New EIR army

[Kris Dray]

I am wrapping up the Hail Casesar rulebook, waiting on Ancient and Medieval army list books and I would greatly appreciate some advice for my early Imperial Romans.

Will the plastic SPQR Caesarians stand out with the Imperial Roman starter I started with? I would like to build three divisions including cavalry, auxillary, artillery and baggage and two subcommanders, etc.

I am thinking of individual 20mm x 20mm bases so I can use them in skirmish games like SPQR and Clash of Spears…a bit tedious but I will put magnets on each one and a flexible metal mat in the bottom of each movement tray. Should work nicely. My dilemma is esthetics vs practicality vs cost.

Leaning toward 8 legionary by 3 ranks for esthetics. Still is it worth the cost and practically I will only play this game solo, against grandsons while I teach them history and against opponents at the nearest FLGS 70 miles away and on 6 x4 tables?

Do I understand correctly the logic that having more units to support using Standard 8×2 units with Stamina 6 is more cost effective (and less costly) than an 8 x 4 Large unit with Stamina 8. Just looking at trying to move the 8 x 4 Goth warbands around a reasonably terrain rich table is going to be something if I try to fit several (pseudo)century of legionaries on the table too. By my measure consistent 160mm frontage on units gives me end to end 11 units…11 pretty crowded units each with 160mm frontage. I realize the light cavalry, horse archers and skirmishers plus a deeper deployment zone will help a bit. I guess I am asking if 8 x 2 units will look Imperial enough? Several 8 x 4 Large units of Legionaries seems impractical on a 4 x 6 table, but I think the 8 x 3 definitely looks nifty.

Thanks in advance for your consideration.

[Charge The Guns]

Hi Kris,

I think the technically Caesarian and EIR are different eras and so wouldn’t normally be mixed. I guess there must have been a time when some units were having new kit rolled out to them and others didn’t have it yet? Perhaps a way to rationalise it. For friendly games, not the end of the world.

Regular and large sized units need to be differentiated by their widths, not their depth. So 8 figure wide regular units and 12 wide large units would work. I would be ok with 8×2 for Roman cohorts. Barbarian 8×4 for a regular warband (the depth is purely aesthetic), and 12 x4 for large units.

On a 6×4’ table I would consider changing movement and ranges to 2/3. Easiest way to do this is to make some measuring sticks marked up in 2/3 inches and use these for the game.

[Kris Dray]

I think the technically Caesarian and EIR are different eras and so wouldn’t normally be mixed. I guess there must have been a time when some units were having new kit rolled out to them and others didn’t have it yet? Perhaps a way to rationalise it. For friendly games, not the end of the world.

Scratch that question. I suppose technically the Caesarians who invaded Gaul are the forerunners of the Early Imperial Legionary. My cross-wired brain was thinking Gallic Celts, British Celts, Germanic tribes…the early Imperials from Claudius’ invasion of Britain will work fine with my EIR starter. I am hoping that the SPQR Caesarians will work fine on 20mm squares and fold right into a Caesarian starter army. Should be plenty of battles with, hopefully, a civil war mixed in there somewhere. Maybe a mix of Victrix, Gripping Beast and Aventine Republicans to fight the Punic Wars…

Right now, I am mainly aiming at EIR and the Germanic tribes which will hopefully work well both as mercenaries against the Gauls for Caesar and in some fall of Rome scenario against late Romans if I live that long!

• This reply was modified 5 years, 2 months ago by Kris Dray.

[Kris Dray]

Regular and large sized units need to be differentiated by their widths, not their depth. So 8 figure wide regular units and 12 wide large units would work. I would be ok with 8×2 for Roman cohorts. Barbarian 8×4 for a regular warband (the depth is purely aesthetic), and 12 x4 for large units.

I didn’t say it above, so thanks for the help! The suggestion for ranges and distance on a 6×4 table is an excellent one.

Playing with 2000 point warbands from Warlords of Erehwon with 5″ deployment zones has been quite fun, but at 28mm (especially slightly heroic) models in 2×5 units it gets a bit crowded.

I think I will stick with standard units (still thinking of cohorts at 8×3) but 9+ inches to a 12-man front I can’t imagine what a 20×4 unit would be like to move, even at 10mm or 15mm. If I stick to standard warband or phalanx, at 8 x 4, I expend fewer models, get more units, and if I ever get to a massive table I can always stick the two 8×4 units together to make a large unit of frontage 320mm. Does that make sense? I would like to get as large a number and variety of units on the table as possible without it looking overwhelmed.

Thanks again

[Charge The Guns]

Hi Kris,

Yes, I think 8 wide is ideal for regular sized units. You can always adjust later as you say but a great starting point.

Please come back and show us your units as they get completed 🙂

[Duane Young]

Because of costs, and also “heroic” sized 28mm fugues, I have opted for “standard” units that are only twelve figures not sixteen.  I have also opted to base them where the space I have allotted for a figure amounts to 1-inch or 25mm square, not 20mm.  Some figures of some units have been based literally “individually” on such 25mm squares, but while I use movement trays, that is still proving a little cumbersome.  I am now trying out — with the latest figures to be painted/based — putting “light infantry” on two-figure stands 25x50mm, and medium and heavy infantry on four-figure stands, 50mm square.  I do (for now) plan to continue to base “skirmishers” individually on 25mm squares.

So far my EIR and MIR cohorts are only identical.  I have arrayed them with ranks of six figures in two files (6×2) on a basis of 150mm frontage and 50mm depth.   Since I clearly note that my 150mm units are “standard,” and as the movement trays push that up to just over 160mm, there is no confusion on the table… so far.

The one thing I have not yet tackled is:
— a) whether to have some “milliaria” cohorts, and if I do,
— b) how to “size” and to base them.

Although the root of the word means “1000,” the theoretical strength of such cohorts (so historians say) was 800 men.  As such they were not double the size of a regular cohort of a theoretical 480 men (or about 500), but more like half-again as large.  Thus I am thinking to field such a cohort as eighteen figures (half-again larger than my “standrd” units of twelve figures).  What is stopping me for now is what basis to use for frontage?  Should such a unit be “deeper” than a standard unit (i.e. a three-deep unit)?  Or, should it take up a wider frontage but be arrayed only as deep as the standard unit?  Thus, should it be arrayed 6×3, and with a frontage and depth of 150mmx 75mm?  Or should it be 9×2, and with a frontage and depth of 225mmx 50mm?  Happy to hear other’s thoughts on that.  Cheers!

[Roy H Anderson]

One thing we do is use the Caesarean troops as auxiliary troops since the Romans often handed down old equipment to auxiliary units.

[Author]

Posts