"Starting Macedonians/Successors" Topic

Dear G-D help me…I am actually thinking of starting ancients with collection and gaming with Macedonians or Successors. I literally know zippo about them – other than I am infatuated with the idea of building phalanxes with pikes…

So, can you help give me a bit of advices here?

Can I buy Alexandrian Macedonians and use for successor-era gaming? Vice versa?

Did Successor armies fight each other so painting up a whole bunch and then using them for both sides becomes a possibility?

Any good suggestions for relevant army lists? Trying to avoid a debate on best rules though…for now.

Lastly, any good resources in color for painting?

Thank you all in advance for your help (which could also include some advice such as "don't do it and instead paint all of the Nappys, ACW, and WWII miniatures you have in your pile…"

"Can I buy Alexandrian Macedonians and use for successor-era gaming? Vice versa?"

Basically, yes. The Successor phalanxes would have different shield designs, but the figures work for both.

"Did Successor armies fight each other so painting up a whole bunch and then using them for both sides becomes a possibility?"

Yes, but the units outside of the phalanxes varied greatly, such as one might still have hoplites while another would not. The phalanxes for Ptolemy in Egypt were known to have worn pants. Also, as the years went by, the proportion of actual Greeks in several of the armies dropped significantly, especially those in the Seleucid and Ptolomeic armies.

"Any good suggestions for relevant army lists? "

You would have to refer to the lists for the rules that you will be using. There's just too many variations to discuss here in brevity.

"Lastly, any good resources in color for painting?"

Outside of the Ospreys and Sekunda books, there really isn't anything. Even those are pure conjecture and most of what we know was taken from an eyewitness description of the parade at Daphne. This is also a blessing in that you can pretty much paint units up as you please.

Successor armies certainly fought each other, and there is little enough known about costume and enough variance over time in known costume that you can certainly paint up a bunch and use them against each other. (But then how do you tell the sides apart?) Anyway, scrounge up several uniform books and observe how much they disagree.

That said, armies are major investments. I'd suggest reading enough about battles--and maybe even fighting through a few with cardstock stands--first, to be sure you'll get enough use out of the final product to justify the time and money. I have ancients forces, but they were built late and are relatively small because I find they lack the tactical variety of, say, Napoleonics or WWII. Ancients tend to be "one army=one tactical option."

(Without getting into specific rule sets, keep in mind that if most of the decision-making is picking forces and initial deployment, you want very rapid resolution afterward.)

And good luck!

One of the best general histories of the Hellenistic period is _Alexander to Actium The Historical Evolution of the Hellenistic Age_ by Peter Green. Not cheap, but library ought to have, or be able to interlibrary loan it. Fascinating period of history.

Was 250-year period. Almost anything that wasn't 'modern synthetic dye color' was worn by troops in that time.

Duncan Head's _Armies of the Macedonian and Punic Wars_ is good 'uniform guide', B&W with notes on colors

If large Successor Armies are what you're looking for try:
link

In terms of Successor armies, the Seleucids are my absolute favorite. They have it all: pike, cataphracts, elephants, scythed chariots, elite infantry and cavalry. They fought the Egyptians, the Republican Romans, the Indians, the Parthians, and the Galatians (just to name a few).

The Successor Wars always seemed to be the wars most like a typical Wargames campaign. Fighting for control of territories which give access to a variety of troop-types for no discernable reason other than grabbing power.

Simon Miller's blog listed above and Jeff Jonas' Ancient Battles site have excellent color photos of 28mm Successor armies:

link

Jeff Jonas' Ancient Battles site is good for both source information and examples of painted miniatures – link – for both Alexander and the Successors.

"The phalanxes for Ptolemy in Egypt were known to have worn pants."
Err, no!!! The only evidence for trousered phalangites is one terracotta battle-scene (now lost), and when I based a figure on that in AMPW I suggested that he might be a Seleucid! What evidence there is from Ptolemaic Egypt suggests tunics and bare legs.

Some online resources for military clothing to start you off:

link – late 4th century, probably Cassander's army
link – 2nd century, Ptolemaic or possibly Seleucid
link – Galatians from various armies
link – "Ptolemaic Cavalrymen on Painted Alexandrian Funerary Monuments"

The books of the Wargames Research Group (http://www.wrg.me.uk/WRG.net/index.html) are good. See the book "Armies of the Macedonian and Punic Wars" by Duncan Head. published 1983. Lots of valuable information.

But, if you love phalanxes, why not simply the Greek Hoplite armies ?

"Can I buy Alexandrian Macedonians and use for successor-era gaming? Vice versa?"

The first phases of the Successor wars were fought using Alexander's armies. I find this the most interesting period.
If you have a core of Macedonian phalangites and Companion cavalry with a few generic light troops, they will serve for most of the period and most of the successor regions.
For the later period, the most notable change is in the heavy cavalry e.g. Seleucids getting more armour, various others starting to use shields.

The phalanx is the core of most Successor armies, but the tactical interest usually happens with the stuff around it so getting a good balance is important.

The biggest problem I found is that once you start getting into the period, you can end up telling yourself "If I just buy a few of X, then I can do kingdom Y" and you end up with a lot of stuff.

Swampster, is that a problem or an opportunity?

"Swampster, is that a problem or an opportunity?"
I try to convince myself that it is an opportunity but my floorboards do not necessarily agree.

Thank you all for the help. Some very useful information here. Much appreciated.

I recommend going 6mm, I started in 28mm and regretted it. I would recommend 2 rulesets:

To the Strongest – tailor made for successors, amazingly detailed army lists.

Age of Hannibal – less tailored, but very 6mm friendly.

Every scale has its charm. I love 6mm ancients. Only problem is that I hating painting 6mm figures. Certainly BRB's pictures above convey a strong case for 28mm.

Can I buy Alexandrian Macedonians and use for successor-era gaming? Vice versa?

Yes. I wrote an article for WSS magazine (issue 109) that covered this "Crossover army " concept for the early successors.
My website does not have the full text and charts of the argument, but the concept of crossover armies generally agrees with other poster's responses.
Successors had core Macedonians that would initially look similar on all sides. As times progressed and kingdoms formed then troops would begin to be issued equipment with royal symbols and regimental shield styles. Alexandrian era troops may have been the most generic troops so the sun burst symbol makes them useful in almost all armies.

Some of the images are here:
link

Did Successor armies fight each other so painting up a whole bunch and then using them for both sides becomes a possibility?

Yes. Often armies included the same types of troops and similar if not identical auxiliaries such as Thracians or Cretan archers. The obvious choice is do you wish to focus one army as Seleucid or one as Ptolemaic? The one might research shield designs and styles of gear. Some styles presented are quite fanciful such as Egyptians wearing linen helmets and phalanxes wearing trousers, but that often allows one to separate the levies the regulars on the tabletop. Cavalry types are the same, early troops looking similar, and later adopting new armor, tactics, and styles.

Any good suggestions for relevant army lists? Trying to avoid a debate on best rules though…for now.

Paul Rigby and I played out a fun Syrian vs. Ptolemaic campaign of the third Syrian war era.
There are some lists posted in the various links:
link

Lastly, any good resources in color for painting?

I can say the web is great for images now. But there is a lot of visual ideas on my website at:
link

Good Luck, the Successor are very rewarding period, but it is a difficult choice where to dive in. One finds that interest in one character or army leads to another. I find that I can field for gaming three or four Successor era armies for gaming, but I would not claim that any of them are "complete." There are new discoveries and then tempting new models that undermine the idea of ever being finished.

However, this is a great time since there is robust flowing spigot of source books, and miniatures. Ospreys are even catching up with the demand offering some specific Successor era books now on Pyrrhus and the Macedonian Antigonids.