Paraitacene 317 B.C. v. 1.0

[keyth]

This is my first attempt at scenario building... Antigonus 'One-eye' faces off against Eumenes in the Second War of the Diadochoi.

http://cid-404614788b316f26.skydrive.li ... 7%20BC.zip

The Antigonids are more suitable for the human vs. the AI, but I think it will play out best in multiplayer. If anyone would care to playtest this, I would appreciate the feedback. Also, as I have created this while 6000 miles from all my history books, I have scarce information about Macedonian light troops, hence the use of the unit name 'Skirmisher' for want of anything better!

Cheers,

Keyth

[keyth]

http://cid-404614788b316f26.skydrive.li ... e317BC.zip

Version 1.1 is here with updated light troops. I found out that Eumenes' lieutenant, Eudamus, brought elephants and light troops from India, so the Eumenids have Indian skirmishers and elephants. The Antigonids are using psiloi in the Alexandrian fashion.

Cheers,

Keyth

[keyth]

Having changed the light infantry around, I think it now works better as the Eumenids... but hey, you decide

[Examinondas]

Just finished playing as Eumenes with balanced settings.

The terrain is great. The gullies on the Eumenid left provided some cover for my indians and LF when a couple of Antigonid phalanx units attacked them.

At first I thought that my indian MF would be useful to clear the map of Antigonid LF. But then the LF evaded and the indians ended facing the enemy phalanx The result was that most indian units fighting in the centre routed. However, some indian units were able to hold their ground against the pikemen, and in the flanks they performed quite well against the cavalry and elephants.

Even though the routing indians caused some disorder in my phalanx at the centre, the elite Argyraspides smashed the Antigonids very fast. With the enemy centre routed, my phalanx turned to the flanks to help in the fight against the cavalry.

Some nice elephant vs elephant battles took place in the flanks. In the right, the Companions were put to flight when they charged without orders against the mass of Antigonid LH and ended facing some pikemen... The Antigonid LH on the right was a constant annoyance. If the AI had used them more decisively, they could have turned the battle in Antigonos' favour.

The final result was a clear Eumenid victory in 10 turns, with 24 break points to 49 of the Antigonids.

Overall, a fun and interesting battle. Can't wait to try Telamon!

I also didn't know that the Hypaspists and the Argyraspides were different units (always thought the former changed their name to the latter at some point of Alexander's campaigns), so I also learned something new!

[Ironclad]

I also didn't know that the Hypaspists and the Argyraspides were different units (always thought the former changed their name to the latter at some point of Alexander's campaigns), so I also learned something new!

The Argyraspides was the new name for Alexander's Hypaspists after they were re-equipped in India. The Hypaspists at Paraitacene was an entirely different formation - this may have comprised elite troops or veterans from the forces of the eastern satraps who joined Eumenes.

[keyth]

Thanks for the feedback - while I was playtesting, I found that the Argyraspides will nearly always smash the opposing centre. Against the AI, this can be contained so I recommend giving the AI a slight advantage. I guess I just like the clash of two phalangite armies fighting on pretty decent phalanx terrain

Cheers,

Keyth

[deeter]

I just played this scenario and it's really good. However, I don't think the Argyraspides should be elite. In the miniatures rules, elites are very rare. Maybe superior would be a better rating. Also rare are inspired commanders and only one to a side. Keep up the good work.

Deeter

[keyth]

I just played this scenario and it's really good. However, I don't think the Argyraspides should be elite. In the miniatures rules, elites are very rare. Maybe superior would be a better rating. Also rare are inspired commanders and only one to a side. Keep up the good work.

Deeter

Thanks for the advice - I shall tweak a few settings and get back to play-testing.

Cheers,

Keyth

[Ironclad]

I just played this scenario and it's really good. However, I don't think the Argyraspides should be elite. In the miniatures rules, elites are very rare. Maybe superior would be a better rating. Also rare are inspired commanders and only one to a side. Keep up the good work.

Deeter

Thanks for the advice - I shall tweak a few settings and get back to play-testing.

Cheers,

Keyth

I haven't been able to get your download to work which is a pity since I wanted to compare it to the Paraitacene scenario that I had done - not that mine is worthy of disseminating. From your army point totals shown in the screenshot it looks like you have avoided replicating the masses of light infantry that Eumenes had which does tend to complicate things as was shown when I tried out mine with AI v AI. I assume that Antigonus had fewer, although the sources are no help there.

On the Argyraspides I think there is a very strong case to treat them as elite given their awesome reputation and battle performance during this period.

[Ironclad]

The Argyraspides at Paraicatene only numbered around 3000 (not the 10,000 of the later Seleucid formation) and were equivalent in strength to the Hypaspists at that battle. Four battle groups would therefore be sufficient to represent the two units. Rating the former as elite and the latter as superior would seem to reflect their greater fighting prowess. The majority of Eumenes's phalanx, the remaining 11,000 out of the 17,000 total, would have been of lesser quality - average would be reasonable for the mercenaries and the other phalangites comprised of all races (ie non-Macedonians) could either be average or poor, presumably of similar quality to their equivalents in the Antigonid phalanx.