"Ancient rules: simulation prefered" Topic

Hi

our wargaming club is looking for an ancient set of rules. We already play DBM, DBA, Fields of Glory, but now we are looking for the simulation way of the game.The period we are looking for is ancient Greece, ancient Rome, no need to simulate other periods or regions.
We don't care if the rules are "heavy" or generate long games.

We played the GMT's GBOH system with counters and minis but didn't like it (the initiative momentum effect crashes most games).

We cureently play AH's Trireme for naval ancients and like it a lot.

Thanks for your suggestions.

Pascal

Check out Justin Taylors 'Alia Iacta Est', made for big games in the Classical period

* What are you trying to simulate ?

I think DBA and DBMM (and FOG to a lesser extent) simulate ancient battles at their scale.

Are you wanting older style rules that use casualty removal, morale tests, micro measurement, order writing, and all the fiddly bits that DBA and others removed ? If so.. WRG 5th? Imperium by Leopard Heraldry, and Shock of Impact are all OK, (I play Imperium with the designer, and It is an excellent experience – but it is only one step away from WRG (It is better … )

I use the Warrior rules, basically an updated WRG 7th edition. Perhaps the last of the old style simulation rules.

Simulation? Then look no further than Phil Sabins 'Lost Battles' (or its predecessors Strategos and Strategos II).

link

Simulation? Then look no further than Phil Sabins 'Lost Battles' (or its predecessors Strategos and Strategos II).

Absolutely agree. "Lost Battles" is the best simulation type ancients game around.

Hi Pascal

Lost Battles, perhaps? It's quite abstract, using around 20 units per side for most scenarios (numbers scale up or down depending on the engagement), but it is most definitely a simulation, and it covers the period you're after.

The boardgame version is OOP, but you can still pick up the book (which is all you need if you have miniatures already) from Amazon or elsewhere, or buy the earlier version, Strategos II, from the Society of Ancients.

It's a great system, but is not to everyone's tastes.

Here's an example of a game in play:

link

And this is an overview of how the game plays. This one uses the boardgame, but it's the same when you play with miniatures:

link

Hope that helps a little.

Cheers,
Aaron

Oops, my recommendation took a while to type up – I wasn't ignoring you Martin and MajorB; I'd just posted before seeing yours!

thanks for these first replies.

Maddaz, we don't find that DBA, DBMM, and FOG simulate history. They are fine and fun games to play but they don't feel historical to us.

Martin: of course we know Lost Battles and we'd like to give it a try, but it's too expensive at the moment!
yes we don't care about fiddly aspects of the game, we want simulation.

Lost Battles and we'd like to give it a try, but it's too expensive at the moment!

Is £6.69 GBP cheap enough?
link

It's out-of-print at the moment so your best bet is secondhand as above.

We didn't know that we could play Lost Battles with minis without buying the boardgame.

So, we already have one good hint here.

Now I'll be looking for informations about the WRG rules and Imperium by Leopard Heraldry, and Shock of Impact as specified by Maddraz

For the Imperial Roman era, I can suggest no better set than Phil Hendrys Augustus to Aurelias from TooFatLardies.

link

By the way … Lost battles – is the best simulation of ancient battles for its money…

I bought the book twice, and the boardgame.

But I am still asking what you are trying to simulate?

Lost battles is more DBA like..(but the book is worth it for the detailed research… )

What is wrong (in your eyes?) with DBA/DBMM/FOG..? If I knew what was wrong, I could create a better answer.

I have not played Augustus to Aurelian .. Two Fat Lardies rules for this, but if they are anything like any other TFL rules, then they will be cleverer than they first appear, and truly genius in how they handle friction. I enjoy many other TFL rules, Including Dux Brittaniarum, which I can suggest is a fine skirmish game!

Civitates Bellantes is indeed designed as a simulation of Greek and Roman warfare. £5.00 GBP for the PDF at
link
Simon

Maddaz

we are tired of games of DBA/DBMM/FOG won because of lucky dice or because one troop is better rated in the rules.

Of course lucky dice will always impact a game but we want to see game won or eleganly loosed by clever manoeuvers or fine tactics.

After all your tips I'll get my eyes on (by priority):

-Warrior
-Lost Battles
-Imperium
-Civitates Bellantes

I'd like to thank you all for these fine tips.
Our ancient armies won't no longer stay on the shelves.

Pascal

I am going to come at the answer from a different direction and suggest another set of rules that I have played and enjoyed…

Command And Colours Ancients.

(its a hex based and very simple boardgame.. but the friction of the cards and dice produce a fun game)

It is very easy to change it to a tabletop game, and you can double the sizes of the table by using the epic rules..

(It is quite a light game, and sometimes produces a fluke dice result.. but ninety (or more) percent of the time, it is as realistic as much more rules heavy games.

Maddaz

we know well CCAncients and have played it with minis too.

I have played all the scenarios and Epic versions too.

We like it a lot but we don't see it as a simulation.

I have found Roman Seas is much better than Trireme, especially for large battles.

Lost Battles if you are going for Simulation. Anything else if you just want a game.

Lost Battles is not a simulation, it is a game like all others. In fact I find the whole idea on this thread a bit ridiculous. We play wargames, not simulations. A flight simulator gives one a reasonable expectation of what one will experience when actually flying a plane. What we do on the table top does nothing of the sort. There is no ability to simulate ancient warfare using toy soldiers and players with god's eyes view.

Lost Battles is not a simulation, it is a game like all others. In fact I find the whole idea on this thread a bit ridiculous. We play wargames, not simulations. A flight simulator gives one a reasonable expectation of what one will experience when actually flying a plane. What we do on the table top does nothing of the sort. There is no ability to simulate ancient warfare using toy soldiers and players with god's eyes view.

In one sense you are right, Marcus Brutus, but in another you are not. It depends on what is meant by simulation. If we define it as a mathematical system which attempts to create a model of ancient warfare that accords at a certain level with what the sources tell us about that warfare, then some games will meet that criteria.

It's not an absolute state of course, but I think we all know what we mean when we talk about a simulation versus a game. A game's purpose is to create an exciting contest based upon a theme. A simulation attempts to show or tell us something about how something works or did work.

I agree with you that if we take a hard definition no game will qualify as a simulation, but if we step back and relax a bit, some toy soldier rules will be a little more about creating a working model of aspects of ancient warfare than others.

Cheers,
Aaron

I share Marcus Brutus' scepticism, though one could imagine a computer game providing a more realistic simulation, especially if it delivered a jab between the ribs with a sharp blade if you lose. That, after all, is the true reality of warfare.

Well, wargames give players certain decisions to make, some of which will be similar to those that real captains faced. If the game is made up of a majority of these 'realistic' decisions, then, like Marcus Brutus' flight simulator, you are getting a certain level of simulation. It's not a complete simulation, but you don't die if you crash a flight simulator, either!

a mathematical system which attempts to create a model of ancient warfare that accords at a certain level with what the sources tell us about that warfare, then some games will meet that criteria.

And that is exactly the premise of "Lost Battles".

Certain game systems simulate some things well.

Others create believable outputs from reasonable inputs.

No one game system simulates everything an Ancients general would have to do.

(no drills, parades, order writing, planning, discussions with sub commanders, examining scouts reports, dining, reassuring the men, drinking, checking the coffers, and sorting out logistical log jams..) and they are only just what I think about initially…

So yes most simulations are games, but not all games are simulations..

Interesting discussion.

Simulation is as has been pointed out something that really cannot be done in a tabletop game :(

What matters really is limiting command and control on the part of the general and then having a mechanism that regulates combat such that when two groups of troops fight there will eventually be an outcome and one side or the other will most likley lose.

Just because 12 figures at factor 6 cause 47 casualties compared to 16 figures at factor 5 only causing 43 and thus that unit loses does not a simulation make.

The real question is what are you trying to simulate?

Pascal
You might want to try Scutarii from Hoplite Research Games
link
also available from Caliver Books.
link
The following is an account of a refight of Asculum
link
Other battle accounts also on the blog.
Regards,
Bill

If you want a simulation your best bet will be to have a person in the room with the game itself. Put the other two people in different rooms with a lot of loud noise. Then put a small camera on one of the figures representing the general.

The player each get a short overview of what his line looks like and then gets to make decisions based on that. The figure itself is allowed to rotate in place as much as possible before issuing orders.

Then when orders are issued to the person in the room with the game he does what he thinks he has been told to do and rolls all dice and measures all movements.

If you do it like that you will probably find that any actual rules you use don't make that much difference in how the results come out as far as simulating what an actual battle might feel like.

Once you can see even all of your own guys, never mind where all the enemy stuff is, you've pretty much blown any chance of having a simulation.

Avoid Shock of Impact. If my memory serves me right, it just becomes a mass unformed melee with ridiculous calculations as to who took what casualties…. unless we were playing it wrong all those years ago. WRG 6th was a coin toss compared to those rules.
Imagine two sets of football fans fans slugging it out on the terraces in an unformed mass, throw in a few riot police and the odd hot dog seller, and there's your game. Not what I see as a simulation.

I never even knew there was a board game version of Lost Battles, I've only ever played Phil's games with figures. If you can't find a cheap copy of the book then iirc The Society of Ancients still sells Strategos.

What constitutes Simulation in game design is a whole different kettle of fish. LB does however allow you to fight Cannae in a reasonably convincing manner, the Austerlitz of Ancient battles.

You might look at Might of Arms as well. About the same detail as Warrior but a different combat system. Many people did not like it because combats between units can go several turns.

With all respect people are listing game systems, not simulations. Warrior is a more complex game but doesn't even come close to representing a simulation so let's not get confused about what we are talking about. A simulation gives one an approximate experience of what a real life circumstance would give. Obviously not identical or there would be no need for the simulation. My point is that wargaming isn't even remotely approximate to what real life combat is like.

Hell is other people's ancients rules.

Regards

David F Brown

With all respect people are listing game systems, not simulations.

I disagree:

simulation – the act of imitating the behavior of some situation or some process by means of something suitably analogous (especially for the purpose of study or personnel training)
war game – a simulation of a military operation intended to train military commanders or to demonstrate a situation or to test a proposed strategy.

Tell me MajorB what the analogy of moving lead soldiers on the table top is with fighting real battles? I don't see any analogies but I am willing to hear the counter point.

I used to game with a guy who'd say, "I don't know what I'd be like in a real battle but on the table top I'm fearless." I think that quote pretty much states my point of view.

Marcus – you are confusing the experience of battle with a simulation of the decision/action/outcome that is a wargame (and possibly the General's view of a battle sometimes). A wargame CAN simulate the latter but not the former.

Wargames as simulations are imperfect to varying degrees and the level of simulation is usually quite low but they aim for an acceptable/believable/justifiable outcome from a 'realistic' set/series of choices made by the players with randomness added.

Lost Battles is an attempt to produce an abstract system that models the process from decision to outcome so that bad decisions produce poor outcomes (most of the time) and good decisions produce mostly positive outcomes. Phil Sabine has developed the model from real data (i.e. the results of real battles) and then tested it against their 'story' – that clearly makes it a simulation, however imperfect, as well as a game.

The German army used blocks instead of figures for Kriegspiel as a training method. The US army commissioned a large number of micro armor vehicles from GHQ for their Dunn Kemp training system. There is also the story of the Japanese navy gaming a battle with the US navy using model ships where the junior officers defeated their seniors. The umpires ruled that there was a mistake and that the senior officers should have won. The story goes that the US navy did defeat the Japanese navy in the actual battle.

As it is though we are playing games with lead or plastic soldiers. How close a game comes to history or just being a game is a matter of interpretation.

Here's a few simulations used by the military:
link

What Marcus Brutus said. Don't kid yourselves, you'll end up sounding like a certain pompous buffoon of a rules author.

cheers

CW

No one is suggesting that playing with toy soldiers is the same as fighting for your life on an ancient battlefield.

If you look up 'simulation' in the dictionary – as MajorB has kindly done for us – you will find that some 'toy soldier games' can meet the definition(s).

No one is saying that playing with toy soldiers equals reality.

BTW CW, I'm curious to know who your pompous buffoon of a rules author is. Would you care to say?

I'm not sure what your trying to "simulate" here, but if I had to guess, you are looking to limit your control over most of the army's activities once the battle begins. I suggest the following experiment.

If you are concerned that units move too freely on the battlefield, then try the movement restrictions of Armati 2. While sometimes panned as being "too restrictive", these maybe the closest rules in actually simulating both a limiting command structure and what could really be done maneuvering in the face of the enemy.

If you are trying to achieve a good representation of just the combat related unit interactions then the SPQR board game or the FOG combat mechanism are probably the best that your going to get.

I would suggest that you combine these two areas from these games and then use ironclad, fairly specific orders for most of the units not within a couple of base widths of your general figure. Let them go and see what happens.

For good measure, only allow your commander to move a significant distance a couple of times during the game, restricting him to one or two general localities at most.

This sounds so interesting, I might give it a try myself.

Maybe what bonzillou means is that he wanta a set of rules that are focused on re-playing actual battles rather than a ubiquitous 400 point a side meeting engagement.

If so, Lost Battles is a good suggestion.

IMO, like other have commentated, the suggestion that certain rules are more "simulation" than others is somewhat silly.

Cheers,
JohnG

I'm surprised nobody's suggested The Perfect Captain's Hoplomachia. It's free, but requires learning a bunch of terminology and printing off a ton of counters and cards and the like. Depends what you're trying to simulate, but if you want to think about what it would be like trying to rustle up the citizens from your city-state to go and trample the olive groves of your rivals and neighbours and vice-versa, it seems hard to beat.

A game I am sad to say I've never had the chance to play, and probably never will, but would really, really like to one day.

A blurb from the website:

Question:
Have you been looking for a set of fast, easy to learn rules that generally simulate any engagement from 3000 BC to 1500 AD? You have?

THEN GO AWAY! SHOO! WE HAVE NOTHING HERE FOR YOU!
These rules are not for the faint of heart! There are lots of strange and arcane systems which may baffle the novice gamer, and loads of Greek words and terms that you'll have to memorize. You have been forewarned! We here at the Captain's Mess have been looking far and wide for a set of rules that would give us the closest feeling to the awful and bloody battles that are crammed into all the historical writings of the ancient Greeks. We looked far and wide, but found nothing that "tasted" anything like the accounts in Herodotus, Thukydides, or Xenophon- so we decided to "cook" one up ourselves.

We have tried to embody all the main characteristics of warfare at that time in the systems of Hoplomachia

This includes:
An additive system for determining Army morale, depending on both artificial events orchestrated by the commander-in-chief, and events that are beyond his control
-Pre-battle Sacrifice,
-Breakfast and Speech-making
-Managing your army merely by signals
-Different modes of movement, depending on intentions
Actually test the manhood of your troops!

What else is featured?
A ranged combat system that makes you feel your troops cringing under their shields as another squall of arrows, javelins or rocks come their way!
~Paean singing & goat slaughtering rules! ~
we're not kidding. Get it? Kidding!
-Melee rules that actually allow you to feel how far your spear penetrates into your enemy!
More than 40 unit cards, with literally hundreds of variations, yet with almost every factor pre-calculated into each system
-Comprehensive battle generation system which covers every battle situation possible in the Classical era Full army lists for virtually every Greek City State and League,even including the Western Persian Satrapies and the Odrysian Thracian Kingdom!

I always liked Might of Arms, has a bit of WRG and DBM flavor, but I liked it more, it somehow felt more … historical?

And what about Warmaster Ancients?

Cheers

Hi

I'd like to thank you all for the tips you gave me about rulesets.

The debate about simulation is also very interesting.

What I mean about simulation (sorry if I wasn't clear enough, I'm french!) is for example:
Would I fight a battle the same way if I'm commanding Julian reform roman legions or Marius reform roman legions?

We want to feel this aspect of ancients warfare.

skippy0001: we've chosen Trireme because we prefer playing small part of the battle and have more details for each "galley".

"What I mean about simulation (sorry if I wasn't clear enough, I'm french!) is for example:
Would I fight a battle the same way if I'm commanding Julian reform roman legions or Marius reform roman legions?"

In that case you might want to try Warhammer Ancient Battles. For some of the supplements there are very detailed lists that allow for subtleties even within different Saxon armies (for example.)

Here's a link for the perfect captain…..

link

After all your tips I'll get my eyes on (by priority):

I know it is an older set of rules but it still does a good job Classical Hack available from Amazon or as a .pdf from Wargame Vault