"Help me pick an A&A starting middle imperial Roman order?" Topic

I'm considering ordering some A&A middle imperial Romans and starting this month with an infantry order to make use of the current deal, and combining this with the 13-pack deal. Then come back and get cavalry in a future order. Can you help me pick my 13 packs?

I'm looking to the Hail Caesar and Field of Glory army lists as guidance, as well as some Ospreys and Phil Hendry's wonderful gallery at link along with other things and general googling. I base on 20mm wide x 25mm deep bases that I can then use to play either of these or other DBx-derrived as well as Dragon Rampant, which I don't favor but is the popular for after work club night, for the ease of getting it all done in a few hours. Happily, all of these (or pretty much anything else, too) work well if I think in terms of unit strength in multiples of twelve (or six for light troops).

I was thinking of starting with a core of at least two units of 24-strong legionaries including command, which should let me get a good mix of the various armor types A&A offers. And I guess the same figures can be used for auxiliary, with the difference being I would give them spears instead of the pila they come with? How many units overall to get a solid proportion for this starting force? Two, three or four?

Next question is archers. I quite like the look of the armored archer figures. Any reason not to get two packs of them with command? Field them as a regular unit of 24 on their own or would they be integrated in some other way with the legionairies?

Then, to fill out the rest of the order, I may have to decide between unarmored archers, unarmored "lanciarii" or praetorian guard, or pick two as smaller units (for now). I have been hastily searching for answers about lanciarii including skimming the article at link and Osprey's "Imperial Roman Legionary AD161-284" (the section starting on page 23) for info. Phil Hendry has opted for armored lanciarii using the legionary figures. I quite like the look and feel of the unarmored ones and the depiction of light armed spearmen in the Osprey book, so unless this is controversial I think I might go for at least a unit of 12, but how should I be thinking of them as I build and plan the tactics of the army. Start with at least 24 and leave unarmored archers for another time? Forego archers entirely until later?

Tips on praetorian guard would also be helpful. Something I can consider core or a more fringe unit to come to later? One standard unit of 24 or something else?

Last question for now is what campaign would you say is the best to use as a model, with the best known info about it, and what source for that info should I go to? I always like to ground things with as concrete a foundation as possible.

I assume you mean 193-324AD. Septimius Severus may be a good period, he fought a number of battles, Battle of Issus and Battle of Lugdunum in 194AD. You could model your army on his force, although there is a lack of source material. The old SPI boardgame lists the army of Septimius as follows; 20SD (Legionaries), 8HC (Heavy Cavalry), 12SK (Skirmishers), 4LC (Light Cavalry), 4BW (Bowmen). That may allow you get your ratios' correct.

Some thoughts. The auxiliary should not outnumber the legionary figures and as for the archers I would keep them around 25 percent of the total infantry force. Armored or unarmored either way is fine. Same with integrating them… I personally prefer to integrate them in the rear ranks. The praetorian guard infantry is something I would add later. I would think a ratio of 2-1 legionaries to auxiliary would seem appropriate. Which campaign? They fought numerous large scale battles against the Sassanians during this time frame as well as German incursions over the Rhine in addition to which pfmodel mentioned. Google search be recommended as a starting point for campaigns.

Thank you kindly, both! Very helpful.

Yes, 193-324AD is right. The ratios from the game are a good broad constraint and seem doable for this starter force.

Oregon01, are you the Oregon Painter (http://oregon01.historical28sallthingsmetal.com/)? You remind me I was meaning to get back to your blog and give you a follow and comments after seeing your work some time ago. Well, you've got a new fan! And all your suggestions sound good to me, thanks.

Taken all together, it sounds like I was on the right track with my general plan, and here's where it stands at the moment with some refinements.

24 Legionaries
24 Legionaries
24 Auxiliaries using legionary figures
20 or 24 Armored archers to either back the legionary units or stand on their own
20 or 24 Light infantry lanciarii with spears that can be split up into smaller units as required

For campaigns, I am prepping my goths at the moment so I might start with googling those matchups. Also, I came to the period with a strong interest in sassanids and parthians and that's how I found and then became enamored of the A&A Romans.

I've done some reading and usually I do more before making a purchase, but I'm in an impulsive frame of mind at the moment due to a combination of factors including things like having saved throughout the pandemic and being alarmed at rising shipping and metal costs and wanting to put in orders where the going is still good with those that haven't had to make a big hike already.

The Romans on Romans matchups would require me talking others into joining in the 3rd century, which is a strong possibility given how many guys are in my local club. I've asked around and there are plenty of early and late imperial armies among the group, but none middle so far. Which maybe should have told me to focus instead on my own unpainted late Roman force but as I say I'm in an impulsive state of mind. :D

Anyway, thanks again and welcome further feedback. Sounds like my plan for this order is on solid footing but it will need to be bolstered sooner or later (possibly sooner).

Oregon painter blog is indeed myself. Goths will make a good choice for an opponent.

For the early part of the period you could look at Arrian's campaign against the Alans – there are several online translations. It's about a small Roman army deployed for battle. Re: your force – You need to include some cavalry. That seems like a lot of archers for a Roman force, especially if 24, 48 or 72 figures = 1 legion. Full legions still have 10 cohorts (although this would include your lanciarii). Auxiliaries are deployed in single cohorts. I assume you are referring to A&As 121 – 260 AD range? The archers are great figures and the range paints up very well. The Goths are a good enemy for say 250 AD +.

If you're interested, Crusader Miniatures has two packs that compliment A&A excellently. I intend to use both in my own (in the far future) middle Imperial legion.

link
link
The later are mono pose, but I think they would still look nice.

If you plan on having them fighting Sassanids or Parthians, I would look into A&A's Palmyrans, too. I love their model of Queen Zenobia.

Thanks gavandjosh02, I found this page here with a translation and commentary: link . I'll give it a read!

Thanks for the note about archers. I'll look more into it. It's between one or two packs of ten, so if one would do I could start with one (and he may be willing to sell me a few more to get to 12, which many games call for).

My plan for cavalry would be to follow up with another order, as I'm looking to take full advantage of the current special A&A is running this month.

When it comes to figure ratios, I am definitely the type that needs to ground the game with specific numbers in order to fully enjoy it and immerse myself in it. For other periods I typically plan it out in a spreadsheet, but for this army I am winging it a bit. But then when it comes to game time it's the more practical type that have the wherewithal to bring everyone out to the table, and then we play some 100% abstract gamey contemporary game like Lion Rampant. Even the "middle ground" type games like Field of Glory have these highly unrealistic and highly abstract unit sizes everything is pigeon-holed into. :P But I'll see if I can pin this down a bit more before I put in the order.

Thanks FilsduPoitou, I'll keep it in mind. I actually have my first North Star order in transit as we speak. I'm not sure I'll have a need for them, as I love all the variety of the A&A legionaries, and I've also seen comparison photos that show A&A roman equaling the size of Gripping Beast late roman, and another that shows a Crusader late roman quite a bit shorter than a Gripping Beast late roman. The A&A are also a bit less expensive, so no reason there.

I like the A&A Palmyrans, but would first go with Sassanids and/or Parthians, and there is very little chance of going beyond that. But, there is a fair chance I could entice another guy at the club to go for them. :D

On the subject of enemies for Middle Rome, I found this wikipedia overview to be very helpful starting at 3.1.4, the Struggle with Parthia (114–217 AD): link

You have:
Struggle with Parthia (114–217 AD)
Migration period (163–378 AD)
Usurpers (193–394 AD)
Struggle with the Sassanid Empire (230–363 AD)

The migration period deals with tribes including the Allamani and Goths. As you say, gavandjosh02, Goths enter around 250 AD, which is right at the edge of the timespan this miniature range covers (A&A itself puts the range at 121 AD to the 260 AD).

So, while there's some overlap, goths are better suited to the Late Roman army I already have but also haven't painted. The Allamani would be a more appropriate enemy.

The late Romans are also as fit to face off against the planned Sassanids as the middle Romans. As I've said already, the more rational choice might be to focus on the fourth century instead. I need to ask myself, what more will the middle period bring that is unique?

I'll need to do a little more digging to see what would be most suitable for Allemani and other tribes. Whether they could make use of goths and early saxons (I already have) that didn't have distinguishing later period ridge helmets, or they would be better represented by the various bare-chested, fur-clad early German ranges, or would really be neither. Was there a shift from the one to the other in the course of this interval. A German horde could be an idea that guys at the club could get behind, especially if the Victrix kit was suitable.

The Victrix kit gives the range of 100-200AD, and links to the opening of Gladiator, which takes place in 180 AD, squarely in our period. Now we are talking about Marcomanni rather than Allamani link. But it looks like the bare-chested types are suitable at least for the earlier part of this period. Personally, I would be tempted to contribute with some Foundry Copplestone Germans if I could find them second-hand.

At any rate, my enthusiasm remains high, despite this seeming more and more like two projects with a high degree of overlap.

" I need to ask myself, what more will the middle period bring that is unique?"

That I can't answer, but what attracts the middle Imperial over the Pax Romana or (to a lesser extent) the fourth century is that Rome is going up against newly centralized states (the ethnogenesis of various new German confederations and kingdoms) and ascending empires (Gallic, Palmyrene, Sassanids). It's the greatest threat to the Roman state in hundreds of years; since Hannibal was rampaging across Italia. It's more interesting when both sides are taking severe beatings. Plus, the middle Empire is a transitory period when it comes to armor, so you get a more unique looking exotic army compared to the bog standard Roman Legionnaire everyone imagines in their head.

As for the Goths, I think you could use them even earlier than 250 AD. The first major attack on Rome by them was in 238 and Goths even participated as mercenaries during the wars with the Sassanids during the mid 240s.

@FilsduPoitou

A great perspective on it, thanks! I haven't "done" early imperial Rome so I'm coming to it mostly looking back from the later era, but in time I'll work on being able to come from both directions.

And good to know about the Goths!

I find the civl wars of the 3rd century more interesting than the 1st as well.

I am seeing their appeal for sure. And I see good potential to use the civil wars as a (second) selling point (along with the German federation), if I pitch this to be one of my club's periodic group projects.

Thanks again everyone who helped me out here. I pulled the trigger and a legion is on the march!

For those interested, this is what I'll have to start working on, and again, I plan to add cavalry in a second order. 24 will make a cohort.

24 Legionaries
24 Legionaries
24 Lanciarii* or Legionaires in light armor with spear
12 Light infantry or unarmored lanciarii* with spears
12 armored archers
12 unarmored archers
12 Palestinian Clubmen (impulse buy)
10 Legionaries to convert into crew for ballistas and mangonels I have ready.

*Am reading the conjectures about who they were, but have made no decisions as to which, if any, units I will apply this label to, or what it will mean. For now I'm thinking about them in terms of their basic armament and function: light armor with spear, and light infantry skirmishers with spear.

Feel free to jump in with what I did right or wrong, or ask me questions. I don't know much but I'm continuing to read up here and there as I have time. And I have an … elliptical approach to my projects and backlog, so don't hold your breath watching for them to pop up in the gallery forums. ;)

Hi R Strickland.

I too am putting to0gether a Middle Imperial Roman force but as yet I'm undecided as to when to place the army it time and space.

The whole army will be A&A.I'm looking to use Dr Phil Hendry's AVGVSTVS to AVRELIAN rules.

What are you planning on using rule wise?

My Just Add Water Miniature Painting Blog:
justaddwater-bedford.blogspot.com