A sad and bloody hour by the Roman sundial

[Justin Swanton]

I played an Optio game yesterday with Riaan (who is now an addict). Republican Rome vs Gaul.

Rome fielded a full Consular army: 2 Allied Legions, 2 Roman legions, Allied and Roman cavalry. 40 bases in total.

Gaul put up a big tribal army: 32 Warband bases, 4 Gaesati bases, 10 Soldurii bases, 4 Chariot bases and 4 Cavalry bases. 54 bases in total.

The pre-battle operational manoeuvring led (typically) to a square with no terrain, but since this was a big battle, we used the terrain of adjacent squares, giving us some hills and an easy river. Both armies deployed thus:




Riaan commanding Rome chose a standard deployment. Legions in the centre and cavalry on the wings with most cavalry covering his right flank.

Yours truly deployed his Warband in depth in a forward line, and his Gaesati and Soldurii in a second line, stretching his Soldurii a bit to cover the breadth of the forward line. Then chariots on the right flank and cavalry on the left. My plan was to use the Warband to soften up the legions then finish them off with my higher-quality Gaesati and Soldurii.

I was worried that the battle might prove a bit boring. Infantry are not very manoeuvrable in Optio, especially not in this scenario. The legions must stick to their multi-line arrangement whilst the Gauls, being unwieldy-class troops, can't do things like form column without a general or wheel (that's right - non-skirmisher infantry that aren't in column can't change direction in Optio. They are allowed to change direction only to face adjacent enemy, and they become disordered as a result). The battle looked like being a long, frontal slog with little opportunity for tactical finesse.

Boy, was I wrong!

Before going on, let me explain how a legion works. Each legion consists of two command groups (a command group is a number of bases that occupy the same battlefield square and share the same morale). A legion command group has 1 velites, 2 hastati and 1 principes base, arranged in 3 rows:




I've removed the triarii (for the moment) as my understanding of the legion is that if the triarii were actually committed then the game was generally up anyway. I'm also not aware of any battles in which the triarii actually fought as part of a legion. Examples, anyone?

The velites can shoot into the square in front of them. If the legion is charged, or the player decides it himself, they are withdrawn and effectively become the last 2 ranks of the hastati, principes and triarii, which I represent thus:




A typical legion's morale is 3-2, meaning 3 fresh and 2 shaken morale intervals after which it routs. During his move, the player may decide to do a line relief, which means switching the two lines, thus:




When the lines switch, the legion's morale goes back to top fresh. This give the legion an effective morale of 6-3, enough, all else being equal, to frontally beat virtually any opponent except a pike phalanx and elephants.

The Gauls cannot do line relief but they compensate by deploying in a deep line. A deep line command group (2 bases wide and 2 deep) fights with its highest shaken morale interval treated as fresh. So the Warband, with a morale of 2-2, fight as 3-1. Gauls are also formidable in the charge, inflicting in normal circumstances a loss of 2 morale intervals on the Romans. The legions could manage the first line, but it was uncertain they could manage the second.

Gallic chariots are outfought by cavalry, but they can dismount (1 infantry base replaces the 2 chariot bases) and can then outfight the cavalry.

The battle began with a Roman cavalry advance against the Gallic left wing cavalry. The Gauls widened their cavalry into a thin line to match the frontage of the Romans. A thin line (only one base in the command group) fights with its bottom fresh interval treated as shaken. So the Gallic cavalry, normally 2-1, fought as 1-2.




The Roman mounted shift to the left opened a gap between their cavalry and infantry, and the Gauls seized the opportunity to get on the Roman infantry flank, obliging the Roman cavalry to turn to counter the threat. The Gallic chariots on the right flank fell back before the Roman infantry and Cavalry, and dismounted on the hill.




As the main infantry lines clashed, the Gauls were able to hold back the Roman cavalry on the left flank despite losing half theirs, and put pressure on the leftmost legion command group. Meanwhile, a Roman attempt to perform a similar flanking movement against the Gallic right went sour as the dismounted charioteers routed the Roman cavalry and attacked the disordered legion command group, ultimately routing it.




This was the high point for the Gauls. The legions wore down the warband, eventually routing the first line. A very complicated cavalry dance on the Roman right flank eventually neutralised the Gallic threat to the Roman right. The legion on the Roman left was now put under pressure by a flanking manoeuvre by the charioteers, who formed column (with their chieftain present to make it possible) and marched around the rear of the leftmost legion.

It was now a race against time. In Optio, each time a command group routs, it applies a simple panic test to nearby friendly command groups. Elephants, skirmishers and scythed chariots bases (not command groups) each apply 1 panic hit, all other bases apply 2 panic hits. Panic hits of the bases (totaled up) of the currently routed command group are added to panic hits of previously routed bases. Depending on the size of the army, a certain number of panic hits will rout nearby friendlies. If those friendlies rout they apply a panic test to other nearby friendlies, starting a chain reaction that can cause the entire army to rout.

The point was reached where, if either Rome or Gaul lost another command group, the rest of their army would run for it. The honour of deciding the game went to the overextended Soldurii command groups on the left who finally crumbled before the might of Rome, causing the remainder of the second line to flee. Game over!

For Riaan it was one of the most nailbiting games he had played. Me, I'm chuffed. 

[Chris]

Thanks for posting Justin. Interesting and engaging, as always.

Has me thinking about setting up a "traditional" Rome vs barbarians scrap . . .

Appears that OPTIO can handle large actions rather well.

Understand what is meant by "nail biting", but am not as certain about "chuffed". I gather that "chuffed" is not good? If it were an emoji, perhaps it would be a cross between a frownie face and something else?

Thanks again for posting. A bit jealous of the maps.

Chris

[Justin Swanton]

Thanks Chris.

'Chuffed' means 'really happy'. South African slang. British too I think?

[aligern]

Its great to have a close finish to a game, but what caused that ? Looking at the battle description the Gauls are about to win...is it a grinding match in the centre that decided the day, even though the most active action was on the flank.
Looks lije the Gallic comnander should learn not to engage with the infantry until one or other Roman  flank guard has been destroyed.  I wonder if some of the soldurii might gave been mire use on the flank , as long as the main line could buy time by hanging back?
Roy

[Imperial Dave]

Thanks Chris.

'Chuffed' means 'really happy'. South African slang. British too I think?

yep......chuffed to bits

[Justin Swanton]

Its great to have a close finish to a game, but what caused that ? Looking at the battle description the Gauls are about to win...is it a grinding match in the centre that decided the day, even though the most active action was on the flank.
Looks lije the Gallic comnander should learn not to engage with the infantry until one or other Roman  flank guard has been destroyed.  I wonder if some of the soldurii might gave been mire use on the flank , as long as the main line could buy time by hanging back?
Roy

Trouble is that the Gauls didn't have mounted superiority on the wings. Adding soldurii there would probably have meant punching fresh air as mounted command groups are highly manoeuvrable, easily able to keep clear of infantry.  Even if I'd widened my line by adding more soldurii to the flanks, only those soldurii that ended up adjacent to the legions after advancing could have turned to confront them. The others would have been facing fresh air. Optio does not help an infantry line that is very much wider than its opponent. Bigger armies get more dividends by deploying in depth.

There is also the problem of command limitations. The Gallic army had one general and three commanders. The general commanded the chariots, one commander the cavalry, and the two infantry lines were split between the two remaining commanders. General and commanders can put into command only those command groups in a rectangle measuring 2 x 4 battlefield squares, which meant that the Gallic infantry as deployed in the game were all barely in command. Like this:




I really punish players who try to deploy too wide. 

[Patrick Waterson]

I'm also not aware of any battles in which the triarii actually fought as part of a legion. Examples, anyone?

If this means 'any battles in which the triarii are specifically mentioned as being engaged', then examples are comparatively few.

At Vesuvius in 340 BC (the battle against the Latins which stimulates Livy to give a description of the then-existing legion in VIII. the Latin and Roman triarii engage each other - after the Latin Triarii have been weakened by engaging the Roman accensi, the pseudo-triarii added to the Livian legion for emergencies.  OK, that one does not involve the Polybian legion, so here are a few which do.

1) The battle against the Insubres, 223 BC (Polybius II.33).  The hastati use the spears from the triarii to pull a trick to draw the teeth of the Gallic  front rank, enabling the Romans to close and kill without suffering the customary loss of head-cloven front rankers.

2) Ilipa, 206 BC: Scipio puts his triarii on the flanks to extend his line (in complete contravention of standard Roman doctrine).

3) Zama, 202 BC: Scipio does exactly the same thing prior to engaging Hannibal's line of veterans.

Accounts of other Second Punic War battles do not mention the triarii by name, but also do not mention the hastati and principes.  One is left to assume that the triarii either ended up fighting to the last in a defeat or remained unengaged during a victory.

If the idea is the triarii were sufficiently tied in to the general operation and fortunes of the legion that separate representation at this scale and level of abstraction is unnecessary, then yes, I think that is a valid standpoint.  The key consideration is: does the legion as represented in the game have the kind of staying-power it had historically?  If it does (and it seems to) then not giving separate representation to the triarii would seem to work.

[Justin Swanton]

1) The battle against the Insubres, 223 BC (Polybius II.33).  The hastati use the spears from the triarii to pull a trick to draw the teeth of the Gallic  front rank, enabling the Romans to close and kill without suffering the customary loss of head-cloven front rankers.

2) Ilipa, 206 BC: Scipio puts his triarii on the flanks to extend his line (in complete contravention of standard Roman doctrine).

3) Zama, 202 BC: Scipio does exactly the same thing prior to engaging Hannibal's line of veterans.

Note that in these three examples the triarii do not engage as the third line after the hastati and principes withdraw - they are used differently (I also get the impression that Scipio felt they were just cooling their heels as a third relief line and put them to work).

For the present I'm open to putting them in provided that doesn't turn the legion into a super-weapon. At present it seems have about the right amount of staying power.

[Patrick Waterson]

All well and good, then.

Did players ask about the apparent absence of triarii?  Their inclusion has been practically a fetish in the UK, so not representing them is a fairly bold step and probably merits a designer's note when the game hits the big wide world.  If things work as they are then there is no need to bundle them in, but people with existing figure collections may grouse if their triarii cannot see the light of day and will want to know the reason.

There is also the question of whether a legion will need different representation when Scipio is in charge.  As you rightly point out, he made the triarii earn their pay instead of spending the battle just watching the first two lines doing all the serious hard work.  He also grouped the triarii (and principes) from different legions together, in effect creating a whole new army organisation.

[Chris]

Picking up on the triarii thread or apparent thread, it might be interesting as well as educational to look at other reserve or "elite" troop types and see where and when they were present but not engaged in battle(s). Or, I wonder, are we just looking at the Roman history here, given the function of triarii in that system.

On a different subject matter, and here I am concerned/wondering about the history of words, I wonder when and how "chuffed" developed. Would not have guess that it means or translates into "very happy or pleased". Perhaps I will do a quick Google search of "chuffed" . . .

Looking forward to next OPTIO report. Have you had a chance to use it/test it for latter periods, say with Huns or Mongols?

Cheers,

Chris

[Duncan Head]

On a different subject matter, and here I am concerned/wondering about the history of words, I wonder when and how "chuffed" developed. Would not have guess that it means or translates into "very happy or pleased".

Try http://www.bbcamerica.com/anglophenia/2011/09/frasers-phrases-chuffed

[Justin Swanton]

Picking up on the triarii thread or apparent thread, it might be interesting as well as educational to look at other reserve or "elite" troop types and see where and when they were present but not engaged in battle(s). Or, I wonder, are we just looking at the Roman history here, given the function of triarii in that system.

On a different subject matter, and here I am concerned/wondering about the history of words, I wonder when and how "chuffed" developed. Would not have guess that it means or translates into "very happy or pleased". Perhaps I will do a quick Google search of "chuffed" . . .

Looking forward to next OPTIO report. Have you had a chance to use it/test it for latter periods, say with Huns or Mongols?

Cheers,

Chris

A the moment I'm focussed on the 1st and 2nd Punic war: Carthage in Africa, Spain and Italy, Numidia, Spanish tribes, Gauls and Rome. The idea is to create Optio 'period packs' with OBs and reference sheets for historical opponents. So other period packs would be (more or less):

- Greeks, Persians, Macedonians, Thracians. Also India to cover Hydapes.

- Seleucids, Ptolemaid Egypt, Bactria, Asia Minor states, Parthians, Macedonia,  Romans (mid Republican Rome ovelaps these two periods)

- Late Republican Rome, Germans, Gauls, Britons, Pontus, Armenia, Parthia (also overlaps 2 periods)

- Imperial Rome, Germanic tribes, Parthia, Sassanids.

And so on.

I've worked out ranges and hitting power for bows and other missile weapons and eventually will get to the Huns and Mongols, though bows will feature earlier on with the Persians and Parthians (and Macedonians/Successor states). Missile weapons inflict 1 - 4 'missile hits' on a command group per movement phase (2 movement phases in a turn). 4 missile hits disorder a command group. An already disordered command group loses 1 morale interval. So archery fire can eventually rout an enemy unit, but not in the short term.

[Erpingham]

On a different subject matter, and here I am concerned/wondering about the history of words, I wonder when and how "chuffed" developed. Would not have guess that it means or translates into "very happy or pleased". Perhaps I will do a quick Google search of "chuffed" . . .

Chris

You can usually substitute "chuffed" for pleased.  Its negative, like pleased, is "dischuffed".