Working on these new rules has me really excited about wargaming again. For a while, after the final playtesting of Medieval Warfare, I felt mentally burned out on gaming. The intensity of putting together the 90+ army lists and the 'down to the wire' problems with getting the rules proofed and to the printer's simply added to the overall anxiety of putting on three demo games at Historicon. Since Bruce and I began working on the Ancient Warfare rules, however, the fun has returned. One reason is that I am getting to dust off some armies which gave me many great games in the past.

It has been years since I've used my Romans. WRG 7th simply did not allow the use of historical tactics due to their scale, while DBM did a bit better, but not enough. So, selfishly, perhaps, I approached the new rules system from the perspective of allowing the simulation of Roman manipular tactics on the wargames table, while still retaining the simplified, unified battle system of MW. This has not proven to be that difficult.

At first, Bruce and I thought to go grand tactical in these rules (a 1 to 40 or 50 figure to man ratio). After a playtest, however, we found that this would not work, at least insofar as groundscale to movement, fire, etc. We concluded that the tactical system of MW could be easily integrated into earlier periods of warfare. Thus, a typical gamewill pit a full Roman legion and auxiliaries, or two understrength legions and their allies against a warband of Gauls (6-8,000 Romans fighting 8-10,000 Gauls). This translates into 300 to 400 Roman figures vrs. 400 to 500 Gauls.

In our initial playtest games, Bruce has been using Seleucid Greeks vrs. my Punic War period Romans. We have had to redefine the armor classes, though basically they remain similar to those in MW, as well as introduce a new order, the Maneuver, which replaces Hold. Hoplite/phalanx tactics are fairly straightforward. Allowing for the typical phalanx, 16 ranks deep, gives us 4 ranks of figures able to fight with the sarissa (pike). Allowing the phalanx to 'lock shields', will give the phalanx a plus in melee and for morale, but cuts movement and forces the unit to drift right while moving forward. Skirmishers may not retire through a phalanx with locked shields.

Optionally, how can we provide for the very real tactic of allowing chariots and elephants to pass harmlessly through the ranks of the phalanx? An 'open order' formation (used by both Greeks and Romans) vrs. elephants and chariots frenzied (impetuous) charge provides for a -2 on the enemy combat modifier chart. Open order disadvantage is the loss of the big minus against charging enemy cavalry for the pikemen.

How do we replicate the Roman manipular tactics? This is again easily done.

By allowing the Romans (or any trained troops) to sidestep, oblique move and retire, the student of historical tactics can explore the significance of these maneuvers in the game. We are still working on this aspect, but it looks good, feels right and seems to accurately portray the tactics used by Roman leaders.

Cavalry were not as effective in these rules as they are in MW, primarily because of the lack of stirrups and the high pommeled saddle. We have therefore eliminated the requirement that close order foot must take a morale test when charged by heavier cavalry. Besides that, foot factors have been slightly upgraded against cavalry. Of course, chariots and elephants still cause morale problems for any foot.

When the pikemen and Romans charge into contact, the pikemen have an initial advantage, fighting four ranks deep vrs. two ranks for the Romans, but in subsequent rounds, the Romans will have the advantage, with the skilled swordsmen negating the pike advantage.

These are a few of the things we have been working on. There will be many more as we proceed. We have two new playtest groups ready to go, and once Bruce has a version ready to run with, he will e-mail it out to them. In the meantime, I'm having a great time!