In the early spring of 420 B.C., the governing assembly of Athens-controlled by a hawkish majority-debated the issue and subsequently voted in favor of expanding the already three-year old war against Sparta and her adherents, to the northern city-states. Eurymedon was placed in command of the force charged with this task, and he immediately set about raising, training and securing supplies for his predominantly hoplite force. As high summer approached, General Eurymedon and his subordinates began their march to the border region of Athens and Boeotia. Shortly after the assembly meetings and ultimate vote to expand the campaign, an elder of the assembly but an advocate of peace and not of continued, expanded war, sent a courier in secret to the ruling council in Boeotia. This notification confirming their simmering suspicion of the Athenian plans for hegemony of all of Greece, the elders sent ambassadors to a number of neighboring city-states in order to make clear their plans to contest, and with aid of allies, turn back the Athenians once and for all. As Eurymedon gathered his troops and supplies, the newly formed Allied League under the command of the young Boeotian general Pleistoanax, mustered for action some 15 miles from the border. Though his force was composed of more light infantry and skirmishers than of standard, heavy hoplites, Pleistoanax was confident in his ability to defeat the "superior" Athenians in pitched battle. The feeling was one transmitted to the allied sub-generals and the conglomeration of troops under their command. And so, the small force of hoplites, peltasts and light cavalry marched south with shoulders back and heads held high. In the third week of the last month of high summer, the two armies were met at the border. FACT, NOT FICTION The preceding narrative was simply the product of my, at times, perhaps overactive imagination. The intention was to set out some background for a planned wargame using the WARHAMMER ANCIENT BATTLES rules. My imagination was fueled by a number of sources. First, the recent reading of yet another brilliant text by Classics Professor, Victor Davis Hanson. Ripples of Battle: How Wars of the Past Still Determine How We Fight, How We Live and How We Think, is a study of three distinct battles, and the ripples (there is no other appropriate adjective) that these engagements have had upon history. I was particularly fascinated by Chapter 3 of this book, as I had not heard of this engagement which witnessed, arguably, the birth of tactics and tactical thought. ("The Culture of Delium, November 424 B.C., pages 170 - 243.) Second, at the risk of redundancy, I will mention the text by Charles Grant, Wargame Tactics. In this case, I was interested in the narrative of Chapter 5, "The Battle of Korepsis Pass," wherein Mr. Grant describes a wargame between opposing city-states in Ancient Greece. Indeed, this chapter of this specific work was/is the catalyst for the present effort. And while the present effort does "betray" the promise to myself (and to readers) of making 2005 a new year with respect to wargaming theme, I simply could not let my imagination rest. I simply could not spend the money and time on WAB and its supplement, Armies of Antiquity, without trying out the rules in an actual wargame setting. ORDERS OF BATTLE The Athenian expedition is adapted from the order of battle listed in Mr. Grant's text. In contrast to several bodies of hoplites with equal rosters, this small army contains four units of varying strengths. As provided for in the WAB rules and as expanded upon in my previous article, each phalanx of hoplites included a leader or commander figure. The largest body of hoplites were joined by the overall commander of the Athenians, General Eurymedon. He stood in the front ranks of the formation, along with the other bravest and strongest warriors. The remaining forces in the Athenian host consisted of light troops: skirmishers. There was a unit each of javelin-armed infantry, slingers, and archers. In addition, there was a small contingent of cavalry. These were light troopers, armed with javelins and not carrying shields, nor mounted in the saddle. The WAB rules provide for a detailed description of the marching, fighting and leadership quality of all units on the wargame table. Briefly-or perhaps not so briefly-these attributes are nine in number and include the following: Movement; Weapon Skill; Ballistic Skill; Strength; Toughness; Wounds; Initiative; Attacks and, Leadership. For ease of reference and to speed play, on the unit identification cards, one can also note the "save" roll required for figures of the unit. Additional notes may be recorded with regard to armor, weapons and other factors like veteran status or even special "psychology" characteristics. In order to save typing time, space as well as repetition (the hoplites are basically the same, no matter what side of the border they come from), the nine basic qualities of the units will not be "spelled out." Following then, please see the order of battle for the Athenian command, under General Eurymedon. (Incidentally, this name as well as that of the Allied General, were plucked from the text of The Peloponnesian War, by Donald Kagan. The purpose behind this was to add a little more color to the scenario background and subsequent report.) Map Identification Unit / Unit Description A Athenian Hoplite "Phalanx" General - 157 pts Heavy Armor & Large Shield; Hand Weapon B Athenian Hoplite "Phalanx" - 494 pts: 38 Hoplites Heavy Armor & Large Shield; Thrusting Spear w/ Hand Weapon C Athenian Hoplite "Phalanx" - 278 pts: 21 Hoplites Heavy Armor & Large Shield; Thrusting Spear w/ Hand Weapon D Athenian Hoplite "Phalanx" - 239 pts: 18 Hoplites Heavy Armor & Large Shield; Thrusting Spear w/ Hand Weapon E Athenian Hoplite "Phalanx" - 356 pts: 27 Hoplites Heavy Armor & Large Shield; Thrusting Spear w/ Hand Weapon F "Skirmishers" - 60 pts: 12 Slingers Buckler and Sling; hand weapon G "Skirmishers" - 40 pts: 8 Javelin men Buckler and Javelin(s); hand weapon  H Cretan Archers - 40 pts: 8 Bowmen Bow; hand weapon I Athenian Light Cavalry - 99 pts: 9 Troopers Javelins and hand weapon As previously mentioned, each unit of hoplites included a leader figure. The "main" phalanx was quite well officered, holding as it did a unit leader as well as the overall commander. None of the skirmisher units or the light horse included an integral unit leader. Calculating the total points then, for this rather small but powerful force of 104 hoplites and 37 light troops, one arrives at the figure of 1,763. Of this total, over 1,300 points were "spent" on the heavily armed and armored hoplites. In contrast, the hoplites of the fictional Allied League, under command of General Pleistoanax, accounted for just 473 points out of a grand total of 1,696. The majority of this smaller but more mobile and confident force was comprised of light infantry; of peltasts. This, in an attempt to mirror the Grant design. The subjective "imbalance" is apparent when the order of battle for the Allies is reviewed. Map Identification Unit / Unit Description 1 Allied "Army" General - 157 pts Heavy Armor & Large Shield; Thrusting Spear w/Hand Weapon 2 Boeotian Hoplite "Phalanx" - 473 pts: 36 Hoplites Heavy Armor & Large Shield; Thrusting Spear w/ Hand Weapon 3 Allied Peltasts - 229 pts: 32 Peltasts Shield; Javelins, Thrusting Spear w/ Hand Weapon 4 Boeotian Peltasts - 140 pts: 20 Peltasts Shield; Javelins and Hand Weapon 5 Allied Peltasts - 84 pts: 12 Peltasts Shield; Javelins and Hand Weapon 6 Thracian Peltasts - 221 pts: 24 Peltasts Shield; "Halberd" and Javelins 7 "Skirmishers" - 60 pts: 12 Slingers Buckler and Sling; Hand Weapon 8 Mercenary Archers - 80 pts: 16 Bowmen Bow; hand weapon 9 "Skirmishers" - 60 pts: 12 Javelin men Buckler and Javelin(s); hand weapon 10 Thracian Light Cavalry - 192 pts: 12 Troopers Javelins and hand weapon There are 88 peltasts total, compared to just 36 fully armored hoplites. Forty missilearmed troops and 12 cavalry troopers, bring the scales of army balance well over to the "lighter" side. Rough calculations show that around 25% of Pleistoanax's force consists of the traditional heavy infantry. This percentage rather dwarfed by number of hoplites in the Athenian expedition: 74% of their roster space was taken up by heavy infantry. Map 1 : Border Waifare in Ancient Greece. Athenians on the south edge of field and Allied League arrayed to north. Map shows initial deployment and terrain feahaes. TERRAIN, DEPLOYMENTS & BATTLE PLANS As with the order of battles, the terrain for this wargame scenario is based heavily upon that provided by Mr. Grant in his text. There have been some modifications, however. For one, the Athenians are now on the opposite side of the field. For another, an entire ridge line and view-blocking wood have been eliminated to "clean up" the field. Otherwise, the wargame table is similar to that described and detailed by Mr. Grant. The table itself measures eight feet along the north and south axis, and is five feet in depth. The central feature of the field is a small valley, formed by the eastern ridge line and the large hill on the western edge of this Grecian plain. The ridge line is composed of two long, one-tier hills. There are smallish woods or patches of rough dotting this terrain feature. More woods, a wild olive grove perhaps, and more rough terrain decorate the two-tiered hill. To begin with the deployment of the Athenian force-for they are the aggressors in this adapted scenario-one can see that it is as traditional as their weapons and armor. The largest unit of hoplites holds the right of the line (the place of honor), and is slightly forward of the other three units of heavy infantry. General Eurymedon is on the right side of this formation; he is in the front rank along with the actual phalanx commander. The other units of hoplites, as suggested, are in a line to the left and rear of these soldiers. Bringing up the rear of the right flank, there is a single unit of light horsemen. In front of the four units of hoplites, there are three units of missile troops, acting as skirmishers. The slingers screen the main group of hoplites, while the javelin and bow-armed infantry provide a two-line screen for the rest of the heavy infantry. (Please see Map l for a facsimile view of the Athenian deployment.) As to the battle plan, General Eurymedon was a veteran of several successful battles and so, a believer in doing things as they had always been done. Phrased another way, in his experience, there was no enemy that could withstand the advance of a well-controlled hoplite force. If the well-controlled hoplites were free citizens of the great city-state of Athens, well then, the conclusion was basically foregone. General Eurymedon planned to use the natural shape of the valley to channel the Athenian attack. The ridge line and large hill would essentially serve as inanimate defenders of the flanks of the battle line. The skirmishers would screen the hoplites from harassing missiles until the heavy infantry of each side were met. That was where the battle would be decided: hoplite versus hoplite, warrior versus warrior. It was beneath the richly armored and decorated citizen soldiers to try and come to terms with nearly naked slingers, javelin men or very lightly armed/armored peltasts. In brief summary, the Athenian General would simply follow the course of the valley, marching over and through any enemy formations foolish enough to stand in the way. In contrast, the deployments made by General Pleistoanax were perhaps less traditional. While he did station his only formation of hoplite infantry on the right of the line (at least that part of the line which was visible to the Athenians), he decided to use the terrain features of the valley to his and the Allied League's advantage. On the far right of his line then, he stationed a strong force of javelin skirmishers and peltasts. In the center, he screened his "weak" line with a contingent of Thracian light cavalry and a large complement of mercenary archers. A unit of slingers was ranged on the far left of the line; this unit also out of the immediate visual range of the Athenian command. The left of the main battle line was composed of two units of peltasts. The right and center of the main line was also a two formation arrangement. First and forward, there was a small unit of peltasts. These doughty warriors were lined up just behind the Thracian horse. Deployed to their left and rear was the main force of this Allied League. And standing no more than ten yards in front of these heavy infantry, with a few aids and a runner or two, was General Pleistoanax himself. The General's plan of battle was not so very traditional, however. The young Pleistoanax had been present at a few engagements too, and had learned on one unfortunate occasion, the value of light troops and how to use the terrain. Understanding fully that the Allied League did not possess comparable numbers of hoplites, General Pleistoanax crafted a plan that would make as much use of the Athenian stubbornness and "superiority complex" as it did of the terrain and missile armed skirmishers. The hidden units on the far right flank would advance in forced marches to gain the Athenian left flank. Utilizing the hill, they would rain down javelins into the serried ranks of the unknowing hoplites. In the valley itself, the archers and Thracian cavalry would harass and delay. The slingers on the far left would advance and contribute to this harassing fire. They would also be tasked with taking on the Athenian horsemen. As this stage of the engagement unfolded, the two most forward units of the main battle line would advance and try to work their way onto a flank of one of the occupied hoplite units. As for the hoplites and large unit of peltasts forming the main line of battle, these formations would act as a type of bait for the Athenian phalanxes. Here too, only when the Athenians were involved in protecting their flanks and weakened by seemingly endless showers of arrows, javelins and sling stones, would the fresh hoplites charge and break the line. To be certain, it was a rather complex plan. But it was one that the confident General Pleistoanax felt he could bring to fruition. His various unit commanders took some of that confidence and spirit into themselves and so, transferred it to the men under their command. OMENS AND OTHER NOTES In the supplement booklet Armies of Antiquity, the Army List for the Greeks provides something like a "consultation" with an oracle or the sacrifice of goat, sheep or calf, and reading of the entrails to determine the omens prior to battle. A single d6 is rolled for each 1,000 points in the standing army, and this score is then translated into combat bonus scores or "fail safe" leadership test(s) for a unit or units that have had a "bad morale." Referencing the orders of battles for both sides, each force was permitted a single die roll. Unbeknownst to the men of the Allied League, the Athenian command had a better sacrificial goat (or whatever animal it was), and earned five (5) points against the poorer roll of two (2). Of course, General Pleistoanax put a positive spin on this, emphasizing that the entrails were acceptable and reemphasizing that the new way of war-his way of war-would win against the old. In a previous article, I had commented on areas where I found the WAB rules to be "lacking." This perception is of course, purely subjective. The revisions put forward concerning countercharging (charges) and the impact of leadership will be tested then, in this wargame. At least a couple other revisions have been instituted, though these were the result of the aforementioned readings and not a result of "problems" with the WAB rules. However, it is perhaps difficult to fully separate the two. For example, the Allied League commander, General Pleistoanax, is separate from any formation in the deployment. This goes right against the special rule found in the Army List, wherein it is stated: "The General must lead (and may not leave) a Hoplite phalanx." (15, Armies of Antiquity) In order to reflect the "new" approach suggested by Mr. Grant in his description of the Aetolians as well as adopt the apparent historical significance of the battle narrative from Hanson, the commanding general of the Allied League is given "free reign." In sum, Pleistoanax has more of a character status than he does an Army General status. In some respects too, a liberty or two is taken with deployment on the field. Looking over the scenario possibilities in the WAB rules, this adapted wargame idea is a blend of pitched battle and meeting engagement. To further reflect the difference in approach and style of the opposing forces and their commanders, the formations of the Allied League are not as bound to WAB guidelines for deployment. Therefore, instead of a what might be called a traditional, historical array on the battlefield, one finds Pleistoanax experimenting with his available resources. His men are more spread out; the battle plan is more complex; he is not attached to the hoplite phalanx, or to any unit; and, the Allied League is counting on an almost Persian strategy of mobility and missile fire to defeat fellow Greeks. Finally, given that this is my first wargame with WAB and the rule amendments pulled from the Internet. I have chosen to draft the narrative in specific seauence. That is to explain: instead of a my usual and perhaps more fluid approach wherein I provide snapshots of the battle as it unfolds-breaking the account into smaller chapters by use of "headlines," the following narrative will be a turn by turn account. Granted, this approach may ultimately lack in narrative effect and dramatic exposition. This will be most evident in the reporting of the first few turns where I expect nothing but movement will take place. In order to add some additional substance to this format, I might include a Notes section. Here, I will attempt to comment upon or briefly explain the rules and concepts of same as they apply to the action(s) of each turn. My intent is not to become lost in a maze of rule musings, however. It is simply to provide additional information for the interested reader. Overall, I think this is a fairly sensible course, given again my inexperience with the rules, combat procedures and morale processes. This method may also prove to be of interest or educational for those readers who have considered purchasing WAB and one or more of its supplement booklets. In the Valley of the Hoplites: The Wargame Back to MWAN # 133 Table of Contents Back to MWAN List of Issues Back to MagWeb Magazine List © Copyright 2005 by Legio X This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com