NT Rules: Ancient Army Lists V - Crusades

 Let me first start out by saying that the title for this series - the Ancient Army Lists (for Niel Thomas' rules from Wargaming: An Introduction) is a bit of misnomer for this particular entrance in the series.  By this point in his timeline, Thomas has moved on from the ancient world, into the firm middle of the Medieval world.  The armies covered here are those involved in the middle and later Crusading period.

As a reminder, the earlier articles in the series are:

• NT Rules: Ancient Wargaming
• NT Rules: Ancient Army Lists I - Persian Invasion
• NT Rules: Ancient Army Lists II - Alexander the Great 
• NT Rules: Ancient Army Lists III - The Punic Wars
• NT Rules: Ancient Army Lists IV - Imperial Rome 

 As I pointed out in some of the earlier articles, there are many additional lists for each of those periods covered in the longer, and more complete, treatment on the topic in Thomas' book dedicated to this period - Ancient and Medieval Wargaming.  Those rules have a little more to them, and a little more nuance, than the rules in the Introduction book.  Having said that, in many cases the army lists will transport to the earlier book.  What is different, is the grouping of the periods.  In his more advanced book, Thomas, for instance, groups what are here list periods I, II, and III into one chapter, entitled the Classical Period.  The army lists covered here from the Introductory book are present, with additions of other armies from the period such as Parthians and Numidians.

What is interesting, however, is that the army lists from the Introductory book jump from the Imperial Rome period, all they way up to a thousand years later, into the Later Crusades.  Absent are Late Antiquity, the Early Medieval period (or Dark Ages), and of course the Viking Age, if you choose to interject such between Early and High medieval periods.  There are some fascinating armies and wargaming possibilities covered in that millennium between Second century AD and Twelfth century AD.

However, space in the Introduction book is limited, and perhaps a better choice of Medieval representation could not be made than to cover the Crusades - an iconic chapter of medieval warfare that is always popular.  Thomas skips a general introduction to this period (covering 1180AD - 1290AD), rather he chooses to get right into the first army list - the Later Crusader army.  This is representing the Western Europeans armies on crusade in the Levant, during the events generally thought of the Third through Sixth crusades.  This covers the battles of the Crusader states (Kingdom of Jerusalem, Principality of Antioch, etc.) as well as the battles between Richard the Lionheart and Saladin.  It continues to cover the armies of the west, up until the events of 1289 (Tripoli) and 1291 (Acre).

 Here is a list of the units in the Later Crusader army:

Knights Templar (Heavy Cavalry, Extra-Heavy Armor, Fanatical) 0-1 unit
Knights Hospitaller (Heavy Cavalry, Extra-Heavy Armor, Fanatical) 0-1 unit
Other Knights (Heavy Cavalry, Extra Heavy Armor, Elite) 0-1 unit
Turcopoles (Light Cavalry, Light Armor, Bow) 1-3 units
Infantry (Mixed) 2-6 units

The Infantry is Mixed, and here that means that each 4 stand unit has 2 stands of Heavy Infantry (with Heavy Armor), and 2 stands of Heavy Archers (with Medium Armor and Crossbows).

This army has two special rules associated with it:

1. Fanatic units never have to check morale, but they may never withdraw from combat.
2. Mixed units will always have the Heavy Infantry targeted first, until only Archers remain.

The Later Crusader army is for the player that likes to charge his enemy, and stomp him into the dust.  Not that this will always work, but it is hard to envision the army being successful any other way.

The army list that is presented as an opposition to the Later Crusaders, is the Saracen Army, which can represent the different armies of the region who were opposed to the Crusaders and their establishment of states and principalities (Saladin's Ayyubid Egyptian army, or the Fatimids, Khwarismians, or even the Mameluks).  This army is an interesting foil to the Later Crusader army.

The Saracen player can choose his army from these units:

Guard Cavalry (Heavy Cavalry, Medium Armor, Bow, Elite) 1-2 units
Heavy Cavalry (Heavy Cavalry, Medium Armor, Bow) 1-2 units
Turcomans (Light Cavalry, Light Armor, Bow) 1-2 units
Infantry (Heavy Archers, Light Armor, Bow) 2-4 units

The general ruleset does not allow Heavy Cavalry to be armed with bow, however that and some other concerns are covered by special rules for this army:

1. Saracen Heavy Cavalry may be equipped with Bow
2. Saracen Heavy Cavalry may move before they fire
3. Saracen Heavy Cavalry are allowed to make a 180 degree turn (about face) any number of times during movement
4. Saracen Heavy Archers move as Warband, however they fight and shoot as Heavy Archers

This army allows for, and may demand, considerable more finesse than the Later Crusaders army.  Every unit is armed with a bow, which helps, however with the exception of a pair-up between Turcopoles and Turcomans, the Later Crusader has better armor, and often, better morale.

A really interesting battle would be between a Fatimid army (this list) and a Sunni foe, such as the Ayyubid army (also this list). 

Finally, this section also introduces a third army.  The Mongols, which are according to the author fought just about everyone (including the forces represented by the Saracen list given here), except for the later Crusaders.  More about that below...

 The Mongol player has this army list to choose from:

Guard Calvary (Heavy Cavalry, Bow, Heavy Armor, Elite) 0-1 unit
Cavalry (Heavy Cavalry, Bow, Light Armor, Elite) 1-3 units
Horse Archers (Light Cavalry, Bow, Light Armor, Elite) 4-7 units

This is an all mounted force, unlike the Saracens which include infantry archers.  It will make for an interesting foe to fight the Saracens, and others.  The army, as presented in the book has a few special rules associated with it:

1. Mongol Heavy Cavalry may be equipped with bow
2. Mongol Heavy Cavalry may move before they fire
3. Mongol Heavy Cavalry may make an about face (180 degrees) any number of times during their move, without penalty

 These of course are almost identical to the Saracen list of special rules, which is what makes them an especially worthy foe for the Saracens. The addition of the foot archers for the Saracens might make all the difference in the world, if the terrain is friendly.  However, if the terrain is mostly open, with little space for the Saracen infantry to have a rough spot (woods, rubble, etc) to anchor against, then they may be overrun by the Mongols.  It would be a good fight.

---

One other way to fight the Mongols would be against a Northern Crusades army.  This is something, here, of my own inventing, but owes a lot to similar army lists in other games.  I would rework the Later Crusaders army list into a Northern Crusades army list as this:

Teutonic Knights (Heavy Cavalry, Extra-Heavy Armor, Fanatical) 1-2 units
German Knights (Heavy Cavalry, Extra Heavy Armor, Elite) 0-1 unit
Lithuanian Cavalry (Light Cavalry, Bow, Light Armor) 0-2 units
Sergeants (Heavy Cavalry, Heavy Armor) 1-3 units
Foot Sergeants (Mixed) 2-4 units

The Foot Sergeant units are Mixed, and here that means that each 4 stand unit has 2 stands of Heavy Infantry (with Heavy Armor), and 2 stands of Heavy Archers (with Medium Armor and Crossbows).

This army has two special rules associated with it:

1. Fanatic units never have to check morale, but they may never withdraw from combat.
2. Mixed units will always have the Heavy Infantry targeted first, until only Archers remain.

 This last army list could be a challenge to the Mongols.  It would still have a hard time in the battle, as the Teutonic Order did have a hard time vs the Mongols in history.  With the Fanatic Order knights, and the Elite other knights, this is an interesting mix of morale grades, but it would be very interesting (and fun) to field.  Maybe a playtest should come up soon...

NT Rules: Ancient Wargames

The first set of rules in the book Wargaming: An Introduction is called Ancient wargaming, but in fact it covers Armies and sub-periods ranging from the fifth century BC up through the Middle Ages.  As with the other rulesets in this book, this one is presented over three different chapters. The first chapter introduces the period, and discusses some of the peculiarities of warfare in this period. This discussion includes mention of the troop types, and also any peculiar formations or weapons.  The second chapter will present the rules for the period.  And the third chapter will present army lists.

For the Ancient Wargaming set, the various troop types are these:

• Heavy Infantry - examples include Greek hoplites and Roman legionnaires
• Heavy Archers - examples include Persian Immortals, and English longbowmen
• Warband- examples given include Gallic warriors, and Roman Auxiliaries
• Light Infantry - no specific examples given, except to say that many armies rely on light, skirmishing missile troops
• Heavy Cavalry - examples given are Macedonian Companions and Crusader Knights
• Light Cavalry - examples include Numidian Cavalry Andrew Mongol horse archers
• Heavy Chariots - examples here include Assyrian four-horse Chariots, and Hittite two-horse and three-horse Chariots
• Light Chariots - examples include Egyptian and British two-horse Chariots
• Scythed Chariots - the example given is the Persian use
• Elephants - here the examples are the Indian and Carthaginian armies
• Artillery - the example given of battlefield (i.e. Not in a siege) use is the Romans

Each of these units are portrayed with four stands per unit, except for the last three types. Scythed Chariots, Elephants, and Artillery each have only one stand in a unit.

Hannibal crossing the Rhone - Henri Paul Motte

Some interesting things are already apparent. Although the first sub period covers warfare in the early part of the fifth century BC (490-480 BC) with the wars between the Greeks and Persians, and moving forward - there are no chariot armies.  This is already beyond the period of Assyria and the Hittites, and even the period of chariot use in Egypt, yet they are mentioned in the textile on unit types. Also, a quick look over the army lists provided shows no army in the book with heavy Chariots. Although not stated, what the author has done here is to present a ruleset with broad applicability beyond the Armies and sub periods he discusses.

Another thing of note is that it states in the second chapter, on rules, that units take four hits per stand, regardless of the troop type. With some units having only one stand, that make sure those units are very fragile and vulnerable. Since we are talking about Scythed Chariots, Elephants, and Artillery, this makes sense.

One thing mentioned near the end of chapter one, and unfortunately not mentioned again clearly in chapter two (but stated in the introduction to chapter three on army lists for these rules), is that the standard game is played between armies of eight units each.

An additional thing mentioned in chapter one, is the concept of armor, which applies to infantry and cavalry. Armor types are Extra Heavy, Heavy, Medium and Light.  These confer saving throws to avoid casualties in both shooting and hand-to-hand combat.  Crossbows reduce the effect of armor, and artillery hits ignore it entirely.

 

---

 

The second chapter contains the rules, in a well organized outline format. 

Set up rules are not given, but victory conditions are. If an army is reduced to two units (25%) then it has lost.  In addition, if any of your units exits the map/board on the enemy's baseline, other than Light Infantry, the enemy player must remove two of his own units.  Presumably this represents panic due to having the baggage looted, or a withdrawal route cut off.

The rules start off with giving the turn sequence.  This is a typical, old school version of I go/You go. The sequence given is:

1. Charge Sequence
2. Movement
3. Shooting
4. Hand-to-hand combat
5. Morale tests

Once one player completes all five phases, then it is the other player's turn, until the game ends.  Nothing exotic here, and it gives a fairly good flow.

Charging is done in three steps.  First, prior to measuring, the player whose turn it is announces charges. Then they are measured. If the enemy is reached, move the unit. If the unit cannot reach it stays put with no other penalty. If the target unit is equipped with javelins, it may then fire at the charging unit, as long as the charging unit moved at least 8cm.  The third step mentions that combat will occur, but not until the hand-to-hand phase.

All other (non-charging) movement is next.  Artillery is immobile, all other units have a movement rate from 8cm for heavy infantry, up to 24cm for light cavalry.

Wheeling and turning are not defined, but if any unit other than Light Cavalry or Light Infantry wish to move in any direction other than a straight line ahead, they only move at half speed.  Presumably this also includes Light Chariots, as they are not listed with the other group.

About movement: when I use the rules to run games on a club night, or at a convention, it is the movement rules that causes the most difficulties for veteran players.  There are no rules for different formations, and no rules for various maneuvers found in many rulesets.  So, if you want to oblique, move at the wheel, turn a unit about, etc. then you are able to, as long as no part of the unit moves more than the allowed amount (full movement value for Light Cavalry or Light Infantry; half movement value for everyone else).  As there are no rules that (for instance) allow a unit to about face in place (rather than wheeling through 180 degrees; or spinning the unit with a forward wheel on one flank, and a rearward wheel on the opposite flank), it presumably cannot be done - except by following the general "half move for any movement other than straight ahead".  Note, in the army lists, there are some exceptions, for instance some heavy horse archers are allowed to make free about face maneuvers..  However we have found, as with most things, that reasonable house rules (or referee interpretations) can allow for certain things not expressly forbidden

The rules give instances for three classes of terrain.  Rivers take a unit a complete turn to cross (they start on one bank, and just move to the other bank is the implication).  Hills block line of sight, but otherwise don't affect movement.  Woods are immobile to some units (Cavalry, Chariots, Elephants), slow down other units to half speed (Heavy Infantry, and Heavy Archers),  but don't slow down light Infantry or Warbands.

Rules are given that allow Light troops (Infantry, Cavalry, Chariots) to fire on the move. Other units cannot do so.

Shooting rules are next. Weapons are defined by their maximum range, from 8cm for javelins, up to 48cm for artillery.  

Rolls to hit are based on rolling one dice per stand in the firing unit, and the target number is based on the weapon.  There are no modifiers to the hit number. Bows and Javelins need 4,5,6.  Crossbows need 5,6.  Units in the woods suffer only half the hits rolled. The rules don't state, but we round this up for the shooter's favor. (House Rule)

Next, the target unit gets to make saving rolls for each hit scored.  As mentioned, this chance is reduced versus crossbows.

Artillery fire is somewhat different. Rather than rolling one dice to hit for the artillery, the firing player first roll said one dice, to see how many to-hit dice he gets.  Then roll to hit, again halve hits vs targets in the woods.  There are no saving rolls vs artillery, every hit results in a kill.

Recall it takes four kills to eliminate a stand from a unit. Kills have to be marked, as they are persistent, until a stand is removed. We use plastic upholstery rings, hung on the miniature that is killed. But any method works.  I have seen online battle reports, where players use a dice behind the unit, indicating how many hits have been scored. When 4 are reached, a stand is removed.

When an elephant receives four hits, since its only a one stand unit, it would normally be eliminated. Instead it rolls to go berserk.  It moves a full move in a direction based on a random chart, and if it strikes a unit, it immediately fights a round of combat.  Then the poor beast dies.

Next we get to hand to hand combat.  The rules give a set of priority considerations, to determine who strikes first..  Units then roll a number of d6 per stand in the unit, based on an striker/target matrix.  Hits are on a 4,5,6. Saving throws are allowed, and kills marked.  Both sides get to fight, but if a stand is lost to a foe who fights first in priority, it does not get to roll.

Saving rolls are not allowed against Elephants or Scythed Chariots.

Special striker/target considerations apply to combat in the woods, making Warband twice as effective there.

Artillery units contacted for Hand-to-hand combat don't fight, they are immediately destroyed.

Finally, the morale phase occurs. If the unit lost any bases in the turn, it makes a d6 test for each lost base. The scores required are based on morale grade of the unit. If a dice test is failed, the unit loses an additional stand for each failure.

 

---

 

Those are the rules as presented. In the next few articles, I will discuss the Armies and sub periods.  Links to the successive article for each period of army lists are below.

• NT Rules: Ancient Army Lists I - Persian Invasion
• NT Rules: Ancient Army Lists II - Alexander the Great 
• NT Rules: Ancient Army Lists III - The Punic Wars
• NT Rules: Ancient Army Lists IV - Imperial Rome
• NT Rules: Ancient Army Lists V - Crusades 
  

Saga - and the Dark Ages

Just a quick note - we (myself and the members of ODMS local to Hampton Roads, Virginia) have been playing a lot of SAGA lately (2nd edition).  One of our members has even started a very nice SAGA campaign.

In that campaign, I am playing an Anglo Saxon contingent, with Wulfric of Kent as the faction leader.

But, one of the things that is exciting, is the rekindling of interest in Dark Ages history, within the club.

It got me to thinking about some of the early dark ages articles I wrote last year.  I am thinking of creating SAGA boards for some of them - based on some that do exist (some in Aetius & Arthur), such as the Franks, Goths, Carolingians and others.

-Chuck
posting from GwC HQ, hidden in the Lake Maury Forest, with a view of the verge

Wargaming the Barbarian Kingdoms (6th and 7th century) - Part 3, Franks under Merovingian Rule

The Franks, of course, are those Germanic tribes that were in the area previously called Gaul, and soon to become called France.  In the period we are looking at, for wargaming, they are ruled by the Merovingians, and the style of warfare during this time and for these peoples is definitely a telltale version of the tribal type infantry army, replacing the remnants of anything the Romans left during the last stages of antiquity - but starting to get a little more organized as the political units of the day get larger and more sophisticated.

Brief history of the people and period:
The Merovingian dynasty properly started towards the end of the 5th century, in 481.  That year is significant because Childeric, who had ruled the Merovingian tribe, among several tribes of the Franks, was succeeded in 481 by his son, Clovis I - and it was Clovis (Chlodowig) who united all of Gaul under Merovingian rule.   This will last until the year 751 (just outside our period, in the middle of the 8th century), when Pepin deposed the last Merovingian king, and established the Carolingian dynasty.

During the reign of Clovis, the original territory he recieved from his father (Austrasia), was added to by his military victories at battles such as Soisson (the Gauls of Neustria, defeated in 486), and Vouille (the Visigoths of Aquitaine, north of the Iberian peninsula, in 507).  By the end of his reign, the kingdom of France was pretty large, indeed.

From Wikipedia article on Merovingian dynasty

Clovis left the kingdom to his four sons, who defeated Burgundy in 532 at the battle of Autun, then captured the defeated Burgundian king (Godomar) in 534, and annexed Burgundy.  At this point, the only lands that could be called Frankish (German) that were outside the control of the Merovingian monarchs were Saxony and Frisia in the north, the Spanish Marches, Gascony, and Septimania (and Provence) in the south, the holdout german kingdoms of Bavaria, Carinthia and Lombardy in the southeast.  All those territories would come under Frankish rule, but not until the Carolingians began their expansion.

A couple of interesting cultural and historical factors from this period.  The Muslim conquest would reach southern Europe for some time (end of the 6th century, roughly), so the tribes in the south and west that the Merovingians had troubles with were other German, Gothic and related successors to the failed Roman period.  The Lombards, distinctively, retained their paganism in this period.  Clovis himself (first king of the Merovingians) is considered to be the last of the Pagan kings of the Franks, because after his victories over the Alemani (in 496 and 506), he converted to Christianity, and his people (who hadn't already) followed suit.

One of the aspects of Clovis' conversion is that he (under influence of his wife) adopted Catholicism, rather than the Arianism that was prevalent among the Goths, Vandals and Burgundians. This gave him (after the Alemani) something of a religious reason for subjugating his enemies. In addition it made the remaining Roman population loyal to him.

Around the period of 540 or so, for a few years, there was a bad outbreak of Bubonic Plague, although this wouldn't be as devastating as the later Medieval outbreak in the 14th century would be (because of fewer large population concentrations) it would be bad enough, and since it hit the agricultural areas hardest, it would have had a huge impact on this post-antiquity economy - which would have kept military forces necessarily small for almost all the belligerents we are talking about.
Wargaming the Merovingians

Merovingian Re-enactor

Let's start out by taking a look at the DBA army list for the Merovingians.  If we are talking about the period from 481 to 751, this covers a couple of DBA lists.

First,Early Franks, up until roughly 496 (corresponding, roughly, to the major unification under Clovis I with his defeat of the Alemani, and eventually setting up his capital at Paris) and then the Middle Franks.

The Early Franks (II/72d) in DBA really reflect the post antiquity tribal quality of the warfare.  The army consists of one element of cavalry, and ten elements of warband, and one element of psiloi.  The cavalry element is the general - representing a Frankish leader and his comitatus.  The warbands are the tribal warriors (round shields, and spear and ax - or the), and the psiloi would be maybe slingers or throwers of the angon javelin.

Their Alemani (II/72b) enemies (fought Clovis in 496 and 506) were similar - one cavalry element, seven warband elements, one psiloi - and the difference is that the Alemani had much better quality archery, so they receive three elements of bow, in addition to the psiloi element that might represent slingers or angon throwers.

In both cases, the general and his comitatus can choose to fight dismounted (especially useful in the many forested areas of the region), in which case the cavalry element becomes another warband.

The Middle Frankish list (III/5) covers the Merovingian Franks from the war with the Alemani up until the dominance of the Carolingian Mayers of the Palace (639).  This list (III/5) has two variants, corresponding roughly to the North and East, or Austrasian and Burgundian area (III/5a), and the South and West, or Neustria, Provence, and Aquitaine areas (III/5b).
The first of these (III/5a) contains:  the general is either a Cavalry or Knight element, and there is an additional mounted element which can also be Cavalry or Knight.  There are  six elements of warband, and then three elements which may choose to be warband, or may be upgraded to spear, and finally one element of psiloi.

The second of these (III/5b) contains: the same mounted elements as above (the general, and an additional element, each of which can be cavalry or knights), six elements of spear, again three additional elements which may be spear, or warband, and one element of psiloi.

Here we see the growing sophistication of the armies, as the mounted troops become much more effective as knights (introduction of new equipment such as the stirrup, and better armor).  As the region gives way from dense forests to more and more agricultural land, the troops can find more uses to fight in a tighter formation - hence the spear elements (also representing the greater training available under rulers of larger armed forces).  In the south, more spears than warbands represents the terrain, as well as exposure to the Goths and other enemies.

For miniatures - Baueda makes some excellent figures for the Carolingians, and they are promising Merovingian figures any day now.

The Essex figures are quite gorgeous, but their "Early Franks" seem to be from a much earlier period (the era of the Roman Frankish Federates).  However, their Saxon, Frisian, Suevi and Bavarian line is just about perfect.  Here are some pictures of the figures from that line.

Essex SXA1

Essex SXA4

Essex SXA2

Old Glory 15s makes a very nice range of Carolingians - and the infantry, at least (and truly, most of the cavalry) is useable for at 15mm Merovingian army.

In 28mm, one of the companies that is supporting a lot of Dark Ages gaming in recent years, is of course Gripping Beast.  As usually, they have a great offering for this period, and they would make a great army for a wargamer.

Okay, so what is the compelling reason to wargame the Franks under Clovis (and his successors)?  Three reasons, immediately that I can think of.  First - if you are a fan of late antiquity/early medieval wargaming, and want to explore the earliest history of what would become Medieval France.  Second, because of the interesting foes that the Merovingians fought against.  And Third, the most practical reason - you can represent a Merovingian army pretty easily with a a reasonable collection of Dark Ages infantry and some cavalry.  Mounted Saxons work well.  You could use Normans in a pinch, although your opponent is likely to call foul on the shields...  Still, this gives you a new set of armies, history, and foes to explore with your dark ages infantry figures (hairy men, round shields, chainmail, and a variety of fierce weapons).

Wargaming the Barbarian Kingdoms (6th and 7th century) - Part 2, Visigoths

Visigoths - originally, as Feoderati under the Romans, they established area of rule in Gaul and Spain. The early (but exciting) campaigns of Alaric I predate the period considered here.  In 507, however, the Franks, under Clovis I beat the Goths (under Alaric II) at the Battle of Vouille  Visigoth rule in Gaul was at an end, but the Frank's were established as a kingdom that would give us Charlemagne, France, Germany, and a lot of different kinds of cheese.

The Visigoths, however, survived the loss of Gaul.  They had a kingdom in the Iberian Peninsula (Spain, or Hispania).  There, they survived (and in harmony with the rest of Christendom after converting from Arianism in 589) until being overrun by the Moors (Berbers and Arabs up from North Africa) in about the year 711 or 712 (the Mozarbic Chronicle of 741, written in Latin, is unclear).  That was the Battle of Guadalete between King Roderic of the Goths, and Tariq ibn Ziyad.

Battle of Guadalete

So, for about two hundred years, there was a gothic kingdom in Spain. It gave us a lot of interesting Gothic architecture and early cathedrals, but not a lot of details on military practices.

Tariq Ibn Ziyad

Looking at what wargames have to offer on the Western Goths is interesting.  Again, turning to the original DBA list (as a conceptual distillation of the 1982 WRG army lists, and benefitting from eight years of further research and debate) we see that there is an infantry core of five elements. These can be either spear, or warband, or a mix of warband and auxilia - depending on which allies or sources you prefer. But that establishes a solid infantry battle line, supported by two units of skirmishers (Psiloi), and finally a solid mounted contingent of four units of four Cavalry units, and a Knight (general) unit.  

King Roderic

This could easily represent the army of Roderic, at the battle of Guadalete.  There, his solid infantry line was a match for the Moors, but he lost because his right cavalry wing under a disgruntled commander abandoned the field allowing the numerous, but lighter, Moorish cavalry to flank the infantry line.  Legend replaces the commander with Count Julian, who turned traitor because his daughter was raped at Roderic's court, but this (while a great medieval narrative) is unsubstantiated.

Visigothic Warriors - from a later English sculpting method.

Refighting Guadalete as a decisive battle that ended Christian rule in western Spain, until the Reconquista, is a worthy war gaming goal, but the lack of other major foes makes the prospect of building a large Visigothic army seem like a futile enterprise.  It is, however, a great example of a balanced army from the Barbarian Kingdoms era.  There are, of course, lots of Possible match ups against sixth century foes, such as Byzantines, Ostrogoths, or even early Andalusians from the other parts of Spain.

For figures, standard dark age infantry (metal conic helms, round shields, and either sword, spear, or bow) make the battle line and Psiloi easy to model. Likewise, the cavalry (cloaks, metal helms, round shields) are readily available. The older Minifigs heavy barbarian horse and heavy barbarian infantry are nearly perfect, as well as many modern manufacturers.

A nice set of pictures of a painted army is here.

is here.

Wargaming the Barbarian Kingdom Period (6th century AD) - Part 1, Ostrogoths

The story of the Ostrogoths is a very interesting one, including their origin, and how they became to be considered a single people, but from a military/wargaming perspective, their war against the Romans (especially the Eastern Romans, or the Byzantines, as their identity was coalescing following the fall of Western Rome) in and around Italy is the most interesting, and where we find some potential scenarios and campaigns for good games.

The eastern Goths had come into Italy in the previous century, and held (as the result of a number of successful sieges and sacks) many of the key cities of the peninsula.  In a period of almost 20 years, under Justinian, the Byzantines waged the "Gothic War" in order to restore these areas back to Roman (Byzantine) rule.  This lasted from 535 to 554 AD.  Some Gothic strongholds in Northern Italy would hold out for another 8 years, not falling until 562.

The earlier period is the successful sweep of the Byzantines up the peninsula, crossing from Africa, and securing a number of strong strategic points up the Italian peninsula.

Early Phase of the Gothic War

Battles of this period feature an early Ostrogothic army, against a Justinian Byzantine army.  The fighting is suitable for somewhat larger battles, and also (due to the rough country and terrain of Italy) for smaller raids and skirmishes, that no doubt took place between Byzantine forces, and smaller Gothic strongholds and military units.  Eventually the Gothic stronghold at Ravenna would be conquered by the Byzantines in 539/540.

This leads to the second phase of the Gothic War (540-554 or event 562) where a revived Gothic push back against the Byzantines takes place under the Gothic leader of Totila.

Totila, painted by Salviati in 1549

During the push back phase of the Ostrogoths reclaiming the initiative from the Byzantines, the great Byzantine general Narses would suffer because he also was dealing with encroachments from the Franks and the Alamanni.  In 554 AD, Narses was succesful against the Goths, at the battle of Vesuvius (also known as the Battle of Mons Lactarius), by defeating the army of Totila, and also killing the king.  The Goths, after this, retreated north into Austria.

In the end, however, Byzantines were successful against the Goths in Italy, but it was a fleeting victory.  First, it kept the strength of the Byzantines from dealing with problems in the north and the east.  Second, once the Goths were subjugated, the area was swept over again, by another German group, the Lombards, who would prove to be a lot harder to dislodge (that task being left to the Carolingians).

Battle of Mons Lactarius in 554AD, painted by Adolf Zick (~1900AD)

The representation of the Ostrogoths in miniature wargaming is pretty interesting, even if the army only has a few distinctive troop types.  The DBA rules give a pretty good indication of what we can surmise from history (and how rules writers interpret that history into wargaming terms).  DBA (original) has Army number 86 (Italian Ostrogothic 493-554AD) with 6x elements of Knights, 4x elements of Psiloi, or skirmish infantry, and finally 2x elements which could be either formed as 2x more Psiloi elements, or 2x spear elements.  

Before looking at how they are represented in other rules, it is worth considering the basics presented by the DBA list.  First, is the cavalry. In a gothic army, that is the Ostrogoths that settled in Italy, or the Visigoths that settled in Spain, and the various places these two broad groups came from (stretching all the way back to Northern Eurooe, in what is modern day Sweden), the army was mainly focused on the Warriors being mounted, and fighting in a close order, for shock value.  The other members of the population, as well as absorbed and allied peoples, would generally fight on foot.  Mainly these were loose order skirmishes, designated to a role supporting the mounted warriors. But in the case of some absorbed peoples (like the remnants of local Romanized infantry, which would fight in a dense shielded formation, with sword and spear) the foot troops might actually fight in a formed up formation, not entirely unsuited for a place in the battle line.  Still, however, the main branch is the mounted warriors.

 This is very much the same as what we find in the original 1982 WRG Army List Book Two entry.  There, the army gets a mandatory 44-72 Gothic Cavalry (start at Heavy Cavalry, but some portion can be upgraded to Extra Heavy Cavalry, all with javelin/light spear and shield).  Add to those figures, up to 90 additional Gothic Cavalry (which start at Medium Cavalry, but can up upgraded to Heavy Cavalry, and can be upgraded to match the morale grade of the earlier lot, Irregular B).  This makes for a very strong cavalry section (as you would expect, given the history of the army at battles like Taginae and Mons Lactarius, where the Ostrogoths fought against Byzantines and Germans that countered them with a reinforced infantry center), but without infantry it will have problems against a mixed foe who can reinforce a central battleline of heavy infantry.  The only real infantry presence the Goths have is that of the Gothic Archery (presented in the WRG list as up to 100 Light Infantry, which can remain as Irregular D or be upgraded to Irregular C).

This is a very interesting army, for a wargamer, because of it's strange mix of troop types.  The heavy cavalry is very good, and may be a precursor for later armies in the post-dark ages period.  But, as it is only supported by light infantry archers, it might be tough against some armies.  Where this will do well (a-historically) is in games the give too much credence to archery, and games that do not provide structural problems to cavalry fighting deep formation infantry without support.  I own (and fight with) an Ostrogoth DBA army, but I have not yet tried it with Might of Arms, or Terry Gore's rules.  It should be (at least) an educational matchup against a sixth century Byzantine army.

More on Arthur

I have found a nice blog, by Guy Halsall, on his wargaming activities. Dr. Halsall is an academic that makes a fine study of sixth century history, and starting back in the late 1990s he combined his history pursuits with his wargaming and published a series on King Arthur.  Much of the series found its way into Wargames Illustrated, all of it is on his blog.

Halsall goes on to complete a lengthy, and excellent (once he moves away from the touchy subject of Morris) series on both Arthur and the wargaming of Arthur inspired scenarios.  He has a nice introduction to campaigning, here giving a set of simple mapless rules (but with excellent scenario generator guidelines), and also a set of map based campaign (more detailed, naturally) rules. He discusses lists and rules (as I had done earlier here  but while I chose to compare lists against each other, he is comparing them to what he projects to be proper warfare for the period, based on his scholarly research).  In his discussion of rules, he gives kudos to Dan Mersey (Glutter of Ravens) and to Simon McDowall (Goths, Huns and Romans), both of which I highly regard.

In short, a great article series. Halsall's historical work is top drawer, and even his criticism of Morris is well placed (he takes down one of my favorites, John Morris, for writing history that is more of the "enjoyable narrative" rather than the "rigorous scholarship" type of work).  I am forced to agree with his criticism, even if I have a strong fondness for The Age of Arthur. 


For me, as a wargamer, I am perfectly fine with a strong narrative version of a potential historical Arthur.  It was not an especially literate time, so the lack of much literary evidence doesn't bother me - and an actual King Arthur is not necessary to me as much as a potential Arthur that is consistent with what we do know about the history. 

I find very appealing the notion of an Arthur-like figure in the sixth century keeping alive the spark of Romano-civilization against the inevitable sweep back into Germanic paganism.  And so it follows that I would want my wargaming to be based on that idea. It is my world view, and my sense of myth and legend of the West.

So, I will stick with Morris, and Arthur, warts and all.  And still enjoy the great work of Guy Halsall, as well.

 

Medieval Periods - Middle Dark Ages (6th and 7th centuries)

Following on my first article about wargaming in the various sub periods of the Medieval Age, I would like to address what I am here referring to as the middle Dark Ages.  For me, this is roughly the 6th and 7th centuries, so definitely in a Post (Western) Roman setting, but one where the rise of new entities and the rise of Byzantium provide rich war gaming possibilities. As with the first article, I remain focused on Europe.

As far as I know, there is no common reference to this period, at least as a period distinct from either the earlier dark ages, or the later dark ages.  If anything, the earlier dark ages, and this period (I am thinking of approximately the 6th and 7th centuries) are part of what is usually referred to as Late Antiquity, although that really stretches back further than I wanted to (Late Antiquity is usually 300-700 AD).

But here I am talking about the 6th and 7th centuries.  In the early period (5th century, into the Age of Arthur.  To me that is the interesting activity going on in that period (from a European perspective) for wargaming.  In this period, there are really three things going on that provide for good wargaming.  As I see them these are:
beginning of the 6th), I covered the

1. Consolidation of the Barbarian/Germanic Kingdoms
2. Muslim Conquest (starting in the 7th century, but lasting into the 8th)
3. Byzantium Ascendency, starting with Justinian in the 6th century 

As with the other Medieval periods, although infantry is still a very common component of armies of this period, the strength of cavalry is one of the hallmarks of many Medieval military systems (at least for me). That was the reason why I thought of the Romano-British as an example of a very early Medieval army (even though, it is extremely Roman, and infantry heavy, in flavor).

So, from a wargaming perspective (although just the history of this period, leaving aside gaming for an instant, is itself completely fascinating) here is what I see for the three periods.  I think I might list things like miniatures rules, board games, and army lists for each in separate posts.

Barbarian Kingdoms

These are large groups of (mostly) Germanic people's, or confederacies of people's, that were occupying lands in or on the border of the (former) Western Roman territories. They either had been invited to settle and become feoderates by the Romans, or else migrated in on their own, or (as in the case of Theoderic) would be contracted to come in by the Eastern Emperors. Because there are lots of clashes, both with remnants of the Western empire, and with other barbarian kingdoms, there is a lot of wargaming potential here.  Some of the people's I am thinking of (although there are many, many others):

• Ostrogoths - the Eastern Goths, mostly in and around Italy
• Visigoths - the Western (or Bright) Goths, mostly in and around the Iberian lands, filling the space previously occupied by Vandals and Suevi
• Franks - Extremely successful on both sides of the Danube, and against other tribes/confederacies, this period includes the Merovingians.
• Saxons - As in the earlier period, this may also include related peoples such as the Jutes and Angles, both in Britain (which is now becoming, finally, Angle-land, or England) and back in Europe.  On the British Isles, the series of struggling Kingdoms form the Heptarchy, although rarely is it exactly seven kingdoms.
• And non-Germanics from the East - Alans, Avars, Huns, etc. 

There are a lot of miniature wargaming possibilities here, but also some board gaming titles as well.  Right away, I am reminded of Barbarian, Kingdom and Empire, as well as Catan: Struggle for Rome (a great game, but maybe not a wargame?).  Possibly Rise and Fall  but possibly not (and it is very similar to the already mentioned BKE).  A game I used to play quite a bit is the area control game, Attila.

Muslim Conquest

Starting in the early part of the seventh century, the armies of the Prophet and his successors provide a history that is ripe with opportunities for Wargamers who want to recreate the battles of this period.  This is divided up into an early expansion period, starting with the battle of Bedr, in 624 (two years after the flight of the Prophet to Medina) and ending in 661 when Muawiya Uthman had the Prophet's son in law (Ali) killed in the civil war for succession.  Muawiya then formed the first Caliphate.  

The armies of Islam, with roots in a popular religious undertaking, necessarily had a lot of simple (but effective) foot elements, but also (and increasingly as time went on) both a professional infantry core and large amounts of mounted troops developed.  The Arab cavalry favored the Lance, although there are some Persian elements that use the bow.  This is, tactically, a very interesting army.

It clashed, of course, with many of the other armies described in this article, so a Wargamer seeking to develop a collection for this period, would have a lot of scenario possibilities if he were to include the elements that make up this army. A very useful collection of essential troops, that would serve for representing this army over many centuries, would be a decent sized collection of Arab spear, Arab archers, and Lance armed Arab horse. As the conquest settles into an imperial mode in the later part of this period (starting with the establishment of the caliphate) other troops can be added in, representing absorbed people's. This includes horse archers among other things, and even extends to elephants.

One of the more interesting enemies of the Arab Conquest, of course, is the Sassanid Persians.  This fantastic army will be described in a later article on the Arab Conquest.

Board wargames about this period are rare, and I am only aware of a few. There was a Canadian Papercut games.  More recently, there was, in Freng from Griffon Games, a good looking design called Au Nom d'ALLAH that covers the expansion period from 632-732 AD.  Finally, and this is the one most accessible I think (from the preview material), is the title Apocalypse in the East  from Against the Odds magazine, to be published in 2017. It is about the ten year struggle between the first Caliphate and the Byzantines. Victory Point Games is working up an excellent solitaire, called The First Jihad which should be published soon.
Simulations game back in the early 1980s called Jihad, but I don't think it has a following any longer. More recently, three titles come to mind. There was a game in 2007 called Caliphate, that was never quite finished, but is available as a free print and play download from 

Byzantium

As the surviving successor to Rome, the empire in the east begins this period with an army very much in the tradition of the old Legion system of the Western army.  However, starting under Justinian, and coming full circle under Maurice, the army transforms into something different - the Byzantine army, which is very much more reliant on cavalry.  This will last throughout the period covered by this article, but will eventually give way to the feudal Thematic system (still cavalry dominant, but structured and supplied very differently).

A nice overview and description of the army under Maurice (the Maurikian Byzantine Army) is provided on this DBA page - it talks about DBA army elements for this army, but also gives a nice short history about the various components.  Some very interesting fighting by the Byzantines, in this period, takes place in the Balkan peninsula, as well as else where, and against some of the other armies described in this article.  Other enemies for the Byzantines exist as well.

Options for boardgame Wargamers might include a number of titles, such as Justinian from GMT or Byzantium from Martin Wallace. There are some other traditional wargames that touch on Byzantine warfare, but I'll mention them in a later article, as they cover later Byzantine history.  In addition to board wargames, there are even a number of other strategy games in this theme, that may or may not warrant the name "wargame".  Some examples might be Justinian from Mayfair (a Byzantine politics game) or Constantinopolis (Trade in Byzantium in the 7th century).

That is my start for this topic, but I think I will develop some information about army lists, and tactics, and possible scenarios/campaigns for each of these separately.  Each of these three focus areas has lots of great personalities, will have strong links to the previous and the succeeding historical periods (and armies), and present loads of interesting wargaming possibilities.

Note: Since writing this article, I started on a series of articles talking about wargaming the Barbarian Kingdoms.  Here they are, so far:
Ostrogoths
Visigoths

Taking Stock - 15mm Collections pt. 2 - Medievals

This list covers my medieval armies, and a number of early medieval, or dark ages armies.

 

Medievals

Saxons

Size: Large collection, enough for two large armies, with some borrowed figures maybe from the Vikings. I have options and leaders to do early Pagan Saxons, and later Christian Anglo-Saxons.

Condition: painted and ready to play. My only regret is my Saxon fyrd are mounted 3 to a stand.

Notes: A nice large collection. Makes me wish I had later Imperial Romans (or Byzantines, or Post-Roman British), to use these guys as fifth and sixth century threats against the remainders of the Empire.  Still, plenty of foes in my collection.

Irish

Size: I have two distinct medieval Irish collections. One is a medium/large early Dark Ages focus, even including hound handlers and some chariots for those who believed the Irish still used them for leaders.  The other is later, but a smaller collection, and could be a foe for Normans in Ireland.

Condition: Painted, based, ready to play.

Notes: Personally, I like the Chariots. Also, stands with Druids, and some with Christian priests. 

Welsh

Size: Again, two sets. Dark ages Welsh in a sizable collection (enough for a large army), and later Welsh as 13th/14th century foes for England.

Condition: Painted and ready to play. The later army, if it goes for a longbow heavy variant, has to borrow archers from my Hundred Years War English, but plenty to go around.

Notes: Two nice foes for my other English based armies. I'd like to add some flavorful command stands with Dragon banners.

Normans/Franks

Size: plenty of figures and options for a large army. 

Condition: Painted, based, very playable.

Notes: Cavalry have the distinctive Norman shield, as do some infantry. Plenty of other infantry to use in a Frankish option.

Vikings

Size: A vast collection of sea wolves. Easily enough for two large armies.

Condition: Painted, based, bloodied in battle.

Notes: Lots of options here, included mounted Viking infantry. I have some unpainted Long Ships, but I wish I had more.

Carolingians

Size: A large collection,me ought for a big army, although cavalry has to be borrowed from other Early Medieval forces (such as the Norman army).

Condition: Painted, based, and ready o play. I'd like to get and paint some actual continental cavalry from the 8th century. 

Notes: This makes a nice replacement for the Normans, to have a more balanced army against other early medieval infantry armies.  Can fight a Moslem army judicially selected from the units of my Crusades collection.

Crusades

Size: Two large armies with many options, one is Christian and one is Moslem. Can definitely cover first and third crusades, as well as other battles of the same period.

Condition:  Painted (beautifully) and based, ready to go. 

Notes: My largest regret here is that I don't have more Moslem figures, and that I don't have more theater specific terrain.

Baron's Wars

Size: Enough units to do two moderate/large armies.

Condition: All painted, all based. Ready to go.

Notes: These are "generic" medieval figures for battles in the 12th and 13th century. Some overlap with HYW collection. Could use some more lighter troops.

Swiss

Size: A moderate sized army, if the keils are all halberd armed. Could be quite large if pike blocks are borrowed from my Renaissance Swiss.

Condition:  All painted and ready to play. Some infantry could stand to be rebased.

Notes: A solid foe for other medieval armies here, or could represent mercenary units.

Hundred Years War

Size: Two very large armies, one French and one English. 

Condition: All painted, 90% based properly, ready for St Crispin's Day.

Notes: There are some elements I would like to add, especially like lighter cavalry (sergeants, hobilars, jinetes) and maybe some more foot such as peasants/villeins and crossbow.  I probably have too many knights if such a thing is feasible.

Scots

Size: A moderate sized collection of specifically Scottish units (schiltrons mostly, and some Scottish knights) but could be padded with other figures.  Easily could field a large army.

Condition:  All painted, about half need rebasing.

Notes: The long spear units look good, but need some organizing. Otherwise, another nice group to provide mercenaries/allies for other armies, or could be padded to stand on its own.

Picts

Size: Moderate size, but could easily be padded out with other similar Dark Ages figures.

Condition: All painted, all based, ready to take on a variety of enemies.

Notes: Another in my assortment of dark age armies, these are a precursor to the above Scottish army, from a few hundred years earlier. Not a lot to distinguish it from say the early Welsh or Irish - spearman, light horse, heavier infantry, slingers and archers.

This series includes

Part 1 - Ancients

Part 2 - Medievals  (this article)

Part 3 - Renaissance

Part 4 - 18th Century

Part 5 - Napoleonics

Part 6 - 19th Century

Chainmail Variant Rule - Post-Melee Results

Chainmail has many ways in which to recommend itself as a fast play set of big battle Medieval rules.  One of the more troubling areas, however, is in post-melee morale.

To a modern eye, this is a set of mathematical calculations that will slow down the flow of the game.  It is actually all just simple math (addition and multiplication, for the most part), but it does seem to be out of favor with modern war game design philosophy.

To that end, I offer the following system (but first, present the current system, for comparison).

The Post-Melee Morale system, as is
On page 15 of the rule book, there is a procedure for calculating Post-Melee Morale.  It involves three factors, added together:

1. A factor for the side that took fewer casualties in the melee.  This is the difference between the two casualty counts, times a d6 roll.  Only the side that took fewer casualties gets this factor.
2. A factor based on the current size of the unit, as number of total figures times their Morale Rating.  Both sides get this factor.
3. A factor based on who has more figures surviving after the melee.  This difference between the two totals of surviving figures, and is multiplied by a d6 roll.  Only the side with more figures gets this factor.

Add up the factors.  Each side will have at least one of these (number 2), but only one side or the other will benefit from the others (numbers 1 and 3).

Compare the two totals, and then consult the difference on this table:

Difference	Result
0-19 difference	melee continues
20-39 difference	lower total side moves back 1/2 move, but in good order
40-59 difference	lower total side moves back 1 move, but in good order
60-79 difference	lower side retreats 1 move
80-99 difference	lower side routs 1 1/2 move
100+ difference	lower side surrenders, and victorious side may continue a charge if possible, leaving behind 1 guard per 5 prisoners

Factor number 2 above, is the current total value of each unit - meaning the total number of remaining figures, multiplied by the Morale Rating of the figures.  In a mixed unit, each figure is multiplied by it's own Morale Rating, and then the subunits are added together.  Here are the Morale Ratings:

Troop Type	Morale Rating
Peasants	3
Light Foot and Levies	4
Heavy Foot	5
Elite Heavy Foot	6
Light Horse	6
Armored Foot, Janissary	7
Medium Horse, Landsknechte	8
Heavy Horse, Swiss Pikemen	9

The New Post-Melee Morale System, Proposed
First, the concept - This method involves taking a morale test.  Both sides calculate what their target number would be, and the lower total tests first (2d6, trying to roll the target number or less).  If the first test fails, then depending on the nature of the fail, it will consult the Post-Melee Morale Test Results table below.  If the first test passes, then the second unit will make a test against it's target number.  If the second unit fails, then it will also suffer the results from the table below.  If it passes, then both units are still engaged in combat, and the melee continues next turn.

Method -
Each side determines their target number.  This is based on the Morale Rating from the above table.  To that number, add/subtract the following:
+1, if larger than the enemy
+1, if took fewer casualties than the enemy
-2, if 1/4 of the original unit is dead
-4, if 1/3 of the original unit is dead
-6, if 1/2 of the original unit is dead, or more

Each side will calculate this target number.
The side with the lower target number tests first.
If the first testing unit fails, then it consults the results table below.
If the first testing unit passes, then the other side will test.
If the second unit has to test, and it fails, consult the results table below.
If the second unit has to test, and it passes, then that means both sides have passed, and the melee continues.

In practice, this amounts to a quick comparison of target numbers, and the lower number tests.  If it fails, that is the end.  If it passes, then the other side tests.  That's all.

If the two target numbers are tied - both sides roll.  Either side that fails will suffers the results.  If (extremely rarely) both sides try to surrender, then both sides rout instead.

Post-Melee Morale Test Results

Test	Results
Pass	Continue
Miss -1	back 1/2 move, good order
Miss -2	back 1 move, good order
Miss -3	retreat 1 move
Miss -4	rout 1 1/2 move
Miss -5 or more	surrender

Miss -1, etc, means the 2d6 dice roll missed the target number by 1 (i.e. target=7, and 8 is rolled on the dice).

Here is the whole process reduced to a flow chart, and with the Morale Rating, and Test Results charts included (click to make bigger/more readable).

Multiple Units
In order to apply this method to multiple units, calculate the Target Number for all units involved on all sides.

1. Starting with the lowest value unit, begin testing.  Apply results to each unit, as it tests.
2. If any units have the same Target Number, always test them simultaneously.  
3. Apply the "Took Less Casualties" modifier to each unit on the side that took fewer overall.  
4. Apply the "Larger than the Enemy" modifier to the side that has more total figures (counting all units involved), to each unit on that side.  
5. Apply the modifiers for unit loss to each unit individually.
6. Stop testing when only units from one side or the other remain in contact.
7. If a unit is to Surrender, but the final results have a friendly unit still in contact, then that unit Routs instead.

Example - A heavy foot unit (12 figures), and a medium horse unit (9 figures) hit a large armored foot unit (24 figures).  In the melee, the heavy foot unit loses 4 figures.  The medium horse unit loses 2 figures.  The armored foot unit loses 5 figures.  Start by calculating Target Numbers:

• Heavy Foot - base value of 5
• Medium Horse - base value of 8
• Armored Foot - base value of 7

After the Melee, the Armored Foot unit is larger (19 remaining, vs a total of 15 remaining on the other side).  The Armored Foot also took fewer casualties than the other side (5 figures killed, vs 6 figures killed).  So the Armored Foot unit gains a +1 for Fewer Casualties, and a +1 for larger than the enemy.  The Heavy Foot have lost 1/3 of their figures, so take a -4.  That makes the Heavy Foot unit have a target of 1, the Medium Horse unit still has a target of 8, and the Armored Foot unit has a target of 9.  
Rolling, in order, for the Heavy Foot (roll of a 6, which means that they will surrender to the Armored Foot).  The Medium Horse is next, and must test (even though the Heavy Foot failed) because there are still units in contact from both sides.  The Medium Horse rolls a 7, and remains in contact.  The Armored Foot rolls a 6, and also remains in contact.  The melee will continue next turn between the Medium Horse (with 7 figures remaining) and the Armored Foot (with 19 figures remaining).
Because the Heavy Foot still had a friendly unit in contact after all tests, rather than surrender, they rout instead.

Thoughts
In practice, trying this out with just nominal units fighting it out using pencil and paper, this works fine.  It rewards the better quality unit (very medieval), but also modifies that by the realities of the melee.

This method seems to work, it only has to be put into practice in a few solo games.  If anyone reading this tries it out, please let me know your results.