Yes, yes, I know: I should be writing up my 'Shiloh' narrative. I have made a little bit of a start, but a long way to go yet.
![]() |
| The first play test battle, seen from the Rus point of view |
Meanwhile, I thought it high time to revisit my 10x10 'Byzantiad' project, about which I posted some articles about April last year (2025). I wanted to polish up the rule set I had been putting together. There was also a combat mechanic that occurred to me at the time, but which I thought might put the Byzantine skoutatoi - 'protected bowmen' as I styled them - at some disadvantage against the spearmen of the Rus.
So I tried it out. The results were startling, to say the least - and not in the way I had apprehended. Three battles the Byzantine Imperial Army has taken on the Rus, for three crushing victories. The dice haven't been kind to the Rus, but even so, I would not have anticipated the level of drubbing they've taken. The first battle was pretty bloody, but the Rus were routed for a loss of 14SP against the Byzantine loss of 7. Two more battles have been equally decisive.
All the battles have standardised in 25 Strength Points, on a 10x10 square-mesh grid. One SP is for the Army Commander, the remainder for the types of troops. The number of units to the army varies, the Rus fielding just 7 (on account of all their 4SP spearmen), the standard Byzantine army, 9. But, as the imperial army includes the 12-figure kataphraktoi (a.k.a. klibanophoroi), the SP equivalent of 2 cavalry (kavallarioi) units, the army I used for play testing fielded 8 units only.
![]() |
| Rus army. Two units have seized a ridge line... |
The Rus:
1 x Command element (mounted) = 1SP1 x cavalry unit: 'Charging Cavalry' = 2SP
5 x Spearmen @ 4SP = 20SP
1 x Horse Archer light cavalry = 2 SP
Seven units, 25 SP, exhausted on -9SP; rout on -13SP
90 figures (excluding command), 80 foot, 10 horse. Represents an army 4,500 strong.
![]() |
| Byzantine army less its light horse. |
Byzantine Imperial Army:
1 x Command element (mounted) = 1SP1 x Kataphraktoi fully armoured horse = 4SP
3 x Kavallarioi cavalry @ 2SP = 6SP
1 x Prokoursatores lance and bow armed light horse = 2SP
3 x Skoutatoi 'Protected Bowmen' @ 4SP = 12SP
Eight units, 25SP, exhausted on -9SP, rout on -13SP
82 figures (excluding command), 48 foot, 34 horse. Represents an army 4,100 strong.
If there is to be a Fifth Wargames Compendium, I propose submitting a rule set for the the editor's consideration. I will have a follow-up article here to discuss the design considerations, terrain generation and possible army lists for the 10x10 game.
![]() |
| Before the battle lines could close, Byzantine archery drives back two Rus units, and then the kataphraktoi smash through a third unit of spearmen, wiping out the whole unit for the loss of 1SP. |
Interested readers might like to look at last year's 'Byzantiad' articles here:
'Byzantiad' - a Pecheneg Raid
'Byzantiad' - Doing the Math
'Byzantiad' - Further Tests
One thing to note: there will be changes to the table of troop types.
To be continued...




Good looking games. Glad to see this project getting your attention again. I look forward to further developments and even more so to seeing the variant published.
ReplyDeleteWEK
DeleteThanks for your comment. The games are very quick to play, and don't demand much in the way of resources. You could use a square grid with half the dimensions of the gris cells, and single stand units just as well - if you use SP markers. I have a simple 'terrain generation' system - at least for this play test.
I'm just a little disconcerted by how uncompetitive the Rus have been so far. One possible 'fix' I have in mind might turn out to be an over-correction, though. The thing is that, historically, infantry armies lacking firepower were very vulnerable to adversaries that did have firepower and the striking power to back it up (e.g. inter alia, Hastings).
Something to work on anyhow. I'll see how the Bulgars go...
Cheers,
Ion
Those blocks of Kataphractoi look mean..,a lot of heavy metal in a small space.
DeleteInteresting results from the tweak, too. Always surprising how small changes can have big consequences.
Martin -
DeleteThe kataphraktoi with this rule set are formidable, all right. Although the spears get an extra die for mounted, these fellows get 2 'shooting before combat' dice. So far, spear units have simply been ridden down, though the horsemen have not always come out unscathed.
The problem at the moment is that probably the skoutatoi are too powerful. If a spear unit survives incoming archery until contact - not a high probability at all - then 4 dice vs 2 gives them a fair suck of the sav. I did think of 'equalising' by removing a whole double-stand for each hit taken, but the thought occurs that one might as well give the skoutatoi 2SP - and that won't do!
I might have to go back to giving the spears +1 on the close combat dice against foot, but what edge should axemen get? Although I have no axemen to give to the Rus army, I want to include them in the rule set for anyone else who might like to give this thing a try.
There is one other possibility that I have yet to try out. Although all combats are competitive where possible, one idea is to employ a method I use for map games, in which matching pip scores cancel. It would tend to more protracted combats, I think, and that system was designed for a whole different set-up anyhow.
All very interesting.
Cheers,
Ion
I missed this post as it only just seems to have appeared on my list - Blogger has been even more peculiar recently. I'm looking forward to the battle report and the publication of the rules 👍 Always happy to see some Cataphracts - when I started wargaming they were known as Super Heavy Cavalry, and everyone wanted some in their generic Ancients army
ReplyDeleteMaudlin Jack -
DeleteI rather think that WRG 7th ed put paid to the SHC category - they got exhausted before they could see any action. As double-based Kn(I) they were OK under DBM, though. A lot of the Byzantine cavalry were classed as EHC. I formed the habit of classing the barded horse as Tagmatic and the unbarded as thematic for my Nikephorian/ Konstantinian armies.
The two double-stands of kataphraktoi (klibanophoroi in WRG-speak) actually started out as one - the all-lance stand. Later I put together a stand with the two front rank guys holding maces, the outer two of the four in the rear rank as lancers, and the inner two as horse archers (slightly less armoured than the others).
But for this rule set I combined the two. If I were to design the unit from scratch, I would have a 3-stand option (Silistria) or the 4-stand. The 3 stands would have a front rank of macemen, and the other two stands would form the rear rank with the inner 2-4 men with bows, and the outer 6 or 4 with lance. They would probably be only 3SP, but I'd still give them the hitting power of 4.
The 3SP option might yet have to be settled upon...
Incidentally, the Varangian Guard weren't much ... erm ... chop under WRG7, either...
Cheers,
Ion
I think we were playing WRG 3 or 4 back then - being early teens we didn't worry too much about the historical accuracy of our armies, we just wanted the toughest units we could get so there were some very strange mixes of units. I think reading Donald Featherstone didn't help as his Ancients rules had an example from Hyboria!!
DeleteMaudlin Jack -
DeleteI think that WRG didn't always 'get it right' either, though that was their laudable aim. To this day, I have a feeling their 'auxilia' are largely mythical (though I would have to explain why at considerable length!)
I think the Don Featherstone Hyrcania-Hyperborea rule set was based upon Tony Bath's Hyboria epic.
The thing about WRG and the 'Ancients' genre in general is that (a) the genre is far too broad, which leads to (b) having some weird adversaries (Byzantines vs Aztecs, anyone?!) and (c) also led to 'competitions', the point of which were completely lost on me (though I played in one or two). The broadness of the genre in my view really makes a nonsense of 'historical accuracy', especially in the formation of armies.
That is one of the reasons for 'going solo' and for narrowing my genres to historical adversaries.
Cheers,
Ion