Chariots, Crossbowmen and Halberdiers vs Archers, Cataphracts and Legionaries

[Chris]

Frustrated by the lack of progress in transforming an idea about terrain into a cogent article (or perhaps a few articles), I decided to extricate myself from this particular patch of difficult ground and seek temporary or perhaps longer in duration refuge in a more familiar as well as friendly landscape.

Inspiration was found in an ancient copy of The Courier. In the October-November 1979 issue of "America's Foremost Miniature Wargaming Magazine", Eric Ritchie provided a concise, engaging, and entertaining report of the WRG Ancients Competition championship game held at Origins '79. His three-page report contained orders of battle as well as three black and white diagrams of the action. (Would that I were as capable and concise.) My guess is that the rules used were WRG 5th Edition. (The magazine cover included a blurb about "a peek into the WRG 6th Edition rules.) In a review of the Origins convention, Richard Bryant explained how many attended (4,500) and how many dealers were present (130). The review also included quite a few pictures. I was pleasantly surprised to see two photos of the aforementioned championship game. The well-known in the wargaming world Phil Barker was featured in both. In one, he was caught in action, contemplating a rule decision. At the risk of dwelling on my terrain "troubles", I could not help but notice the look of the table. It appeared to be a simple plywood affair. There was not green cloth, drape, piece of teddybear fur, or anything looking like a battle mat in sight. The terrain impressed me as abstract as opposed to aesthetically pleasing. I cannot comment on its authenticity, as I do not believe the armies participating in this final wargame ever met in historical battle. That opinion offered, it did not appear to impact the contest between the Chinese player-general and the Palmyran player-general. The look of the playing surface did not appear to bother any of the three individuals directly involved.

A refight of this 40-year-old championship game, where 1,000 point armies struggled for supremacy, was attempted using L'Art de la Guerre (ADLG or ALG) armies of similar size. (In typical ADLG games, 200 point armies are used.) I regret to inform that interest waned rather quickly and then was lost completely during the middle of the sixth turn. I have not determined or decided on the exact cause or causes of this unfortunate development. (Size does seem an obvious candidate or culprit, however. Then again, an accusatory finger could also be pointed at outside concerns and influences. Anyway.) In an attempt to salvage something and in the additional interest of keeping my mind off the topic of terrain, I turned to my well-used copy of Armati 2nd Edition. Rather than employ the unusually large forces that saw action in my recent "Seleucid Civil War" scenario, I decided to build Han Chinese and Palmyran armies that were only four times the size of forces deployed in a traditional Armati 2nd Edition encounter.

Deployments, Terrain & Adjustments
The Palmyran formations were arranged on the near side of my smallish tabletop. Instead of trying to replicate the deployment of the original Palmyran player-general (one T. Lyons, a Canadian) and instead of using a "blind" or screen, I let several rolls of a six-sided die decide where the cataphracts, camels, archers, and Roman allies would be positioned. The all-knowing d6 determined that the Palmyran right would be held by half of the light cavalry and all of the camel troops. Further, the centre would consist of two strong and adjacent lines of archers screened by skirmishers. There would be a reserve force of Romans (both legionaries and auxiliaries). The left wing would consist of the rest of the light cavalry and all of the cataphracts, an impressive total of 13 units. As for the terrain, well, there was a light wood on the extreme left of the Palmyran position. There was another patch of woods along their baseline. This would not impact movement or fighting, but did serve as a nice landmark between the left wing and centre. In the middle of the fictional field (drawing a line straight out from this patch of woods), there was a patch of scrub. In the original contest and diagrams, it looked like some marshy ground. However, no positive identification was made. There was no mention of this feature having any impact on the course of the original wargame. Neither scrub nor marshy ground is listed on the Terrain Table of the Armati 2nd Edition rules. I thought about declaring this terrain a patch of rough ground or "rocky patches of high ground", but decided against it. It seems odd to have "high ground" without a hill. So, a patch of scrub it was. This feature would not have any affect on movement, missiles or melee. The abstract terrain piece was placed for "aesthetic" reasons. There was a fairly large hill in front of the centre-right of the Palmyran line. This hill was classed as gentle, and portions of it had two levels of elevation.

The Han Chinese army was positioned on the far side of the model battlefield. The die rolls determined that the heavy chariots would be split between the wings, but all the heavy cavalry would be on the left, along with a small gentle hill, while all the light horse would be on the right. The centre was the responsibility of the crossbowmen and halberd-carrying foot. The infantry were drawn up in a huge "phalanx" containing two rows of 16 units. The first row contained crossbow troops. The second row contained the troops armed with melee weapons. There was a reserve force behind this main formation. The reserve division consisted of eight more units of halberdiers along with a screen of skirmishers. 

Summary of the Action
On the Chinese right wing, both sides advanced their light cavalry formations to within bow range and started loosing volleys  of arrows. The Han units gained the upper hand in this contest, convincing the Palmyran light horse to withdraw. The Palmyran cataphracts lumbered forward, somewhat constrained by the nature of the ground. The Chinese replaced their horse archers with heavy chariots. A chaotic melee resulted as the new lines clashed. The cataphracts proved nearly irresistible and almost indestructible as they doled out casualties against the Han turn after turn. Eventually, the Han right wing lost two-thirds of their chariots. The flank hung by a slender light cavalry thread. The Palmyran cataphracts were exhausted by the melee. They were also stymied by command and control issues. Another melee way over on the left of their first line held up the rest of the division, which held up the rest of the cataphracts.
During this period of frustrating inactivity, the cataphracts were subjected to several volleys from nearby Chinese light cavalry. The Han arrows were like water balloons against the armour of the cataphracts.

In the centre of the field, the Palmyran skirmishers very much annoyed the Chinese formation. Numerous fatigue markers were placed on the units of crossbowmen. The archers on the Palmyran left, by virtue of their greater range (24 inches to 18 inches) were able to deliver some effective long range volleys against the targeted Han formations. In an attempt to scatter the enemy skirmishers, the Chinese advanced their long and solid line of troops. The Palmyran skirmishers scoffed and scooted out the way, only to resume a harassing posture. The Palmyran archers also moved forward, closing the distance between the main lines. After some more volleys and fatigue markers, the Palmyran skirmishers withdrew behind friendly forces. This screen removed, arrows and bolts flew in great numbers. Men of both sides fell, but no gaps or holes were created in either opposing line.

On the Palmyran right flank, light cavalry and camel troops faced a strong  force of Chinese heavy horse. There was a brief exchange of missiles as the light cavalry evaded and the outnumbered camel units engaged the Han formations in melee. The Chinese horses appeared immune to the smell and look of the humped-back animals employed by the Palmyrans. The developing combat favoured the Chinese. Closer to the centre of the field, a formation of Chinese cavalry were able to charge some Palmyran archers. These bowmen could not get off a decent volley as evading skirmishers interfered with their line of sight. The ensuing charge broke a few units of foot and then transformed into a confusing struggle. The Chinese were not able to support with their chariots, and the Palmyrans had trouble moving up supporting troops from the Romans that were held in reserve. After some time, however, which saw a number of Chinese heavy cavalry units exhausted and many units on both sides decorated with casualty and fatigue markers, a few chariots and a few auxiliary units were able to get into the fight. These fresh troops did not tip the battle one way or another, they simply added to the general confusion. Additional rounds of melee saw the complete destruction of all the camel units on this wing and the loss of at least as many Chinese units.

After 10 turns of play, and after careful consideration of the status of the field, it was decided to call the contest a draw, with a slight edge to the Palmyrans.

Comments
In the championship wargame held at Origins '79, the Palmyrans managed to snatch a two-point victory against the Chinese after time was called. In my adapted version of this battle, I did not call time, but as just related, the Palmyrans were awarded a marginal victory in what was otherwise a draw. The Chinese had lost 12 key units (out of a total of 28), while the Palmyrans had suffered the loss of 9 key units (out of a total of 21). The Han chariots and heavy cavalry bore the brunt of the battle. The camel troops and archers paid the ultimate price on the other side of the field. The Chinese did manage to capture an enemy sub-general during the fighting on the Palmyran right. 

In general, I think the scenario went fairly well. To be certain, it was somewhat frustrating to not reach a definitive conclusion. Given the comparative difficulty of wheeling heavy troops in Armati, it would have taken at least four or more turns to get the opposite wings in any kind of condition to launch a flank attack. Given the length of turns in a typical Armati contest, it seemed to me that night would have fallen by this time, ending the battle.

On immediate reflection, perhaps the problem in command and control was of my own creation. I employed armies four times the usual size, but I only doubled the heavy and light control divisions available to each army. The Roman legionaries, for example, were deployed as a single division or command containing six units of powerful cohorts. The effort involved in wheeling this command toward the threatened Palmyran right was herculean and was not all that successful, as none of the legionaries threw a pilum or drew their gladius.

Despite my familiarity with these rules, events or situations often transpire in a scenario that require some thinking or the quick formulation of an amendment that has not been previously discussed, debated, or even play tested. Two instances in the recently "completed" contest spring to mind. Over on the Palmyran left, some light cavalry,having taken too many arrow hits, routed into some reserve cataphract formations. Armati classifies light cavalry as "massed" formations, so when they rout, friendly units in the path have to take a morale check to see if they run away as well. Guessing that the cataphracts would be more densely formed than the "skirmishing" light cavalry, I adjusted this rule so that the cataphracts stood a slight chance of losing a unit break point instead of turning tail and running away. As it turned out, both testing units of cataphracts simply shouted out insults to the fleeing light horsemen. The second episode took place over on the Palmyran right or right-centre. Here, a line of skirmishers (with javelins) were facing off against some Chinese heavy cavalry. After an ineffective volley of javelins, the skirmishers evaded. The distance involved took them right to the front of some friendly archer units. The Chinese gave chase, but were not able to catch the skirmishers. In the next turn, the Palmyran archers were not able to launch a volley of arrows as friendly skirmishers were right in their faces. Of course, this could have been avoided had I simply let the skirmishers be ridden down and dispersed by the enemy horse. This struck me a rather "gamey" however, so I opted to evade the skirmishers. Thinking that there might be some gaps in the skirmisher "cloud" seeking to escape the pursuing Chinese, I let the archers shoot arrows anyway, but added an additional +1 to the protection factor of the heavy cavalry. As might be guessed, there were not a lot of hits produced. A few archer units were broken by the subsequent charge, as reported above, but this  did not spell the complete end of the Palmyran right.

In summary, a satisfactory scenario that leaves much room for improvement and tinkering.

[dwkay57]

WRG 5th - I how I used to enjoy playing with them.

My recollection of terrain in those days matches what you are seeing in the photographs, and I've reflected on it in an article currently with the editor.

[Chris]

Looking forward to reading it, David. Perhaps studying your thoughts will generate the impetus that seems to be lacking over here . . . 

Thanks for taking the time to read my report.

Cheers,
Chris

[dwkay57]

Having recently re-skimmed through John Greer's WRG Armies and Enemies of Ancient China, I picked up on his comments on the Han Chinese planned invasion of the Roman empire - apparently they thought the Roman capital was Antioch until the Parthians advised otherwise.

He comments that in 116AD Trajan's advances into Parthia would bring him within one day's march of the Han border garrisons. So perhaps your battle could be an historical "might have been".