Monday, October 26, 2026

Wargame Design: Friction in Wargames

 


Of course, one of the seminal works about warfare came from Carl Von Clausewitz in his book “On War”.  This was written based on Von Clausewitz’ own experiences during the Napoleonic Wars and has been critical reading for those who think about Military matters ever since.  I have read it and have a copy of it on my shelf along with Jomini, Mahan, Sun Tzu, Machiavelli and many others.

There are many great quotes in the book that you have probably heard before.  One of my favorites is about Friction, and it goes something like this…..

“Everything is very simple in war, but the simplest thing is difficult. These difficulties accumulate and produce a friction, which no man can imagine exactly who has not seen war”

The idea is that Military things are hard to accomplish.  However, as you conduct operations in the field there is a “friction” that builds up and makes everything more complicated than it would normally be.  The trick for a successful commander is to be able to navigate that Friction and manage it.  Friction can be a wide variety of things and is a catch-all term for conditions that make conducting military actions increasingly difficult, from fatigue, to weather, to morale, to casualties, to logistics, to enemy action, and beyond.  It is a nice catch-all term. 

As a player, I have a preference for games that somehow allow me as the commander to have to "deal" with this growing friction. As a designer, capturing this increasing sense of building Friction is something that is fascinating, difficult, and important to me.  However, as Clausewitz points out that it can be hard to imagine.  

So, let's talk about adding "Friction" in a wargame that is fun to experience and not annoying.  


Kill Team

This Feels Good

There are a number of ways that games make players feel friction in game.  The most successful ones I have played tend to focus on the Morale Phase of the game, where Friction impacts Command and Control of your forces more than any other aspect of the game.  This often takes the form of Fatigue, Pins, and Suppression.  With such rules, the basic activities that the units partake in become more difficult or harder to accomplish.  Tasks which required no risk of failure, start to have the risk of failure.  

A great example is the game Bolt Action.  In the opening turn or two, generally speaking units are not subject to enemy fire (with exceptions) and therefore can move freely around the board with fewer limitations.  However, as they close on objectives and with the enemy forces, the volume of fire and therefore danger increases.  This takes the form of "pin markers" that the unit accrues.  These Pin Markers impact how a unit can move, shoot, or fight.  If it has too many Pins it will have to use special orders to shed these Pins, or even no longer be able to be activated.  The Player has to decide how to deal with the growing number of Pins on their units and use limited resources and time to mitigate them.  

Pin Markers like these are a great visualizations for how Friction works in many games systems, where the focus is on its impact to Command and Control.  The units can still do what they normally do, but it is harder.  

Castles in the Sky

This Burns

Then there is the type of friction that does not feel so good.  The kind that is more of a hinderance to the game.  I am not going to name names here, but there is a thin line between the good kind of Friction and the not so good kind.  At first glance, they can look very similar.  However, mechanics that require a lot of mental load on players or force reference into the rulebook is bad Friction.  

The big difference is when the Friction elements do not fit smoothly into the gameplay loop, and require the player to "do more" rather than simply limit their decision making.  Often this "doing more" takes the form of operating the game play with more tracking, more tokens, cross-reference the rules, etc.  Things like tracking every time a unit does X it causes Y Fatigue and therefore, every time a unit takes any action some sort of Friction occurs.  

Another common feature is different types of Friction that players track for different effects.  I.e. Friction from combat causes Morale issues, but Friction from moving causes Exhaustion, and Friction from using resources causes Logistics ratings to change, etc.  Good friction mechanics try to put all those factors into one abstracted mechanic.  

Often, Friction mechanics should all take effect in one of the 4Ms, for easier tracking and resolution.  Having different Friction mechanics in the different phases only works IF they can be abstracted into one simple token or measure of total Friction.  I.e. the unit gains a Pin from moving through difficult terrain, enemy shooting, units breaking nearby, charging, etc.  These are all friction that can happen in different parts of the game BUT they still fall under one simple Friction mechanic. 

All of the above cause players too much mental load and will lead to more time in the rulebook than the action on the table.  
Fury of the Northman

Effects of Friction

Ideally, Friction should force decision making.  The core of gameplay should be to have meaningful decisions.  Friction is a great method to impose consequences on player decisions and force players to manage variable performance of their units.  Friction should ideally be an escalating set of conditions to be overcome by the commander of the force.  So, how do you do this in your wargames? 

The easiest answer is.... it depends!  What period and effects you are trying to model will determine what the mechanic will look like.  However, that kind of wishy-washy, but accurate answer is not why you come to this blog!  

I think there are a few ways to manage:

1. Modifiers - The easiest way to make friction become a "universal modifier" for all checks a unit has to make as the Friction mounts.  Most games use a Target Number approach to resolving situations via mechanics.  Therefore, as Friction mounts Modifiers increase the Target Numbers of these tests.  

2. Status Effects- The units themselves move into different game states such as wavering, disrupted etc.  Each state imposes challenges or restrictions on the units.  

For example, in Wars of the Republic units go into a Wavering status that means they lose the benefit of any formation.  This can shift the tide greatly in a melee! 

3. Change of Activation- Friction causes the initiative to change between players or forces, or limits the number of activations.  This restricts the freedom of action of the commander and forces choice about who needs to do what when. 

For example, in Blood Bowl play is changed from one team to the next. 

4. Change of Phase or End Game- The growing Friction causes the game to move closer to ending, such as a Doom Clock or moves from one action phase to the next.  I.e. the Friction causes the game to shift from the movement phase into the melee phase, etc.  This shift has to happen at a time when it forces commanders to priotize actions or change their previous action sequencing.  

5. Unit Under Glass- A Unit can that hits certain friction points can no longer participate in the normal turn activation process.  It is unavailable.  Commonly in games this is seen by putting them in a "routing" state where they are moving to the board edge.  

Men of Bronze

Regaining Control

Of course, one of the key factors of adding Friction to a game is that you also need a way to mitigate it.  Once Friction starts accruing, their has to be a cost for a Commander to mitigate it and overcome it.  If you think of the examples above, how do you get a unit back into fighting shape?  How do you let them participate back in the battle fully?  What is the trade-off that a commander needs to make here in order for the unit to get back into the fight?

Friction build-up is only half the equation of successfully implementing Friction into your wargame.  The other half is giving Commanders a way to work around it.... at a cost.  That is where the meaningful choices comes into play.  If you manage it here, how does it impact the rest of the battle? 

Here is some ways I have seen it done: 

1.   Resources - The most common way I have seen is via resource management.  I.e. you have a limited number of tokens and you can use them to mitigate the impact of Friction, but there is only so many to go around.  If you spend them on X they are not available for Y.

See Fury of the Northman as a prime example of how this works.  Fury points can be used to mitigate many conditions and improve performance but they are limited to a limited number that have a number of uses.  Commanders have to choose how they use them in order to off-set Friction.  

2. Commanders - Using a physical model and distance to and from that model to help mitigate the effects of Friction.  Of Course, if you commander is at location Y he can not help units at location Z.  

Many Horse and Musket games use this approach.  Commander's Radius such as in Honours of War is a classic and common example. 

3. Board Edges - Once a Unit has hit the table edge or other distance from the battle, they can be influenced by their officers to return to the battle as normal.  However, by that time they are some distance from the action and will take time to move back into position.  

This one was common in early versions of Warhammer games, where units that hit the board edge could make a final rally check to avoid fleeing the field and return to the fight.  

4. Pauses - Units must forego other actions and instead take time to steady themselves and remove the impacts of Friction.  Of course, by standing still they can not fully participate in the game until they have regrouped.  It is a choice when to pause and when to push.  

This is the process used in Clash of Spears to reduce fatigue and other friction. 

5. Action Funnels - The actions that can be taken are reduced to a minimal amount until Friction is removed.  

The Men Who Would Be Kings has this as a component of the rules.  

Heirs to Empire: Wars of the Diadochi

Final Thoughts

Friction and how you use it is an exciting and compelling part of Wargame Design.  It can be used to added a variety of tactical and strategic choice to a game.  How you implement it depends on what you are trying to create, but Friction is an important element to any wargame design no matter where you are on the Designer's Triangle.  Do not overlook its importance as a tool as often it means the difference between a solid game and a great game.  

Until next time! 


Become a Patron and get access to all the cool stuff, a peak behind the curtain of Blood and Spectacles, and early-access to playtest games!  


You can follow Blood and Spectacles Facebook page or Instagram for more fun! 

Check out the latest publications and contact me at our Blood and Spectacles website

Or purchase all out games at the Blood and Spectacles Publishing Wargames Vault Page!              

  
  


 
   

Monday, October 19, 2026

On The Painting Desk: Tagging some Vandals!

 

Last time On the Painting Desk..... faithful readers, you will recall that I started batch-painting an army for my latest ruleset, Barbarians at the Gates.  You will recall that this was a force of about 40 infantry and 10 cavalry (or about 60 models).  I have a larger force but this is the core for the example army from the book.  The models are from Gripping Beast that I ordered from the Michigan Toy Soldier company.  I am trying to batch paint them all together using Armypainter Speedpaints, which is something I have not done with Historicals before.  I am not sure how they will turn out compared to my other Historical minis.  

You will also recall, that I had managed to assemble them all, undercoat them, and get started on some of the basic painting over the course of a couple weekends.  Therefore, they still have a lot to go as I finish their flesh, boots, hooves, and horseflesh before calling it a weekend.  


That brings us to today!  Looking at where I started.... yikes.... there is a lot to paint still!  Let's dive in!

I decided to spend sometime working on the infantry first.  I wanted everyone to get some pants on!  That meant painting up their leggings and then their pants as needed.  For the leggings, I decided to use three colors: Crusader Skin, Hardened Leather, and Holy White.  The armored dudes all had leggings, but the unarmored only a smattering had them.  I typically gave every third mini the same color leggings.  

From there, I decided to use the primary colors on the pants.  Those were Highland Blue, Absolution Green, Orc Skin, Slaughter Red, and Fire-Giant Orange.  Two people in each unit got the same color pants.  This gave them a nice mix of colors.  Finally, everyone had some pants on! 


 This was good progress, but now I had to get everyone's tunics painted up.  For the unarmored blokes, this would be the bulk of their color scheme.  For the armored dudes, it would be their sleeves and trim under their chain shirts.  I used the same colors as I did the legs, but I also added in some other colors for the unarmored types such as Dark Wood, Malignant Green, Pallid Bone, and Holy White for more variety and some less colorful looks.  I made sure to mix it up so no one had the same color pants as their tunics.  That would be a fashion faux pas!  


I did not paint the pants on the horseman yet.  They would need to get their Horse armor sorted before I moved onto the riders.  That made them out of step with the rest of the minis getting their batch painting done.  Instead, I went back and completed the ears, as I missed them last time!  I also got the horse tails sorted out as well.  This was mostly the same colors I used on the horses themselves with some Grim Black added to the mix.  I again made sure not to double up on skin and tail colors. 

The armor on the horses and the infantry would need to be the next big painting lift.  That would be the bulk of the armored infantry and cavalry models.  However, I decided to wait on that lift until the next day.  Armor up, weapons next.  Then, I would do belts, buckles and details the following day.  Then, round it all off with washes and basing.  Shields would be another day as well.  That left me with about 4 more days of painting to do.


However, the unarmored guys were getting closed to being done than they Cavalry and Armored brothers.  Despite the bulk of them being done, they would still take the same amount of time as the rest.  Afterall, I was batch painting them.  The temptation to split them and paint them as smaller units to completion was strong now.  However, that would defeat the purpose of batch-painting!  


The end was insight for this project, but for now this was a good days work.  Time to take a break.  In theory, I think I could paint the whole army in a 7-day painting challenge if I had the week off?  That is from box to finished models.  I think that would be pushing it though. 

I think the Gripping Beast plastics are working really well for batch painting.  They do not have the same level of detail as the Victrix models, but as a mass they look really good together and they batch paint up quickly and easily.  Very satisfying kit so far.  I am looking forward to seeing them all completed.  

Until next time! 



You can follow Blood and Spectacles Facebook page for more fun: https://m.facebook.com/pg/BloodandSpectacles/posts/?ref=bookmarks&mt_nav=0

Or our website:

Or our Messageboard:

Or our Wargames Vault Page:

https://www.wargamevault.com/browse.php?keywords=blood+and+spectacles&x=0&y=0&author=&artist=&pfrom=&pto=     



Monday, October 12, 2026

Review: Oathsworn: Into the Deepwoods - Shadowborn Games

 


Full Disclosure: I do not own this game.  However, I did get to play it on my journeys with a group of fellow players.  We played it enough times for me to get an understanding of the game, its world, and what it is trying to do.  Therefore, I feel like I can talk about the game with some confidence even though I have not played it all the way through and I do not own it.  

This is a 1-4 plays cooperative board game.  It has two parts to each game, the first part is a story-driven section where you make decisions and follow branching story lines based on those decisions and results of the checks and tests.  Here you collect clues, items, and allies that will come into play during phase 2 of the game.  Phase 2 of the game has your group switch into a tactile wargame on a hex grid against the big bad of the mission.  The things you collected in the early phase of the game can help you in this battle.  The various missions are linked together in an on running storyline and series of adventures that make up a campaign.  

There are a lot of elements here that will be familiar to readers of this blog.  There is the decision-making and branching story lines of RPGs.  There is the grid-based tactical combat of some tabletop wargames.  The technical term I have heard for this game is a story-based boss battler.  I tend to think of these types of "hybrid" games that use miniatures as a "Dudes on a Board" game.  

So, now that you know what this game is let's dive into the Deep Woods.  Grab you compass, collect your iron, and hold onto the wirebridge!  Here we go! 


Things I Liked

First off, this game has really top tier production values.  The story lines, the miniatures, the artwork, etc.  It is all very well-made and well-presented.  The storylines fit together nicely, the branching works well, and the world that this game inhabits feels real and lived in.  Great work on making a fantasy, horror style Hybrid game.  This game is very replayable and as a co-op game works well.  The voice acting in the app is also top tier and sets the tone well.  This is a AAA board game product and it shows how much bigger of a market board games are compared to Indie wargames and RPGs.  

The game is cooperative.  I.e. players are working together to beat the game.  This set-up works well int he story-driven segment as well as the tactical segment.  There is a wide variety of heroes to choose from and I like that they each have a difficulty rating so you know what you are getting into as you choose your avatar.  Most of what you need to play is right on the play board and then you supplement it with action and equipment cards.  

They use a blind box approach to the baddies.  Therefore, there is an element of surprise as you play the game and encounter the enemies.  Each box has a number that corresponds to the mission, so you do not know what you are going to fight until it is revealed.  It felt a bit like when you would get a cut-scene in a video game with a fun reveal moment.    

The minis for the PCs are 54mm and big with good detail and options to swap weapons and such as you gain power.  They are all pretty nice sculpts.  I think my host had splurged on the top tier content though. 

They manage to capture the feel of a horror game.  I.e. you do not really improve as you play.  Instead you are avoiding degradation more than anything else.  That also makes it interesting in that you have to make "less bad" choices as you play. 

Things I Did Not Like

Like all modern board games, this thing is way more complicated than it really needed to be.  There is a lot of different actions and cards that essentially boil down to hitting it with a stick.  The main tactics are focused on system mastery, managing your "battle flow", and knowing how the enemy AI works.  In that sense, it really almost feels more like a computer game except I am pressing all the buttons for the game to keep working.  I spent just as much time operating the game as playing it and making decisions.  

The most complicated decisions were trying to decide which RNG I wanted to use, cards or dice.  The cards allowed you to manipulate the deck while the dice allowed you to bypass some of the worse outcomes.  More important than choosing the right "card" to play from you hand was deciding which combination of RNGs you wanted to use and when.  It essentially boiled down to a game of probability manipulation and card-counting.  Again, this whole process made it feel super gamey to me.  

You would get an idea of what the enemy was going to do next, so you could then build your turn strategy cooperatively to minimize the impact of the creature's actions.  It was played off as our experience as Oathsworn fighting monsters, but ultimately it felt like another gamey element.   It the monster abilities were not revealed until they happened, then it would be much more horrific and less gamey.  

Finally, we all had a deck of cards that could be used to attack or defend.  As you used them, they dropped into a refresh pattern called a battle flow.  More powerful defense and attack took longer to refresh.  In theory, manipulating this battle flow was a big part of the tactics of the game, along with managing your pool of action points.  The tactics of the game felt more about manipulating these elements on your character card more than what was happening on the game board, such as terrain, model placement, tactical maneuver, etc.  Yeah, I was able to use LOS blocking, some kiting, etc. but ultimately it was the artificial tactics of the "battleflow" and action points that mattered more than position and maneuver.  



Meh and Other Uncertainties

The game had a nice city map that you moved around in Phase 1 and triggered story points.  There was also some time elements, as the faster you gathered clues and figured out the patterns the more cool gear you got for Phase 2.  There was also a nice double sided hex map for outside or indoor encounters.  However, all used the same.  Terrain mattered at the beginning, but most of the monsters just wrecked it instantly if they moved over it and by the end the board was mostly empty then.  

Each mission took about 2 hours to play.  1 hour for the story and 1 hour for the boss battle. However, the game seemed to have some replayability in the story segment if you decided to follow different threads or paths.  The boss battler part would be modified but what you gathered along the way.  For example, in mission two we failed a check during the story section, which allowed the boss to ambush us in the final battle and attack us first.  If we had gone a different route, we may have avoided that peril.  

The world building in the story-section is pretty solid.  I liked the idea of the Deep Woood, the wire bridges connecting the towns, the desperation to survive in a dangerous environment, and the idea of the Oathsworn.  There was a lot of world-building woven into the Fighting Fantasy section of the game, and some foreshadowing for those paying close attention. 

Final Thoughts

These types of Hybrid games are not for me personally, but I won't turn down a game of them either.  I find that with the right players, any game can be really fun.  I was a Polar Warbear in this one, and that led to some fun banter and jokes around the table.  I mean, I got to drop a Golden Compass joke!  Plus, any cooperative game always leads to a good time.  

However, I find these "hybrid" games lean to far towards "Game" rather than Simulation or Narrative on the Designer's Triangle.  I feel like the focus of these types of games becomes system mastery more than actual tactical maneuver.  It feels more like mastering the combos in an arcade beat'em up or CRPG.  The story is good, but lacks the true choice of an RPG and the combat lacks the actual tactical depth of a true wargame. Instead, the focus is on mastering the mechanics and probabilities of the game itself and that is what leads to success.           

I can see the appeal of a game like this to a lot of players, especially those who lean towards system mastery.  That seems to be a trait in board game players in general.  Me, I do not care too much about system mastery and instead lean towards spectacle.  Oathsworn has great models, but the lack of painting to manage the surprise and the "samey" battle conditions do not keep me engaged on that level even if the models are very good. 

I am glad I got to play it and will play it again, but I am in no rush to go buy it.  I would get Shadows of Brimstone before Oathsworn.

Until next time! 


Become a Patron and get access to all the cool stuff, a peak behind the curtain of Blood and Spectacles, and early-access to playtest games!  


You can follow Blood and Spectacles Facebook page or Instagram for more fun! 

Check out the latest publications and contact me at our Blood and Spectacles website

Or purchase all out games at the Blood and Spectacles Publishing Wargames Vault Page!           

Monday, October 5, 2026

On The Painting Desk: Sacking Rome with the Vandals!

 

Faithful readers, you know that I recently closed a deal to write a new book for the Osprey Wargaming Series, Barbarians at the Gates.  As part of that process I also need 30 photographs of miniatures.  I also like to have two armies for playtesting and Demo Games.  That means, I need to paint up some models!  

These may or may not feature in the book later.  I am hoping to find some manufacturers to support me with the photos.  However, I still need some painted armies.  After thinking about it, I decided to focus on the Vandals as my Barbarian force.  Why the Vandals?  First, I have been fascinated by them as they were not 100% successful historically.  They faced a lot of set-backs and some victories in their history.  Sure they had some pretty big highs like sacking Rome and conquering North Africa but some big lows too.  I mean, they basically got expelled from Europe by other barbarian groups after they had been driven from their traditional homelands by Huns.  They also lost in Spain to the Romans.  Like I said, not always the best track record.  Sounds like my gaming history in a nutshell! 

The first step was to get a feel for what I wanted in the army.  Thankfully, I had an example Line-of-Battle for the Vandals in the draft rules.  I decided to use this as the core of my Vandal army.  This would be....

  • 1 Unit of Heavy Cavalry
  • 1 Unit of Elite warriors
  • 1 Unit of Warriors
  • 1 Unit of Militia
  • 1 Unit of Archers
Of course, that would be the core of my force, but I was also going to make other units to be able to swap in and out.  That would include more of each unit type (except Cavalry) and some skirmisher units with Javelins.  

With the force selected, it was time to think about the models. I took a look at several lines and what was available to me from US distributors.  Ultimately, I decided to go with Gripping Beast plastics.  


The Goth Elites would be the main Heavy Cavalry unit, the Saxon Thegns would be the Elites and warriors, Dark Age Warriors would be the militia and skirmishers, and archers are self-explanatory.  I spent a weekend and built and spray undercoated the core of the army.  With that done, I loaded it up into my WIP box and ready for the road.  

I also built and undercoated all the archers, all the Javelin armed skirmishers, and spear-armed Militia.  However, I did not need these for the core army so left them to paint up later.  I still had enough miniatures for 2 spear-armed units of warriors that I did not get time to build.      

So, here is the core of the Vandal army.


Of course, I am going to be Batch Painting as much of this as I can all at once.  I will probably do all the infantry together.  I will be painting the cavalry on their own. Not to brag, but I tend to think I am a pretty good batch painter, but you will get to judge for yourself. 

On the next weekend, I made sure to drybrush all the minis with cheap acrylic white.  Those who know my process know that I skipped the Dark Grey wash.  This is a test to simplify my approach.  Using Speedpaints on Historical models is also a test.  I am not sure how these will turn out and how well they will fit in with my other Historicals.  

From there, I started the batch painting.  The first thing I did was to use Barbarian Flesh and paint up all the skin tones for the Vandals.  Painting has begun in earnest now.  This is real!   


After that, I picked out a few colors for footwear.  Graveyard Grey, Hardened Leather, and Dark Brown all got the nod.   All the boots got painted.  From there, is was time to make sure the horses got their feet colored too!  I made their hooves Graveyard Grey.  Then I used a variety of colors for their skin such as Hardened Leather, Dark Brown, Sand Golem, and Runic Grey.  The horses are mostly armored so only their legs, noses, tails, and ears really show.


Hard to believe, but with that my daylight for the second weekend day working on these guys was waning.  I had to pack it in for the day and do some sight-seeing!  Not great progress, but I am batch-painting 60 models, if you count the horses and riders separately.  Progress will be iterative!  



Here are some sight-seeing photos since I don't have that many miniature photos in this one.  This is Badlands National Park below.... 


Mount Rushmore.  I have been here a few times, and I always make sure I get some of the famous Thomas Jefferson ice cream when I stop by.  This was particularly fun as we had pre-planned to meet some folks here and hang out!   
   

The Mammoth Site in Hot Springs, South Dakota.  An active dig-site of Mammoth bones.  The area has a lot of fossils from the end of the Ice Age.  


You can see that I have had a hard time finding time to paint miniatures as I spent quality time checking out the Black Hills area of South Dakota.  There were plenty of others stops and discoveries as well.  However, not much on the gaming side of things or that would be of interest to wargamers at the moment.  

Keep in mind, there is a rather large delay between when these post on the blog and when I actually did it.  Therefore, by the time you read this I will be long gone from the area.  However, I expect I will be heading back through a few more times on my travels so let me know you favorite Black Hills related sights, and what game stores I should visit in the area!  Is there any local cons I should try to time my visit to attend?     

Until next time!  


Monday, September 28, 2026

Wargame Design: Heirs to Empire - The Late Persian Army

 


This is a ruleset that has been out for a while now, and the focus is on the wars of the Diadochi after the death of Alexander the Great.  Therefore, all your favorite Greek generals get a shout-out and have their own Lines of Battle.  However, one thing I do not think the rules cover very well is Lines of Battle for the Late Persian Army or rather Lines of Battle for rebel Persian Satraps who mostly drew their forces from the remains of the Late Persian Army.  We know from the sources that Perdiccas and others had to contend with rebel Persians after Alexander's Death.

Therefore, this will be a post where I try to rectify that situation and "build a better" Late Persian list to be used in your games.  This is not the first time I have gone back to add a new Line of Battle for this game.  Long-time readers and fans will recall my efforts to add a Mauryan Empire list to potentially face off against Seleceus during his Eastern Anabasis.  You can find that here.  The very sharp-eyed of you will also see that I updated the games cover since those halcyon days too!  

This is also not the first time going to take a closer look at the Late Persian Army for me either.  The Ionian Revolt supplement for Men of Bronze also has an updated Line of Battle for the Late Persian army to update it from the core rulebook.  Therefore, the list you see here will build off this as a source.  That supplement also details many of the foes of the Persian Empire as well and is a great resource for those of you who want to expand your games with Persian armies.  I think it is also important that Heirs of Empire was written before The Ionian Revolt so my thinking and scholarship around these forces has evolved.   


Who Were the Persians?

The Persians were a vassal tribe of the Medes from the Iranian steppe. Their king Cyrus the Great led them to victory over the Medes, and then the Babylonians, and finally the Lydians.  At this point, the Achaemenid Empire was declared.  The empire continued to expand outward under other kings.  At its height, it covered the majority of the known world, stretching from the Indus River Valley to the Balkans to Egypt. 

Cyrus and his descendants brought a new model of control to the region.  The Assyrians had brought a reign of terror for their subject people including royal massacres, forced deportations, destruction of temples, and brutal military tactics designed to cause terror.  The Medes and the Babylonians followed this successful example.  However, when Cyrus took over he did not bring brutality with him.  Instead, he offered stability.  His empire respected local religions, kept local leadership in charge, and showed mercy.  The Persians had a relatively hands off approach to their provinces as long as the taxes were paid, the levied troops provided, and the Kings orders were followed.  This approach allowed the Persian Empire to flourish and grow.    

In addition, the Persians brought an efficient bureaucracy and administration to their holdings.  They built infrastructure like the great Royal Road that crossed the Empire.  This infrastructure allowed a series of message relays and a post-offices that made Royal communications swift.  In addition, the infrastructure allowed the King’s soldiers to get from one end of the Empire to the other rapidly to maintain order.  They also professionalized government officials and created a professional army.  

The Persians were very wealthy from the taxes they collected from their subject people.  They used this wealth shrewdly to expand trade, professionalize their leadership, and to de-stabilize their enemies.  After the Greco-Persian Wars, the Persians cannily used their wealth to play one Greek city-state off against another to keep them focus inward instead of on the Persians.  This policy was very successful for a number of decades as internal warfare kept the Greeks mostly focused inward.

The Persians were a religious people.  They believed in the Flame of Truth and its avatar Ahura Mazda.  To their way of thinking, as the Empire expanded they rolled back the darkness and brought the light of Truth.  Ahura Mazda was leading them to expel the darkness.  Despite this religious philosophy, they did not expect their subject people to convert to their religion or abandon their own gods.  Instead, the empire was tolerant of local custom and religious practices.  

The Persian Empire began to decline as outside pressures grew.  The taxation burden became heavy on the satraps who controlled the various provinces, and the economy began to stagnate from too much wealth not being re-invested.  In addition, the Empire’s hands off approach meant that no national identity or larger shared ethnic identity was ever achieved for the empire.  Therefore, when Alexander and the Macedonians took over, there was not real change to the average Persian Imperial citizen’s life.  They continued on much as they had before.      

How Did They Fight? 

By the late period of the Persian Empire, the way that they fought had evolved a lot over the centuries.  Generally speaking, by the late period the army was made up of 2 main branches.  They were the infantry and the cavalry.  There was also several "novelty" units like scythed chariots, camel cavalry, war elephants, and mercenaries like Greeks.  

Persian Infantry was drawn from across the Empire.  However, the backbone was the Medes and Persian troops.  These were primarily armed with spears, swords, and most importantly bows.  The Persians specialized in range firepower.  From there, other troops came from across the empire to fill their own niches like skirmishers, light troops, etc. However, as the Empire came apart access to these auxiliary troops became restricted.  

Much has been written about the Kardaks as a troop type in Late Period Persian armies.  I tend to think that this was a reference to Persian troops.  It is unclear who they are, but they were light and heavy troops of various branches of the military.  It does not seem like they were a unique unit type and could possibly be "new recruits" or troops still in their training phase.  

Perhaps the most important arm of the Persian Late Period army was the cavalry.  Again, this was mostly Persian nobles who were the Heavies.  However, they also had lighter cavalry made up of allied groups like Bactrians or Sogdians.  The infantry would pin down the enemy troops with archery while the cavalry would maneuver for flank attacks.  The Persian army was known for its mobility as well as its size.

What draws many people to the Persian Army is their novelty units.  They had a wide variety of mercenary and specialty units in their forces.  This included Greek Mercenaries of the heavy and light variety.  War Elephants from India, Egyptian Marines, Camel cavalry from Arabia, and Scythed Chariots from the Steppe all had their place in the Late Empire army.  Of course, after the death of Darius and the sundering of the Empire access to all of these troops might no longer be available thereby limiting the Line-of-Battle.                      

Building the Line of Battle for Late Persians for Heirs of Empire

It may have been a while since you have looked at the rules for Heirs of Empire.  However, it is a game that makes use of army wings on the table.  Therefore, the Lines-of-Battle focus on what units can make up the Left, Center, and Right of the army.  

We know that traditionally the Core or center of the army will be the infantry forces with the cavalry moving around on the flanks.  We saw this formation during the famous late period battles against Alexander.  Therefore, the Line-of-Battle should match-up with these formations.  

I wanted to add some infantry with bow armed troops integrated into the units.  Therefore, I am adding the following option: 

Bows
The bow was an integral part of the Late Persian Army.  Bows were a cultural icon of the Persians, and therefore many of the Mede and Persian soldiers were equipped with a compound bow. Therefore, mixed units of infantry and bows was a common feature of their armies.  

You can add Bows to Epilectoi Cavalry, Asphract Cavalry, Drilled Infantry and Warband Infantry for +1 Point.  They would allow the unit to have the following added to their profile: 

Bows: Shoot 2 (12MU)

Hoplite Mercenaries
One of the biggest employers of Greek mercenaries was the Late Persians.  They used these mercenaries as their melee-shock infantry.  The Persians preferred the bow and cavalry tactics.  Therefore, they were happy to let the Greek Hoplites be their heavy infantry.  

They have the following profile: 

Mercenary Hoplites                                                5 Points
Move    Attack     Armor    Courage     Discipline
6 MU    3            1                4                3

Special Rules: Phalanx, Drilled, Counter-Charge

Scythed Chariots
Part of the Late Persians "Novelty" units were the Scythed Chariots.  Xenophon writes a compelling account of how such units could be very effective against unorganized or isolated Greek troops.  However, against the Macedonians they were much less effective.  

They have the following profile:

Scythed Chariots                                                    5 Points
Move    Attack     Armor    Courage     Discipline
6 MU    3            1                4                3

Special Rules: Pursue, Counter-Charge

Other "novelty" units can be accounted for in the standard Heirs to Empire profiles.  For example, Camel Cavalry would simply be Asphract cavalry.  

Late Persian Line of Battle

The following is the Line-of-Battle for the Late Persians and their rebel Persian forces after the death of the Great King.   The Lines of Battle help to choose the appropriate Units for your Historical forces. Check the scenarios for starting point cost for a force. 

Each Line of Battle will have an entry with a number. The number indicates the limit of that Unit you can take in the army. If an entry says 1+ your army must have at least one of these units in it. If it is 0+ any number of that unit may be taken. If a Unit is not on the list, it can not be chosen.

Center: 
0-2 Skirmishers
0-2 Elephants
1+ Drilled Infantry
 -- Bows for +1 Point
0+ Warband Infantry
-- Bows for +1 Point
0-4 Archers/Slingers
0-2 Irregular Peltasts
0-2 Scythed Chariots
0-2 Mercenary Hoplites

Left/Right Wing: 
0-1 Companion Cavalry
0+ Epilektoi Cavalry
0+ Asphract Cavalry
0-2 Scythed Chariots
0-2 Elephants
0-2 Skirmishers 
0-2 Slinger/Archer 
0-2 Irregular Peltast 
0-2 Warband Infantry
-- Bows for +1 Point

Sample Line of Battle

Below you can see a Sample Army built from the Lines of Battle provided. It gives you an idea of what your force could look like. It is built to a 54-point force per the examples in the main rulebook. The Late Persians has 9 Units in the force. 

Center: 
1 Drill Infantry with Bows 
1 Warband Infantry with Bows
2 Irregular Peltasts
1 Mercenary Hoplite
1 Skirmisher

Left Wing: 
Epilektoi Cavalry with Bows
Scythed Chariots

Right Wing: 
Asphract Cavalry with Bows

Final Thoughts

These Late Persian Rebel Satraps will give a much different feel to a traditional Diadochi army.  Their hitting power is reduced up-close, but their ranged firepower is greater.  It will take a skilled commander to maneuver and fight these units against a Macedonian Phalanx force, but hopefully the extra troops and Commander's Gaze can give the Late Persian player an edge and the ability to "kite" against the harder hitting Phalanx units of the other Successors?  

I look forward to you giving them a try on the battlefield and letting me know what happens in the comments.  I think they lead to very different strategic and tactical challenges for your games of Heirs of Empire. 

Until next time.  

 


Become a Patron and get access to all the cool stuff, a peak behind the curtain of Blood and Spectacles, and early-access to playtest games!  


You can follow Blood and Spectacles Facebook page or Instagram for more fun! 

Check out the latest publications and contact me at our Blood and Spectacles website

Or purchase all out games at the Blood and Spectacles Publishing Wargames Vault Page!