Later Macedonian

AlanYork · Post by **AlanYork** » Mon Sep 08, 2008 9:23 am

What does this army offer?

It seems to be the Cinderella of Macedonian armies, rarely seen. It doesn't have any of the goodies that other Hellenistic armies do; no cataphracts, no elephants, no legionaries- real or imitation, no scythed chariots. Even its allies are a bit ho hum; Hellenistic Greeks so a few lancer cavalry and some light and medium troops that the Macedonians already plenty of have anyway.

Also its cavalry seems a little thin on the ground, enough for 3 BGs of non shock heavies and two of lights. Not quite enough to adequately cover both flanks IMO.

Despite seemingly owning every 15mm Hellenistic figure under the sun, I've never really given this army a run out and I'd like to. Can somebody sell me on it? Is there really any point in giving it a whirl?

Quintus · Post by **Quintus** » Mon Sep 08, 2008 10:08 am

This is the thing about modern wargaming. So often wargames armies are looked upon as a gaming tool rather than a model of a historical army.

A Late Macedonian army is a fit opponent to face the army of the Roman Republic and those of Greece at that time. If you admire this small and once-great kingdom the army list can help model an army resembling its historical counterpart.

I suppose in order to sell this army one would have to appeal to the romantic part of a wargamer so here goes.

This was a period when the Macedonians had to rely more and more upon the heavy phalanx of the Macedonian levy and could no longer raise and field numerous and effective cavalry. Given these limitations can you enable the Macedonian phalanx to triumph against all opponents and reassert the dominance of Macedonian arms?

MarkSieber · Post by **MarkSieber** » Mon Sep 08, 2008 2:07 pm

The Macedonian kingdom had fewer auxiliary resources to draw on than the eastern Successors, but did have the best-trained infantry. The list allows for a small but quality army with a pike phalanx stiffened by core of superior pikes. This list has more Thureophoroi, Cretan archers than the other Successors. Anchor one flank on terrain, perhaps augmenting MF Thureophoroi with Thracians to exploit it.

Cavalry is scarce, yes, but aren't shock troops so they can choose their time to engage, should be kept in reserve or teamed with some MF Offensive Spear. Cretans paired with the LH can be effective.

Where Alexander used his pike as a pinning force and his heavy cavalry as the shock arm, here the asset is your superior pike and this reflects the army's historical practice of using the phalanx as the striking arm.

I'm looking at this list to do historical scenarios against the Romans, who also lack cavalry resources.

daleivan · Post by **daleivan** » Mon Sep 08, 2008 3:10 pm

Later Macedonian is similar to a medieval Low Countries or Swiss army, only with more MF and cav. It can have as many as 80 bases of pike, 24 which can be superior. As Mark observed, it can have plenty of MF--and you could go with 18 bases of thureophoroi and another 12 of Illyrian. Offensive spear to cover terrain while a massive block of pike deploys in the center. Use the cavarly--again as Mark notes--to evade and pin down an enemy on the flank, charging when necessary. You've got LF to screen, too.

I think it could be a pretty competitive list. I'm certainly intrigued by it.

Cheers,

Dale

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Mon Sep 08, 2008 3:31 pm

While it won't get prizes for most BGs it is a pretty stonking army.

There are more than enough good medium foot to dominate terrain (you can have 4 BGs of 8, one armoured and up to 2 with heavy weapons), 2 BGs of Cretans (not many armies get that) the cavalry are light spear not lancers so you have the option to evade and you can have some superior pike. What is not to like about this army?

AlanYork · Post by **AlanYork** » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:03 pm

Quintus wrote:This is the thing about modern wargaming. So often wargames armies are looked upon as a gaming tool rather than a model of a historical army.

A Late Macedonian army is a fit opponent to face the army of the Roman Republic and those of Greece at that time. If you admire this small and once-great kingdom the army list can help model an army resembling its historical counterpart.

I suppose in order to sell this army one would have to appeal to the romantic part of a wargamer so here goes.

This was a period when the Macedonians had to rely more and more upon the heavy phalanx of the Macedonian levy and could no longer raise and field numerous and effective cavalry. Given these limitations can you enable the Macedonian phalanx to triumph against all opponents and reassert the dominance of Macedonian arms?

I don't view my armies as a gaming tool, I'm actually very interested in all things Hellenistic. I do take your point though. Perhaps after many years of playing DBM, which despite the arguments of others to the contrary, IMO did Macedonians no favours at all, it might be nice to win a few without having to use pike "flying columns", deploy with the old "hollow centre" routine, have one's phalanx skirmished out of it by two blokes throwing rocks or have it avoided completely because it didn't take up enough frontage in relation to the width of the table or lose one combat and have to take off 4 phalanx bases. In short, to be able to deploy historically with an army that isn't a "tournament tiger" and have a reasonable chance of winning without feeling the rules, as well as my opponent, are against me. I feel FoG does enable me to do this and I'd like to give this "Cinderella army" a run out.

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Mon Sep 08, 2008 4:33 pm

AlanYork wrote:I feel FoG does enable me to do this and I'd like to give this "Cinderella army" a run out.

While it may have been a "Cinderella army" in DBM I very nearly took it to the Punic Wars theme at Warfare a couple of years ago only to discover that for some unknown reason the powers of WAR decided that it was not allowed in the theme

Instead I took pyrrhic which wasn't quite as good and duly won the tournament. In period Later Macedonian was a wolf in sheeps clothing or at least with the advent of DBM 3.1 it was.

In FoG there is definitely a viable army there. It is not dissimilar to the Macedonian Early Successor list and that has been used in a couple of FoG tournaments to good effect.

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Mon Sep 08, 2008 5:18 pm

Take a big enough phalanx in this army and the enemy will have to fight it to stand a chance of beating your army - the trick is, IMO, taking enough "auxiliary" troops to do what they need to but not so many that you haven't enough phalanx.

Whilst not quite the same, having faced a Ptolemaic that had, IIRC, 8BGs of 8 bases of pikemen I can tell you it is intimidating

timmy1 · Post by **timmy1** » Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:09 pm

Thanks for this thread, it made me look at an army that I had ignored (despite owning Later Swiss). There are enough Pike to do exactly what Hammy and Nik say and there are some very interesting options around the Pike. Not sure I would play the army but I would not want to play AGAINST it. If you use it, I agree the trick is keep the number of non-Pike BGs small enough that you can lose ALL of them and not be defeated, then your opponent HAS to fight the Pike.

Also the quality of the non-Pike is such that they will be no pushover. They might cause some nasty surprises, especially if your opponent wanders into some of the fringe stuff that is in ambush.

Quintus · Post by **Quintus** » Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:24 pm

AlanYork wrote:I don't view my armies as a gaming tool, I'm actually very interested in all things Hellenistic. I do take your point though. Perhaps after many years of playing DBM, which despite the arguments of others to the contrary, IMO did Macedonians no favours at all, it might be nice to win a few without having to use pike "flying columns", deploy with the old "hollow centre" routine, have one's phalanx skirmished out of it by two blokes throwing rocks or have it avoided completely because it didn't take up enough frontage in relation to the width of the table or lose one combat and have to take off 4 phalanx bases. In short, to be able to deploy historically with an army that isn't a "tournament tiger" and have a reasonable chance of winning without feeling the rules, as well as my opponent, are against me. I feel FoG does enable me to do this and I'd like to give this "Cinderella army" a run out.

Nicely put. In fact you're getting me interested about the Macedonians in a way that surpasses what has become merely a long-ingrained loyalty to it. As a fantasy-Successor I suffered frustration and disillusionment under DBM and hopefully FoG will be more satisfying. After I've finished my Scots Islesmen I will definitely start painting Macedonians again (I wish I'd never got rid of my old pike army in the first place).

AlanYork · Post by **AlanYork** » Wed Sep 10, 2008 12:06 am

Quintus wrote:
AlanYork wrote:I don't view my armies as a gaming tool, I'm actually very interested in all things Hellenistic. I do take your point though. Perhaps after many years of playing DBM, which despite the arguments of others to the contrary, IMO did Macedonians no favours at all, it might be nice to win a few without having to use pike "flying columns", deploy with the old "hollow centre" routine, have one's phalanx skirmished out of it by two blokes throwing rocks or have it avoided completely because it didn't take up enough frontage in relation to the width of the table or lose one combat and have to take off 4 phalanx bases. In short, to be able to deploy historically with an army that isn't a "tournament tiger" and have a reasonable chance of winning without feeling the rules, as well as my opponent, are against me. I feel FoG does enable me to do this and I'd like to give this "Cinderella army" a run out.
Nicely put. In fact you're getting me interested about the Macedonians in a way that surpasses what has become merely a long-ingrained loyalty to it. As a fantasy-Successor I suffered frustration and disillusionment under DBM and hopefully FoG will be more satisfying. After I've finished my Scots Islesmen I will definitely start painting Macedonians again (I wish I'd never got rid of my old pike army in the first place).

Yeah, you're right DBM was frustrating for us Hellenistic types and I share your pain about regretting selling stuff. I used to have a 25mm Wars Of The Roses army, Yorkist of course, and I sold it years ago. I always regretted it. One day I will get it again in 15mm, once I finish my Russian Civil War stuff.

I'm about to enter a 650pt competition soon. As you guys seem to think that the pike is the real strength of the Later Macedonian army, and I am inclined to agree, how many pike BGs would you take?