs were average with just enough to reform a line or two.
The main troops just lurched back and forth. Bowfire was ineffective the entire game, but anytime I got a double overlap on either side, the underdog would get a luck break and fight their way out (or just recoil to reform a line).
So, in terms of rules, perhaps the two rules aren't so bad. Haven't tried +1PIP for charging bow. Might try that next.
And a question. This came up:
___4Sp__ 8Bw_____ ___8Bw8Bw
The central Bow wants to fire at the 4Sp. The 8Bw to his right can obviously support shooting, but the 8Bw on the left is in corner to corner contact with the 4Sp, so he can only shoot at the side of the spear while the main unit shoots at it's front. Can he support the central 8Bw?
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Feb 26, 2019 7:54:58 GMT
... It was a slog. ...Bowfire was ineffective the entire game, but anytime I got a double overlap on either side, the underdog would get a luck break and fight their way out (or just recoil to reform a line). That sounds like you refought Plataea - ish ... It's funny when one first starts playing with EAPs, and the bows pop a couple of hoplites in a couple of games, you get all giddy and think "yeah, these Persians rock ...". Then regression to the mean pops up, and bowfire suddenly does nothing whatsoever. Like they left their arrows at home, or the bowstrings are rain-sodden, or something. And then the hoplites are in your face...
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Feb 26, 2019 9:59:25 GMT
And a question. This came up: 4Sp 8Bw 8Bw 8Bw The central Bow wants to fire at the 4Sp. The 8Bw to his right can obviously support shooting, but the 8Bw on the left is in corner to corner contact with the 4Sp, so he can only shoot at the side of the spear while the main unit shoots at it's front. Can he support the central 8Bw? I had exactly the same situation at one point Chris:- S5 S6 S7 B2 B3 B4Yes, all three Bows can target S6 (if you ignore the stupid and broken ‘Threat Zone Priority’ rule that is), and it doesn’t matter that some arrows are landing on the target’s flank while others are striking the front... ...they are all still hitting the same target. But see page 10 paragraph 5:- “A second or third element shooting at the same target aids the shooting of the nearest....” ...so technically, B2 is the primary shooter and not B3. Oh, and one does not ‘fire’ a bow...if you did you’d end up with a pile of ash. One ‘shoots’ a bow, and ‘fires’ a firearm... (They don’t call me pedantic Stevie for nothing you know)
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Feb 26, 2019 10:05:22 GMT
The thing everyone forgets is that the Athenians lost their campaign with Syracuse (suffered a humiliating fiasco) for the SAME reasons the Persians lost against Greece in Greece. Operating a successful invasion that relied heavily on sea supply routes really have been a constant problem. It wasn't that Syracuse was so much better than Athens, by the way. These were strategic defeats. Remember, the Greeks lost against Persian armies in the Western Satrapies just as often (if you believe the Carians were also HI hoplites, as DBA does). So we have a Persian empire that is 100% winning against Greek hoplite armies in Persia before 490 BC, and you have a Greek military system that is 50% winning against Persian armies in Greece afterwards. Marathon was the historical equivalent of Midway. Plataea was the island-hopping grind. Sorry if we have a hard time with this, the Persians sacked and burned Athens. And crushed the defenders of Thermopylae. The Spartans ran home, and hid for over a full year (!), while the Persians had their way with MOST of Greece. Macedon, Thrace and Thebes all cut immediate deals with the Persians. The Athenians hid out on an island. Forget Hollywood propaganda, and the movie '300'. This is fact. Funny too, no one seems to want to make the Spartan 4Sp "better" than the Athenians in the DBA system. Yet apparently there was some considerable trepidation among the hoplite states to face Sparta in open battle. RAW simply utterly dismiss the Persians as being able to defeat Greek hoplite armies, despite history showing that this happened more than once. I don't believe the Carians were "hoplites" in the same way as the mainland Greek armies. They are unlikely to have had any significant experience in phalanx fighting. They stung the Persians at Pedasos (496 BC) under Heracleidas with an ambush in hilly terrain after a night flank march, killing the Persian commanders and causing significant casualties to this force. I cannot see this type of attack performed by Greek hoplites. Hilly terrain is anathema to them. That is my point. That many spear armed troops in DBA 3 should be classed 4Ax(+1). That is why EAP does poorly against armies that historically it bested more times than not. That is not the case with the mainland Greeks. But if you consider the Carians as hoplites then the Persian 100% record needs to be adjusted. I am not certain how you got a 50/50 split after Marathon. The Persians did burn Athens but that is not a strategic victory. Otherwise the Ionians/Athenians conquered Lydia when they burned Sardis (and Napoleon conquered Russia). Thebes, Thessaly, Macedon and Thrace were not sending tribute to Susa after the ship bridge was burned at the Hellespoint in 479BC. Much of Darius' excellent work in his Skythian campaign was undone. In fact, the Persian Empire did not add any further satrapies after Darius. I am not making these comments from Hollywood inspiration. More from reading the works of Nick Sekunda, Duncan Head, Tom Holland and others. They are far more knowledgeable than I am. It seems that most people in this thread (including myself) are in favour of improving the sparabara. You are absolutely right in saying that we don't know that much about them other than they won an Empire for the Persians but struggled against phalanx spearmen. I don't think anyone is being disparaging to men that were very tough and very brave. We're just trying to balance a game of toy soldiers with the sources we have. Jim
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Feb 26, 2019 15:35:10 GMT
Jim, sorry the scholarship on Carians (and Syracusans, and Kyrenes) would suggest it is far more likely they were hoplites than not. They were all Greek colonists (mostly) with the same language, poetry, systems of government and fighting style).
Secondly, did I just hear you say "hilly terrain was anathema to hoplites?" ... Did you ever go to Greece? Ever stood at Plataea? Ever toured the ancient Greek hoplite battlefields? I have lifelong pals who have. The first thing they say is "how the heck did they ever deploy a phalanx here?"
Heck even Marathon is less like a football field (factoring in modern landscaping) than you'd think. Now they too had been steeped in the wargamers belief system about hoplite warfare.
Ever read Theucydides? You'll be familiar with how much hopites shifted weapons and tactics constantly. And also how flexible and drilled they were at using the phalanx in terrain you would most definitely not describe as smooth and flat!
Marathon - crushing Greek victory. Thermopylae - crushing Persian tactical victory. Artemisia - tactical Persian victory, including land units sweeping Greek resisitance along the shoreline. Thebes: frightened enough by Persia's march to immediately join them, after some skirmishing. And they were pretty good Hoplites, those Beoetians.
Plataea was Waterloo for the Persian Army. A 50/50 toss that came up heads for the Greeks, if you accept Herodotus and Theucydides.
Sacking of Athens = Sacking of Sardis: 1-1 draw.
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Feb 26, 2019 17:49:16 GMT
Ever read Theucydides? You'll be familiar with how much hopites shifted weapons and tactics constantly. And also how flexible and drilled they were at using the phalanx in terrain you would most definitely not describe as smooth and flat! But if a Hoplite walks in a forrest and nobody is around to see how he's fighting, is he still a Hoplite? Would he devolve into a 4Ax that doesn't get a -2 in rough! (except against HI in rough terrain in which case he still gets the -2)
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Feb 26, 2019 17:51:09 GMT
Yes, all three Bows can target S6 (if you ignore the stupid and broken ‘Threat Zone Priority’ rule that is), and it doesn’t matter that some arrows are landing on the target’s flank while others are striking the front... ...they are all still hitting the same target. But see page 10 paragraph 5:- “A second or third element shooting at the same target aids the shooting of the nearest....” ...so technically, B2 is the primary shooter and not B3. Oh, and one does not ‘fire’ a bow...if you did you’d end up with a pile of ash. One ‘shoots’ a bow, and ‘fires’ a firearm... (They don’t call me pedantic Stevie for nothing you know) Good to know about shooting. I'm actually not completely against the TZ rule. I can rationalize it, but it wasn't born of rationality, then all good with it vanishing. Back to ashing my bows.. Been playing too much Flames of War
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Feb 26, 2019 18:16:38 GMT
But if a Hoplite walks in a forrest and nobody is around to see how he's fighting, is he still a Hoplite? Would he devolve into a 4Ax that doesn't get a -2 in rough! (except against HI in rough terrain in which case he still gets the -2) The Spartans at Sphacteria were definitely hoplites. DBA depicts a variety of terrain as "good going". The phalanx has never been comprehensively defined, by the way, with some ancient writers alluding to it being the barracks/regimental system, and nothing at all about formation, and others implying it was just a schiltron formation hoplites sometimes adopted, when it was expedient to do so and nothing more, and still others suggesting it was only ever deployed as about 8 ranks deep in a long, perfect line. We will never know for sure how the hoplite fought. But we do have a bit better idea of the outcomes. And it is outcomes that my rule is simulating. I find after beginner's luck wears off (and it really is a thing - every time I play EAP/Hoplites against a beginner, Persian archery is devastating! Every time!) then suddenly the Persians look vulnerable, and you get Marathon and Plataea. Gee, kinda like the historical accounts!!!
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Feb 26, 2019 21:15:23 GMT
One thing I did not appreciate was that I'm playing with 15mm for the first time. With 40mm wide bases, the battlefield is quite narrow.
I played 2.2 with 60mm wide bases with 20mm Hat Plastics, and the battlefield was much wider, plus I did BBDBA, and had a battlefield 3x the width. So a literal SHIELD WALL of Hoplites is very possible, where before I was used to there being stuff around the edges.
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Feb 26, 2019 21:31:20 GMT
One thing I did not appreciate was that I'm playing with 15mm for the first time. With 40mm wide bases, the battlefield is quite narrow. I played 2.2 with 60mm wide bases with 20mm Hat Plastics, and the battlefield was much wider, plus I did BBDBA, and had a battlefield 3x the width. So a literal SHIELD WALL of Hoplites is very possible, where before I was used to there being stuff around the edges. Greedo, The larger game board (80cm x 80cm) is what we uso and this equals 20BW.
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Feb 27, 2019 3:05:28 GMT
Jim, sorry the scholarship on Carians (and Syracusans, and Kyrenes) would suggest it is far more likely they were hoplites than not. They were all Greek colonists (mostly) with the same language, poetry, systems of government and fighting style). Secondly, did I just hear you say "hilly terrain was anathema to hoplites?" ... Did you ever go to Greece? Ever stood at Plataea? Ever toured the ancient Greek hoplite battlefields? I have lifelong pals who have. The first thing they say is "how the heck did they ever deploy a phalanx here?" Heck even Marathon is less like a football field (factoring in modern landscaping) than you'd think. Now they too had been steeped in the wargamers belief system about hoplite warfare. Ever read Theucydides? You'll be familiar with how much hopites shifted weapons and tactics constantly. And also how flexible and drilled they were at using the phalanx in terrain you would most definitely not describe as smooth and flat! Marathon - crushing Greek victory. Thermopylae - crushing Persian tactical victory. Artemisia - tactical Persian victory, including land units sweeping Greek resisitance along the shoreline. Thebes: frightened enough by Persia's march to immediately join them, after some skirmishing. And they were pretty good Hoplites, those Beoetians. Plataea was Waterloo for the Persian Army. A 50/50 toss that came up heads for the Greeks, if you accept Herodotus and Theucydides. Sacking of Athens = Sacking of Sardis: 1-1 draw. There were Greek colonies in Caria and the population of Miletus was mixed. But Carians considered themselves Anatolian. They spoke Carian, an Anatolian language. There are Hittite references that suggest a specific people before the Dorian/Ionian migrations. They were influenced by Greeks certainly. But against whom did they employ phalanx fighting? Again, my point is that carrying a shield and a spear doesn't make you a hoplite. Otherwise sparabara were fronted by hoplites. As you have said, we don't know how they fought but we know the outcomes and they stack heavily in favour of the hoplite v sparabara on the battlefield. Look at the battles after Plataea. I do have some familiarity with Greece. As a pathological wargamer a made my 5 year old son and 75 year old parents wander around Marathon a couple of years ago (really hot! how did they fight in that armour?) We also had a Peloponnesian road trip, visiting Tegea amongst other places. Marathon, between the foothills and the beach, is relatively flat, as much as the Earth can be. No battle was ever fought on a billiard table. But didn't even Mardonius comment with disdain on the Greek practice of lining on flat ground to battle? In my mind's eye, it would've been denuded of trees for farming in the ancient times but wild shrubs and small trees would exist. There are accounts that these were some impediment to the centre of the Athenian line. Driving through the Peloponnese, I could clearly picture city-state phalanxes deploying between the hills, anchoring their flanks, just as described. No place for sweeping cavalry movements. I could also see great ambush locations as used in other battles in later periods. It's a quirk of DBA 3 terrain rules that Greek battles tend to be on billiard tables because at 600x600mm you don't need to anchor your flank on terrain. The phalanx runs right across the board! Indeed, you mostly see the phalanx incompletely formed at deployment or with some unusual kink or line of reserves (a tactic only seen after Alexander). I use 750x750mm to change that up. Thucydides gives great accounts of hoplites in rough terrain. Demosthenes' disaster in Aetolia. Spartan disaster at Sphacteria. These are clear demonstrations that troops expecting to fight as hoplites are not well matched against light troops in favourable terrain. No doubt some hoplites could fight in rough terrain, if the lightened there equipment, opened their order and put away the idea of shoulder to shoulder formation. But that is not a phalanx (or shieldwall if you'd rather). Thebes may have been frightened (I have no love for ancient Thebes) but also may have wanted to replace Athens as the local power. Probably a bit of both. Corinth too, was doing it's political best to assure the eclipse of Athens. Argos was hoping to replace Sparta. I see Thebes as making a rational political decision (the decision to resist Persia is quite irrational). Other Boeotians chose to fight (Platea, Thespia). By all means, let's work on improving DBA 3 so that the Persian Wars are fun to play. But we shouldn't completely overturn the historical basis. Cheers Jim PS Pictures of the beach at Marathon, looking east and west. I spent considerable time imagining the Persian ships pulled onto the beach. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Feb 27, 2019 6:55:39 GMT
Game ... 4?
Same setup as last time. Deep spears on each flank. Avoided the Hd this time for a 3rd Ps. Greeks won 4-1
A shorter game this time. Happily not a slog, but an interesting game. No bows were killed, and didn't kill any Spears. BUT, they did disrupt the Spears a lot, and this time instead of doing 3 on 1, I tried (2 on 1) x 2 to get the recoil, and it worked. The hoplites were in single elements so couldn't really advance against the bows.
What lost it for the Persians however, was they lost 2 of the Ps on the right flank (probably should take a Hd next time), and 2 Cv on the left flank (including the general).
So lots of bowfire that didn't kill anything but held up the spears long enough for the wings to get engaged. Unfortunately hoplites just fought well (high dice rolls), and fended off the flanking.
I'm still down to give 8Bw 4 vs HI in CC. I will keep testing, but I will start testing the 1st Ps = 0, since the games always begin with a Ps dying, and I don't like games ending because of that. I might also make sure I go 3 on 1 with the Bows to really try to KILL a spear via shooting.
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Feb 27, 2019 7:33:48 GMT
Jim, the fact is that (a) we remain unclear about how hoplites fought. (b) Carians were believed to have been the last remaining hoplites to fight in bronze cuirasses, (c) Greeks were themselves mixed, and some believe they were descended from original settlers from ... you guessed it, Ionia, Anatolia, and Egypt (possibly Memphis?).We won't evwr know.
Also, sorry the evidence remains as I said, unclear about the phalanx - was it shoulder to shoulder as described about later Greek armies. Or did it just mean barracks/bamd of brothers.
Mardonius was challenging the Greeks to leave their defensive positions on the slopes of Cytheron. And you'll know that archaeological evidence includes arrow and spear tips on the side of the mountain that are consistent with Persian HC weaponry as well as foot. Which squares with Herodotus' account of the Persian C harassing them in the rough going! But then you already knew that, since you've been there! You recall the Spartans hiding from the Immortals, much to their disgust. You will never convince me Plataea was anything other than the Midway campaign of that war. A lucky break the hoplites got, winning while the underdog, desperately defending their homes.
Are you telling me the Greeks by then were as convinced as you were of the inevitability of hoplite victories over Persian HI? If so, why did the hide out on the mountain for 8 full days? And you know that according to Herodotus, the battle took place when there was a gigantic eff up in an attempt to withdraw further out of reach of the Persians, when the Greeks realised they had to fight, or die.
Plataea was less '300', and more failing to heed the principles of Sun-Tzu.
We must be wary of ancient writers' descriptions of weaponry, tactics and amrour capabilities, and do as Stevie says - focus on the high level accounts. Heck the average journalist nowadays has an embarassing grasp of military hardware and tactics. Just laughable. How much worse were the ancient writers, without even photographs and video to help them?
I focus on what they were good at: describing events, struggles and outcomes. The rest is just fantasy.
|
|