 Editor in Chief Bill   | 28 Jul 2015 11:38 a.m. PST |
During the Ancients period (before 500 AD), which time in British history is the most interesting to wargame on the tabletop? |
 Herkybird  | 28 Jul 2015 12:15 p.m. PST |
For me, the Roman conquest! |
| elsyrsyn | 28 Jul 2015 2:29 p.m. PST |
Yup. Roman conquest is probably the tops for me too. Post-roman Arthurian dark ages would be second, if we can squeeze it into the period. Doug |
| Who asked this joker | 28 Jul 2015 2:32 p.m. PST |
Arthurian for me. Roughly 400AD- AKA the Dark Ages. |
| Big Red | 28 Jul 2015 3:53 p.m. PST |
|
 PaulCollins | 28 Jul 2015 5:24 p.m. PST |
|
| Benvartok | 28 Jul 2015 5:45 p.m. PST |
Roman Conquest or Dark Ages….hard to choose but probably Dark Ages. |
| Wulfgar | 28 Jul 2015 7:57 p.m. PST |
|
| Editor in Chief Bill | 28 Jul 2015 8:08 p.m. PST |
No love for pre-Roman eras? |
| Dexter Ward | 29 Jul 2015 1:48 a.m. PST |
Pre-Roman Britain is just a bunch of tattooed guys in bogs burying each other in wheelbarrows. |
| Green Tiger | 29 Jul 2015 2:07 a.m. PST |
Roman invasion onwards – what's not to love about 30-40 years of guerrilla warfare – now that's an ulcer! |
| Benvartok | 29 Jul 2015 3:03 a.m. PST |
I recall a kids or teenage book or two set in pre Celtic Britain that was entertaining. Celts arrived and cleaned up, steel v stone so not much of a game possible. |
| Yesthatphil | 29 Jul 2015 5:22 a.m. PST |
Roman invasion onwards – what's not to love about 30-40 years of guerrilla warfare – now that's an ulcer! Adrian Goldsworthy did a very interesting game of the Roman assault on Anglesey at a Society of Ancients AGM many moons ago (with WAB rules FWIW) … I was too busy firefighting a brief outbreak of *wargame society politics* (we had them occasionally) to be able to give it my full attention. Otherwise I guess I'm another vote for historical Arthur … Phil
Ancients on the Move |
| Mute Bystander | 29 Jul 2015 6:08 a.m. PST |
None. For me, YMMV, interesting war games start with the introduction and widespread deployment of firearms. |
| WillieB | 29 Jul 2015 10:59 a.m. PST |
|
| Dagwood | 29 Jul 2015 12:45 p.m. PST |
Isn't Arthur out of the time frame ? I assumed that was deliberate. But you could still have Saxons vs Very Late Romans if you wanted |
| handgrenadealien | 29 Jul 2015 2:30 p.m. PST |
The civil war Queen Cartimandua fought against her husband with Roman support sounds interesting. |
| Wargamer Blue | 29 Jul 2015 2:38 p.m. PST |
Early dark age Arthurian. |
| Herkybird | 29 Jul 2015 3:41 p.m. PST |
Dark Ages by far! Sadly, I think the 500AD cut off point precludes this as an option! |
| Yesthatphil | 29 Jul 2015 6:08 p.m. PST |
Isn't Arthur out of the time frame ? According to A/S Chron, Vortigern vs Hengist and Horsa is 455 … It's a good bet this is the period of any real Arthur figure (so 'in', I think) … Phil |
| Elenderil | 05 Aug 2015 5:22 a.m. PST |
I'd have to go with the twilight of the Roman occupation. Say around 375AD to 400AD. Gives the option to field a decent late Roman or if you prefer a poorer quality Patrician Roman/ Sub-Roman British (sorry this is WRG/DBA classification) force plus a good mix of incoming invaders. Picts, Early Anglo-Saxons, Scots Irish so a decent number of match ups become available. |
| Lee Brilleaux | 05 Aug 2015 6:55 a.m. PST |
What, no enthusiasm for defending Avebury and Stonehenge? Just because we have no evidence about warfare, politics, tribal structure or any sort of sequential history? We have the Amesbury archer, some flint weapon heads, and what else to go on? This is really a Two Possible Answer poll. |
