East Meets West - An Engagement between Empires with Armati 2

[Chris]

EAST MEETS WEST

or
A Shallow River Runs Through It


Using Mark Fry's entertaining and excellent "Chalons 451 AD - With Epic Armati" as a guide [Battle Day Report in the July/August 2013 issue of SLINGSHOT, pages 25-28], I thought it might prove fun to put together a similar project. My engagement differed from the one staged by Mark and his veteran cohorts in several respects. (Actually, the Armati rules and their experience with same allowed them to refight Chalons twice during The Society of Ancients event.) First, my tabletop contest was not a reconstruction of a battle from the pages of history but a product of my imagination supported the rich selection of armies offered on pages A through AC in the Armati 2 rule book. After perusing the lists, I decided to field forces representing the Late Roman Western Empire (page N) versus forces representing the Late Roman Eastern Empire (page 0). Second, my contest was planned as a solo wargame and not as a group effort. Third, my fictional engagement was much smaller and much less of a spectacle (if a spectacle at all) than the two presented by Mark and his venerable associates. I do not possess a 12 by 6-foot table and I certainly do not have a collection of 1,700 painted and based 15mm miniatures. My playing surface measures just 24 square-feet and I don't use miniature figures in my wargames. I find that I am able to get along very well with colored counters produced on my computer or manufactured by hand. I readily acknowledge that this approach is atypical and perhaps even anathema but it does afford me the flexibility of entertaining my interest, which, for good or bad, ranges across a fair number of periods and or battles "of the moment," without bankrupting my treasury or over-taxing my time. The fourth and final point of difference concerned the scenario specific rules utilized. I thought Mark's additional rules were well done and adopted a majority of them for my fictional engagement. I made a few adjustments, however. For example, I did not make use of army camps or baggage. I changed the rule about subordinate commands remaining in the fight by having them roll against their current initiative rating as opposed to their starting initiative rating. I also dug out my copies of the various RVs (rule variations) discussed and debated way back when (fall of 2008) on the Armati Forum and "cherry picked" a few of these for inclusion. For starters, skirmish infantry were given a double-frontage. Skirmishers were also taken out of the mix - as it were - with regard to divisional control. Furthermore, skirmishers were allowed to "flow like water" with respect to movement. This meant that skirmishers  could move obliquely, slide to the side, etc. In terms of combat, hits scored by skirmishers (from missile fire, not melee) were treated as fatigue until such a time as unit breakpoint was reached, when further hits would be treated as actual damage. In addition, skirmishers armed with javelins were given a fighting chance against cataphract cavalry. Moving on to warbands, I resurrected the idea or rule permitting warband infantry to roll two dice during the initial round of melee to reflect the ferocity of their impact. The warband would take the better roll of the two against its opponent. The last bit of tinkering with the rules concerned replacing the current routed into morale check procedure with Rule Variant 14b, which has broken units running straight back to their friendly table edge and having a possible effect on all friendly units in that path.

In terms of appearance, the landscape of my fictional battlefield centered on a shallow river instead of a hill on the right and low ridge on the left of the historical Roman deployment. Given the nature of this terrain feature, I modified Paragraph 11.6 of Armati 2 slightly. Cavalry units would only pay 1 centimeter of their movement rate. Skirmishers and light infantry formations would spend 2 centimeters of their movement in crossing. The "poor bloody" heavy infantry and warbands would have to pay a toll equal to half of their movement. Impetus could still be claimed when attacking across the river, but troops defending the opposite bank would still be entitled to the +1 bonus for "defensive terrain."

As revealed above, I switched from inches to centimeters in order to maximize the available playing surface. So that I could field comparatively large forces, I reduced unit dimensions by 50 percent. For example, a normal unit of heavy infantry would have a frontage of 8 centimeters and a depth of 4.5 centimeters when using Epic Scale with 15mm figures. My adjusted unit of heavy infantry would have a frontage of 4 centi-meters and a depth of 2.25 centimeters. If deployed in depth, my adjusted heavy infantry unit would have a frontage of just 2 centimeters and a depth of 4.5 centimeters.

With regard to army size, I decided to field a main force reinforced by 110 bonus points, and two subordinate formations supported 90 and 80 bonus points respectively. Each army would be triple the normal size, but each command would operate as its own entity, having its own commander, control ratings, and break point.

SOLO MECHANICS
The choice of long sides of the table was determined by a competitive roll of the dice. The winner was given his choice of table edge; the loser took the other side of the field and had to deploy all of his commands first. To take some more control out of my hands with respect to deployment, a roll of a six-sided die determined where each command would arrange itself. Typically, the main command would be stationed in the center of the field or battle line. With this required roll, however, the main command  could find itself on the left or on the right. To take an additional level of control out of my grasp, each command rolled an additional 1d6. The result of this roll determined how far from the river edge its formations could deploy. Each pip of the die represented 6 centi-meters of distance. For example, a roll of 3 permitted troops to deploy 18 centimeters from the river bank.

HOW THE ARMIES DEPLOYED
The dice decided that the formations of the Eastern Empire would deploy first. The dice also determined that the strongest contingent of the army would occupy the right, while the weakest contingent would hold the center of the line. With regards to distance from the river bank, the left flank was 36 centimeters from the water; the center of the army was 24 centimeters from the river, and the right flank, under the commanding general, was also 24 centimeters distant but actually closest to enemy territory, as the river was shaped like the letter "C" on this part of the field. As to the particular deployment of each contingent of the army, generally speaking, a skirmish screen was followed by divisions of light infantry which were, in turn, supported by the heavy infantry formations. The flanks of each smaller army were protected by light cavalry (deployed wide, it must be stated) with heavier squadrons positioned as reinforcements. In a couple of instances, the solid lines of heavy infantry had a heavy cavalry unit or two attached.

Given that the strength of the Eastern army lay on the right and left flanks, it seemed prudent to develop a battle plan playing to this strength. Attacks would be launched against the enemy's right and left while the forces holding the center would simply occupy the enemy. If this smallest contingent could also support the flank attacks, then so much the better.

Not only did the commanding general of the Western Empire's forces get to deploy his army after viewing the enemy's dispositions but the dice assisted him by dictating that the largest segment of his force would occupy the left flank - directly opposite the strength of the Eastern Empire. The second strongest contingent was assigned the center of the line; the contingent with the fewest men and horses was given the right flank. Furthermore, the deployment dice placed his formations much closer to the river bank. Forces on the right were just 6 centimeters from the river while troops fighting for the commander-in-chief were only 12 centimeters from the water's edge. By and large, the deployment of the individual commands mirrored that of the enemy. A screen of skirmisher and light cavalry masked a second line of light infantry. The main battle lines were composed of heavy foot supported on the flanks by heavy horse.

As to the battle plan for the Roman commander leading the forces of the Western Empire, the main attack would be delivered from the left, with the forces of the center and right following in that order.

HOW THE BATTLE PROCEEDED: A SUMMARY   
For the first two turns of the battle, the Western Empire won the move option and being in an offensive frame of mind, pushed its various formations forward as rapidly as possible. The contingent on the right flank was soon across the shallow river and arrows, javelins, and sling stones were flying back and forth between the opposing lines. The cavalry forces of each side - at least on this part of the field - engaged in a protracted game of cat and mouse. For example, the Armenian light cavalry evaded a unit of enemy heavy horse and then returned to the action only to find their bows and arrows could not hit water if they were fired from a boat. Western light cavalry got  involved as well. On the left flank of this sector, two units galloped through a gap in the Eastern lines and were pursued by slower moving units of cataphract horse. The Western horse fired several volleys of arrows but given the armor of the cataphracts, these volleys were merely annoying as opposed to damaging. Eventually, the infantry  formations of the East and West came to grips. First, the light-heavy and light troops did battle. Then, the "big boys" moved into contact with each other. As the forces of the Eastern Empire dominated the move option from Turn 3 until the end of the battle, they were able to dictate the pace of the dance. With some fortunate die rolls, the Western heavy foot were soon being whittled down. While the infantry were occupied, a unit of Armenian cataphracts caught an enemy unit of heavy horse flat-footed and broke them in close combat. This spelled the beginning of the end for the Western cause on their right flank. In another turn or so, the break point of the Western contingent was reached and the surviving troops retreated back across the river, yielding this portion of the field to the bruised but certainly not beaten enemy formations.

In the center of the field, both sides made efforts to get across the river and bring the fight to the enemy. In the center of the field, both sides committed their light troops and cavalry but held their heavy infantry in reserve. As on the Western right flank, the dice tended to favor the Eastern units, both in terms of shooting and actual hand-to-hand fighting. Enjoying a slight advantage in non-key units, the Eastern commander in this  sector was able to focus his attention on the more vulnerable key units of the enemy. Having the move option for 6 of the 8 turns of battle certainly assisted this effort. Although the Eastern forces were not able to break the enemy in the center of the field, they were able to give the Western formations quite a bloody nose. In so doing, they allowed the units on the right and left flanks to carry out the original battle plan.

A strong argument can be made for the decisive action of the battle taking place on the Western left/Eastern right of the field. Here, as related previously, the opposing commanders arranged the strongest wings of their respective armies. As a result, a major confrontation occurred between the heavy infantry and heavy cavalry of both sides in this sector. Interestingly enough, due to the nature of terrain (the bend in the course of the river), the Eastern forces  moved across and attack the left and right of  the Western contingent while in the center, the Western heavy infantry advanced across and sought battle with its counterpart. A unit of Eastern slingers proved especially effective in this local battle, unleashing quite a few stones into the packed racks of a unit of Western foot soldiers. A group of Eastern light-heavy infantry also proved to be rather effective and stubborn when facing heavier enemy units. The heavy foot of the Western Empire had a brief shining moment in this sector when they successfully withstood the charge of some Sarmatians, some cataphracts, and some other heavy cavalry. They were rewarded for their valor when friendly heavy cavalry joined in, sending half of the enemy squadrons packing. Unfortunately, it proved to be too little and too late, as the heavy infantry contest was decided in favor of the Eastern Empire on the other side of the river.

REFLECTION
Even though I did not have a splendid collection of miniatures arranged on spectacular terrain, or the camaraderie of a select group of experts, I rather enjoyed solo wargaming  this fictional engagement on my smallish tabletop with my "troops." In some respects, however, I do think that it might have been too large a contest for one person to manage. Indeed, I am quite certain that in the "heat of battle" I misapplied or failed to apply this or that rule amendment and or revision. Accepting these expected errors, I do not think any one or any combination of them had a significant impact on the outcome of  the wargame. The dice did seem to favor the Emperor of the Eastern Empire. His forces controlled the move option from Turn 3 until the end of the battle and the dice were kind to him with respect to missile exchanges and melee resolutions.

I would hazard to suggest that the solo mechanics worked rather well. It's quite nice not having to worry about how and where to deploy the formations of the engaged armies.

I thought that the rule revisions and amendments worked fairly well, but again, I may have tacked on too many for a single mind to effectively manage. That much admitted, I especially like the idea of light cavalry being able to withdraw through heavier mounted types. I also liked the impetuous warband rule, even though it did not help the Visigoths on either side of the field.

In the final analysis, an enjoyable 6 days were spent playing 8 turns of a rather large if  also modified Armati 2 wargame. Lessons were learned that will be applied or at least noted for future projects. What those projects are, however, remains to be seen.


ORDERS OF BATTLE
As mentioned previously, the army of the Western Empire was drafted from page N. The core force of each army consisted of the following troops/units:

1 x Foot (Heavy Infantry) - with spear/sword/javelin
2 x Light-Heavy Infantry - with javelin/sword
3 x Skirmishers - armed with bows
1 x Heavy Cavalry - lances
2 x Light Cavalry - javelins

The bonus troops/units for the 110-point contingent included:
6 Foot - as above
2 x Light Infantry - with javelin/sword
2 x Skirmishers - armed with javelins
1 x Warband (Visigoths) - armed with various weapons
1 x Cataphract cavalry - lances
1 x Heavy Cavalry - armed with various weapons
1 x Heavy Cavalry - lances

The bonus troops/units for the 90-point contingent included:
4 Foot - as above
2 x Light Infantry - with javelin/sword
2 x Skirmishers - armed with javelins
1 x Cataphract cavalry - lances
1 x Heavy Cavalry - armed with various weapons
1 x Light Cavalry (Huns) - armed with various weapons/bows
1 x Light Cavalry - javelins

The bonus troops/units for the 80-point contingent included:
4 Foot - as above
2 x Light Infantry - with javelin/sword
2 x Skirmishers - armed with javelins
1 x Cataphract cavalry - lances
1 x Light Cavalry (Huns) - armed with various weapons/bows
1 x Light Cavalry - javelins

The army of the Eastern half of the Empire was drawn from the list on page O. The core of the three contingents contained the following troop types or units:
1 x Foot (Heavy Infantry) - with spear/sword/javelin
2 x Light-Heavy Infantry - javelin/sword
1 x Cataphract cavalry - lances
1 x Light Cavalry - javelins
1 x Light Cavalry - bows

Note: In the commanding general's formation, the Cataphracts were classed as veteran troops.

The bonus troops/units for the 110-point contingent included:
4 Foot - as above
2 x Light Infantry - with javelin/sword
3 x Skirmishers - armed with javelins, slings, or bows
1 x Heavy Cavalry (Clibanarii) - armed with lances/bows
2 x Heavy Cavalry - armed with various weapons
1 x Heavy Cavalry - lances

The bonus troops/units for the 90-point contingent included:
3 Foot - as above
2 x Light Infantry - with javelin/sword
1 x Light Infantry - with bows
4 x Skirmishers - armed with javelins, slings, or bows
1 x Cataphract cavalry - lances
1 x Heavy Cavalry - lances
1 x Cataphract cavalry (Armenians) - lances
2 x Light Cavalry (Armenians) - bows

The bonus troops/units for the 80-point contingent included:
3 Foot - as above
1 x Light Infantry - with javelin/sword
1 x Light Infantry - with bows
1 x Skirmishers - slingers
1 x Warband (Visigoths) - armed with various weapons
1 x Heavy Cavalry (Clibanarii) - armed with lances/bows / veteran status
1 x Heavy Cavalry - armed with various weapons
1 x Light Cavalry - javelins

[Chris]

Perhaps it's bad form to reply to your own posting, but . . .

For what it's worth, there are pictures of my admittedly atypical approach now up on the Lone Warrior Blog.

Here's the link for those interested (fingers crossed that it works):

http://lonewarriorswa.com/east-versus-west-fictional-history-with-armati-2

[Imperial Dave]

This is not the typical miniature-works-of-art fare that you will see gracing the pages of WI, MWBG, etc. Instead, this is the purely functional work of a soloist who recognizes the visual import of the hobby but plays within his financial means as well as painting ability

(taken from Chris's Lone Warrior webpage)

Thanks for this Chris. A great write up above and the sentiments you put at the start of your blog post do resonate. I actually quite liked the way you laid the game out as it did not detract from the visual appreciation of the battle lines and structure.

I too tend to solo wargame and also agree with your comments about "getting it wrong" on some of the rule minutiae when playing big games. All in all a very good game with a well written battle report that I thoroughly enjoyed 

[Chris]

Thanks for taking the time to post a reply Dave. And thanks for the compliment! Much appreciated.

Chris

[Patrick Waterson]

The battle itself reminds me of the Frigidus in AD 394 - the last and possibly the most expensive of the great East-West clashes, not least because Theodosius on his deathbed permanently divided the Empire the following year.