Battle of Strasbourg - a committee game

In order to make up some gaming time, while the whole world is shut down in a semi-quarantine state due to the Novel Corona Virus pandemic, I hosted and refereed a committee game based on the battle of Strasbourg, 357AD, where Caesar Julian (and a council of advisors) decided what to do in response to King Chnodomar, head of a Germanic horde (Franci, Burgundi, and Alamanni), crossing the Rhine river (at Argentoratum - modern day Strasbourg) into Gaul.

Below are the briefings, maps, etc, that I provided the players.

From the Battle of Strasbourg Wikipedia page

Julian - You are Caesar Julian responsible for the defence of Gaul.  You are new to military command and it is very important that you make a name for yourself with the troops and increase your reputation.  The Emperor Constantius has been successfully campaigning in the East.  He is jealous of you and has been undermining everything you have tried to do.  He has said that you are not capable of dealing with such a military problem as this and consequently has dispatched troops under one of his generals (Richomer) to deal with the barbarian incursion.  You have to decide whether you will wait for Constantius (and his main army), thereby risking losing credibility in the eyes of your soldiers, or attack now and secure fame for yourself.

You were raised in a Greek speaking household, and spent your youth at schools in Athens.  You were raised as a Christian, but your study of the ancient philosophers has convinced you that it would be better for the empire if it returned to it's Pagan Roman roots.  This position is not always popular with the men.

Your inclination is to attack now before Constantius' troops come and take all the glory.  But being a prudent man, you have called a council of your senior officers to ask their advice.  After you have listened all you want (at least three game turns), you will make your decision.  Remember, the only thing worse than losing glory to Constantius, would be to fight on your own, and lose.

What you know about your council:
Sebastian - Your best officer, although a German by birth.  One of the best officers in the Roman army.  An excellent tactician and very popular with the troops.  He has recently replace Trajan as Master of Infantry.

Victor - A Sarmatian by birth.  He is known for his cautious approach.  He is the Master of Cavalry.  He is responsible for scouting reports.

Richomer - Master of Offices.  German born.  He commands the Household Guard of Emperor Constantius, who have arrived to assist you.  He has come with a message telling you in part to share the danger and to not rashly commit yourself to the risks of decisive action, single handedly.

Trajan - Former Master of Infantry.  Born in Rome, proud of being a true Latin.  You had him replaced by Sebastian because Trajan is lazy, incompetent, and he was very critical of you in front of the men.  He is dangerous and probably has his own eye on the throne.  Be careful.  However, he has friends in the court of Constantius.

Equitius - A kinsman of yours, and Marshal of the Court (the Court of Constantinople, the capitol of the Empire).  He has a high sense of honour and you respect him.  Just like you he is very respectful of the old ways, and has high regard for the Senate.  He is the highest ranking Civillian Official present in all of Gaul, second only to you in most matters.  But he is a civillian without a military appreciation for things.

Potentius - A very highly regarded junior officer.  The young soldiers like him, the old soldiers respect him.  He is going to achieve great things.  He is the son of the former Caesar of the West, but you were not responsible for assasinating your predecessor.  You don't think Potentius has any ill will towards you.

---

Sebastian - You were born a German, but have been a loyal Roman soldier your whole life.  You are Master of Infantry of Julian's army (the field army of the Western Provinces).  The only infantry you do not command, are the garrison troops of the fortresses.  You are a capable, seasoned officer and very popular with the troops.  You are without a doubt the best commander on Julian's staff and what you say carries a lot of weight.  Many of the junior officers will support you, whatever you say.  Trajan is your enemy, as he was the previous Master of Infantry, but was removed from office by Julian and replaced by you.  He has connections with Constantius, however, so Julian retains him as a senior officer.

You, like many of your men, are a Christian.  You have nothing against Romans of other religions, but the one difference you have with Julian, is he wants to return back to the older Roman pagan ways.

Your aim is to get Julian to attack the barbarians now.  If he does, you will probably gain a great deal of credit for victory, as it is well known that you are his best general.  If he waits, Constantius' generals will certainly steal the glory.

What you know about the council:

Victor  - A Sarmatian by birth.  Master of the Cavalry.  Cautious.  He is very beloved by his horsemen, mostly because he kept all of them alive during the recent civil war.  He is very protective of his cavalry, but is still a good commander in battle.

Richomer  - Master of Offices.  German born.  He commands the Household Guard of Emperor Constantius.  A very good officer, with very good troops. 

Trajan  - Former Master of Infantry.  Born in Rome, proud of being a true Latin.  He hates you, you took his job.  He was not very good at his job, but blames Julian and You for losing it.  Be careful.  However, he has friends in the court of Constantius.

Equitius  - Marshal of the Court (the Court of Constantinople, the capitol of the Empire).  He is distantly related to Julian.  Very important, but not to the army.

Potentius - A very highly regarded junior officer.  He is the son of the former Caesar of the West.  You like him, but do not know where his loyalties are.

---

Victor - You were born a Sarmatian, but you have been a loyal Roman soldier your whole life.  You are Master of Cavalry and equal in rank with Sebastian.  Together you are the senior army commanders, although Trajan is along, out of respect.  You don't like this situation - you have spent the past decade very carefully keeping your cavalry alive and well, in spite of the bloody civil war fighting.  For that reason, many of them are seasoned veterans, and very loyal to you.  This coming fight that Sebastian and Julian are itching for will be very dangerous and could cost many lives.

You, like many of your men, are a Christian.  You have nothing against Romans of other religions, but the one difference you have with Julian, is he wants to return back to the older Roman pagan ways.

You are responsible for the border scouting along the Rhine river, and you think that the barbarians do not pose a pressing threat, and you would be better of waiting for reinforcements to make certain of victory.  Your aim is to convince Julian to wait.  If it is going to be a battle, your aim is to keep your cavalry safe.

What you know about the council:

Sebastian - A German by birth.  Master of the Infantry.  An excellent commander, and not afraid of a fight.  He is very loyal to Julian, and will see this battle as a way to make a name for the young Caesar.

Richomer - Master of Offices.  He commands the Household Guard of Emperor Constantius.  A very good officer, with very good troops.  He was born a German.

Trajan - Former Master of Infantry.  Born in Rome, and somewhat proud of being a true Latin.  He hates Sebastian, who took his job.  It is unsure what his feelings are towards Constantius.  He may not be the best battlefield commander.

Equitius - Marshal of the Court (the Court of Constantinople, the capitol of the Empire).  He is distantly related to Julian.  Very important, but not to the army.

Potentius - A very highly regarded junior officer.  He is the son of the former Caesar of the West.  You like him, but do not know where his loyalties are.

---

Richomer - You were born a German, but have been a loyal Roman your whole life.  You are Master of Officers, the commander of the Imperial Household Guard, sent by the Emperor Constantius to tell Julian that he should wait for reinforcements.

Personally, you think Constantius is just jealous of Julian as the barbarians don't seem so strong.  For political reasons you must convey Constantius' message and be cautious of contradicting him.  Your aim is to give Julian the best advice you can without damaging your standing with Constantius.  If there is to be a battle, your 2,000 household guards are the best troops in Julian's army.

What you know about the council:

Sebastian - Master of Infantry for Julian.  A very good commander.  Maybe the best in Gaul.  He was born a German.

Victor - Master of Cavalry for Julian.  Cautious, but good.  Has miraculously kept his cavalry alive during the recent, bloody civil wars.  He was born a Sarmatian.

Trajan- A senior officer.  You don't know much about him.  He was born in Rome, a true Latin.

Equitius - Marshal of the Court (the Court of Constantinople, the capitol of the Empire).  Supportive of the government, and that means the Emperor.  But you don't think he cares which Emperor.

Potentius - A very highly regarded junior officer.  You don't know why he is in the council, but he is likable.

---

Trajan -  You used to be the Commander of Infantry, until Constantius replaced the former Caesar of the West, with this young upstart Julian.  For some reason he doesn't like you, and replaced you with that popinjay Sebastian.  You have heard some ugly things about Sebastian's past, and when you spread rumors and spoke ill of him, you were replaced.  You were born in Rome, and represent one of the true Latins, who should hold all the real positions of power in the Empire. 

Your aim is to discredit Sebastian.  You don't really care who gets credit for the battle, Julian or Constantius.  In battle you will not command the main battle line, but probably the secondary infantry (auxilliaries, archers, etc.)

What you know about the rest of the council:

Sebastian - You don't like him. A German by birth. He has your old job. Not fair.

Victor - A good officer of Cavalry.  A Sarmatian by birth.  But what good has the Cavalry every done?  And he is a Sarmatian! Victor tried to stay out of the fight all during the civil wars, maybe he is a coward?

Richomer - The officer of the Household Guard.  A German by birth.  Here on Constantius' orders.  Maybe if you work well with him, on Constantius orders you may replace Sebastian?

Equitius  - A high ranking civilian.  He is a Greek by birth.  He controls the paychests of the soldiers, and also is very loyal to the capitol (Constantinople).

Potentius - Another cavalry officer.  For some reason the other officers (Sebastian and Victor) like him.

---

Equitius - You are Curator Palatii, Marshal of the Court.  You are the highest ranking official in Gaul, except for Caesar Julian.  Julian is a distant cousin.  You are Greek born.  You are a civilian with only limited military experience, however you control the paychests, and have been asked by Julian to keep the soldiers up to date on pay.  You are very conscious of your position and feel yourself above all this military riffraff, especially those who rose from the ranks of barbarians, like Sebastian, Richomer and Victor.  From your perspective, it seems more prudent to wait for reinforcements but you will advise whatever seems honourable for you to try and impress Julian.  You are very loyal to the capital at Constantinople, and to whomever is Emperor.  Is it possible that Julian will make a better Emperor than Constantius?  It might be good for the stability of the Empire to have a learned man in charge.

What you know about the rest of the council:

Sebastian: A senior officer, who was born as a German.  He is a good leader, or so the other military men tell you.

Victor:  A senior officer, who was born as a Sarmatian.  Also a good leader, but you understand that he is very cautious.  His men are responsible for scouting, and may be useful to try to get parlay messages out to the German leaders.

Trajan: A senior officer, who was born as a true Latin, in Rome.  He is currently out of favor, and was replaced by Sebastian in his job as leader of the Infantry.

Richomer: You have had dealings with Richomer before.  Although he was born a German, he has a taste for the finer things in life.  But he is also a first rate military man.  He commands Constantius' household guard, and will be sure to keep an eye open for those who are loyal to the Emperor, and those who are loyal rather to Julian.  Be careful of him.

Potentius: A young man.  Like all young men, he is more interested in women than he should be.  Perhaps that is a weakness?  The other military men like him, perhaps he shows promise that you just don't see.

---

Potentius: You are a junior officer, but from a very noble family which adds weight to your opinion.  Your father was the previous Caesar of the West, however, he was kiled by his own men at the end of the recent Civil War.

You have found a home in the army, and are a very skilled cavalry officer.  You hope to rise in the army, and want your record and achievements to recommend you to higher service in the Empire.  You admire successful senior officers like Sebastian and Victor.

You want to attack now and get the battle over with.  If you wait for reinforcements, the barbarians might do untold damage.

What you know about the council:

Sebastian: A senior officer, commander of the Infantry.  Very responsible, and very talented.  Your father and his men spoke of Sebastian as if he were the best general in Gaul.

Victor: Another senior officer, commander of the Cavalry. Also very responsible and beloved by his men.  The junior officers under him tell you that Victor is extremely popular with his men, because he kept them out of the recent Civil War battles, and kept most of them alive, when so many other Roman soldiers were killed on one side or the other.

Trajan: A senior officer, but one you want to be like.  He has a reputation for being lazy and incompetent, but for some reason, he served on your Father's staff, as his master of Infantry.

Equitius: A civilian.  He is very important at court, and is very loyal to the Empire.  You don't think he is a military man.  He seems to know many important women, and who knows?  A politically connected wife might be good for your military career.

Richomer: Another legendary senior officer.  He is the Master of Offices for Emperor Constantius, that means he is the commander of the Emperor's Household Guards.  He has brought 2,000 elite guardsmen here to help Julian.  He also has brought messages from the Emperor.

The idea for the game came from one of the Wargaming in History volumes - Goths, Huns and Romans by Simon McDowell.  As detailed in the book, the ideas for particulars in the scenario are based on Valens' battle of Adrianople, but using the terrain and historical persons from the Julian situation.  It was a lot of fun, and the players had a good time.  I think next time I try this, I will insert some more structure, as it was too easy for the more eager players to overshadow the less eager participants (that could have been a product of being online, though).

On Serious Wargaming

The US Department of Defense, under Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert Work, realized that professional wargaming had lagged over the few decades of us fighting in Southwest Asia, and in short, since the "end" of the cold war in 1991.

He proposed a re-invigoration of the art, and suggested a few ways in which this could be done.

One of those was something called the Wargaming Initiative Fund, which is a way for the Department of Defense to fund new and interesting wargaming activities within the multiple parts of the service.

Here is a recent article by the current overseer of the effort - COL Heath.  This is very interesting to me as I have been funded as a research scientist working on projects related to this for the past few years, and I hope that continues.

The article is here.

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).

Local wargaming club - active and moving forward

The Old Dominion Military Society has reformed and has been gaming weekly with great success for several months. We recently held our summer convention (Guns of August) at the local military museum, the Virginia War Museum in Newport News, and it was a great success.

Check out the after action report on the club blog.

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.

Wargamer's Guide to the English Civil War - review

This is another review in the Once and Future Rules series, of wargame rules that are out of print, but that got a lot of play at one time (at least, in the clubs and groups I played in since the early 1980s).

I have mentioned my love for renaissance gaming in general, and the English Civil War period in particular, several times during this series of reviews.  This time, I would like to review a set of miniature rules that I came to in the mid 1980s, although they were first published in 1974 (a second edition came out in 1977, and that is the edition that I own).  These rules are the 'Wargamer's Guide to the English Civil War' by Bill Protz.  These are still available for sale on Bill's website, along with some of his other excellent rules.

Curiously enough, the first edition of Bill Protz' ECW wargaming masterpiece (i.e. - the volume I am reviewing here) came out in 1974.  It was published by the Myers and Zimmermann wargaming house of Z&M Publishing (Myers and Zimmermann were the lads behind the Angriff rules, and they went on to form a publishing house for wargaming rules - mostly from their neck of the woods up in Milwaukee).

The interesting thing about the publishing year, is that it is one year after the first appearance of Cavaliers and Roundheads, by Gygax and Perren (published by TSR).  From Bill's website, he got interested in the English Civil War, as a wargaming topic, because of Cavaliers and Roundheads (C&R), and also the availability of the Hinchliffe ECW figures.  I seem to recall that TSR needed cash for their new publishing idea, the Dungeons & Dragons boxed set, and that they rushed out C&R for publication in order to raise cash.  The English Civil War must have been a popular period at this time, to not only inspire two great rulesets coming out within a year of each other, but also to convince Mssrs. Kuntz and Gygax at TSR that they could raise capital from selling an ECW rule book.  But they did.  And, furthermore, the Protz book (WGECW) is still highly regarded, and as mentioned above, still for sale.

The English Civil War continues to be a very interesting topic for wargamers, as it not only features in generic, broadbased rules sets such as DBR and Field of Glory Renaissance, but also continues to inspire specific rulesets in popular series' such as Warhammer English Civil War (sadly, now out of print, like the rest of the Warhammer historical series), and Pike and Shotte from Warlord Games (which covers the broader Renaissance, but which has an ECW specific period book - 'To Kill a King' -  due for release the month that this article is being written).  Of course, it has been, and continues a period of interest for me, as well.  On to the rules . . .

WGECW is presented as a 5x8 booklet, 76 pages long.  The book is divided up, generally, into three sections: (1) is an introduction, which gives a very brief overview of the English Civil War, and also reasons for wargaming in this period, (2) is the section containing the rules themselves, and (3) is a series of appendices that introduce information about army composition, painting and uniform information, rules for fighting sieges, and other bits of extra information.  It is this third section that lifts this book from being just a tactical rulebook, to being a wargamer's guide.  C&R did this, somewhat, but not to the extent that Bill Protz has done here.

Initial Concepts
One thing to establish up front, is that the miniatures within the units don't really matter.  Well, that is to say, they matter because it is a miniatures game, and they matter because they bring the splendor and pageantry to the wargame, but they don't matter in the sense of combat being based on particular figures in contact, or even specifically how many figures there are in a unit.  What does matter, is the units CR or Combat Rating.  Now this is typically computed initially from the number of miniatures in a unit (and the point value of those miniatures), but it will change up and down with circumstance, and in fact, the initial CR of a unit might be increased by 25% if the unit is elite.  The unit's CR is what matters, in WGECW.  Combat effectiveness is based on the CR, and losses are subtracted from the CR (although the author suggests that miniatures be removed from a unit, in proportion to CR losses that the unit undergoes).

 The CR is calculated from points values of the miniatures in a formation.  This includes extra points for figures such as officers, flag bearers, and sergeants.  For a mixed formation, such as an ECW formation with a body of Pikemen, and perhaps two flanking bodies of Musketeers, each of those divisions would have its own CR calculated and recorded on a unit roster.

Scale and Unit Types
Game scale is given at 1 inch to 15 yards for the ground, 1 figure to 20 men for the troops.  Basic types of figures are foot, horse, and artillery.

Foot troops can be Open Ordered (such as skirmishing forlorn hope), Ordered (typical musket and pike formation), Double Ordered (half the depth of Ordered formations), or Close Ordered (tightly packed infantry, in order to defend against enemy cavalry).  Finally, there is the possibility of a Ring formation (like a hedgehog, or square formation).

Horse troops can be either Ordered (such as typical charging cavalry), or Open Ordered (such as dragoons or other cavalry, spread out in order to screen), or Caracole (designed to allow pistol fire and recall against an enemy unit).

The rules give basing sizes for troops, which generally doesn't change for the different ordering listed above, EXCEPT for Close Ordered Infantry.  In that case, the player is to remove half the stands of the unit from the table, but to record and remember what their CR is - they have just gotten denser.

Foot unit stands represent three ranks of troops, and Ordered and Close Ordered units are 6 ranks deep, so they should be two miniature ranks (or stands) deep.  Double Ordered infantry are only 3 ranks deep, so are only one stand deep (called Double Ordered, because by halving the depth, they double the length of the formation line).  Horse units and artillery have their methods of representing Ordering on the tabletop.  Open Ordered units, it should be pointed out, have the stands dispersed by a short gap between them - typical skirmishing formation representation.

Turn Sequence
The game turn is divided up into a sequence of events.  Since this is a game that practices simultaneous movement, it features order writing.  Regular readers of this blog will know my affection for simultaneous movement and order writing (similar to my affection for root canal).  When we played these rules, so many years ago, we would write general battlefield orders at the beginning of the game, and our specific turn orders were only changes to those, as well as announcing charges etc.  It helps to have a referee.

The sequenced events of the turn, however, are these:

1. Both sides write down orders for their units.
2. Both sides read out their orders, alternating who goes first every other turn.
3. Moves are performed simultaneously according to orders.
4. Skirmish Fire is assessed, and casualties immediately calculated and removed.
5. Artillery Fire is assessed, and casualties immediately calculated and removed.
6. Other Small Arms Fire is assessed, and casualties immediately calculated and removed.
7. Melee is adjudicated and resolved.
8. Turn is complete.

Morale tests can be triggered in any of the firing or melee events.

Movement
Movement is quite straight forward, and is based on some simple charts showing inches, based on the type of movement (and troop type) performing it.  There are some simple reductions and additions based on different circumstances (road movement, move and fire, direction change, etc).  There are some specifics to be followed if a unit of musketeers is going to be firing by introduction (that is, as the ranks fire, and are replaced from the rear, that they slowly move forward), or extroduction (the same, only the unit as a whole slowly moves backward, as firers run to the rear of their file).

Movement for cavalry is slightly more involved, although the chart is every bit as simple.  For mounted troops, the player must determine if the horses are trotting, cantering or galloping.   Rules are given about accelerating through these different states.  A horse, cannot, for instance, go from a simple stand-still to galloping in one move.  It must start at trotting, then the next turn can proceed to cantering, and finally to galloping.  As with foot troops, there are some simple additions or reductions based on circumstance and operations.

Finally, there is a similar table, with similar rules for artillery pieces of different sizes, and different situations.

Small Arms Fire
Once the type of fire (regular, introduction/extroduction, pistol caracole, etc) is determined, then the number of figures, and their CR, can be assessed.  The following procedure is used to determine the number of casualties (expressed in CR reduction to the target unit) is finalized.

1. Determine CR
2. Determine Range
3. Toss 1 die
4. Check Die Adjustment Chart for mods
5. Cross reference die results with range, to get an Effectiveness Letter
6. Cross reference the effect letter, and the CR firing on the Small Arms Casualty Chart, to get the casualty integer.
7. Modify the casualty integer by modifiers on the final casualty adjustment chart.
8. Take the final modified casualty integer, and multiply it by the point value of the target troops, and deduct the result from the target unit's CR

One final consideration, is that armored units (foot and horse) have a reduced calculus of how much total CR damage is inflicted.

Artillery Fire
The procedures for doing Artillery Fire, are somewhat different from small arms fire.

• First,  determine your target, and then based on range there is a chance for the artillery shot to go awry.  If at short range, it is a definite hit, but at medium and long range there is a chance to miss.
• Second, determine the ranks penetrated (light guns penetrate 2 ranks, medium guns penetrate 3, and heavy guns will penetrate 4).  
• Third, for each rank penetrated, there is a one point casualty integer, and these are all summed up (so for 3 ranks penetrated, there is a total casualty integer of 3).  This is reduced by terrain (such as firing up- or down-hill).  
• Finally, multiply the casualty integer times the CR of the troops hit, and reduce this from the target unit.  This total amount is reduced by half in a number of situations.
• The final CR total is subtracted from the target unit's CR.

There are similar procedures for other types of shot (the above, is for regular round shot, that does damage by bouncing through multiple ranks of soldiers, and killing them).  Shot types include exploding shell and langridge (case, or hail) shot.

Melee
Not surprising, the CR system is core to how melee engagements are adjudicated in these rules.  Each side calculates their current CR (lots of modifiers, such as Horse vs. non-Horse gets multiplied by 125%).  Then, the winner of the melee is determined.  This is done by each side rolling 2d6, and multiplying the result by their unit's CR.  The high score wins the melee combat.  Now, casualties are inflicted as a percentage of the original CR (not the product of the CR multiplied by dice).  The losing side will deduct (from their base CR score) an amount equal to 25% of the winner's CR.  The winning side will deduct 10% of the loser's CR.  The loser then takes, and applies, a morale test.  There are rules for fleeing, pursuits, and how officers affect things.  That is it - it is easy to play out melee combat, and although the impact of multiplying your CR by a 2d6 roll at first blush seems like there can be a lot of variability, the actual casualties (CR deduction) and morale results are more important.

Example combat - Lets say a Royalist Pike and Shot unit, with 12 pikemen (including 2pt command figures), and 12 musketeers will have a total CR of 36.  It is facing a Parliamentarian unit with 8 pikemen and 16 musketeers, or a total CR of 32.  The Royalist player rolls a 7 on the dice, and a total of (7x36) or 252.  The Parliamentarian player rolls a 9 on the dice, and a total of (9x32) or 288.  The Parliamentarian unit wins.  The Royalist unit subtracts (.25 x 32) 8 points from it's CR.  The Parliamentary unit subtracts (.10 x 36) 4 points from it's CR.  The Royalist unit, as the losing unit, will have to test morale

Extras
The rulebook is about half full of appendices. The first few of these go over how units should be organized on the wargames table, and a short guide to painting and flags, as well as advice to the 15mm player (a new scale, for the most part, in the early 1970s).

But then the appendices get more interesting.  There is a subset of rules for doing siege games.  These cover the specifics of affecting fortifications and buildings, as well as rules for grenadoes and other siege equipment.  A series of six different classes of storming/sieging are described, as scenarios and what is to be done in each (as well as victory conditions, and how to represent that sort of siege on the tabletop).

There is a set of notes regarding the organization of armies and the proportion of units, etc, in the years of the First Civil War (1642-1646).  And finally, there are some blank and sample unit rosters (showing a clean way to record unit CR and orders/status).  Lastly, the book ends with a nice glossary of ECW military terms.

Assessment/Conclusion
I owned this book before I owned either Forlorn Hope or 1644 (both of which I played more than these rules).  In fact, the only renaissance/ECW rules I owned before these were the George Gush rules from WRG (and, eventually, Universal Soldier).  I only played these a few times, but I returned to the book for information about the period, and units, artillery types, etc many times over while in my early years of ECW playing.  This was one of those rulebooks that back then (in the 1980s) was in many of the wargaming shops I visited, and also on the rack at vendor booths at wargaming conventions. I saw it a lot, but unfortunately the people I played with did not use it.

One of the things I found disconcerting (more below, as I discuss this effect in regards to shooting) is the fact that the unit is kept track of by its CR, and casualties and effects are based on total CR engaged, and not individual stands or figures.  I understand the reason for this, with mixed units of pike and shot, but it seemed to introduce as many difficulties as it solved, see my comments below about shooting (both musketry and artillery).

The basic scale and representation of the game (in terms of figures per unit, movement and shooting ranges, and also turn/time sequence) works very well.  But for some reason, these rules never quite were the thing in the group I played with. I include it here, because of the impact the book had, and Bill Protz's excellent writing about wargames, not so much because I played it so often (I played almost all the other ECW rules mentioned in this review series - Forlorn Hope, Cavaliers and Roundheads, Universal Soldier, Hackbutt and Pike, and the forthcoming Gush rules and 1644 - more than I played the Wargamer's Guide to the English Civil War).  Eventually, I would get other resources on wargaming units and uniforms and army lists, etc (Forlorn Hope was excellent in that regard, but also great books from Caliver), but early on - this is the book that made me fall in love with wargaming the period.  Even if the rules in this book did not.

Pros/Cons for Musketry and Artillery
Okay, this seems (to me) to be a bit overly complicated, mostly because of the basic structure of WGECW.  The casualty integer is a number of enemy figures killed.  But the final step, of converting it back to points and then deducting it from the CR, is because of the requirement to discuss everything about a unit in terms of CR, rather than in terms of figures. 


I give the author (Bill Protz) the benefit of the doubt, because there are benefits of doing a unit as a whole, even when it is comprised of disparate parts (like pike, officers, halberdiers, and shot all in a large battalia, for instance).  That is always hard to do, and rules for the period (even the latest modern rules) always struggle hard in how to do hybrid units.  The CR system is an elegant way to do it, it just didn't appeal to the people I was playing with.

Card based system for wargames deployment

One of the features I like about the various strains of card driven board wargames, is the decision involved in playing a card for activation.  Clearly this does not apply to all card driven systems, but the ones I am thinking of have cards with multiple options on them, that the player must choose from when playing a card.  Does the player use the card for bringing on reinforcements, or to activate an event, or for a special ability/modifier, or simply to activate units/leaders already in the game?

 

This seems like a useful thing to try and bring into a miniatures wargame, to put a little spin on that old standby scenario - the meeting engagement.  So what I am considering here is a system of cards, each with two different pieces of information on it. Each player would, in turn, place one of these cards, from a small handful they have to choose from, on the table, in one of three different sectors.eventually, each player will play two cards in each sector.  Each sector would have one card, for that player's forces, that corresponds to one of the two categories of information on he cards (so, one card for forces, and one card for deployment).

The first piece of information is a partial basic order of battle. It would list a number of units that would belong to one of three sectors on the battlefield (left, center, right).  Depending on the period and the number of units a player owns, this could be tailored so that a personal collection could provide the figures needed. This could easily be three or four units, or as many as a dozen, depending on period, scale, and rules used.

The second piece of information would control the deployment of forces in that sector.  Are the forces arrayed in a single line? Some units off board? In column on a road?  Dug in with scouts deployed?  Again lots of possibilities, depending on period, scale, and rules.

An example might be this, for Blue Army's Left Flank... (Fictional situation, of course)

Forces Card: Infantry Division, 6 units of line infantry, 1 medium gun battery. 

Deployment Card: Probing Line, All units in a battle line, 12" in from base edge.  Up to two subunits (converged flank companies, or detached squadrons) can be deployed up to 24" in from base line.  

I can see this used in several ways. The easiest, and maybe most interesting, is to deal out six cards to each player, and they need to use all six.  The second way, is to deal three cards each, and as a player places a card, they draw a new one.  Other possibilities exist, but in all cases, the players roll initiative, and high roller places one card, and then the players alternate until all six cards for each side are played.

I am looking forward to trying a set of these, maybe for Napoleonics first. Loads and loads of possibilities exist, including special event cards, special decks for special scenarios, and ancillary effects of cards, like logistical conditions, weather, or affects to limit or increase command.

A neat project to ponder.

Taking Stock - 15mm Collections pt. 6 - 19th Century

Wargaming topics and possible theaters of battle in the 19th century are extremely varied and provide for a lot of exciting gaming possibilities.  One of the most popular is of course the American Civil War.  But not for me, I have tended to avoid that conflict ( I had a collection in 25mm, but I only used them for imagi-nations gaming).

This period, from the perspective of military operations and wargaming potential, is fantastic.  It is the century that sees musketry evolve from a weapon of mass application (with little precision), into the dominant force on the battlefield (as we evolve from the age of muskets, to the age of rifles).  The introduction of the railroad and mass production also mean that armies and logistics are evolving, so that operational campaigns are very different.  Naval capability changes from being wind and muscle driven, to being steam driven - which means that imperial and global colonialism is not only possible, but commonplace (with the colonial wars that go along with it).

I will include in this listing a few armies from the very early (pre-WW1) 20th Century.

Mexican-American War

This is a big enough collection to put on a 6-8 player game. Maybe a thousand Mexican figures, and maybe eight hundred Americans and Texans.  All painted, recently rebased.

Mahdi Rebellion

This is a larger scale (in terms of larger scale battles) and more serious study of the two parts of the River War (as Churchill called it) than my 28mm TSATF collection ( which is, appropriately, for small scale skirmish engagements).  I have British (painted), Egyptians (unpainted, but also suitable for the Arabi Revolt), and Mahdists (hundreds painted, but hundreds not painted).

Zulu War

Probably not worth mentioning except for an impressive stash of very nice, but unpainted, Zulus. Hundreds of 'em.

American Indian Wars
This is a recent acquisition for me, a set of very nice (but individually mounted, so suitable for skirmish gaming) figures including US cavalry forces (mounted and dismounted), and a large selection of American Indian figures.  There are leaders and a variety of figures for both sides.  I have not gamed with these yet, but I am planning on trying The Tomahawk and the Flame, Pony Wars, and/or Hey You in the Jail (one of my favorites, now available as a PDF download).

Spanish American War

A few years back, Patrick Wilson re-released the Richard Houston Lyzard's Grin collection. I bought in. I have a few hundred figures, all painted nicely by John Callahan. Both sides, and big enough for a modest game. No Philippines or Moro figures.

Boxer Rebellion

Very nice Old Glory 15s, this is at heart a nice, large collection of unpainted Boxers, and some Europeans. Started this collection to take advantage of Americans (from above), and Russians and Japanese (both from below).

Russo-Japanese War

Another nice OG15s set, painted (by me) and large enough for a meaningful game. Maybe a dozen infantry units per side, with 2 or 3 cavalry and artillery units for each side. Many more troops for Russians. In addition, maybe another dozen units each side, of infantry.

This series includes

Part 1 - Ancients

Part 2 - Medievals

Part 3 - Renaissance

Part 4 - 18th Century

Part 5 - Napoleonics

Part 6 - 19th Century (this article)

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