"Republican Romans vs Caesarian Romans" Topic

Would the appearance of these two armies have been much different? I'm trying to come up with an early Roman army that might have fought a Successor army, without painting up just another pike army. I'm wondering if Roman, or Carthaginian, might be good opponents for a pike-heavy Successor army?

Any thoughts from the hive mind?

Thanks!

Pyrrhus faced off against both Republican Rome and Carthage, and he was really just a mini Successor. That's a classic match-up.

A Republican army could have some colorful Italian Allies, or you can keep them looking like a mass of army ants. It is a great visual contrast to a pike army.

A Carthaginian army facing Pyrrhus in Sicily is another classic, wildly colorful mess of an army. They beauty is that all three of these armies are historical matches to each other.

Republican romans fought Seleucids and Macedonians so they would work just fine.

Caesar fought against Mithridates VI of Pontus who had a very Hellenistic army, even if he wasn't a successor in the strictest sense, he also became embroiled in the politics of Ptolemaic Egypt. So both types of Roman armies can find Hellenistic themed military opponents.

Would the appearance of these two armies have been much different?

The biggest diference in appearance is probably the tall feather plums that the mid-Republican legions sport, which had disappeared by Caesar's day. Plus of course that the earlier army has Roman citizen light infantry (velites) and cavalry whereas the Caesarians are mostly using foreign auxiliaries. As Prince Rupert said, CAesar did face off against late Hellenistic opponents, but it's the "Polybian" mid-Republican armies who are the classic pike-beaters.

by Caesar's time – more standardized armour (chain for all vs. chest protectors) some helmet differences, all troops armed with pila.

No Triarii by Caesar's time. But Caesarian legionaries look fine as Polybian Hastati/Principes; I use them that way, anyway!

The Roman armies that fought the Successors and in particular the Seleucids, looked nothing like the later Roman armies. If you don't want to use Romans, but still want to fight Successor pike armies, you might try Indians, Parthians, Bactrian Greek, and Galatians, just to name a few Seleucid enemies.

You could use a Caesarian army under Sulla against Mithridates the Great to fight Chaeronea 86BC; that is a cracking battle which I've fought many times. Nice things about it are that we know a lot about the troops present, and also that the site of the battle has been confirmed by archaeology. I can even send you a scenario…

link

wow, thats alot of pointy sticks

That is not a lot of pointy sticks… THIS is a lot of pointy sticks. ;-)

For the meglomaniac in all of us.

Love BigRedBat's massive and gorgeous armies.

Now, fight that out using WAB or WAC rules and see how long it takes.

Republican Romans at the time of the Punic Wars used different troop types and weapon types (javelins and spears for some troop types, as stated above).

Helmets are different (as reported, I don't recall anyone I know personally being there).

Armour, like helmets, are often represented as different (extra shoulder armour for Punic War Republicans). Again, I don't know anyone who was actually there to confirm all troops had changed armour.

Marius reformed the army (time between Julius Caesar and the Punic Wars Republican army).

So, formations and tactics are also different.

It's fascinating to learn about the differences (or at least I think so…).

It's a learning curve, so don't worry about rushing it.

Also, remember, these are games, no doctoral dioramas. You can be a bit creative. As you learn, you may decide to change or add troop types.

I think having fun is the most important.

brb – please post the scenario.

You are correct sir,I'm definitely in error. I thought that I had a lot, a measly 200!

Ah I can't post the scenario here, but if anyone wants it message me here or via my shop and I can email it.

I'm just not going to try to outpoint Simon :)

As for Late Republic as principes or late hastati- that shouldn't move one to lose one's salad over. The triarii were spear armed, so they are a bit of a problem.

As stated the velites and allies are somewhat different as well as the Roman cavalry- something almost completely gone by Caesar's day.

I think the differences in appearance and tactics between the Roman armies of Zama or Magnesia and, say, Chaeronea are more developed than some are acknowledging. We wouldn't be comfortable using SYW French for the Napoleonic Period and I don't think we should shrug off the differences between Scipio and Sulla's armies either.