SOMEWHERE IN GAUL, 231 BC

An idea for a massive if also fictional contest involving Successor armies and the Tactica II rules sputtered to a halt after two weeks of “work.” A solo campaign, using the recently purchased TRIUMPH! rules and projected to take six months or more of real time, started out well enough with two victories for my side (I was commanding Sassanid Persians against Romans), but then interest fizzled as issues with the rules bubbled to the surface and other items (some related to wargaming, some not) vied for more and more of my attention. Given these developments, the prudent course of action would have been to take a break from the hobby for a month or two or even three. I could spend the additional spare time on reading more or on taking up running again, perhaps even expand my social circle or improve my professional network. After this mini-sabbatical, I could set my sights on starting 2022 with a clean slate, rested and recuperated from “waging war” and writing about same. Instead, and perhaps if not probably to my detriment, I decided that it might prove engaging and entertaining to distract myself from what was fast becoming something of a wreck of a wargaming calendar by spending some time in ancient Gaul.

The Scenario

In Chapter 6 of his 1979 book Wargame Tactics, (a requirement for any historical wargamer, in my admittedly amateur and completely unsolicited opinion) the Charles Grant writes briefly but with some authority on “The Emergence of Rome.” In Chapter 7, the reader is treated to an engaging and exciting (again, in my opinion) account of “The Battle of the Mandubian Hills.” This “very speculative battle involving a Roman column and a large German raiding party” formed the basis for this present adaptation. Instead of Marian or Caesarean Romans, I would be commanding Polybian Romans. Instead of Germanic tribal warriors, I would be commanding Gallic infantry, cavalry, and a handful of chariots. Instead of an early version of the WRG rules or perhaps a set developed by the well-known author and figure in the hobby, I would be using Version 1.1 of Simon Miller’s To the Strongest! rules, as well as the amendments/corrections provided in Even Stronger V6 (revised June 19, 2018). 

The 63 square-feet playing surface used by Mr. Grant (apologies to some readers, I mean no disrespect by using the formal title; I simply do not feel comfortable referring to one of the “fathers” of the hobby by his first name) and his associates was fairly sparse. There was a smallish central wood and a series of hills or ridges placed on each long side of the table. There was also a small isolated hill located on the right-front of the Roman deployment. There did not appear to be much in the way of terrain features. Then again, I cannot be certain as there were no photographs of the wargame included with the narrative.

Some 40 years after this traditional wargame was played, I decorated a table having a total area of 24.375 square-feet with functional and inexpensive terrain features. In addition to marking the 4-inch squares with green spots, I arranged two woods, two patches of scrub or heavier vegetation, and a small ravine in a section of Gaul. The opposing ridge lines were also present. The isolated hill was made a little bit larger and was moved over to the left side of the Roman deployment zone. Admittedly, my finished battlefield paled (significantly) in comparison to the vast majority of tabletops prepared by more accomplished wargamers and more proficient terrain makers. For the limited purposes of engaging and entertaining a solo gamer in search of a distraction, this particular fictional ancient battlefield would serve. 

As for the orders of battle, well, I referred to Simon’s informative brief on The Polybian Roman Army (please see https://aventineminiatures.co.uk//wp/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Polybian-Romans.pdf), and fabricated a poor man’s version of the formation. I debated adding some auxiliary units, but decided to stick with the nucleus of four legions (two Roman and two Allied) and their cavalry supports. In broad summary, each legion contained two units of Velites, two units of Hastati, two units of Principes, a single unit of Triarii, a couple of heroes, and was commanded by a Legate. As each troop type or stand was a small unit, each legion was worth nine victory medals. (This total included the two medals for the legion commander.) In terms of cost or points, each legion was valued at around 41 points. Turning to the cavalry component of this force, there were two units of Roman Equites and four units of Latin cavalry. Each wing was led by a Tribune; each wing was assisted by a hero. Adding up the victory medals and cost in points, the Consul’s cavalry arm was worth 28 medals and 66 points. All together then, including the Consul himself (three victory medals and seven points), the Roman force added up to 237 points, approximately, and was worth 64 victory medals. Taking a third of the victory medals then, a breaking point of 21 lost victory medals was determined for the consular army.

Across my “model” battlefield, the Gallic chieftain who had been elected king (after a rather contentious and raucous council, it must be noted), arranged the assembled tribal warbands. Coincidentally, each of the four subordinate leaders mustered four deep warbands, a unit of light infantry skirmishers, as well as a handful of heroes. Each group of warbands was valued at around 15 victory medals and approximately 52 points. There was another collection of warriors, veterans this time, who mustered three additional deep warbands as well as a unit of Solduri (fanatics). This group was accompanied by some skirmishers and the requisite handful of strong-willed not to mention fierce heroes. The victory medal total for this formation was the same, 15, but its cost or point value was estimated to be around 62. For the mounted arm, the barbarians brought three units of light chariots and four units of cavalry to the field. These were divided into two “divisions,” each commanded by a mounted chieftain and each accompanied by a number of heroes. Based on my calculations, the Gallic chariots and cavalry were worth about 80 points and added 15 victory medals to their overall count. Taken all together, the Gauls mustered approximately 350 points of troops and held 90 victory medals, which meant that the alliance of tribes would run away when 30 victory medals had been won by the Romans. 

In brief overview, deployment of the opposing forces was fairly traditional or historical. Taking a cue or cues from the diagram provided in Simon’s brief, I arranged the Romans legions in the center and placed the Allied legions on the left and right. The three ranks of heavy infantry, screened by an additional rank of velites, occupied a rectangle measuring 8 squares or boxes across by two squares or boxes deep. The Roman equites were positioned on the right, each unit having its own square. The Allied cavalry was on the left wing, and these formations occupied four squares or boxes. The 7 “divisions” or commands of Gauls looked rather intimidating, even though they were depicted by or modeled with colored counters instead of animated metal/plastic sculptures. The right of the barbarian host was held by 4 units of Gallic horse. These would counter or engage their Latin foes. A veritable wall of warbands stretched from the left of these cavalry to a few squadrons of light chariots drawn up on the left wing. The assembled warriors were formed deeper than the Romans, even though these fierce-looking fighters occupied the same depth of squares or boxes. Over on the left-front of this impressive looking line of battle, the chosen king had ordered a warband to sneak forward and take possession of the wooded ground between the two armies. 

Taken from behind and above the Roman battle line. The four legions are deployed in the usual fashion with Velites forward and the supporting ranks of Hastati, Principes, and Triarii ready to bear the brunt of the fighting. I readily stipulate that these legions look nothing like those other historical wargamers have posted to their blogs. However, the type of unit is readily identifiable; the presence of a hero and the location of a commander are also visible. The purple dots marking ammunition blend rather well with the form and function of the color counter units.

Another view of the legions, but one that also allows a glimpse of the Gallic deployment. Here, one can see warbands in a wooded area, with more warriors on the elevation to the right and left. 

A Short Summary of the Action

Early on in the battle, a unit of Gallic skirmishers dared to dart from the relative safety of the woods and expose themselves to the attention of numerous units of Velites. Volleys of light javelins were immediately thrown by both Roman and Allied troops, but not a single missile struck home. Thoroughly annoyed by the apparent invulnerability of these enemy skirmishers, a unit of Velites declared a charge, made contact, and was subsequently repulsed. It took another try, after two more volleys of missiles landed well short of their target, before the Gallic light troops were broken. This episode seemed to foreshadow the course of events for the Consul and his army. 

The evolving action on the Roman right wing, where the Gallic light chariots caused no little havoc among the Roman equites. The yellow dice mark disordered units; the red die indicates a wounded leader. (I guess I could not quite give up using dice in some form!)

The Gallic horse and light chariots, operating on their respective wings, were the first main formations to make contact with their Roman or Allied counterparts. They were also the first troops to start ripping holes in the Roman and Allied formations. In what seemed to be a matter of minutes, the flanks of the consular army were in dire straights. Indeed, on the Roman right, a group of Gallic light chariots had worked its way into the Roman rear. The Tribune leading the cavalry in this sector of the field had been wounded in a chaotic melee. 

This shows a couple of Gallic warbands after they have charged and flattened two units of Hastati in the Allied legion on the right of the Roman line. From the start of the engagement, it appeared that the Romans were always dancing to the tune being played by the Gallic warriors. 

To extend the Roman line, to shore up a faltering right wing, the Allied legion on this side of the field moved its Principes and Triarii to the right. This defensive ploy left the Hastati and Velites rather exposed. A wave of warbands advanced from the left of the wooded area, and more warbands appeared from the trees and undergrowth. These eager and fierce-looking warriors hit the thin Roman line with the weight and effect of a large hammer - swung several times in succession. In a matter of minutes, the Hastati were lying in bloody heaps. The Roman legion next in line was trying to decide if it should continue moving forward or halt and wheel to protect its now vulnerable right flank. 

Late in the brief battle . . . This shows a couple of legions foolishly attempting to engage the much more numerous enemy who have just come down off the ridge. This combat was not completely resolved as the Roman flanks were in ruins (or very near it) by this time. 

While all this was transpiring, the two legions on the left of the larger formation continued their steady and intimidating march toward the mass of warbands standing on the far ridge. As these heavy infantry made their way forward, the Allied cavalry on the left continued to be pummeled and broken by charges made by several units of Gallic horsemen. By the time the legions made it to the base of the shallow ridge and were readying their pila for the anticipated charge of hundreds if not thousands of barbarians, the Roman left was well and truly broken. 

A look from the Gallic left, looking toward the center of the field. The Roman right is in a state of disarray. Even though a warband is in disorder (yellow die) and its chieftain has been wounded (red die), the Gauls have the advantage in this sector of the field. 

At this point, with just 6 victory medals remaining, I, in the role of the Consul, conceded the battle to the Gallic king, who was also played by me. I was surprised at the rapid nature of Rome’s terrible defeat as well as by the quick and substantial victory scored by the assembled Gallic tribes.

The Roman victory medals left when the Consul (“Maximus Moronicus”?) waved the white flag.

The victory medals held by the Gallic king (“Vituperatix”?) when the Roman commander conceded. 

Questions & Answers

Was I engaged and entertained? 

Yes, albeit for just four turns of play. It was rather refreshing to be able to command and fight with two armies without having to bother with dice, rulers, and the geometric intricacies of wheeling a unit or units, etc. 

Was it realistic?

Well, I think one needs to define the word or at least establish some boundaries. The historical record abounds with losses suffered by Rome/Romans at the hands of barbarian armies. I do not think this terrible performance on a fictional field in ancient Gaul is an exception. The cards, or in my case, lightweight wooden circles with numbers drawn on them, were just not there for the Romans and their Allies. On further reflection, I suppose I will be taken to task for letting the Gauls field light chariots in addition to cavalry. So be it. 

Was it played without error?

No, I am afraid that, as per usual, I muffed the rout rules by completely forgetting about them in the heat of the first three turns of battle when "all hell" was breaking loose on the Roman wings. Aside from this error and the larger tactical one committed as the Roman Consul in charge of not letting the barbarians come to me while my legionary infantry waited on slightly higher ground, the game flowed quite smoothly.  Upon further reflection, it appears that I also mistakenly allowed the Gallic light chariots to have 2 unit break points instead of just a single unit break point. This error may have swayed things a little more on the Roman right. However, the advance of a large number of warbands against this point of the Roman line would have, I think, prove unstoppable. 

Was I tempted to tinker with the rules?

I confess that I thought about combining the newer rout rules with the older demoralization rules. Aside from this fleeting idea, the wargame was played with the rules as written and revised. 

Would Mr. Grant have approved?

Obviously, I cannot answer this question as I cannot speak for someone else. I can only make an “educated” guess or guesses. I like to think that he would have been a little pleased that I adapted or was inspired by his original scenario. I also like to think that he would have smiled and nodded at the awful day experienced by the Roman army. However, based on his “old school” appreciation of the visual spectacle of this hobby, it appears that the gentleman would not have approved of my methodology. In fact, I am quite certain that he would have questioned it; would have argued for the better representation of painted and based figures over any other way of “playing at war.” 

Is there another TtS! Game in my future?

I certainly hope so. I do not know if I will be able to manage another before 2021 draws to a close, but I have been thinking about seeing how my Polybian Romans would do against a Seleucid army. It would also be interesting to try and stage a historical battle using these rules.