Help support TMP


"EIR versus Romans" Topic


5 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please do not use bad language on the forums.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Solo Wargamers Message Board

Back to the Ancients Battle Reports Message Board


Areas of Interest

General
Ancients

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Top-Rated Ruleset

Impetus


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article

Eureka Amazon Project: Nude Phalangites

More figures for the 28mm Amazon army!


Featured Workbench Article

A Good-Looking Army in a Reasonable Amount of Time

Painting a wargaming army is a completely different beast from painting a single miniature for display.


Featured Profile Article

June Contest Winner: Hoplite Baggage Vignette

Yesthatphil is the winner of the June 2015 contest with this wonderful entry.


Current Poll


1,236 hits since 21 Dec 2013
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Just Plain Chris21 Dec 2013 4:24 p.m. PST

IMPOSSIBLE HISTORY WITH IMPETVS
CHAPTER THREE OF FOUR: EARLY IMPERIAL ROMANS VERSUS NORMANS


The chronologically distant but geographically related enemies were gathered on comparatively nondescript terrain. There was a large gentle hill in front of the Roman right. The feature measured approximately 30 centimeters by 22 centimeters. A portion of the left side of this hill (again, from the Roman perspective) was shaded by a wood. This squarish growth of trees (approximately 15 centimeters on each side) spilled down onto the flat plain that composed the majority of this field of honor.

The deployment dice appeared determined to provided for a thrilling and possibly quick battle, as the Romans had to position 7 of their 12 units on their right flank. Five of these stands were the heavy infantry of the legion. Three units were placed in the first line; the general of the army (let us call him Legate Substantius Moronicus) took his place in the reserve with 2 units. A unit of archers and a unit of medium cavalry completed the Roman right. Of course, the organized Roman encampment was placed in this sector. In the center of the field, 3 units of legionaries deployed as a group. To their right front was a single unit of slingers. The left of the Roman battle line was held by a single unit of medium cavalry. Across 40 centimeters of tabletop, the Normans were formed for battle.

The deployment die for the Normans indicated that three-quarters of their army would arrange itself on the left and the remainder would take up position in the middle. There Norman right flank would be left unoccupied, undefended. The commander of the Norman host (let us refer to him as the Duke of Camembert) placed all of his missile troops in the center of the field. There were 3 units of skirmishers (2 armed with short bows and the Breton unit was armed with javelins) and 2 formed units of archers armed with short bows. On the left, the Duke deployed a solid line of 5 units of heavy cavalry (milites), followed not too closely by a reserve of 3 more units of heavy horse. The Norman camp was guarded by 2 units of heavy infantry armed with long spears. Just to the left of the second cavalry line, there was a single unit of Breton light horse. Behind the far right end of the first line of cavalry, there was another small group (2 units) of heavy infantry.

HOW IT PLAYED
Technically speaking, the miniature version of the Roman general was not able to see the impressive collection of Norman Milites lined up opposite his compact line of legionary infantry, lone unit of archers, and flanking unit of medium horse. In comparison, the solo wargamer (me) playing the role of Substantius had a clear field of vision. And what presented itself was not very pleasing to the eye. On the other hand, as the Duke of Camembert, I was almost salivating at the prospect of launching an irresistible charge against the Roman right.

The battle, as perhaps predicted by some if not most readers, was a quick and rather disastrous affair for the legions of Rome. The advance and subsequent charge of the first line of Norman heavy cavalry did, in fact, prove unstoppable. The Roman medium cavalry and archers (posted on the far right of the Roman line) did what they could to slow the tide of impetuous Normans, but they proved to be more of a speed bump than anything else. The cohorts in the main legionary line also proved surprisingly worthless. As fate (the dice) would have it, the pre-melee volleys of pila were spectacularly ineffective. After a couple of rounds of melee, the two units on the left of the Roman line were destroyed and the survivors were in deep trouble. The destruction of the Roman horse and archers allowed the Breton light cavalry to work its way around the Roman right and attack the Roman camp. Though disordered and slightly hurt by the first charge, the Normans gathered themselves and launched another attack against the Roman general and his reserve. Here, Roman fortitude and stubbornness finally made its appearance. Substantius exhorted his men and volleys of pila severely discomforted the Normans. A solid wall of shields and excellent work with the short sword added to the melee-induced misery of the enemy heavy cavalry. Against all odds, the men in the general's formation held their ground against every enemy charge. They suffered no casualties, but were disordered by the action. This was the only bright spot in an otherwise dark and stormy day for the Romans. Eventually, only one unit remained on the Roman right flank. The camp was taken by the Breton light horse and a fresh line of Norman cavalry trotted down the gentle hill toward what remained of the Romans.

As for the center of the field, well . . . the Roman heavy infantry advanced against the Norman skirmishers and archers. These light enemy troops were able to "shoot and scoot" and thereby, always keep at a safe distance from the slower Romans. Granted, their ability to hit anything at anything like a respectable distance was very low, but on rare occasion, they did place a disorder marker on a targeted unit of heavy infantry. As a result, the group advance of Roman infantry was broken up into separate units. The Roman cavalry on the left was able to swing around and take one of the skirmishing archer units from the rear, but that was about the extent of it. By then, the Roman right was a total wreck.

The tabletop action was, on reflection, two separate battles. The Roman right was not able to advance and occupy the high ground as the legion infantry could not move as quickly as the Norman horse. The only thing that Substantius could do was stand and hope/try to survive. This is what he and his unit did. The rest of his right flank, however, was completely overwhelmed. The formations in the center of the field never really came to grips. It was also rather interesting to note that all of the Norman infantry and three full units of heavy cavalry never saw any action.

The result of this fictional exercise was reached in just 8 turns of play. I find myself tempted to reset the table and have another go, as I would maintain that Early Imperial Romans would fare better against Normans. The dice simply were not with Substantius in this battle. The rematch will have to wait as according to my original design, I have a counterfactual cavalry contest to stage. This fourth chapter will also have to wait, as I find myself rather interested in setting up a refight of an actual, documented battle.

korsun0 Supporting Member of TMP22 Dec 2013 5:47 a.m. PST

I'd say it was pretty realistic. Even good foot suffered against good EHC. The Normans could be Sarmatians or parthians or Sassanids etc. Perhaps deeper infantry as per historical for the Romans may help?

Just Plain Chris26 Dec 2013 8:38 a.m. PST

Ooops! Typing error in title . . . the topic should read EIR versus Normans, NOT Romans. Sorry!

colin knight05 Jan 2014 1:38 p.m. PST

almost ready to do some basic impetus solo and wonder how much terrain can influence a game. Keen to just to stick on some bits but do not want overdo scrub if using chariot army.
May all become apparent when just getting on with some games. These rules certainly seem very popular.

Just Plain Chris06 Jan 2014 6:10 a.m. PST

Colin –
Strongly recommend looking at the Basic Impetus Tutorials posted on YouTube. You might find these very helpful/entertaining. I believe that there is a chapter or video just about terrain.
Don't have the rules right here with me, but if memory serves, most chariots are disordered in Broken and Difficult Ground. Scythed chariots are considered destroyed when they meet this kind of terrain.
In sum, terrain can be absolutely key in games using Impetus – just like it is in real battles.

Best,

Chris

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.