"Most interesting Battle of the Ancient Period to game " Topic

I'm a newcomer to Ancient History and am trying to decide what armies to build for my first pair of opposing forces. I am looking for a starting point to begin my research and reading

What is your vote for your favourite battle ? Why is it interesting to you?

Magnesia. Puts the roman legions up against the Greek pike phalanxes. It's interesting because of two different styles of armies.

Alesia.

Magnesia seconded.Though I use Seleucid Macedonians, not Greeks.

Zama usually comes up in the discussion. As with Magnesia, you can get a lot of mileage out of the armies, too.

Something to be said for for armies under some sort of discipline so the wargamer makes more decisions--unless you're a solo player and need one of them to run on automatic--and something to be said for armies which fought a number of battles and had different opponents.

Telamon

Magnesia was my initial thought as well. Zama is a darn good idea too. One is Rome vs Macedonia and the second is Rome vs Carthage. And since they are only 12 years apart you can just make a Roman army and then both opponents (which is what I did).

Then you can expand out your Gallic section followed by the Spanish and just pick up more Macedonians. Add in a couple of Indians then Numidia's and then…. Now you have 10 or 11 armies.

I don't know how often it's gamed, but Orchomenus is a fun one. Pontic armies are always entertaining, and you have a nice contrast with the Romans on the other side of the table. It's also a more dynamic battle than some of the other clashes between Romans and Hellenistic foes.

In terms of historical context, it's hardly a household name, and it doesn't have quite the same epic weight as Gaugamela, Cannae, Zama, Magnesia, Alesia, Pharsalus, perhaps. But you do have probably the best of the late Pontic commanders on one side of the field, leading a veteran army, and one of Rome's greatest generals on the other, as well as a second, rival, Roman army in the field elsewhere, which means it shouln't be too hard to make it seem like fun.

Raphia

jefritrout

Your idea sounds great. Perhaps I will start with Republican Romans and the Seleucids … and add more opponents later.

I'm going to go with 6mm… for the epic battle look

Deuce03

What figures would you use for the Pontic army?

Cunaxa. Two battles in one – Cyrus loses the battle against Artaxerxes while the Greek mercenaries win the battle against the Persian left.

I highly recommend the book "Lost Battles" by Phillip Sabin. There are numerous OOB's that give a fun game. To answer your question I would say Trebia or Asculum. Both balanced so either player could win. Also lots of troop types.

Chaeronea 86BC. A corking battle between grizzled and sunburned Roman veterans and Pontics famed "for the brightness of their armour, embellished magnificently with gold and silver, and the rich colours of their Median and Scythian coats, intermixed with brass and shining steel, (Which) presented a flaming and terrible sight as they swayed about and moved in their ranks."

I've always liked Kadesh.

The last one he does

Asculum and/or Magnesia. Magnesia has elephants(both Indian and African), cataphracts, scythed chariots, horse archers, pike phalanx, Romans and Pergammon allies. Asculum doesn't have the cataphracts, horse archers, or scythed chariots, but is very evenly matched battle between the Romans and the pike phalanx. I have run Asculum several times and the battle has gone both ways.
link

Armies and Enemies of the Macedonian and Punic Wars has illustrations and descriptions of the various troop types and some information on ones that can be used for the Pontic army.

For 6mm Rapier Miniatures and Baccus mix well with Rapier edging out Baccus for the phalangites (less bendy pikes)
link

Daras, with Later Roman vs Persian, or Talas River. There are also a bunch of very interesting engagements in Italy like Montaperti and so on, but it depends whether you want Biblical, Classical, Late Antiquity or Medieval, or parts of the world outside the usual eurocentric approach.

Yes Kadesh for me too. Real ancient battles have to have chariots ;-)

Battle of Watling Street. Ca 61 AD.

You get Roman legionaries versus Britons led by Boudica.

Screaming Britons in massed formations, with slingers and chariots and some cavalry, all facing the disciplined lines of Rome.

Not to mention lots of civilians on both sides. Pro-Roman folks fleeing while the families of the Britons are along for the adventure.

So many ways to game this, either as a set piece battle, or the end of a campaign.

Heraclea – the original engagement between manipular Romans and the Macedonian phalanx, heavy cav, and war elephants. Both sides had some surpises for the other.

i must admit I really found Heraclea the most interesting battle to play to date. I have played it with about 12 different rulesets and think it is one of the most interesting battles. But I haven't played many historical battles, but of the ones I have – Heraclea.

We recently refought Chalons (451 A.D.)
Romans allied with Visigoths against Huns with subject Gepids and Ostrogoths. Lots of different troop types. Really interesting!

I share Duece03's opinion. The advantage of a Pontic army is that it has numerous parts, each of which can act as a starter for a different army. They have Cataphracts, Pike, Barbarian Tribesmen and Scythed Chariots. On the other side is Romans, which historically fought everyone.

AlexMacP, assuming you can't get "Pontic" figures, I'd sub in successor figures for most of the infantry (Thracians or Celts for the rest), and Parthians for the cavalry. Depending on scale you could probably even get away with some Romans, although Orchomenus was before Mithridates really got stuck into training his imitation legionaries and I think you'd want phalangites out of preference.

I would say the Two battles of Pyrrhus in Italy.

Again you got the pike vs republican legions.

But Pyrrhus has to make due with unreliable allies.
When I read about those battles, they seem very dynamic on both sides, reads much more like a 19th-century Napoleonic battle, With Pyrrhus riding back and forth taking control ect.

I agree on Magnesia because it has two different style armies, then as set out above, you have all these unique has elephants, cataphracts, scythed chariots, horse archers, phalanx, manipular legions, etc. All look really good on the table and present both sides with different tactical options.

Personally I am doing Raphia at the moment, mainly for the visual aspect of the elephants, mass phalanx, etc. But once that is completed filling things out for Magnesia is not all that much more.

The figures for these battles are very nice with several really good compatible figures lines. I'm mainly using Aventine, then adding Polemarch, Crusader and Relic. All match nice.

Research is readily available.

Magnesia is quite a stretch from Raphia- there are a heck of a lot of Seleucid light troops at Magnesia and a great many horse archers and cataphracts. Not to mention the Romans! :-)

I should have said that if you squint you don't need that many more.

I intend to squint.