"Parthians vs Early Imperial Romans" Topic

Hi All

As my Roman army approaches completion I am beginning to consider possible adversaries, and lean towards Parthians …

I do not have the relevant Hail Caesar supplement, so I am interested to know how Parthians and EI Romans actually game – what are they like to play against one-another?

What sort of proportion of mounted troops to foot would a Parthiam army field? Who were their allies? (I wonder about collecting some sort of allied armies for greater variety.)

My Romans are a mixture of (in order of preponderance) Warlord Games, 1st Corps, Wargames Foundry with a smattering of Gripping Beast … I am drawn by the recent Aventine Parthian releases, but the A&A ranges look good too. How well might these mix, visually, scale-wise, with the Romans that I have?

So … a few questions there … considered responses most welcome.

Cheers

Paul
nortivsmaximvs.blogspot.com

I would estimate up to 15% Cataphract cavalry, up to 15% City Militia infantry, and the remainder light cavalry horse archers. A small proportion of the Super Heavy Cavalry might be Super Heavy Camelry.

You might have (extremely unreliable) Arab or Armenian allies.

I think you might want to get some samples. Try Aventine or A&A, although you might find there a little on the large side next to your Warlord legionaries. Also look at Magister Militum and the Newline cataphracts. The Warlord Parthians ought to be a good match; their horse archers (ex Vendel) are very nice, if, perhaps, a little fragile in the bow, although Warlord might have fixed this when they took the range over:

link

Cheers, Simon

It depends on the rules you are using but this might not be the best match-up for interesting games. With light horse archers vs good quality armoured foot it is difficult to get a decisive result in a normal tabletop battle. The horse archers should find it difficult to harm the legions, and the legionaries should find it difficult to catch the horse archers.

Marshal Mark is right about the difficulty of the match-up. Most rulesets struggle with this one: mostly heavy infantry against mostly horse archers. It does work well in a campaign setting, though, so it's on my 'to do' list too.

In terms of figures, maybe also try Navigator Miniatures, by Magister Militum. The figures ain't bad at all, and their army deals are great value:

link

I'd love to see what you do with a Parthian force!

Hi Paul

As has been said the Aventine and A&A ranges are the larger 28mm scale rather than the 25mm of those you already have.

If it helps we would send you samples, just drop us an email and that can be sorted.

The A&A and Aventine ranges were both sculpted by Adam so should sit well together.

As to rules, we are contemplating a big battle for the second Partizan with just those troops using Simon's (BigRedBat) rule set.

Cheers

Keith
Aventine Miniatures

The Roman and Parthian wars went on for a number of years. With the exception of Trajan, most generals suffered total defeat or honourable draws. even Trajan didn't quite finish the job though.

The Romans had numerous advantages including they had a good solid infantry corps and Parthia did not. Foot missile troops outranged mounted missile troops. Roman cavalry could chase down and destroy Horse Archers provided they didn't do a Publius (Crassus' son) and go to far and get cut off. It all depended on the ability of the Roman commander. The following link has some interesting comments;

link

Personally, I'd consider EIR vs Dacians. The Dacians were a damn hard nut to crack for Rome.

In many of the battles after Carrhae the Parthians fielded a much higher percentage of cataphracts. But in Hail Caesar at least 3/4 of the horse must be light, and the foot isn't very good. Depending on how late you want to date your Romans, you might be better using Palmyrans or Sassaanids. Personally, I wouldn't have a problem using early imperials into the 3rd century. In addition, in Hail Caesar Sassanid cataphracts have bow. Cataphracts in other armies are just slow heavy cavalry.

I really don't think Aventines figures are that big. The Aventine Parthians and A&A Sassanids match up pretty well, although the Aventine horses might be a little smaller (at the legs are not as bulky). The A&A Palmyran horses and figures (although very nice) are much larger than the Parthians and Sassanids.

Parthia is a challenge for EIR but as stated before a lot depends on the EIR commander. We use Hail Caesar and each battle has given interesting results.

I did nag Simon about cataphracts a while back and as yet haven't tried them in his rule system. However the rest of the system does reward historical formations and I would expect the cats if used properly to be rewarded the same way.

I would not underestimate Parthia's chances against Rome. Last week the Parthian commander did a good job of thumping the legions and sent them home.

link

The Parthian commander needed to wear down the Roman offensive and to do this the battle was characterized by instances of feigned flight, followed by selective charges from supporting troops on subsequent bounds.

I have not found instances of militia taking the field, but was content to sit behind their walled cities.

Arabo-Aramean allies also served with Parthia; the City State of Hatra supplying the armoured camel troops.

Cheers,
Robert

Hi Nigel, we need to put that right, real soon! :-) I am working towards Carrhae at the September Partizan.

Hello Everybody.

My word! I wasn't expecting such an amazing response. Thank you! Thank you!

In particular, Keith, for your very kind offer, which I would very much like to take up.

Regarding figure size (rather than nominal scale) my understanding is that Warlord's Romans are intentionally smaller fellows, as their auxiliary infantry are intentionally larger … I went for 1st Corps cavalry because I am not so keen on Warlord's horses … and these mounts are small, which I believe to be historically accurate. I have some Warlord dromedaries too (based on eBob camels I think) … and this was the choice that steered my little collection towards the Euphrates …

Simon: it is hard to know what Warlord's plan is for the Parthians – I have asked. I realised that they had acquired part of the Vendel range, but so far nothing has been added (I think Bolt Action may have overwhelmed them somewhat).

Caliban: your observation about campaigning is interesting, since this is my approach – more of a narrative than one-off games.

Everyone else: thank you also … all points noted and will be considered.

Cheers

Paul

Bike is back on the road Simon so just say the word and I'll be right over. Just wish I could bring my cats with me…

:(

In game terms I think that if you go down the path of lots of horse archers, the game runs the risk of not being terribly interesting. If you game the decisive encounter though where it's more the core of the Parthian army having to fight – relatively more cataphracts – it might be a more interesting tabletop activity.

Add in some Greek city militia and some poor quality spear units and you have a core for a good game.

Paul

Essex also do a 28mm range – slight figures, smaller than Aventine and A&A but nicely detailed. Horses are large.

We had a re-play of Carrhae late last year

link

Romans lost their light troops early and the legionaries were starting to look a bit sick at the end. Under Hail Caesar shaken troops when hit again take full account of any casualties so are quite fragile.

Garry

Hi Paul, my plan for the campaign is to permit the Parthians to engage the dastardly Romans in every province they contest. However, as a cavalry army they will be able to just to turn around and withdraw at any point. The idea is that they will turn up, do loads of shooting, degrade the Roman infantry as they trudge miserably across the field, then run away. Rinse and repeat. Do this a couple of times, and then turn up in real force and see what happens.

I hope this means that the tabletop games will be tense as the Parthians loose an arrow storm and try to pick off any odd units, take advantage of any openings ad so on. It will need a campaign-minded player to do this, mind you, so that the Parthian leader doesn't get despondent while the Romans march forward, seemingly invincible on the table itself.

Basically, use the campaign map for a war of attrition and then turn on them when ready!

T'other Paul

For background read 'Winter Quarters' by Alfred Duggan, about the Carrhae campaign

Caliban Paul, you are going to need a big table! :-)

Simon

While the Parthians present a challanging and historic opponent for Romans, it is, IMHO, quite possibly the worst gaming match to play. One side shoots and avoids combat all game and the other side tries to get into combat and get shot at all game. One player has fun … one gets bored and frustrated to death. For a once in a great while game, Parthians offer a difficult enemy. But for collecting an army to oppose your EIR there are much "better" choices … British … Dacian … Germans … Jewish revolt …

Parthians are a beautiful army to model … but u will be sorry.

Mike B

Hi All

Thank you fort he further contributions … Mike B has expressed my concern succinctly … Hmmm!

JARROVIAN: thank you for the recommendation …

I am off to cogitate …

Paul

Look at Palmyrians as well.

Cheers

Keith

I think Parthians represent an interesting choice for fighting Romans, precisely because they do provide such an asymmetric battle. To win the battle, the cataphracts are going to need to charge at some point (Carrhae being the exception that proves the rule).

One would need a set of rules that supported this sort of fighting, though, and a big old table, too!

I've picked up some cats from Keith and hope to have a crack at Carrhae in the autumn, if we can get enough Parthians together in time.

Cheers, Simon

While the Parthians present a challanging and historic opponent for Romans, it is, IMHO, quite possibly the worst gaming match to play.

While I agree that Palmyrans, early Sassanids, or Dacians (with Sarmatian allies) might make a better opponents, the Parthians are not as bad a match as presented. Not every battle or campaign needs to be modeled on Carrhae. There was only one Battle of Carrhae. The following options are possible:

1. As the Parthians settled down as rulers of an empire the number of nomadic type horse archers probably declined, instead relying on a higher percanrage of noble cavalry (cataphracts)
2. Whatever horse archer numbers fielded in the 2nd century were probably countered by the Romans fielding reasonable numbers of foot archers and cavalry.
3. Campaigns can be fought in Armenia instead of Syria. The terrain tend to negate any horse archer advantage.
4. Assume the campaign is part of an Armenian civil war. Both sided have Armenians. The Romans support their side with mostly Legions and the Parthians mostly with cataphracts.

I have played this game many time 20 or so years ago with WRG 7th edition and using 25mm QT models!

In my experience, the Parthian horse archers will do nothing more than frustrate the Romans and prevent them from moving how and where they want to. If the Parthian player can manoeuvre the Cataphracts behind this skirmish screen and into a position where they charge home on weaker Roman troops (Roman cavalry being a good target) and trigger a rout they will usually win.

We always enjoyed the single unit of Irregular A Cataphract camels with the WRG rules, with a positive dice roll they could beat anything in melee!

Oh and if you have any Parthian foot, make sure you put them somewhere where they don't get involved….. :0)

Need a bigger table…hmmm. What about a "floating" table of the kind used by naval and space gamers? Maybe several pre-planned terrain sets together could represent the crucial area of a province, and Parthian cataphracts or whatever could have their positions marked in advance, being activated when certain conditions are met. This might make a good solo project, as a kind of mini-campaign. Might also be the way to go for a convention game.

In fact, the principle could be adapted for other running battles, such as Teutoburgerwald, or Huns, Mongols etc.

Re bigger table, Paul: I'd thought about sliding terrain boards, so that as the Romans advanced, the empty boards behind them could be shifted behind the retreating Parthians.

Hi Simon, that would do nicely. I can feel a Slingshot article germinating…

Play it on a giant conveyor belt, Paul. :-)

Now that I'm in like flint with 10mm EIR, I can do Parthians! Who cares if the game is slow! It will be cool to have a Parthian army that won't take 5 years to paint nor a 2nd mortgage to pay for!

Yes!

Hi All

Thank you for all the interesting replies … now I am torn … I will go away and have a think about this.

Cheer
Paul

"Now that I'm in like flint.."

Hey, Smokey, I could be wrong, but I think it's "in like (Erol) Flynn".

Being "in like (Larry) Flint" is an entirely different situation…

LOL! I think I mean that James Coburn guy! :)

Oh, just googled it. A feminist conspiracy movie just 4 years before my time. Just missed it…

Sorry for the misunderstanding…funny how when one opens one's mouth, what comes out says more about ourselves than others…

Now back to those Parthians…

No worries, Mars! We ALL know who Larry Flynt is, and we all know his product! :)

(and now we all know how old you are) :)

Too young to remember "In Like Flynt", Old enough to remember "Penthouse Forum".

I'd say 30-40?

:)

In like Flint was '67; I missed it by 4 years so that puts me at '71; so 43 in a few weeks. Not quite so young as that. But maybe enough to get Flynt and Flint confused.

It's fairly rare to have a really fun "pitched battle" against nomads… that's the issue I think MikeB is trying to impart…

If you look at the history of wars against the the Skythians and Parthians-- up until the AD Roman Empire pitched battles are few and far between…

What you have is a match-up between the leviathans and the bees… and the bees can sting and flee. The Parthians can 'win" but the games are difficult to manage at a battle level.

What really is clear is that the Parthians avoid defeat, and win campaigns -- not the battles… the leviathan force can win a battle and attempt a siege, and take the town-- but how can they hold it?

The most interesting scenarios I have found occur when you break the conflict down from big battle level to engagements that create a campaign flow. More like SAGA or pig snatching scenarios work with these armies. For example the biggest military disaster to befall Antony in his invasion of Parthia, was the loss of his siege train. The Parthians simply avoided the leviathan force until it was camped around their capitol, then proceeded to make keeping that army supplied and operational impossible. When the siege train was destroyed the Romans had no chance to even do what they do best-- camp out and eat cities. This strategy was similar to how the Parthians gobbled up Seleucid armies and captured their kings, it was not (as some would make everybody believe) because the Parthian cataphracts could overrun a phalanx…

Gaming this means coming up with good smaller scenarios-- that doesn't mean you dont have to game with three dozen miniatures like SAGA or actual skirmish games-- you just have to work hard to create fun scenarios-- guarding the frontier fort, getting to the well, supply siege train escort duty .. etc… in short every type of scenario that applies to colonial style campaigns.

Question: The Parthians seemed like they were the best of both Worlds, a advanced and elite horse archer and knight race, BUT with a civilized, reasonable system of settled society.

Was that their downfall? They were not nomadic and thus dependant upon being plunderers, had a rich, stable economic/socio/political foundation, and were not bad people (the Romans didn't like bad people, and usually devoted lots of resources to mass slaughter and genocide of "bad" races. Seems like despite all the wars and tiffs, the Romans definately regarded the Parthians as a equal or at less respectable, civilized people.

Was it Islam that overwhelmed them?

They were defeated by a group of native Persian nobility, who thought the Parthians, despite being in charge for almost 400 years, were still smelly foreign oiks with no manners. The winners of this Persian civil war became the Sassanid dynasty in 224.

That's a very, very short form answer.

Oh, I thought the Sassanids WERE Parthians. Thanks, mexican!