Scarponna (366)

With my 'Barbarian West' collection getting to a dozen-units-to-a-side standard, it occurred to me I could play Hail Caesar in 28mm.  I have been wanting to delve into Hail Caesar some more of late, because if its comparably less swingy combat system (as opposed to Lion Rampant) and because I quite like the mechanics for units supporting other units in melee, which encourages large blocks of units and maintaining long battle lines.  Flipping through the same source material I used for the basis of the Rutupiae game, I got hooked on the invasion by, and wars with, the Alamanni tribes in 366, specifically the campaign of the Roman general Jovinus.

Gathering their forces, on or shortly after 1 January 366 the Alamanni invaded Gaul in three major 'divisions', plus many smaller groups or semi-independent tribesmen.  Hearing of the invasion, Jovinus moved to meet the intruders.  It is unfortunate that [the chronicler] Ammianus does not give us a complete description of the course of the war. .... It would appear that over the course of several months the defending [Roman] armies of Gaul fought many battles, apart from those fought by the troops under Jovinus. ....

As the Alamannic forces moved into Roman territory, Jovinus was able to identify one of the advancing Alamannic armies.  he advanced to meet them, possibly defeating or dispersing smaller groups of barbarians along the way.  As he neared the enemy Jovinus deployed his troops, 'carefully guarding both wings of his army', and cautiously moved to meet them.  Possibly in early-mid March, in the vicinity of Scarponna (Charpeigne, on the Moselle), Jovinus's tactics of stealth and care paid off handsomely.  He took the Alamannic army completely by surprise.  Before they could take up arms and form to meet the Romans, they were swept away and annihilated.

- Hughes, Ian. Imperial Brothers: Valentinian, Valens and the Disaster at Adrianople (2013).

The description of the attack near Scarponna is vague enough to devise a set-up for a game: the Romans have caught the Alamanni by surprise and are arrayed in line.  Half the Alamanni are loosely arrayed in the middle of the table, and the other half are at the far edge of the table, but start the game with a disorganized marker which must be rallied off before any other actions can be taken.

After the first Roman move. Roman infantry mostly moving up to the right. Burgundian allies in the middle, still scattered about.

I decided to try out the Late Imperial Romans and Franks lists from the Army Lists: Late Antiquity to Early Medieval source book for Hail Caesar as the source for the unit stats.  I was a little wary because there is also a 'Barbarian West' scenario in the back of the Hail Caesar rulebook that presents a quite different vision of unit composition - the rulebook having all infantry classed as heavy infantry (so therefore can 'close ranks' and shooting attacks from front are -1 to hit) while the source book has the Romans as medium infantry and the Franks as medium warbands.  Jovinus thus ended up with two divisions of four units each: the first with 3 medium infantry and 1 light infantry archer, and the second with 2 medium infantry, a light infantry archer, and a unit of cataphracts.  The Alamanni had one division of 4 Alamanni medium warbands with the pila rule (representing their throwing axes, etc.) and another division of 4 allied Burgundian warbands (no pila rule).  The Burgundians were in the forward position. 

 

Two divisions per side is rather on the small side for Hail Caesar, but I set it up as so because this was a remote game played via Google Meets, and I wanted the game to be concluded in two hours or less, so I erred on the small side.  Being remote, I of course converted movement and ranges into a grid-based system.  My new mat has a grid of 3" squares (barely detectable in the photos), with one unit occupying two squares. The modifications for Hail Caesar on a grid were as follows:

Command Radius:  

    Modifier to command rolls as follows: up to 4 squares 0; 5-8 squares -1; 9-12 squares -2 etc.

Movement:

    No diagonals.

    Infantry and Cataphracts: 2 squares per move
    Cavalry: 3 squares/move
    Light cavalry in open order/horse archers: 3 squares
    Commanders: 4 squares/move

Ranges:

    No diagonals for distance.

    Target but be in the square that is within range, not adjacent.

    Line of sight measured from center of originating square to center of target square.

    If line crosses square with another unit or obstructing terrain there is no LOS. 

    If at perfect 45 degree angle the line touches the corner of a square with obstructing terrain or another unit, LOS is not blocked, but cannot shoot “through” the diagonal space between two obstructing squares.
    Javelins, darts, throwing axes, etc: 2 squares.
    Slings: 4 squares
    Bows, crossbows, staff slings: 6 squares.

Hand to Hand:

    Units attack via adjacent squares.

    Victorious unit only moves into loser’s vacated square if clearing a building or defended obstacle such as a wall.

 

Jamie was playing the Romans via remote, and decided to attempt to land an early punch with a well-supported charge of his infantry against some of the isolated Burgundians.  Although his left flank (with the cataphracts) fell behind (the cataphracts hardly moved at all the entire game), a well supported attack on the Burgundians was executed. 

 

Unfortunately, the Roman attack dice came up rather poor, and the Burgundians over-performed a little, such that the entire Roman flank was bounced back. Subsequently, on their turn the Burgundians fell back and formed a battle line, and things were back and forth for a while after that. 

The Alamanni units took almost the entire game to move up into support of the Burgundians, who were exceptional allies as they managed to grind it out with the Roman infantry despite heavy losses.  Even the flight of their chief did not deter the Burgundians.  While the Roman left was able to eventually join their infantry in one last assault, by that time the Alamanni had finally come up in support, and destroyed the archers on the Roman right flank.

The Alamanni who had destroyed the archers were then able to attack the flank of the remnants of the Roman right flank infantry (who were already shaken), and with the routing of that Roman unit, the game ended and victory went to the Alamanni and Burgundians.

The final flank attack on the Romans by the Alamanni.

Roman right breaks and flees, ending the battle.

I had forgotten a lot of the smaller points of the rules since I last played, so there was some wasted time flipping through the rulebook, but otherwise the game went smoothly.  I still like Hail Caesar's propensity to suddenly generate 15 or more dice for an attack when one gets their supports in order and throws a general into the front line. However, the specter of failed activations/orders haunts the table. Both the entire Alamanni division, and most of the Roman division on the left, failed to advance for the majority of the game. 

When you combine this unreliability with the swingy-ness of the combat mechanics I'm left with that "roll some dice, some stuff happens" feeling, despite the fact that I won the game. I contemplated eliminating order rolls altogether (as I did so much with Lion Rampant and its variants last month) but then you lose the double and triple moves which I do like, in the end.  I love the Barbarian West period and am enjoying putting the armies together.  I like the same-same quality of pretty much all and any armies in the period (slight exception for the Huns, but only slightly), and I look forward to gaming in it more.