Post by carl on Mar 24, 2011 18:09:13 GMT
Hail Caesar
Another update on our forthcoming Ancients rules from the author of said tome, Rick Priestley…
This time round I thought I’d talk a little bit more about the Hail Caesar game itself – both in terms of the mechanics and what is sometimes called ‘games philosophy’. I’m not too sure whether ‘philosophy’ is not too grand a title for the kind of thinking that goes into a wargame – Wittgenstein I ain’t – but we can certainly take a look at some of the ideas and ambitions that have informed the development of Hail Caesar over this last year.
Incidentally – if you’ve clicked on this link expecting an exciting and exhaustive discussion of base sizes in the Hail Caesar game then you should take a look at the bottom of this document where an analysis of basing and unit sizes has been complied.
Hail Caesar is – as I’m sure you all know by now – based very firmly upon our Black Powder wargame. Those who already own a copy of Black Powder will therefore have a fair idea of what to expect – and throughout this article I will be making comparisons between the two games. For the benefit of those who might not be familiar with Black Powder I’ve tried to give a brief overview of the mechanisms in their basic form.
Black Powder and Hail Caesar share a common approach to gaming – they have both been developed amongst our own gaming circle, for our own use, and to play the kind of games we enjoy. By making these rule sets available more widely we hope for no more than to introduce others to a style and type of gaming that anyone can participate in should they wish to do so. In presenting the rules for publication we have endeavoured to carefully explain how they work, and how players might choose to expand and develop the core ideas for themselves, but we have not otherwise compromised the central tenet of the game – a game played between friends in the spirit of comradeship and entertainment. Of course, at no point did anyone ever sit down and write a ‘brief’ for our games. They simply evolved over time as a result of ideas and enthusiasms amongst the group. But if a brief had been written it might have looked like this:
* Our game must start and finish over an evening allowing sufficient time for the consumption of curry – the table, armies and scenario would ideally be prepared beforehand – though don’t count on it – especially round at John’s.
* Our game must easily accommodate two or three players a side – although it must be possible for a single player to control an entire army if need be – should Little Steve have so exhausted himself lion taming that he falls asleep on the sofa – for example.
* The game must allow for our existing collections of models, which are based every which way and comprise units of differing sizes – but are all 25mm or 28mm ‘scale’ – except for Rick’s 10mm which we prefer not to dwell upon.
* The armies available are a fair size – well frankly huge in the case of Alan’s Napoleonic collection – and the game must commonly facilitate big battles as well as the occasional smaller action.
* The tabletops available vary – none smaller than 8 feet by 4 – but the chief battlefield is 12 or 14 feet by 6 necessitating the inclusion of at least one player with very long arms – Jervis being a prime example of the breed. All the tables comprise rolling terrain modelled with rises and depressions, rivers and roads, and with plenty of scenery representing villages and towns, fields, orchards and areas of cultivation. This does mean that the exact placement of units can get a bit vague.
* As well as providing for our regular group the game must take into account occasional guests and visitors who may want to pitch in and take control of part of an army.
Those are probably the main drivers behind the development of our rules. Of course, the tastes and preference of our comrades are a major factor too – and here we must bear in mind that most of us are friends because we have at some time or another been workmates at Games Workshop. So, as a group we have a relatively high proportion of professional games designers, sculptors, model makers and artists – including the owners of at least four wargames hobby businesses. Needless to say – everyone has their own ideas about what makes a game enjoyable – but it’s reasonable to say that all of our players are primarily interested in a social game in which the quality of the models, terrain and curry are of at least equal importance to the rules themselves. The aesthetics of the wargame are a major part of its appeal – and the rules must produce games that look attractive and which ‘tell a story’ as they play out. And that story should be entertaining and dramatic – at least worthy of repetition during the post-battle pint in the local pub.
In terms of how this translates into game mechanics, it should be pretty obvious we need a game that plays fairy quickly, as we aim to complete what is probably a larger than average battle over the course of a single evening on what is a big tabletop by most people’s standards. Our players are also looking for an enjoyable, social evening – they are not looking to spend ages cross-referencing charts, totting up factors, and micro-adjusting movement. So, our game is designed to crack along at a good pace, and uses multiple dice rolling as its prime mechanic rather than single rolls with multiple factors, thoughtful card play, or mechanisms that require a great deal of careful calculation before actions can be taken. No criticism of games that employ these techniques is implied, all of these mechanics are good in their place, but for purposes of our game it is preferable to stick to multiple dice rolling with minimal modification.
In broad outline both Black Powder and Hail Caesar play in the same fashion. Each side takes a turn alternately completing all of its movement, then shooting and finally resolving any hand-to-hand combats before the opposing side takes a turn beginning once more with movement. Although play is alternate as described, the side that is not taking the turn has the opportunity to move in some situations (to countercharge or evade for example), and to shoot (with traversing or closing shots), and to fight in hand-to-hand combat. When casualties are inflicted it is also necessary for the side that suffers them to take morale checks (effectively saving throws) and also to take break tests where required. These interactions ensure that all players remain involved in the game even when it isn’t their turn. Hand-to-hand fighting also includes a certain amount of post combat movement when losing troops retreat, allowing the victors to press home their attack or consolidate their position – all of this can potentially result in units form both sides moving regardless of which side’s turn it happens to be.
To achieve our goal of rapid and decisive movement we allow for relatively long moves and we permit units to make up to three moves in their turn. Whether they move at all, and how far they move, depends upon the result of a test made against the command value of their accompanying leader or commander. Each commander controls a brigade or division comprising one or more separate units (for example four infantry battalions). Often a player will take responsibility for one division of troops, with the side represented by three or four players in all. If the army is especially large or players are in short supply each player controls several divisions. To move any unit under his control the player first nominates the commander model that will ‘give the order’, he then explains what he wants the unit to do – in real world terms as far as possible – and then he rolls two dice adding the scores together to determine if the order has been successfully received and understood. Most commanders have a value set at 8 meaning the player must roll 8 or less on two dice to issue a successful order. If the roll is 8 or 1 less the unit has one move in which to try and complete its order, if the result is 2 less the unit has two moves, and if 3 less or more the unit has three moves. If the result is more than 8 the unit fails to move at all, although in some situations units are allowed a single move even when their order is ‘failed’. Units are always obliged to fulfil their order in so far as possible – no hanging back just because you wanted two moves but have rolled only one! This is the principle means by which orders are issued and troops moved in our games – and it allows for rapid movement as well as occasional bottlenecks and frustrations as orders go awry or troops fail to move at all.
As we have said the move distances are quite long – though less so in Hail Caesar than in Black Powder. In Black Powder infantry move 12” at a time, whilst in Hail Caesar they move 6”. In Black Powder cavalry move 18”, where in Hail Caesar they move between 6” and 12” depending on their type. This emphasises the differing character of warfare with the shorter moves in ‘ancients’ tending to place more importance on holding a line and keeping supporting troops nearby. To compensate for this to some extent there are more ‘automatic moves’ in Hail Caesar than are allowed in Black Powder. These cover situations where a unit can move either without an order or, in some cases, allow a unit to move once even where its order is failed. For both of these games we’d happily recommend players adjust the move distances given to suit their own tables if they are significantly smaller than our own. Having said that, we have played Hail Caesar across a 4 foot wide table without feeling the need to reduce movement distances – being content to ensure no troops were deployed within potential charge range of enemies at the start of the game.
Shooting is an important part of Black Powder and much less so in Hail Caesar. In Black Powder volleys of musketry will often stop an enemy formation in its tracks by disordering it. Although shooting is an important part of ancient warfare it is much less likely to be decisive. Hail Caesar therefore treats ranged fire and any resulting disorder a little differently. In Hail Caesar ranged attacks represent not just longer ranged missile fire with bows, crossbows and slings, but also short ranged exchanges of thrown missiles as well as skirmishing either by troops in open order or, where appropriate, by bodies moving beyond the main formation. Almost all units have been given a short ranged ‘shooting’ ability to represent this, including most close-fighting infantry such as Roman legionaries and Greek Hoplites (though not pike-armed phalangites… should you be wondering). This range is a mere 6” but this is entirely adequate to allow for an exchange of missiles prior to a head-to-head clash or ‘soft contact’ between troops fighting in looser formations. All units therefore have a short and long range ‘attack value’ equivalent to a number of dice: usually 3 at short range and either 3 or 0 at long range depending upon armament. When making ranged attacks the unit rolls the number of dice indicated and scores of 4 or better are required to inflict ‘hits’. A few modifiers apply – and in the case of Hail Caesar these modifiers tend to push the odds down slightly compared to Black Powder. In Hail Caesar any 6’s rolled when making ranged attacks result in a break test rather than causing disorder automatically as they do in Black Powder. Hail Caesar also has separate break test charts for missile fire and hand-to-hand combat, with disorder being a potential result of this test in both cases. In both games disordered units are unable to move in their own turn and also suffer a penalty for shooting and hand-to-hand fighting so this is a significant penalty.
When units suffer casualties these are recorded by whatever method the players prefer. Our own habit is to use model casualties – though we often employ a distinctly coloured dice to indicate casualties whilst they are inflicted as this saves time. We do not remove models from the units themselves, and this is one of the reasons why the exact basing style of our troops isn’t terribly important – there being no need to remove individual models as casualties during the game. Although units can suffer any number of casualties throughout the course of a battle the maximum number that is recorded in Hail Caesar is usually 6 if the unit is of a regular size. This is double the value in Black Powder where units can normally take 3 casualties, and the difference reflects the importance of prolonged combats in the ancient game. Of course, this also means that the effect of missile fire is relatively less in Hail Caesar than Black Powder, something we felt was only proper given the differences in weapon technology and tactics. Casualties inflicted in excess of 6 are not carried over from one turn to the next but become negative modifiers on any break tests the unit is obliged to take. Once a unit has its full quota of casualties it is considered ‘shaken’ which prevents it deliberately engaging in hand-to-hand fighting and imposes a penalty on the unit’s shooting and combat dice.
Units also have two different values for hand-to-hand combat: a clash value which is used in the first round of any combat, and the sustained value which is used at all other times. In both cases these values are the number of dice rolled varying from 4 or 5 for light troops to 7 for heavy infantry and 8 or 9 for heavy cavalry. The basic mechanic is the same as for shooting – roll the number of dice indicated and all results of 4 or more score ‘hits’. The unit that has been attacked then rolls one dice for each hit it has suffered and its morale holds on scores of 4 or more effectively negating that hit. All unsaved hits are then recorded as casualties onto the unit. This is a very simple mechanic – multiple dice rolling – but very effective in terms of creating moments of tension within the game and as a method of balancing play. Both sides fight in hand-to-hand combat regardless of which side’s turn it is, and the side that scores the most casualties wins the fight. The losers must then take a break test, rolling two dice against a chart, which can result in the unit holding its ground, retreating or breaking altogether in which case it is removed from play entirely. In Hail Caesar, unlike in Black Powder, there is also the potential for a unit to break automatically without recourse to a break test if is receives enough casualties in one go.
Anyway – that’s a very generalised summary of the game’s basic mechanics and some of the differences that mark Hail Caesar from its Black Powder predecessor. I’ll get back to hand-to-hand fighting some other time as the numerous detail changes are worth longer consideration.
Hail Caesar! – An Update
By Rick Priestley
In case anyone is in any doubt we are talking about a hard-back book about the same size, shape and general demeanour as Black Powder. In fact – just to be crystal clear –Hail Caesar is our adaptation of Black Powder for ancient gaming, and if you want to know what kind of a game we are talking about then refer at once to your copy of Black Powder. Read the introduction and tremble to imagine. Fondle the glossy pages and feast your eyes upon the sumptuous contents. Consider the majestic legions of Rome as they romp across the lavish tabletop to the thunderous rumble of the dice. Should you not already own a copy of this marvellous game (i.e Black Powder) then you are to be envied – for you have that pleasure to come. Fear not – a quick trip to Warlord’s on-line emporium will put a copy into your hands double quick.
Do not let premature mention of things Roman confuse you. The Hail Caesar rules will cover the whole of the ‘ancient’ period from the days of the dusky Pharaohs to the age of the Crusaders. In fact, the Hail Caesar rules would happily cope with wars of the later middle ages right up to the development of effective gunpowder weaponry. We just decided to draw a line at the latest battle described in the book, which takes place at the beginning of the thirteenth century during the Fourth Crusade. This leaves us plenty of elbowroom for further development and supplements in the future. After all, it wasn’t as if we didn’t have enough to go at with two and a half thousand years of battles from chariots to classical warfare, later antiquity and then the early medieval period.
As with Black Powder, the essential details of the game remain the same whatever the specific era – but the addition of special rules and different troop types make each sub-period significantly different. To illustrate this we have included battle write-ups covering Egypt’s wars with the Hittites, the Peloponnesian war, the Roman conquest of Britain, Huns against Late Romans, Vikings against Saxons, and Crusaders against Saracens. These are, of course, merely examples, and the rules provide stats and special rules that cover every army imaginable, whilst leaving sufficient room for players to tailor the game to their own tastes. All this is in much the same fashion as Black Powder and will be entirely familiar to those happy souls fortunate enough to possess a copy of said book.
It will surely surprise no one to hear that Hail Caesar has been designed with 28mm models in mind – although the game is equally playable with 20, 15, 10 and 6mm models and all sizes in-between should anyone feel so inclined. The game adapts easily to different styles and sizes of bases: we have armies based in numerous different ways ourselves. Because hand-to-hand fighting is a much more important part of the ancient game than Black Powder– as you might reasonably expect – the overall width of units has been specified more exactly. This is to ensure that combats and supports work out correctly over the extended combats that are common in ancient battles. However, even here the absolute sizes of units doesn’t matter much so long as both sides are essentially the same. Despite out protestations that it doesn’t really matter, we keep getting asked about basing for Hail Caesar. So we’re going to explain how this works now and hopefully this should successfully banish any untoward terror from the mind of the prospective player. We recommend models are based into convenient multiples to facilitate changing formations and for ease of handling. We’d also recommend that foot skirmishers, horse archers, and light cavalry are based individually as the rules allow these units to fight in a dispersed formation with the models spread out. However, none of this is critical, in the same way as Black Powder, the only absolute constraint is that standard sized units occupy roughly the same frontage when deployed in their usual fighting formations.
The chart below shows the base sizes recommended for individual models. If you have armies built for Warhammer Ancient Battles (WAB), as most of our own armies are, then you’ll probably have a combination of multiple bases and individual bases to facilitate casualty removal. You don’t need individual bases for Hail Caesar because there is no casualty removal – units are removed in their entirety when broken – but it doesn’t matter if you have some figures on multiples and some singles. Multiple bases are just ‘multiples’ of the sizes given: a single base for a heavy infantryman is 20 x 20mm, so a multiple base could have three models on a base 60mm wide and 20mm deep, or six models in two ranks on a base 60mm x 40mm, for example.
Type of Troop - Individual Base
Infantry - 20×20mm Cavalry - 25×50mm
2 Horse Chariot - 40×80mm 4 Horse Chariot - 80×80mm
Elephant - 60×80mm Light Artillery - 40×60mm
Medium/Heavy Artillery - 60×100mm
Depths for chariots, elephants and artillery must be adjusted to fit the models as these tend to vary a great deal in overall size.
Now it’s worth pointing out right away that not all of our models are based as described above – these are merely the sizes we recommend. Furthermore – there is no strict relationship between the models and the bases – so if you want to put differing numbers of models onto multiple bases to give a barbarian army a more ragged appearance then that’s just fine. The key thing is the overall width of the unit when deployed into a fighting formation as shown on the chart below. In fact, the Perry twins insist on basing all their armies to a 15mm frontage for infantry and 20mm frontage for cavalry, whilst some of John Stallard’s armies have skirmishing infantry based to 25mm round bases and light chariots based to 50mm frontages. In terms of our game this makes no difference so long as the widths of the units fall within the parameters given. Of course, a unit based to 15mm will need more models to fill out the same frontage as a unit based to 20mm, so it’s much more to do with the look of the thing than the game rules. Mind you – as owners of existing armies will know – it is practically impossible to fit most modern 28mm models onto these narrower bases, so it’s not necessarily an option in many cases.
As with Black powder the number of models in each unit is pre-set at one of four arbitrary sizes: tiny, small, standard and large. However, there is an assumption in Hail Caesar that units will in most cases be of the standard size, except for foot skirmishers, horse archers and light cavalry units, where the assumption is they will fielded as small units in the majority of armies. The sizes we favour are given below – but there is no need to stick rigidly to the numbers given here so long as opposing units have comparable total frontages as explained later. Also, bear in mind that if opposing armies are based to different dimensions (eg one army to 15mm individual frontage and the other to 20mm) then different numbers of models will be needed to fill out the same width of the formation. There is no absolute rule about the number of ranks in a unit, but we tend to field all of our infantry and cavalry two models deep or more. Chariots, elephants and engines are always one deep. We often field medium and heavy infantry three ranks deep, but this is entirely for the look of the thing and not really necessary. We field pike-armed and barbarian warband infantry four deep – primarily because it looks right but also because this is standard in WAB. Obviously, because we are aiming for our units to have a total width within fixed parameters the number of models in the unit varies with depth as shown on the chart below.
Type of Troops Standard Size Large Small Tiny
2 deep infantry 16 to 20 models 32 to 40 8 to 12 5 or 6
3 deep infantry 24 to 30 models 48 to 60 12 to 15 5 or 6
4 deep infantry 32 to 40 models 60 to 80 20 to 24 Not Allowed
Cavalry 12 to 16 models 24 to 32 6 to 8 3 or 4
Light Chariots 4 or 5 models 8 to 10 2 1
Heavy Chariots 2 or 3 models 4 or 5 1 -
Artillery 2 or 3 models 4 1 -
Elephants 1 model - - -
The next chart shows the recommended variation in widths for units and is just a combination of the base dimensions already given and the unit sizes explained above. Tiny units don’t have formations representing scouts, working parties and such like, and so are not included here. Ignoring artillery – which doesn’t tend to have much a role in hand-to-hand fighting after all – you will see that the variation is 150mm to 200mm for a standard unit. In the case of infantry this is rounded up to 160- 200mm to make the frontage divisible by 20mm, but this is the only reason and it would be fine to field infantry as 150mm if that suits your existing basing. The critical formula is that the widest standard sized unit should be no more than a third wider than the narrowest standard sized unit. If players want to set different values that is just fine. We have fought entirely satisfactory battles using armies reduced to 120-160mm for standard units, for example.
Type of Troops Formation Standard Large Small
2 deep infantry 2 deep battle-line 160-200mm 320-400mm 80-120mm
3 deep Infantry 3 deep battle line 160-200mm 320-400mm 80-120mm
4 deep infantry 4 deep warband/phalanx 160-200mm 300-400mm 100-120mm
Cavalry 2 deep battle-line 150-200mm 300-400mm 75-100mm
Light Chariots 1 deep battle line 160-200mm 320-400mm 80mm
Heavy Chariots 1 deep battle line 160-240mm 320-400mm 80mm
Light Artillery 1 deep battle line 80-120mm 160mm 40mm
Examples: Our Roman legionary infantry are usually fielded 3 deep and 8 models wide covering 160mm frontage. They could equally well be fielded as 20 models 2 deep covering 200mm or 16 models 2 deep covering 160 once more. Barbarian warbands are generally seen as 40 man units 10 models by 4 but could go down to 32 models at 8 by 4. Alternatively, some of our Warbands are based four models on 50 x 50mm bases, making a unit 4 bases wide by 2 bases deep – such a unit is 200mm wide and 8 models by 4. Heavy and medium cavalry are seen either 6 models wide at 150mm up to 8 models wide at 200mm and 2 models deep making 12, 14 or 16 figures in all. Light cavalry as small units are usually fielded at 8 models making a formation of 4 by 2 and 100mm wide. Horse archers are always deployed in open order (with bases spaced apart) and for this reason we often see them at 6 to 8 models (and sometimes 5 under sufferance!).
On occasions we are presented with forces that fall slightly outside the parameters given – but even this doesn’t present insurmountable problems. So long as units are arranged into combat in such a way that no unfair advantage is gained it makes no odds. For example, if a cavalry unit is a little too narrow, then just leave a bit of a gap when arranging other units beside it.
Phil Hendry’s marvellous blog has some pictures and battle report of a Hail Caesar game played with his Romans and Sassanids (based for WAB). Because Phil’s units were all different sizes we had to make allowances for the narrower cataphract units – didn’t stop them giving the Romans a thorough kebabing though. Check out Phil’s blog and battle report at the link below. web.me.com/philhendry/Phil_Wargaming_Website/a-game-of-two-halves/
Finally, should anyone be wondering, whilst unit frontages are reasonably important the actual depths of the bases isn’t especially significant. The bases have to be deep enough for the models to fit on them – but that’s it really. The only consideration with depths is that there are various penalties and restrictions on units moving through each other, and in the cases of 4-deep infantry this does start to impose limits simply because of the distances involved. However, this is by no means critical to game play and, in any case, can be ‘assumed’ if players wish.
Enough with thy endless basing buffoonery – next update a bit less about bases and a bit more about the game!
SUGGESTED UNIT WIDTHS AND SIZES FOR CONSIDERATION.
In consideration of cost of figures, time to paint figures, figure storage, game playability, size of tables available, army composition and game playability and matching with existing WAB organisations and collections, I have provided three options for consideration for the club to adopt a standard approach to Hail Ceasar.
Why have an agreed standard? because as Rick states above ......”the only absolute constraint is that standard sized units occupy roughly the same frontage when deployed in their usual fighting formations.” The possible variations can be significant as demonstrated in the options below, so I thought it worth a discussion so that every one feels happy to play another person with an outline basing convention. I for one hate having to rebase so i would like to agree it up front before I do too much painting and basing.
For me it is about all the above, but most of all having a fun game with multiple players and use of campaign scenarios. Too large units mean few units and loss of the big battle feel, Too small units and it losses its aesthetic appeal.
So I have extrapolated the information from Ricks articles above to provide three FOUR options for consideration, which albeit not exhaustive will hopefully fuel the discussion for the club to adopt a standard that all are happy to work with. This should facilitate a good base for future gaming and hopefully fun campaigns with multiple players.
Any way I hope this is ok.
To add perspective to the unit sizing i restate the individual figure basing.
Type of Troop - Individual Base
Infantry - 20×20mm Cavalry - 25×50mm
2 Horse Chariot - 40×80mm 4 Horse Chariot - 80×80mm
Elephant - 60×80mm Light Artillery - 40×60mm
Medium/Heavy Artillery - 60×100mm
Depths for chariots, elephants and artillery must be adjusted to fit the models as these tend to vary a great deal in overall size.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 1 – Adopt 160mm as standard width [As per rules see article above]
• In line with rule recomendations
• Units can be large
• Loads of Figures looks good – but may be costly
• BUT, Unit sizes not easily supported by “boxed” unit sizes available commercially
• Small units look more feasible in this option over other options
Type of Troops Formation Standard Large Small
2 deep infantry 2 deep battle-line 160mm 320mm 80mm
3 deep Infantry 3 deep battle line 160mm 320mm 80mm
4 deep infantry 4 deep warband/phalanx 160mm 320mm 80mm
Cavalry 2 deep battle-line 150mm 300mm 100mm
Light Chariots 1 deep battle line 120mm 240mm 60mm
Heavy Chariots 1 deep battle line 120mm 240mm 60mm
Light Artillery 1 deep battle line 80mm 160mm 40mm
Type of Troops Standard Size Large Small Tiny
2 deep infantry 16 models 32 models 8 models ?
3 deep infantry 24 models 48 models 12 models ?
4 deep 32 models 64 models 16 models N/A
Cavalry 12 models 24 models 8 models ?
Light Chariots 2-3 models 4-6 models 1-2 models ?
Heavy Chariots 2-3 models 4-6 models 1-2 models ?
Artillery 2 models 4 models 1-2 models ?
Elephants 1 model - - -
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 2 – Adopt 100mm as standard width
Issues very difficult to accommodate the smaller unit options the Number of Figures becomes small are people happy with such small unit sizes for “small” and Tiny becomes non existent?
Having said that Rick does state in his article that variations from standard size should be rare, so are small units likely?
Type of Troops Formation Standard Large Small
2 deep infantry 2 deep battle-line 100mm 200mm 60mm
3 deep Infantry 3 deep battle line 100mm 200mm 60mm
4 deep infantry 4 deep warband/phalanx 100mm 200mm 60mm
Cavalry 2 deep battle-line 100mm 200mm 50mm
Light Chariots 1 deep battle line 120mm 240mm 60mm
Heavy Chariots 1 deep battle line 120mm 240mm 60mm
Light Artillery 1 deep battle line 80mm 160mm 40mm
Type of Troops Standard Size Large Small Tiny
2 deep infantry 10 models 20 models 6 models ?
3 deep infantry 15 models 30 models 9 models ?
4 deep 20 models 40 models 12 models N/A
Cavalry 8 models 16 models 4 models ?
Light Chariots 2-3 models 4-6 models 1-2 models ?
Heavy Chariots 2-3 models 4-6 models 1-2 models ?
Artillery 2 models 4 models 1-2 models ?
Elephants 1 model - - -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 3 – Adopt 120mm as standard width
Allows Tiny units to exist
chariots artillery and elephants no change to option 1
Type of Troops Formation Standard Large Small
2 deep infantry 2 deep battle-line 120mm 240mm 80mm
3 deep Infantry 3 deep battle line 120mm 240mm 80mm
4 deep infantry 4 deep warband/phalanx 120mm 240mm 80mm
Cavalry 2 deep battle-line 125mm 240mm 75mm
Light Chariots 1 deep battle line 120mm 240mm 60mm
Heavy Chariots 1 deep battle line 120mm 240mm 60mm
Light Artillery 1 deep battle line 80mm 160mm 40mm
Type of Troops Standard Size Large Small Tiny
2 deep infantry 12 models 24 models 8 models 4
3 deep infantry 18 models 36 models 12 models 6
4 deep 24 models 48 models 16 models N/A
Cavalry 10 models 20 models 6 models ?
Light Chariots 2-3 models 4-6 models 1-2 models ?
Heavy Chariots 2-3 models 4-6 models 1-2 models ?
Artillery 2 models 4 models 1-2 models ?
Elephants 1 model - - -
Option 4 - No standard just as best fits for your army
Another update on our forthcoming Ancients rules from the author of said tome, Rick Priestley…
This time round I thought I’d talk a little bit more about the Hail Caesar game itself – both in terms of the mechanics and what is sometimes called ‘games philosophy’. I’m not too sure whether ‘philosophy’ is not too grand a title for the kind of thinking that goes into a wargame – Wittgenstein I ain’t – but we can certainly take a look at some of the ideas and ambitions that have informed the development of Hail Caesar over this last year.
Incidentally – if you’ve clicked on this link expecting an exciting and exhaustive discussion of base sizes in the Hail Caesar game then you should take a look at the bottom of this document where an analysis of basing and unit sizes has been complied.
Hail Caesar is – as I’m sure you all know by now – based very firmly upon our Black Powder wargame. Those who already own a copy of Black Powder will therefore have a fair idea of what to expect – and throughout this article I will be making comparisons between the two games. For the benefit of those who might not be familiar with Black Powder I’ve tried to give a brief overview of the mechanisms in their basic form.
Black Powder and Hail Caesar share a common approach to gaming – they have both been developed amongst our own gaming circle, for our own use, and to play the kind of games we enjoy. By making these rule sets available more widely we hope for no more than to introduce others to a style and type of gaming that anyone can participate in should they wish to do so. In presenting the rules for publication we have endeavoured to carefully explain how they work, and how players might choose to expand and develop the core ideas for themselves, but we have not otherwise compromised the central tenet of the game – a game played between friends in the spirit of comradeship and entertainment. Of course, at no point did anyone ever sit down and write a ‘brief’ for our games. They simply evolved over time as a result of ideas and enthusiasms amongst the group. But if a brief had been written it might have looked like this:
* Our game must start and finish over an evening allowing sufficient time for the consumption of curry – the table, armies and scenario would ideally be prepared beforehand – though don’t count on it – especially round at John’s.
* Our game must easily accommodate two or three players a side – although it must be possible for a single player to control an entire army if need be – should Little Steve have so exhausted himself lion taming that he falls asleep on the sofa – for example.
* The game must allow for our existing collections of models, which are based every which way and comprise units of differing sizes – but are all 25mm or 28mm ‘scale’ – except for Rick’s 10mm which we prefer not to dwell upon.
* The armies available are a fair size – well frankly huge in the case of Alan’s Napoleonic collection – and the game must commonly facilitate big battles as well as the occasional smaller action.
* The tabletops available vary – none smaller than 8 feet by 4 – but the chief battlefield is 12 or 14 feet by 6 necessitating the inclusion of at least one player with very long arms – Jervis being a prime example of the breed. All the tables comprise rolling terrain modelled with rises and depressions, rivers and roads, and with plenty of scenery representing villages and towns, fields, orchards and areas of cultivation. This does mean that the exact placement of units can get a bit vague.
* As well as providing for our regular group the game must take into account occasional guests and visitors who may want to pitch in and take control of part of an army.
Those are probably the main drivers behind the development of our rules. Of course, the tastes and preference of our comrades are a major factor too – and here we must bear in mind that most of us are friends because we have at some time or another been workmates at Games Workshop. So, as a group we have a relatively high proportion of professional games designers, sculptors, model makers and artists – including the owners of at least four wargames hobby businesses. Needless to say – everyone has their own ideas about what makes a game enjoyable – but it’s reasonable to say that all of our players are primarily interested in a social game in which the quality of the models, terrain and curry are of at least equal importance to the rules themselves. The aesthetics of the wargame are a major part of its appeal – and the rules must produce games that look attractive and which ‘tell a story’ as they play out. And that story should be entertaining and dramatic – at least worthy of repetition during the post-battle pint in the local pub.
In terms of how this translates into game mechanics, it should be pretty obvious we need a game that plays fairy quickly, as we aim to complete what is probably a larger than average battle over the course of a single evening on what is a big tabletop by most people’s standards. Our players are also looking for an enjoyable, social evening – they are not looking to spend ages cross-referencing charts, totting up factors, and micro-adjusting movement. So, our game is designed to crack along at a good pace, and uses multiple dice rolling as its prime mechanic rather than single rolls with multiple factors, thoughtful card play, or mechanisms that require a great deal of careful calculation before actions can be taken. No criticism of games that employ these techniques is implied, all of these mechanics are good in their place, but for purposes of our game it is preferable to stick to multiple dice rolling with minimal modification.
In broad outline both Black Powder and Hail Caesar play in the same fashion. Each side takes a turn alternately completing all of its movement, then shooting and finally resolving any hand-to-hand combats before the opposing side takes a turn beginning once more with movement. Although play is alternate as described, the side that is not taking the turn has the opportunity to move in some situations (to countercharge or evade for example), and to shoot (with traversing or closing shots), and to fight in hand-to-hand combat. When casualties are inflicted it is also necessary for the side that suffers them to take morale checks (effectively saving throws) and also to take break tests where required. These interactions ensure that all players remain involved in the game even when it isn’t their turn. Hand-to-hand fighting also includes a certain amount of post combat movement when losing troops retreat, allowing the victors to press home their attack or consolidate their position – all of this can potentially result in units form both sides moving regardless of which side’s turn it happens to be.
To achieve our goal of rapid and decisive movement we allow for relatively long moves and we permit units to make up to three moves in their turn. Whether they move at all, and how far they move, depends upon the result of a test made against the command value of their accompanying leader or commander. Each commander controls a brigade or division comprising one or more separate units (for example four infantry battalions). Often a player will take responsibility for one division of troops, with the side represented by three or four players in all. If the army is especially large or players are in short supply each player controls several divisions. To move any unit under his control the player first nominates the commander model that will ‘give the order’, he then explains what he wants the unit to do – in real world terms as far as possible – and then he rolls two dice adding the scores together to determine if the order has been successfully received and understood. Most commanders have a value set at 8 meaning the player must roll 8 or less on two dice to issue a successful order. If the roll is 8 or 1 less the unit has one move in which to try and complete its order, if the result is 2 less the unit has two moves, and if 3 less or more the unit has three moves. If the result is more than 8 the unit fails to move at all, although in some situations units are allowed a single move even when their order is ‘failed’. Units are always obliged to fulfil their order in so far as possible – no hanging back just because you wanted two moves but have rolled only one! This is the principle means by which orders are issued and troops moved in our games – and it allows for rapid movement as well as occasional bottlenecks and frustrations as orders go awry or troops fail to move at all.
As we have said the move distances are quite long – though less so in Hail Caesar than in Black Powder. In Black Powder infantry move 12” at a time, whilst in Hail Caesar they move 6”. In Black Powder cavalry move 18”, where in Hail Caesar they move between 6” and 12” depending on their type. This emphasises the differing character of warfare with the shorter moves in ‘ancients’ tending to place more importance on holding a line and keeping supporting troops nearby. To compensate for this to some extent there are more ‘automatic moves’ in Hail Caesar than are allowed in Black Powder. These cover situations where a unit can move either without an order or, in some cases, allow a unit to move once even where its order is failed. For both of these games we’d happily recommend players adjust the move distances given to suit their own tables if they are significantly smaller than our own. Having said that, we have played Hail Caesar across a 4 foot wide table without feeling the need to reduce movement distances – being content to ensure no troops were deployed within potential charge range of enemies at the start of the game.
Shooting is an important part of Black Powder and much less so in Hail Caesar. In Black Powder volleys of musketry will often stop an enemy formation in its tracks by disordering it. Although shooting is an important part of ancient warfare it is much less likely to be decisive. Hail Caesar therefore treats ranged fire and any resulting disorder a little differently. In Hail Caesar ranged attacks represent not just longer ranged missile fire with bows, crossbows and slings, but also short ranged exchanges of thrown missiles as well as skirmishing either by troops in open order or, where appropriate, by bodies moving beyond the main formation. Almost all units have been given a short ranged ‘shooting’ ability to represent this, including most close-fighting infantry such as Roman legionaries and Greek Hoplites (though not pike-armed phalangites… should you be wondering). This range is a mere 6” but this is entirely adequate to allow for an exchange of missiles prior to a head-to-head clash or ‘soft contact’ between troops fighting in looser formations. All units therefore have a short and long range ‘attack value’ equivalent to a number of dice: usually 3 at short range and either 3 or 0 at long range depending upon armament. When making ranged attacks the unit rolls the number of dice indicated and scores of 4 or better are required to inflict ‘hits’. A few modifiers apply – and in the case of Hail Caesar these modifiers tend to push the odds down slightly compared to Black Powder. In Hail Caesar any 6’s rolled when making ranged attacks result in a break test rather than causing disorder automatically as they do in Black Powder. Hail Caesar also has separate break test charts for missile fire and hand-to-hand combat, with disorder being a potential result of this test in both cases. In both games disordered units are unable to move in their own turn and also suffer a penalty for shooting and hand-to-hand fighting so this is a significant penalty.
When units suffer casualties these are recorded by whatever method the players prefer. Our own habit is to use model casualties – though we often employ a distinctly coloured dice to indicate casualties whilst they are inflicted as this saves time. We do not remove models from the units themselves, and this is one of the reasons why the exact basing style of our troops isn’t terribly important – there being no need to remove individual models as casualties during the game. Although units can suffer any number of casualties throughout the course of a battle the maximum number that is recorded in Hail Caesar is usually 6 if the unit is of a regular size. This is double the value in Black Powder where units can normally take 3 casualties, and the difference reflects the importance of prolonged combats in the ancient game. Of course, this also means that the effect of missile fire is relatively less in Hail Caesar than Black Powder, something we felt was only proper given the differences in weapon technology and tactics. Casualties inflicted in excess of 6 are not carried over from one turn to the next but become negative modifiers on any break tests the unit is obliged to take. Once a unit has its full quota of casualties it is considered ‘shaken’ which prevents it deliberately engaging in hand-to-hand fighting and imposes a penalty on the unit’s shooting and combat dice.
Units also have two different values for hand-to-hand combat: a clash value which is used in the first round of any combat, and the sustained value which is used at all other times. In both cases these values are the number of dice rolled varying from 4 or 5 for light troops to 7 for heavy infantry and 8 or 9 for heavy cavalry. The basic mechanic is the same as for shooting – roll the number of dice indicated and all results of 4 or more score ‘hits’. The unit that has been attacked then rolls one dice for each hit it has suffered and its morale holds on scores of 4 or more effectively negating that hit. All unsaved hits are then recorded as casualties onto the unit. This is a very simple mechanic – multiple dice rolling – but very effective in terms of creating moments of tension within the game and as a method of balancing play. Both sides fight in hand-to-hand combat regardless of which side’s turn it is, and the side that scores the most casualties wins the fight. The losers must then take a break test, rolling two dice against a chart, which can result in the unit holding its ground, retreating or breaking altogether in which case it is removed from play entirely. In Hail Caesar, unlike in Black Powder, there is also the potential for a unit to break automatically without recourse to a break test if is receives enough casualties in one go.
Anyway – that’s a very generalised summary of the game’s basic mechanics and some of the differences that mark Hail Caesar from its Black Powder predecessor. I’ll get back to hand-to-hand fighting some other time as the numerous detail changes are worth longer consideration.
Hail Caesar! – An Update
By Rick Priestley
In case anyone is in any doubt we are talking about a hard-back book about the same size, shape and general demeanour as Black Powder. In fact – just to be crystal clear –Hail Caesar is our adaptation of Black Powder for ancient gaming, and if you want to know what kind of a game we are talking about then refer at once to your copy of Black Powder. Read the introduction and tremble to imagine. Fondle the glossy pages and feast your eyes upon the sumptuous contents. Consider the majestic legions of Rome as they romp across the lavish tabletop to the thunderous rumble of the dice. Should you not already own a copy of this marvellous game (i.e Black Powder) then you are to be envied – for you have that pleasure to come. Fear not – a quick trip to Warlord’s on-line emporium will put a copy into your hands double quick.
Do not let premature mention of things Roman confuse you. The Hail Caesar rules will cover the whole of the ‘ancient’ period from the days of the dusky Pharaohs to the age of the Crusaders. In fact, the Hail Caesar rules would happily cope with wars of the later middle ages right up to the development of effective gunpowder weaponry. We just decided to draw a line at the latest battle described in the book, which takes place at the beginning of the thirteenth century during the Fourth Crusade. This leaves us plenty of elbowroom for further development and supplements in the future. After all, it wasn’t as if we didn’t have enough to go at with two and a half thousand years of battles from chariots to classical warfare, later antiquity and then the early medieval period.
As with Black Powder, the essential details of the game remain the same whatever the specific era – but the addition of special rules and different troop types make each sub-period significantly different. To illustrate this we have included battle write-ups covering Egypt’s wars with the Hittites, the Peloponnesian war, the Roman conquest of Britain, Huns against Late Romans, Vikings against Saxons, and Crusaders against Saracens. These are, of course, merely examples, and the rules provide stats and special rules that cover every army imaginable, whilst leaving sufficient room for players to tailor the game to their own tastes. All this is in much the same fashion as Black Powder and will be entirely familiar to those happy souls fortunate enough to possess a copy of said book.
It will surely surprise no one to hear that Hail Caesar has been designed with 28mm models in mind – although the game is equally playable with 20, 15, 10 and 6mm models and all sizes in-between should anyone feel so inclined. The game adapts easily to different styles and sizes of bases: we have armies based in numerous different ways ourselves. Because hand-to-hand fighting is a much more important part of the ancient game than Black Powder– as you might reasonably expect – the overall width of units has been specified more exactly. This is to ensure that combats and supports work out correctly over the extended combats that are common in ancient battles. However, even here the absolute sizes of units doesn’t matter much so long as both sides are essentially the same. Despite out protestations that it doesn’t really matter, we keep getting asked about basing for Hail Caesar. So we’re going to explain how this works now and hopefully this should successfully banish any untoward terror from the mind of the prospective player. We recommend models are based into convenient multiples to facilitate changing formations and for ease of handling. We’d also recommend that foot skirmishers, horse archers, and light cavalry are based individually as the rules allow these units to fight in a dispersed formation with the models spread out. However, none of this is critical, in the same way as Black Powder, the only absolute constraint is that standard sized units occupy roughly the same frontage when deployed in their usual fighting formations.
The chart below shows the base sizes recommended for individual models. If you have armies built for Warhammer Ancient Battles (WAB), as most of our own armies are, then you’ll probably have a combination of multiple bases and individual bases to facilitate casualty removal. You don’t need individual bases for Hail Caesar because there is no casualty removal – units are removed in their entirety when broken – but it doesn’t matter if you have some figures on multiples and some singles. Multiple bases are just ‘multiples’ of the sizes given: a single base for a heavy infantryman is 20 x 20mm, so a multiple base could have three models on a base 60mm wide and 20mm deep, or six models in two ranks on a base 60mm x 40mm, for example.
Type of Troop - Individual Base
Infantry - 20×20mm Cavalry - 25×50mm
2 Horse Chariot - 40×80mm 4 Horse Chariot - 80×80mm
Elephant - 60×80mm Light Artillery - 40×60mm
Medium/Heavy Artillery - 60×100mm
Depths for chariots, elephants and artillery must be adjusted to fit the models as these tend to vary a great deal in overall size.
Now it’s worth pointing out right away that not all of our models are based as described above – these are merely the sizes we recommend. Furthermore – there is no strict relationship between the models and the bases – so if you want to put differing numbers of models onto multiple bases to give a barbarian army a more ragged appearance then that’s just fine. The key thing is the overall width of the unit when deployed into a fighting formation as shown on the chart below. In fact, the Perry twins insist on basing all their armies to a 15mm frontage for infantry and 20mm frontage for cavalry, whilst some of John Stallard’s armies have skirmishing infantry based to 25mm round bases and light chariots based to 50mm frontages. In terms of our game this makes no difference so long as the widths of the units fall within the parameters given. Of course, a unit based to 15mm will need more models to fill out the same frontage as a unit based to 20mm, so it’s much more to do with the look of the thing than the game rules. Mind you – as owners of existing armies will know – it is practically impossible to fit most modern 28mm models onto these narrower bases, so it’s not necessarily an option in many cases.
As with Black powder the number of models in each unit is pre-set at one of four arbitrary sizes: tiny, small, standard and large. However, there is an assumption in Hail Caesar that units will in most cases be of the standard size, except for foot skirmishers, horse archers and light cavalry units, where the assumption is they will fielded as small units in the majority of armies. The sizes we favour are given below – but there is no need to stick rigidly to the numbers given here so long as opposing units have comparable total frontages as explained later. Also, bear in mind that if opposing armies are based to different dimensions (eg one army to 15mm individual frontage and the other to 20mm) then different numbers of models will be needed to fill out the same width of the formation. There is no absolute rule about the number of ranks in a unit, but we tend to field all of our infantry and cavalry two models deep or more. Chariots, elephants and engines are always one deep. We often field medium and heavy infantry three ranks deep, but this is entirely for the look of the thing and not really necessary. We field pike-armed and barbarian warband infantry four deep – primarily because it looks right but also because this is standard in WAB. Obviously, because we are aiming for our units to have a total width within fixed parameters the number of models in the unit varies with depth as shown on the chart below.
Type of Troops Standard Size Large Small Tiny
2 deep infantry 16 to 20 models 32 to 40 8 to 12 5 or 6
3 deep infantry 24 to 30 models 48 to 60 12 to 15 5 or 6
4 deep infantry 32 to 40 models 60 to 80 20 to 24 Not Allowed
Cavalry 12 to 16 models 24 to 32 6 to 8 3 or 4
Light Chariots 4 or 5 models 8 to 10 2 1
Heavy Chariots 2 or 3 models 4 or 5 1 -
Artillery 2 or 3 models 4 1 -
Elephants 1 model - - -
The next chart shows the recommended variation in widths for units and is just a combination of the base dimensions already given and the unit sizes explained above. Tiny units don’t have formations representing scouts, working parties and such like, and so are not included here. Ignoring artillery – which doesn’t tend to have much a role in hand-to-hand fighting after all – you will see that the variation is 150mm to 200mm for a standard unit. In the case of infantry this is rounded up to 160- 200mm to make the frontage divisible by 20mm, but this is the only reason and it would be fine to field infantry as 150mm if that suits your existing basing. The critical formula is that the widest standard sized unit should be no more than a third wider than the narrowest standard sized unit. If players want to set different values that is just fine. We have fought entirely satisfactory battles using armies reduced to 120-160mm for standard units, for example.
Type of Troops Formation Standard Large Small
2 deep infantry 2 deep battle-line 160-200mm 320-400mm 80-120mm
3 deep Infantry 3 deep battle line 160-200mm 320-400mm 80-120mm
4 deep infantry 4 deep warband/phalanx 160-200mm 300-400mm 100-120mm
Cavalry 2 deep battle-line 150-200mm 300-400mm 75-100mm
Light Chariots 1 deep battle line 160-200mm 320-400mm 80mm
Heavy Chariots 1 deep battle line 160-240mm 320-400mm 80mm
Light Artillery 1 deep battle line 80-120mm 160mm 40mm
Examples: Our Roman legionary infantry are usually fielded 3 deep and 8 models wide covering 160mm frontage. They could equally well be fielded as 20 models 2 deep covering 200mm or 16 models 2 deep covering 160 once more. Barbarian warbands are generally seen as 40 man units 10 models by 4 but could go down to 32 models at 8 by 4. Alternatively, some of our Warbands are based four models on 50 x 50mm bases, making a unit 4 bases wide by 2 bases deep – such a unit is 200mm wide and 8 models by 4. Heavy and medium cavalry are seen either 6 models wide at 150mm up to 8 models wide at 200mm and 2 models deep making 12, 14 or 16 figures in all. Light cavalry as small units are usually fielded at 8 models making a formation of 4 by 2 and 100mm wide. Horse archers are always deployed in open order (with bases spaced apart) and for this reason we often see them at 6 to 8 models (and sometimes 5 under sufferance!).
On occasions we are presented with forces that fall slightly outside the parameters given – but even this doesn’t present insurmountable problems. So long as units are arranged into combat in such a way that no unfair advantage is gained it makes no odds. For example, if a cavalry unit is a little too narrow, then just leave a bit of a gap when arranging other units beside it.
Phil Hendry’s marvellous blog has some pictures and battle report of a Hail Caesar game played with his Romans and Sassanids (based for WAB). Because Phil’s units were all different sizes we had to make allowances for the narrower cataphract units – didn’t stop them giving the Romans a thorough kebabing though. Check out Phil’s blog and battle report at the link below. web.me.com/philhendry/Phil_Wargaming_Website/a-game-of-two-halves/
Finally, should anyone be wondering, whilst unit frontages are reasonably important the actual depths of the bases isn’t especially significant. The bases have to be deep enough for the models to fit on them – but that’s it really. The only consideration with depths is that there are various penalties and restrictions on units moving through each other, and in the cases of 4-deep infantry this does start to impose limits simply because of the distances involved. However, this is by no means critical to game play and, in any case, can be ‘assumed’ if players wish.
Enough with thy endless basing buffoonery – next update a bit less about bases and a bit more about the game!
SUGGESTED UNIT WIDTHS AND SIZES FOR CONSIDERATION.
In consideration of cost of figures, time to paint figures, figure storage, game playability, size of tables available, army composition and game playability and matching with existing WAB organisations and collections, I have provided three options for consideration for the club to adopt a standard approach to Hail Ceasar.
Why have an agreed standard? because as Rick states above ......”the only absolute constraint is that standard sized units occupy roughly the same frontage when deployed in their usual fighting formations.” The possible variations can be significant as demonstrated in the options below, so I thought it worth a discussion so that every one feels happy to play another person with an outline basing convention. I for one hate having to rebase so i would like to agree it up front before I do too much painting and basing.
For me it is about all the above, but most of all having a fun game with multiple players and use of campaign scenarios. Too large units mean few units and loss of the big battle feel, Too small units and it losses its aesthetic appeal.
So I have extrapolated the information from Ricks articles above to provide three FOUR options for consideration, which albeit not exhaustive will hopefully fuel the discussion for the club to adopt a standard that all are happy to work with. This should facilitate a good base for future gaming and hopefully fun campaigns with multiple players.
Any way I hope this is ok.
To add perspective to the unit sizing i restate the individual figure basing.
Type of Troop - Individual Base
Infantry - 20×20mm Cavalry - 25×50mm
2 Horse Chariot - 40×80mm 4 Horse Chariot - 80×80mm
Elephant - 60×80mm Light Artillery - 40×60mm
Medium/Heavy Artillery - 60×100mm
Depths for chariots, elephants and artillery must be adjusted to fit the models as these tend to vary a great deal in overall size.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 1 – Adopt 160mm as standard width [As per rules see article above]
• In line with rule recomendations
• Units can be large
• Loads of Figures looks good – but may be costly
• BUT, Unit sizes not easily supported by “boxed” unit sizes available commercially
• Small units look more feasible in this option over other options
Type of Troops Formation Standard Large Small
2 deep infantry 2 deep battle-line 160mm 320mm 80mm
3 deep Infantry 3 deep battle line 160mm 320mm 80mm
4 deep infantry 4 deep warband/phalanx 160mm 320mm 80mm
Cavalry 2 deep battle-line 150mm 300mm 100mm
Light Chariots 1 deep battle line 120mm 240mm 60mm
Heavy Chariots 1 deep battle line 120mm 240mm 60mm
Light Artillery 1 deep battle line 80mm 160mm 40mm
Type of Troops Standard Size Large Small Tiny
2 deep infantry 16 models 32 models 8 models ?
3 deep infantry 24 models 48 models 12 models ?
4 deep 32 models 64 models 16 models N/A
Cavalry 12 models 24 models 8 models ?
Light Chariots 2-3 models 4-6 models 1-2 models ?
Heavy Chariots 2-3 models 4-6 models 1-2 models ?
Artillery 2 models 4 models 1-2 models ?
Elephants 1 model - - -
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 2 – Adopt 100mm as standard width
Issues very difficult to accommodate the smaller unit options the Number of Figures becomes small are people happy with such small unit sizes for “small” and Tiny becomes non existent?
Having said that Rick does state in his article that variations from standard size should be rare, so are small units likely?
Type of Troops Formation Standard Large Small
2 deep infantry 2 deep battle-line 100mm 200mm 60mm
3 deep Infantry 3 deep battle line 100mm 200mm 60mm
4 deep infantry 4 deep warband/phalanx 100mm 200mm 60mm
Cavalry 2 deep battle-line 100mm 200mm 50mm
Light Chariots 1 deep battle line 120mm 240mm 60mm
Heavy Chariots 1 deep battle line 120mm 240mm 60mm
Light Artillery 1 deep battle line 80mm 160mm 40mm
Type of Troops Standard Size Large Small Tiny
2 deep infantry 10 models 20 models 6 models ?
3 deep infantry 15 models 30 models 9 models ?
4 deep 20 models 40 models 12 models N/A
Cavalry 8 models 16 models 4 models ?
Light Chariots 2-3 models 4-6 models 1-2 models ?
Heavy Chariots 2-3 models 4-6 models 1-2 models ?
Artillery 2 models 4 models 1-2 models ?
Elephants 1 model - - -
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Option 3 – Adopt 120mm as standard width
Allows Tiny units to exist
chariots artillery and elephants no change to option 1
Type of Troops Formation Standard Large Small
2 deep infantry 2 deep battle-line 120mm 240mm 80mm
3 deep Infantry 3 deep battle line 120mm 240mm 80mm
4 deep infantry 4 deep warband/phalanx 120mm 240mm 80mm
Cavalry 2 deep battle-line 125mm 240mm 75mm
Light Chariots 1 deep battle line 120mm 240mm 60mm
Heavy Chariots 1 deep battle line 120mm 240mm 60mm
Light Artillery 1 deep battle line 80mm 160mm 40mm
Type of Troops Standard Size Large Small Tiny
2 deep infantry 12 models 24 models 8 models 4
3 deep infantry 18 models 36 models 12 models 6
4 deep 24 models 48 models 16 models N/A
Cavalry 10 models 20 models 6 models ?
Light Chariots 2-3 models 4-6 models 1-2 models ?
Heavy Chariots 2-3 models 4-6 models 1-2 models ?
Artillery 2 models 4 models 1-2 models ?
Elephants 1 model - - -
Option 4 - No standard just as best fits for your army