"How do you wargame the Bronze Age?" Topic

Probably my favourite wargaming period is the Bronze Age: in 20mm / 1:72, mostly using Hail Caesar and some light solo adaptations.

theminiaturespage.com‌

‌"TMP link

My pals, excellent fellows, are not nearly as keen as I am, dismissing the period as tactically crude — shieldwalls advancing, chariots charging, and not much else — yet on the tabletop IMO, it can produce surprisingly tense and nuanced games. Command friction, uneven troop quality, morale collapse, and terrain all seem to matter far more than flashy manoeuvre.

I've found, in play & particularly with 'Hail Caesar', Bronze Age battles often feel fragile: one failed activation, one flank wavering, and the whole line can unravel very quickly. That feels plausible to me, but it does raise questions about how best to model these armies and battles.

For those who've played or studied the period: Do you think Bronze Age warfare offers genuine tactical depth, or is it inevitably simple by nature?
What rules (commercial or home-grown) have worked for you?
And how do you handle chariots — decisive arm, skirmish support, or morale weapon?

url=https://postimg.cc/sG2QTq0T]

‌

I haven't figured out a good way to game it. But the evolving warfare of the Bronze Age gives rise to many nuances. Elites on chariots are dominant when they arrive, then infantry develop to greater effectiveness – especially the Sea Peoples – to professional armies of Egypt and Hatti. Extend it to the early Iron Age and you have Assyria. What's not to like?

I'm a fan of the Triumph! fast play rule set and army lists, and bronze age chariot armies are probably my favorite battles. I find in my solo games the variety of troop types make the games as tactically challenging as later periods.

I think the Bronze age is my second favourite period to game, its got colour, Chariots, Hoplites and Elephants!
I have found Midgard has rekindled my love of the period!

Play frequently in our rotation of DBA+ games.

For historical theme time periods, broken down into:
* Dawn of Civilisation 3000—1601BCE (low chariot count)
* High Chariot Age 1600–1000BCE (high chariot count)

Both periods provide very entertaining games with the varieties of armies, and we try to line up historical opponents as much as possible, or at least enemies of my enemies.

My background is in Warmaster Ancients, then went on to Hail Caesar. I just don't like the rules and its variants. I even tried it again last year, and it left me flat.

I have really been enjoying To the Strongest. Always gives a good game.

Some really interesting points here and I think they underline why the Bronze Age is such a rewarding but demanding period to game.

What strikes me is that nobody is really saying the warfare itself is dull — rather that it's hard to make it behave properly on the tabletop. The Bronze Age isn't a single military system: it's an era of transition. Elite chariot forces dominate for a time, then face increasingly capable infantry, culminating in more professional, state-controlled armies. Trying to compress all that into a generic "ancients" framework is always going to be tricky.

I've found the period works best when games are scenario-led rather than points-balanced. Bronze Age battles often seem less about total destruction and more about breaking cohesion, holding key ground, or surviving long enough for one side to disengage. Shorter battles, asymmetric objectives, and limited command control feel more convincing than open-ended slugfests.

Chariots, in particular, seem to shine when treated as elite but situational tools — powerful, morale-shaping, and brittle — rather than as line-breakers expected to decide the battle on their own. I've considered changing morale up and down according to how close the PBI are to the elites?

Whether using Triumph!, DBA(+), Midgard, To the Strongest, or other rules, I suspect most success comes from how the battle is framed, not just which rules are chosen. The Bronze Age rewards careful scenario design and historical match-ups more than almost any other period.

Certainly for me, that's where the fun has been.

Mostly DBA, but I'd always intended to paint more for Warhammer Ancients. I could either be inspired – or crushed by inadequacy – when I look at your great figures, much nicer than mine. I'm doing the bronze age in 1/72nd as well so have the same models.

Thanks for the complement. Caesar, bless them, are a source of great figures. Not a lot, apart from this, in plastic. I've used a lot of Newline metals.

I was rather hoping Linear A would contribute but only one set, so far & their recent price hike doesn't bode well for the future.

Keep me appraised as to your progress _ there's so relatively few BA gamers we should stick together.

Several B Age armies in collections, All 25/28mm. Use the old Clash of Empires for rules, basically a version of WAB but without the heavy commander abilities and tabletop movement impact discussion. The abilities of chariots is still open for thoughts on tabletop…I tend towards the swirl of chariots school and not actual impacts or threats of.

Ochoin, do you have a blog or website to show off your miniatures?

Mr.T. I am extremely modest about my extremely modest abilities as a painter. So, no, I do not.

If you really, really want to, search 'ochoin' on this site as I nearly always post battle reports & photos here.
eg:
TMP link

I can also suggest 'Bennos' site:
bennosfiguresforum.com

Here you will see figure painters (not usually wargamers) of true ability. They let me post my photos there, I suspect, out of Christian charity.