Wednesday, April 30, 2025

'Byzantiad' - A Pecheneg raid

Byzantines versus Pechenegs. 

Having read Bob Cordery's account of a battle between the Byzantine strategos, Demis Roussos (an incarnation of one Professor Gary Sheffield, or maybe it was the other way around), and that inscrutably unscrupulous Seljuk Sultan Chor Derrai, I was reminded that I had work to do on a Byzantiad rule set that the Archduke Piccolo was suggesting about the middle of last year.  Bob very kindly told me that their battles were inspired by my chapter in the Third Portable Wargames Compendium. 
Even with ten units against nine, the Pechenegs 
look rather sparse: 34 horse figures plus two war 
wagons against 80 Byzantine figures

Well, in turn, what I read inspired me in turn to return to the Byzantiad and investigate further the ideas I began exploring last August. The battles fought between Bob and the Professor were played out on a 10x7 square grid, with 6 units the side. That offers plenty of room, in which especially the more mobile Turkish light horse might flit about. That didn't seem to help the Turks so much, though.
First contact: Pecheneg horse archers at once rout 
the Byzantine light horse.
Now, I had been looking to 12-unit armies on my hex-grid table. That seemed to be a good 'fit'. Check out the link above. But it seemed in the context of their game to see how things would look on my 10x10 square grid. It fairly quickly became apparent that 12 units might be a bit on the much side, but as 6 units looked (to me) a tad sparse, I settled on a 9 unit army standard, with the Byzantines the benchmark.

Now, this whole topic also induced my scratch-building a couple of War Wagons for my Turkic Pechenegs, and a couple of battles between a provincial Byzantine Army of the early 11th Century, and a force of Pechenegs - two more disparate armies one could scarcely hope to field. At once a certain problem presented itself. To explain, let us begin with the armies:

Provincial Byzantine:

Commander Strategos Kantharos Khymos (+1SP)
1 x Strategos Retinue: Heavy Cavalry = 2SP (elite, Commander's unit)
3 x Thematic Heavy Cavalry (Kavallarioi) @2SP = 6SP (average)
1 x Light Horse Lance (Prokoursatores) = 2SP (average)
2 x Protected Bowmen (Skoutatoi) @4SP = 8SP (average)
1 x Loose Order Spearmen (Peltastoi) = 4SP (poor)
1 x Javelin Light Infantry (Akontistai) = 2SP

9 units, 25SP, including the commander's +1. The army is exhausted after losing 9SP, and routs upon the loss of 13.

Pecheneg Raiding Party:

Commander: Tyrach Kosma (+1 SP)
1 x Commander's personal retinue: Heavy Cavalry = 2SP (elite)
7 x Light horse archers @ 2SP = 14SP (average)
2 x War Wagons @4SP = 8SP

10 units, 25SP, including the commander's +1. The army is exhausted after losing 9SP, and routs upon the loss of 13.

Now the reader who hasn't fallen asleep will observe ten rather than nine Pecheneg units. The reason has to do with the composition of the respective armies and their strength points. A 9-unit Pecheneg army has fewer SPs, a deficiency possibly exacerbated by the qualitative differences: the heavier Byzantine horse, for starters. So, standardising the unit numbers upon the Byzantine, other armies may add units to equalise the Strength Points. Then the question of balance becomes a matter between one side's weight, and the other's mobility.


 
The lines close. You would think that the Pecheneg 
horse archers would be overwhelmed by their weightier
adversaries, wouldn't you?

So to the first battle. And right away, the Muse of Wargame battles, Hexahedra, makes a mockery of all our cogitations. The first clash, between the prokoursatores and the horse archers, went wholly and at once in favour of the latter. Although the Byzantine horse archery was enough to force their Pecheneg adversaries to give way; by way of requital the latter's archery simply shredded the prokoursatores out of the battle. 
The Byzantines charge into close contact...
I won't report this battle blow by blow, except by the captions in the pictures. Suffice otherwise to say that the action went just about all the Pecheneg way. I played them pretty aggressively, charging in even against the heavier Byzantine horse, and taking on the infantry as well. Losing 9SPs to just 4, The Byzantines drew off, under pressure but in good order. They escaped without further loss, that is to say, they were not reduced to rout.
Initiative roll, and activation die

The heavier Byzantine horse gets an extra die for
close combat. Both sides retreat 2 squares




Next along the line, shooting before contact:
nothing much happening here! 
Pechenegs get the better of it here,  
forced back but at heavy cost to the Byzantines.


In their own turn Tyrach's entourage also takes losses 
though forcing back the Byzantine kavallarioi



Both sides lose heavily in this clash: 1SP each.

The point at which the Byzantines concede the palm. 
A heavy cavalry unit destroyed, and the skoutatoi 
reduced to half strength.

This action was very brisk: all done and dusted in four turns. So decisive was the Pecheneg victory, I decided that the jury was still out on play balance!



13 comments:

  1. A great little game and report Ion - I confess that I was anticipating a different result. The Pecheneg Army is tougher than I imagined.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maudlin Jack -
      The Pecheneg Army sure was on this occasion - and the war wagons never got a look-in! Not a lot of use was made of the light horse mobility, either.

      I think that the play balance is probably closer than I thought. I might have to rethink the 'protected bowmen' though. They seemed a tad vulnerable the way I played them.
      Cheers,
      Ion

      Delete
  2. Very interesting, and a lovely presentation as well. I'm looking forward to the results of your continued experiments, and a possible campaign as well.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mark -
      A second battle was fought a few days ago - bit of a charnel house that one. I've set up a third (and final?) battle - same board, same armies, same terrain pieces, different arrangement. At some point, I might try an all-cavalry Byzantine army against the Pechenegs, and see how that goes.
      Cheers,
      Ion

      Delete
  3. An enjoyable read and the result was a wee bit of a surprise to me, didn't see the Pecheneg army winning but they did handsomely, looking forward to seeing where this takes you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Donnie -
      The result was a surprise to me also - especially the margin! The second battle was a deal closer, and the Pechenegs made sure the Byzantines knew they had been in a fight there, also.

      I still have a few little issues - more in the way of verisimilitude than playability. The 'shooting before contact' thig IS a complication, but even with arranging the dice rolls for recording/ explanatory purposes and taking the pictures, both games took rather less than a hour to play. So, I think that as it stands now, the rule set is very playable.
      Cheers,
      Ion

      Delete
  4. Thanks for the report. An interesting result, and not the one I would have expected 🙃. I would have put my money, if forced, on the Byzantines, but Hexahedra certainly had other ideas…🎲

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Martin -
      I would have thought, too, that the action ought to have been a winning proposition for the Byzantines, but in two battles, we haven't noticed such results. Ah, but Hexahedra is such a whimsical and capricious Muse...

      I'm wondering if the extra unit to equalise Strength Points is more equalising than first appears. The extra unit is an extra unit's worth of fighting dice, after all. I might have to look back at the first battles to see if something like that might have been a factor.
      Cheers,
      Ion

      Delete
    2. Martin -
      A quick look seems to indicate that Pecheneg mobility and extra units up at the sharp end DOES make a difference. The action took place mainly on a flank, and there the Pechenegs had the numbers (of units).

      Methinks maybe I need not be so concerned about verisimilitudinousness!
      Cheers, Ion

      Delete
    3. Very interesting battle reports Ion ⚔️⚔️ Those Pechenegs certainly seem to be tough little bu99ers. I wonder how they’d fare if they faced the Cataphractoi 😉
      Cheers,
      Geoff
      Ps / I suspect “verisimilitudinousness” isn’t a word you get to use every day 😂🤣

      Delete
    4. Geoff -
      I prefer “verisimilitudinousness” over "realism" in the war gaming context. Against the kataphraktoi (klibanophoroi) thePechenegs would not fare so well. But I'm now starting to think the fighting margin between heavies and lights just too narrow. I'll examine that later on.
      Cheers,
      Ion

      Delete
  5. Archduke Piccolo,

    Reading your battle reports and taking part in my recent wargame against Gary Sheffield is slowly converting me over to Ancients … and that’s something that I would never have expected to happen.

    All the best,

    Bob

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Bob -
      Such a variety to choose from! I went with an army I liked, though it was only by a sort of accident that I settled on 10-11th Century Byzantines. 40-odd years ago I was more interested in the army of the times of Justinian the Great and Heraclius. Upon my inquiring into availability of figures, Tin Soldier sent me a sample figure - an 11th Century Skoutatos. That was it. I liked him, and so the army was created.

      In the end, having a plan of my own, I bought far too many figures for the battles I was eventually to fight - and far too few 'enemies'.

      If you do go down the 'Ancients' track, pick an army that (a) interests you, (b) that you like AND (c) that have interesting enemies. I have to admit, though, that right now, the Byzantines are a bit of a distraction!
      Cheers,
      Ion

      Delete