Rome vs Gaul Starter Army AAR (Lots of Pics)

[BrianC]

Rome vs Gaul Starter Army AAR
Saturday November 1
10:00am – 2pm

Rome Player – Mike
Gaul Player – Brian
Weather – warm and sunny
Coffee - lots

Introduction

Mike and I decided to get together one on one to try to get a better understanding of the rules and try out a different army to fight against the Romans. Since I can now field Gauls we thought we would give them a test and see how it went. I was drawn to the Gauls due to their good cavalry but was worried about the staying power of the warriors. And I was eager to see if I can successfully use skirmishers in front of the main line. We also decided to use camps for the first time, and we also used the terrain placement rules.

The starting forces can be found right out of the army lists for the above armies.

Setup


I (Gaul) won the initiative and decided to fight the Roman invaders in an agricultural setting and chose terrain accordingly. We took Hammy’s advice and reduced our other selections by 1 as we were playing on a 3x5 table. I chose 2 hills but one got removed and the remaining pieces were allocated to the sides of the table leaving the battlefield clear for the coming battle.

We set out our forces as pictured above. Being the Gaul I wanted to keep my main line of warriors near my rear side initially. I placed 2 Warrior BGs in support of the front line ones. I positioned my cavalry on the far right side of my army to overwhelm the weak Roman cavalry. And my skirmishers, I positioned them as far forward as possible in order to harass the enemy as long as possible.

Here are some more pics of the set up:



View from the Gaul side.


View from the Roman side
Turn 1

The Roman advanced his BL forward and his slirmishers stopped just outside of javelin range trying to taunt the Gaul LF into a foolhardy charge. Mike moved his cavalry to a position more facing my cavalry in hopes of protecting his infantry.

I kept my skirmishers where they were and advanced my 2 warrior BG on the right flank of my BL. I wanted to try to disrupt the Italian foot that were on the Roman left wing. My cavalry also charged forward making use of double moves where possible in order to set up for a charge to end all charges.

Another pic of turn 1



I still have a little base finishing to do. But I had to get my velite and gaul LF done first.



Turn 2





Turn 2 sees the Roman line advancing again and the Roman skirmishers close to javelin range. I decide to move my BL forward 1 move in order to give me some distance to my board edge should I need to rally routers. I also move my warrior BG on the right of my BL in hopes of either fighting the Roman velite should they stay or crush the Italians. The Gaul cavalry continue to race around the edge.

The main action turn 2 is the volley of javelins in both the Roman players turn and Gaul. The right most velite becomes fragmented from the fire.

More pics from turn 2


View from the Roman BL. We use flocked markers to indicate cohesion. 1 = disrupted, 2 = fragmented. When a BG breaks we use a small stone. When the marker is touching the BG it means that its cohesion level has dropped in a previous turn, when it is placed not quite touching as above, that means that the cohesion drop happened in the current turn and no bolstering can happen. In the JAP phase we push all markers so they are touching their associated BGs.


A close up view of the action.



Turn 3



Turn 3 sees the velite retreat through their lines and to safety. The C in C of the army tries to bolster them but the velite are too shaken up. Even questioning their Roman-ness does no good. There is a limit to the amount of naked Gauls one can view without losing it.

More views








Turn 4



Turn 4 saw the Roman BGs roll to charge the Gaul LF. Only 2 BGs decided to go with 2 standing fast. The ones that did go both rolled 1’s and the Romans were able to fix their line. I would have to try again.

More pics








Turn 5




Turn 5 saw the first combat of the game with the Roman triarii and Italian MF fighting the Gaul warriors. The Gauls proved themselves to be hard hitters in the impact phase but were man handled in the melee phases. The Italians fought valiantly this game. I had thought them to be an easy kill but it turned out to be the other way around. Well fought.

We had a weird situation as shown below. The way this in my opinion would have played out is that the BGs would not have conformed and fought as is. This would leave the right most file for the Gauls to fight as overlaps. So for simplicity we just allowed a slight conform and the lines were straight. Not sure how to fight this one.






And this was the result. The Gauls down 1 cohesion. The triarii also made a great showing this game. I was unable to get a kill roll on them.










Turn 6



The Gaul skirmishers cause only 1 Roman BG to break the line and charge and it only moves 2 MUs. I have had little luck in breaking the Roman line but feel that I handled the LF efficiently. The remaining Romans line back up with the chargers and in the Gaul turn my warriors charge forward. Knowing my only hope is to disrupt the Roman BGs and kill stands I try to roll high. I roll good but not good enough, only disrupting 2 BGs and no stand kills.

In the ensuing melee my right most BG loses a cohesion level and a stand. I got off lucky this turn.











These warriors held their own for a couple of turns even when fragmented.






Almost in position for a charge.


Turn 7



Turn 7 shows the Gaul main line thinning out more and more. I had terrible luck with the death rolls but then again with the Romans hitting on 3’s and me on 5’s I usually needed a 5 to survive. Still it was a good result historically.

More pics:



I really needed to hold the line here as the cavalry flank was wide open. And my commander was busy bolstering the main line. Just one more commander.







Turn 8


The Gaul right side BG breaks and the Romans maintain contact. That’s 2 BGs streaming off the table and its looking unlikely that they will be able to rally with the Romans hot on their heels. I now see the devastation of a determined pursuit.

More pics



Roman Perspective





Turn 9



The Roman BG in pursuit managed to autobreak the routers and then turned to charge the last Gaul BG supporting the main line.







This was a great move by Mike the Roman. He brought his LF up in an attempt to slow my charge or to take the brunt of the charge. Another example of the use of light foot.


Turn 10



By this time the writing was on the wall. The Gaul infantry was leaving the table or cut down in battle. The Gaul cavalry was winning the day on its side but there was no infantry left by the time they won through. Pics from turn 10.






















Final Turn (Turn 11)



At this point we call it as the Romans had broken the Gauls in attrition points. The Gauls needed 2 more points to break the Romans so in point wise it was close, 5 to 3 but in BG lost it seemed pretty lop sided.

This last picture shows 2 Gaul cavalry charging a single Triarii. We actually did one turn of combat just to see and the Triarii actually held their own against 2 BG of Cavalry. They turned out to be very tough in this game.

Overall we both really enjoyed the game, the results and the flow. We didn’t spend as much time as I thought we would looking in the book. Also the POA’s and various modifiers were becoming second nature and I can see if we play again within a month that our games will be even faster.

I would like to try this game again but perhaps start with my cavalry closer to the enemy rather than way off on the flank as it took way too long to set up for a proper charge. By then the Gaul infantry’s back was broken. But in the spirit of trying new things and relearning old it was a huge success. Also I think I relied too much on placing the 2 extra Gaul BG’s behind the front troops as it did not seem to help in the CTs, I think that might have been a bad move, but with only 1 game playing the Gauls its hard to say one way or the other, more practice is needed.

I know I love reading AARs and seeing pics so I hope someone will get some enjoyment out of our AAR and pics. I would like to post more AARs as we play more games.

Thanks for reading

Brian

[zatapec]

A really good job and a really step by step battle account.
I like read the AAR too ,
Good works with the pics .
I hope to post mine soon.
Bye Andy

[Blathergut]

Seems to be the way it goes:

A. Cunning Gaul/Spanish/Harries plan to hold centre back whilst flanks encircle and crush.
B. Roman centre plods forward.
C. Flanks finally get into contact but now have 3 or 4 or 5 turns of fighting...
D. Inevitable connecting of the centre with the dreaded ++/-- in melee phases!!!
E. Barbarian centre is hacked down long before flanks can do what they planned to do.

Has anyone found a way around this???

[thefrenchjester]

well done , excellent report and nice pics ;

a good eye candy , it gives a good idea of playing ;

best regards

thefrenchjester

[recharge]

Very nice report. The only success I have heard for the barbarians was when the Gauls wer MF and they were used to ambush from every terrain there was. I did not hear the detals just the result.

John

[deadtorius]

I can feel for your Gauls since my Spaniards have suffered the same fate many times over. Nice AAR good pics. Now if only you had a hill to stand on, the Romans would be +/_ which helps you a bit. I would suggest having your general double march your lights forward to slow the Romans and then he can head back to the main battle group. We recently had a game where light troops shot down and broke 2 units of Spanish because the Roman generals were all on the other flank and there was no bolstering available to them. Check your list to see if you can get light horse, best light troops in my opinion.
As for how to win those one sided fights against the Romans.... offer a prayer to the Gods of rolling 6's and hope for the best.

[BrianC]

Thanks for reading and the replies guys. The game was fun but it sure was different than when I used the Gauls against the Carthaginians. The game was interesting in that the Roman killed all my infantry and I as the Gaul killed all his cavalry. I think maybe 1 or 2 Gaul warrior BGs routed the rest were cut down to the man. Same with the Roman cavalry, they all died valiantly.

We did do one thing wrong with little effect in the game. When I was moving up my last warrior BG to contact the Roman line, it was actually in the restricted area of the Roman BG that turned to the right near the end of the game. I do have a question regarding restricted areas but am at work so can't do up a pic to explain it.

I'd like to learn too how to beat the Romans using a Gaul army. We did pick terrain but little remained and it was positioned around the edge of the board so we basically fought in a huge open field.

We are planning another battle in a couple of weeks hopefully so I will post another AAR of that battle. Hopefully I can have some warriors left by the end : ).

Brian

PS: there was no need to attach a commander to the LF as they were already so close together at the start. But I must admit that having them so far out in front of the main line was helpful and gave them enough time to finish the LF battle while the main lines close. I have never seen so much luck with the dice when the Roman had to charge my LF. He moved no more than 2 MU both times!!! Why couldn't he roll at least 1 six .

Also the LF that moved into a position to block my cavalry from hitting his cavalry had to roll to do it. We did not forget and he actually made it. His troops lasted 1 turn and he did stave off defeat for his cavalry a further turn. I just wish that after I beat his LF that I did not have to pursue since it took me way out of position, especially when my initial target was the cavalry. But I guess 2 attrition poinst is 2 points.

Thanks again

Brian

[domblas]

great report

how can the velite be fragmented in one turn by shooting hits?

[BrianC]

Hey Dom,

They failed their CT really really bad. It was one of the few highlights the Gauls had.

Brian

[chrisrivers]

A BG cannot drop 2 cohesion levels at a time due to shooting. Only close combat when taking 2 or more hits, taking tests from losing commanders, or seeing friendly BG break.

[IanB3406]

I recently played Gauls against Principate Roman. I won but it was against a new player who was learning. This is only my opinion, as I think this is a loosing battle, but here is what I used from Memory

1 Gasetai Ally TC
12 Gasetai Superior HF

1 IC, +2TC
12 MF Gauls
2*10 MF GAuls
8 MF GAuls
6 Armored Gaulic Cav
4 Protected Gaulic Cav
8 Lf Jav
8Lf Sling

Doctrine
Big BG's and not many of them....., and the Gaesetai go down first and almost never move waiting for the Romans. This might be against typical doctrine which says you need more battlegroups, but for the Romans to assualt the Gasetai they will need to throw 3 BG's against them, as they are usually in 6's and 4's. In one game they held up two 4's and a 6 of Roman legions while the massed Mediums on the flanks tried to gang up on the odd BG. In the other game where a couple terrain pieces ended up in the middle the legions didn't get to them in time as they were refused center left back from teh terrain filled with mediums. They die slower being a big Superior BG with the general......also they make the Roman a little nervous at Impact, as he would have to commit many more generals to the melee to get the benefit you get with the one allied TC.

I think that it works better against the in vogue later Roman lists which have the armoured average Medium Foot in small BG's. They can be crushed. Against the late republic it's harder....

If you have two or three BG's crashing against a Roman battleline the Gauls are doomed to fail. If you can isolate the combats the Gaul's are fighting with the extra overlap, then you can hope the extra dice roll some hits and counter the ++/--. Your flank attacks don't need to hit the flank of the Romans, just make it so they don't have a large solid battleline to walk forwards with.....

The Romans can counter by isolating and destroying medium foot hiding in terrain, as the legions are still pretty tough marching through some rough.


Most importantly, Roll High and get good terrain!

[BrianC]

A BG cannot drop 2 cohesion levels at a time due to shooting. Only close combat when taking 2 or more hits, taking tests from losing commanders, or seeing friendly BG break.

This could be a rule that we missed, we'll keep an eye out for it in our next game which will be a rematch hopefully in about 2 to 3 weeks time.

Thanks

Brian

[BrianC]

I recently played Gauls against Principate Roman. I won but it was against a new player who was learning. This is only my opinion, as I think this is a loosing battle, but here is what I used from Memory

1 Gasetai Ally TC
12 Gasetai Superior HF

1 IC, +2TC
12 MF Gauls
2*10 MF GAuls
8 MF GAuls
6 Armored Gaulic Cav
4 Protected Gaulic Cav
8 Lf Jav
8Lf Sling

Doctrine
Big BG's and not many of them....., and the Gaesetai go down first and almost never move waiting for the Romans. This might be against typical doctrine which says you need more battlegroups, but for the Romans to assualt the Gasetai they will need to throw 3 BG's against them, as they are usually in 6's and 4's. In one game they held up two 4's and a 6 of Roman legions while the massed Mediums on the flanks tried to gang up on the odd BG. In the other game where a couple terrain pieces ended up in the middle the legions didn't get to them in time as they were refused center left back from teh terrain filled with mediums. They die slower being a big Superior BG with the general......also they make the Roman a little nervous at Impact, as he would have to commit many more generals to the melee to get the benefit you get with the one allied TC.

I think that it works better against the in vogue later Roman lists which have the armoured average Medium Foot in small BG's. They can be crushed. Against the late republic it's harder....

If you have two or three BG's crashing against a Roman battleline the Gauls are doomed to fail. If you can isolate the combats the Gaul's are fighting with the extra overlap, then you can hope the extra dice roll some hits and counter the ++/--. Your flank attacks don't need to hit the flank of the Romans, just make it so they don't have a large solid battleline to walk forwards with.....

The Romans can counter by isolating and destroying medium foot hiding in terrain, as the legions are still pretty tough marching through some rough.


Most importantly, Roll High and get good terrain!

Good info. Rolling high is one tactic I did not do very well : ) . Hopefully next game the dice will even out.

Brian

[Seldon]

Hey, that is a very nice battle report with pretty armies. It is very easy to follow the action.

Congrats!

Francisco

[SirGarnet]

I think the usual pattern in Gauls vs Romans is the Romans win the center and the Gauls on one or both flanks. I like my Gallic army and will play it despite its challenges.

You already know you should have delayed the infantry fight until you could bring your mounted pressure to bear.

In order to get the overlaps you can try spreading out to try to create gaps in the Roman line.

Having a narrower frontage with some bases in the third rank can help because you can absorb lost bases without losing dice while the Roman, arrogantly confident in his 2 ranks, cannot. They can also expand out for overlaps if you get some.

When you look deeper into the lists, you'll see you can for example take HF Gauls and MF foreign allies and dominate bad terrain on which you can rest a heavy infantry flank while the mounted try to sweep on the other flank, making it more and more awkward for the Romans to press into your line and be vulnerable on both flanks. There is some advantage in meeting Roman HF with your own HF even in the midst of bad terrain - fewer dice means if you don't win at Impact you lose more slowly, giving time to win on the flanks. Of course, it is better for you to stand behind it and have them suffer the dice reduction, but the point is that the goal in the center is pinning and delaying until the right moment after the flank pressure is in place.

I haven't tried adding some central fortifications with the Gauls, but they are a more controllable way of preparing this plan.

Cheers,

Mike

[BrianC]

Hey, that is a very nice battle report with pretty armies. It is very easy to follow the action.

Congrats!

Francisco

Thanks for the kind words Francisco. Your reports are my inspiration actually, they are well done and a great read. The pics and text are awesome. I find it hard sometimes trying to describe everything that happens in the right sequence afterwards. I would love to add diagrams with BGs and arrows but I honestly can't remember where everything is in order to do that .

We are planning on doing another battle tomorrow night using the Mid Republican Romans vs Pyrrhic. We thought about doing a refight using the starter Gauls and Romans but I felt that I needed more MF so we will postpone that fight for an 800 point game. One more starter army battle to get back into the groove so to speak.

We're going to dice for sides and I'll post another AAR once done.

Brian

[BrianC]

I think the usual pattern in Gauls vs Romans is the Romans win the center and the Gauls on one or both flanks. I like my Gallic army and will play it despite its challenges.

You already know you should have delayed the infantry fight until you could bring your mounted pressure to bear.

In order to get the overlaps you can try spreading out to try to create gaps in the Roman line.

Having a narrower frontage with some bases in the third rank can help because you can absorb lost bases without losing dice while the Roman, arrogantly confident in his 2 ranks, cannot. They can also expand out for overlaps if you get some.

When you look deeper into the lists, you'll see you can for example take HF Gauls and MF foreign allies and dominate bad terrain on which you can rest a heavy infantry flank while the mounted try to sweep on the other flank, making it more and more awkward for the Romans to press into your line and be vulnerable on both flanks. There is some advantage in meeting Roman HF with your own HF even in the midst of bad terrain - fewer dice means if you don't win at Impact you lose more slowly, giving time to win on the flanks. Of course, it is better for you to stand behind it and have them suffer the dice reduction, but the point is that the goal in the center is pinning and delaying until the right moment after the flank pressure is in place.

I haven't tried adding some central fortifications with the Gauls, but they are a more controllable way of preparing this plan.

Cheers,

Mike

I think you are right if my first game is any indication. The Romans are just too tough in a head on fair fight. And you are right I should have delayed more in the front and will be more careful in the next game. I can see the use in trying to spread the Roman legions apart, then hopefully the overlaps and open flanks? Will win the day. Excellent point Mike on the bad terrain and losing slower, I never thought of that one, awesome. I was thinking about fortifications for the front middle warrior BGs to try to give them a last ditch location to battle if needed with some advantage at least. I am still keen on using the Gauls and find it will be an interesting challenge using them. They have strengths and weaknesses. Thanks for the advice on their use, its much appreciated.

Brian

[hammy]

While the rules were being developed a lot of people were saying that Gauls or Ancient Britons were no match for Romans. Simon Hall threfore took this as a challenge and took on Terry Shaw's Romans with his Britons. Simon won 25-0...

There is a report somewhere on the forums but it is from well over a year ago so may be hard to find.

[ars_belli]

While the rules were being developed a lot of people were saying that Gauls or Ancient Britons were no match for Romans. Simon Hall threfore took this as a challenge and took on Terry Shaw's Romans with his Britons. Simon won 25-0...

There is a report somewhere on the forums but it is from well over a year ago so may be hard to find.

This one, possibly: viewtopic.php?t=1844

Cheers,
Scott

[lawrenceg]

Simon won that one by killing the auxilia (2 x MF light spear sword, 1 x MF bow), artillery and 1 BG of cavalry and fragging some LH in melee with LF (how often does that happen?) . He also killed a Roman commander early on. He did fight the legions but did little damage to them. He relied on generals and rear support to survive the CTs against the legions. He also possibly had the advantage of defending a hill, although that is not entirely clear fromt he report.

The basic idea was to do everything possible to survive against the legions and kill everything else, which strategy has already been pointed out above.

In the army lists quoted, the Roman cavalry have no swordsman POA. Is that correct?

Simon stated an intention to do some rematches. What were the results?