Roman Manipular tactics

[riddcowler]

I've only recently joined this forum so my apologies if this question has been addressed previously. I have a long standing interest in the 'classical' period and wondered how AOW would tackle the problem of the manipular legion? I don't think DBM made any serious attempt at this but AOW seems to be aiming (possibly I'm mistaken ) at a more sophisticated approach where the system may be able to deal more realistically with (for me) a very important aspect of the period. I don't want you to give away any state secrets (oh go on then ) but hoped AOW would give this problem some serious consideration.

Thanks
Ridd

[rbodleyscott]

I've only recently joined this forum so my apologies if this question has been addressed previously. I have a long standing interest in the 'classical' period and wondered how AOW would tackle the problem of the manipular legion? I don't think DBM made any serious attempt at this but AOW seems to be aiming (possibly I'm mistaken ) at a more sophisticated approach where the system may be able to deal more realistically with (for me) a very important aspect of the period. I don't want you to give away any state secrets (oh go on then ) but hoped AOW would give this problem some serious consideration.

Thanks
Ridd

We started off with a complex system of line replacement for the manipular legion, but eventually came to the conclusion that the (considerable) extra complexity was not in fact justified.

Bearing in mind that at standard scale a battle group of 4 bases represents about 1,000 men, thus about 6 maniples, it would be inappropriate at this scale to represent a manipular chequer board as a chequer-board formation of battle groups.

Essentially therefore, at standard scale, a Roman legion would be represented by about 20 bases. We would represent this as 4 battle groups of 4 bases, each representing 6 maniples of both hastati and principes in chequer-board formation, and 2 battle groups of 2 bases of Triarii. The Triari would be deployed behind the Hastati/Principes battle groups and give them rear support - which amounts to a significant cohesion test bonus.

Much as we were keen to represent the manipular chequer-board in more detail, in truth the scale of the game does not make it viable or relevant.

[riddcowler]

So would a BG of Hastati/Principes assumed to be in manipular formation (though not actually physically displayed as such if I have understood this correctly) actually be any different from any other BG of shock infantry (not sure if I have used the correct term here)? Also, would the Velites be represented by 2 BG's of 4 stands or a single larger BG (or would this be optional)?

Ridd

[honvedseg]

There's reason to believe that the classic "checkerboard" formation of the Roman manipular legions was NOT used at the moment of contact, with the variable width gaps between the blocks of relatively inexperienced front-row troops being filled by the more experienced second row before the final charge. This would have given the Roman battle line the flexibility to cross variable terrain or execute more complex maneuvers without breaking up the overall army's cohesion. In this manner, the more experienced members would have had the responsibility to dress the line before contact, rather then depending on the least experienced elements to maintain a coherent front throughout the entire closing march.

Leaving the gaps between the blocks as suggested by many wargames rules would have resulted in each "corner" being outflanked, and the rapid erosion of the front line units, at least until the second line stepped up to fill the holes. Having them do so BEFORE contact would have been the most sensible approach. Allowing 1/3 or more of your army to fight by itself and rout, then having the second group and third group follow suit is blatantly absurd.

Finally, the use of Triarii as "elite combat units" in most rules systems is directly contrary to their actual historical function. These were usually the army's specialists: smiths, clerks, paymasters, medics, and other essential support personnel, often older or otherwise not ideally suited for placement on the front line. They were life-timers in the Legion, and less likely to break and run than the young recruits, as well as many being too slow to escape in the case of failure. They were the desperate "last ditch effort" to hold back an opponent if all else failed, as evidenced by the statement "it has come down to the Triarii". If all else failed they were probably supposed to sell their lives dearly in order to hold the enemy as long as possible and allow the rest of the army to either regroup or escape. Giving them a high morale but a mediocre combat value would probably be more historically accurate.

[rbodleyscott]

Finally, the use of Triarii as "elite combat units" in most rules systems is directly contrary to their actual historical function. These were usually the army's specialists: smiths, clerks, paymasters, medics, and other essential support personnel, often older or otherwise not ideally suited for placement on the front line. They were life-timers in the Legion, and less likely to break and run than the young recruits, as well as many being too slow to escape in the case of failure. They were the desperate "last ditch effort" to hold back an opponent if all else failed, as evidenced by the statement "it has come down to the Triarii". If all else failed they were probably supposed to sell their lives dearly in order to hold the enemy as long as possible and allow the rest of the army to either regroup or escape. Giving them a high morale but a mediocre combat value would probably be more historically accurate.

The AoW mechanisms make it far more effective to use the Triarii in this way as rear supports (some distance behind the main battle line) than to use them as front line troops.

[riddcowler]

So would a BG of Hastati/Principes assumed to be in manipular formation (though not actually physically displayed as such if I have understood this correctly) actually be any different from any other BG of shock infantry (not sure if I have used the correct term here)? Also, would the Velites be represented by 2 BG's of 4 stands or a single larger BG (or would this be optional)?

Ridd

Sorry but perhaps i should have made my first point clearer. I don't mean to ask whether manipular Roman legions were any different to other ancient shock infantry (I realize I should have used the term 'impact' infantry and not shock...still learning ) in 'real life' as that, for me, is a given. I meant were they treated any differently under the AOW system. Under DBM they weren't treated any differently to other (later) Roman Legions whilst they clearly were different and I was hoping AOW would be an improvement.

Cheers
Ridd

[hammy]

There are quite significant differences between early and late Roman legionaries.

The DBM Bd(O) types start out as:

Average or superior, armoured, heavy foot, impact foot, skilled swordsmen in the early republic

Moving to a peak of

Elite, armoured, heavy foot, impact foot, skilled swordsmen for veteran late republicans

The back to

Superior, armoured, heavy foot, impact foot, skilled swordsmen in the principate (early imperial)

dropping to

Average or superior, protected, heavy foot, impact foot, skilled swordsmen in the principate (mid imperial)

and finally

Average or superior, protected, heavy foot, light spear, swordsmen in the dominate (late imperial)

By the foederate period legions have dwindled to

Average or poor, protected, heavy foot, light spear, swordsmen

In most later periods it is possible to get troops as good as they were in the previous period so later principate can be superior armoured etc. Overall there is a definite change between these troops and they are not all blanket graded as regular Bd(O).

Hammy

[riddcowler]

Thanks for your reply Hammy I can see that there appears to be more variation in grading the Legionaries under AOW rather than the more restrictive Bd(O) or (I) under DBM. However, what I am trying to ascertain is whether:

1. The manipular Legion will fight any differently on the battlefield or tabletop to the later Legions other than having the option of Triarii units in support rather than pilum armed support units.

2. Are the BG's making up the manipular Legions (as illustrated earlier by RBS) going to fight any differently to other armies impact infantry BG's. Are they going to gain some advantage for fighting in 3 battlelines or (as under DBM) will I be better off placing my Principes alongside my Hastati rather than behind them?

Cheers
Ridd

[hammy]

Right,

In short there is no game significant difference between republican and imperial legionaries of the same quality.

When you deploy the Hasti and Princepes of a republican legion what you have in effect are BG's comprised of both types. Deploying two BGs side by side with Triari behind to provide support while not a precise representation does give the correct effect.

A line of triari supported republican legionaries will probably beat a longer unsupported line of identical later legionaries.

Hammy

[riddcowler]

Thanks Hammy. that's clarified things completely for me.

Cheers
Ridd