The Plan: Part IV

Implementation

(See Part I of this series here)

With such a large and ambitious project, I needed very careful planning and clear goals in order to ensure that it was implemented. Again I was inspired by Olicanalad, who planned out his Punic Wars project by buying a big "pile of lead," and then painting small chunks or lots of his "lead-pile" within a set period of time, in order to complete the project within two years.

With a plastic-focused project like mine, it takes a bit more time to complete a group of miniatures due to the increased construction time. With metal figures, most of the time the only construction required is some cleaning of flash and basing. With plastics, heads, weapons, arms, shields, all have to be attached to the central body (some manufacturers even produce separate torsos and legs as well). This generally means much more detail and customizeability, but the trade-off is much more scraping and filing of mold-lines and attaching of very small components. 

Turning this...

In addition, I intended from the start to paint to a "showcase" standard, rather than a "battlefield" standard, despite the fact that I intend to use the collection for wargaming, because I enjoy painting and improving my skills by challenging myself with the ambitiousness of my painting. So I knew that getting about 1,000 figures, mostly plastic, built, painted, and based, would take a good deal of time. 

...Into this takes time (both pics courtesy of Victrix Ltd.)

Since budget is also a concern, rather than buying the entire heap of figures in one go and completing them over time, as Olicanalad did (for the most part), I decided I would purchase the armies in blocs defined by price (rather than number of figures). My initial target was to purchase $100-$150 blocs of figures, then construct, paint, and base the whole lot in a three-month period, and then buy the next bloc.

In this way I can space out my spending and gradually build up the armies over time. I can also buy one or two units for two or more of the armies in one bloc, allowing me to maintain project-motivation by giving me more variety of figures to work with (painting 240 Phalangites in a row being far more demoralizing than, say, 12 Companion cavalry, 40 Phalangites, and 40 Iberians, for instance). This will also allow me to complete small armies that can fight battles for skirmish games or smaller-battle systems (like Warhammer Ancient Battles) while working towards playing the big, cinematic battles, like Cannae or Raphia, that are the final goal of the project.

Warlord Games' as-yet unreleased Armoured Indian elephant

This gradual purchase and completion schedule will also allow me to work while I wait for some items that I require but are as yet unreleased (such as Victrix's plastic Macedonian cavalry, African elephants, and conversion sprues, Warlord Games' Indian elephants, etc.), and, of course, to cross my fingers and hope that currency exchange rates become more favorable.

The Plan: Part III

The Carthaginians and Republican Rome were arch-nemeses, doomed by geographic proximity to war constantly until one destroyed the other and achieved domination of the Western Mediterranean, and this they did over the course of the 3rd-2nd centuries BC. The situation in the east was similar...

The Mediterranean ca. 218 BC, courtesy of Wikimedia

The Seleucid and Ptolemaic Empires also warred ceaselessly over the Eastern Mediterranean coasts (the borders of each empire constantly shifted across modern Syria, Lebanon, Israel, and Turkey), in an ultimately futile attempt to rebuild Alexander's great empire. As with the Punic Wars, which I feel are to an extent best exemplified by Cannae, Raphia was the battle which most resonated with me (also one of the most well-documented battles) amongst the many Syrian Wars between these two Kingdoms, so this was the battle I initially decided to build my armies around.

However, the OOB for Raphia is massive — this was truly a clash of titans — and I quickly realized that it was probably an even less practical starting point than Cannae had been. So I decided instead to start out with a more limited goal: a basic plan for a generic "Alexandrian" Macedonian army which could be expanded until (with the addition of mercenaries and native levies) it could be split into two armies, Ptolemaic and Seleucid. With that task completed, I could gradually build up "faction-specific" units (such as the Arab levies whom Antiochos III used in several battles, or the Ptolemaic Machimoi Phalangites raised by Ptolemaios IV) after the core of the armies was in place.

Raphia

Alexander's expeditionary army consisted of a tightly-organized combined-arms force, each branch of which could be argued to be the best in the world in its field. The core was the Hammer (his Hetairoi, or Companion Cavalry) and the Anvil (the Macedonian Phalangites or Pezhetairoi, foot-companions).

These two core elements required several smaller support-units. The Hypaspistai ("shield-bearers", elite infantry unit) provided a "hinge" between the cavalry "hammer" and Phalanx "anvil". Without going too deeply into the topic, I fall into the camp which considers the Hypaspistai to have been equipped as Hoplites, for a variety of reasons, but capable of being equipped with javelins and lighter equipment for "spec ops" missions (I will post a more in-depth discussion of Hypaspistai at a later date).

In addition, Alexander had a veteran mercenary strike-force (at least at Gaugamela) as a "right flank guard" detachment consisting of Peltophoroi, Agrianian javelinmen, "Macedonian" Archers (likely non-Cretan mercenaries equipped as Cretan archers), Achaean "Peltasts", "Greek" cavalry, and Prodromoi lancers (probably Thracian by ethnicity). This was the force that pinned Darius' left-wing cavalry horde, allowing Alexander to swing back in to the center with 2,000 Companion cavalry at Gaugamela.

Gaugamela

 On the left, another flank-guard detachment consisting of Thracian Peltasts and light cavalry, Cretan Archers, Agrianian skirmishers, and Thessalian cavalry (equal in number to the Companions), was fine-tuned to refuse the flank effectively. The Thessalian cavalry's diamond-formation (Rhombos) was defensive in nature, because it allowed the cavalry to quickly react by turning in place, forming into a wedge at any of the four points, thus quickly reforming to counter-charge in any direction.

The Companions, being intended for offense, simply formed wedges. The Thessalians may have used javelins in the time of Alexander (which would perhaps have been more effective for a defensive battlefield role than long spears), but by the time of the Diadochoi wars, had been converted over to Xystophoroi (Xyston-Bearers), with the role of ranged and light cavalry being filled by mercenaries and native levies. Hippeis Thessalikoi would have been difficult to distinguish from the Companions by appearance (both during and after Alexander's reign), perhaps wearing less impressive cloaks and armour.

Thracian, Illyrian, Agrianian, Cretan, and Greek mercenary light troops (javelinmen, peltasts, slingers, and archers) were interspersed in small "penny-packets" throughout the army for different support-roles.

Peltasts, by Johnny Shumate

 The final element was a reserve of reluctant "allied" Greek League Hoplites, equipped with the traditional panoply of Hoplon, Linothorax, long Dory spear, greaves, and helmets.
So this is my list to recreate an Alexandrian Macedonian army:

Alexandrian Macedonian Army
1x24 Agema Phalangites
3x24 Pezhetairoi Phalangites
1x18 Hypaspistai ("light"-armed)
1x18 Peltophoroi
1x18 Mercenary Hoplites
1x16 Thracian Peltasts
1x16 Illyrian Peltasts
1x10 Agrianian Javelinmen (there were probably about 1,000 of these at Gaugamela, in two units of 500)
1x8 Cretan Archers (representing both the Cretan and "Macedonian" archers)
1x8 Slingers (Thracian, Agrianian, Rhodian, represented by one larger unit)
1x12 Companion Cavalry
1x12 Thessalian Cavalry

This is a balanced force which both represents the elements of Alexander's army fairly well, and should also prove effective in most rulesets. It also, I think, captures the look and feel of Alexander's army without requiring 500+ figures. Most importantly, it can be put together as a standalone, self-contained force in its own right, and also provides a core force which can be split to create the backbone of two Hellenistic Successor armies: the Seleucid and the Ptolemaic.

Here are the expanded lists for these two armies:

Seleucid
1x24 Argyraspidai
2x24 Katoikoi Phalangites (Colonists)
1x24 Pantodapoi Phalangites (Native Levies)*
1x18 Early Thorakitai (Light Hypaspists)
1x18 Thorakitai Proper (mail shirts)*
1x18 Thureophoroi (Thracians/Illyrians)
1x24 Uazali (Cilician/Carian/Psidian/other Anatolian light infantry)*
2x12 Arab Levy Infantry (Skirmishers)*
1x12 Cretan Archers (*)
1x8 Agema Hetairoi (Companion Cavalry)
1x8 Hippeis Thessalikoi (Thessalian Colonist Cavalry)
1x8 Galatian Cavalry+
1x6 Arachosian Cavalry (Javelins)*
1x6 Dahae Horse-Archers*
2x Indian Elephants*

Ptolemaic
1x24 Basilikon Agema (Royal Guards infantry; "Heavy" Hypaspists)*
1x24 Klerouchoi Phalangites (Colonists)
1x24 Mercenary Phalangites*
1x24 Machimoi Phalangites (Native Levies)*
1x24 Galatian Infantry+
2x18 Thureophoroi*
1x12 Thracian Peltasts
1x10 Agrianian Peltasts
1x8 Rhodian Slingers
1x8 Basilike Ile (Companion Cavalry)
1x12 Galatian Cavalry+
1x8 Tarantine Cavalry*
2x African Elephants*

Units marked with an (*) would need to be bought to add to the core Alexandrian army; those marked with a (+) need to be bought for the Carthaginians, and therefore do not represent any additional expense; units not marked are appropriated directly from the Alexandrian list.

These choices for expansion are a compromise between re-using all the units in the Alexandrian list, and also bringing the two armies closer to the OOB at Raphia (without having 500 figures per side).

But this is not the beginning and end of options for expansion. For example, once these two lists are completed (bought, constructed, painted), it would be simple to create a Pyrrhic army by the addition of some Tarantine Phalangites, Tarantine Hoplites, and the Ptolemaic army's Tarantine cavalry. To this could be added Samnite infantry from the Carthaginian/Roman armies.

Tarantine cavalry, artist unknown

An Antigonid force could be created by increasing the ratio of Phalangites and removing the eastern levies; if some Greek skirmish cavalry (Hippakontistai) are bought, and hoplite units are gradually built up (Tarantines, a couple of Allied Greek League hoplites for the Alexandrian army), combined with some javelinmen, then you have an early Greek force, such as that at Chaeronea; add the Thureophoroi, and you have a later Greek League army for the Social Wars. And many of the units for these armies could be used in early Diadochoi battles as well (Paraitacene, Gabiene, Ipsus, etc.)

Thus the principle of versatility provides a wide range of opportunities for expansion of these Hellenistic armies.

To come back to these lists, the new units are representative of later Hellenistic warfare. The Thureophoroi (thureos-bearers) are a new infantry type which developed over the course of the 3rd century BC, as a result of the Galatian invasion of the 270s. Here is a good explanation of the equipment and battlefield roles of the three main types of thureos infantry (Euzonoi, Thureophoroi, Thorakitai).

Kit-bashed Thureophoros made of Victrix components

Conveniently, it is fairly well-established that Illyrian skirmishers had adopted the thureos by the time of Alexander, and it is highly like that the Thracians had as well (this is probably due to their contact with eastern Celts several decades before the Galatian migrations which introduced the thureos to Greece, Macedon, and Anatolia, from whence it spread throughout the Hellenistic world), so I can comfortably equip my Alexandrian "Peltasts" (Illyrians and Thracians) with thureos shields, and then use them as Thureophoroi in Seleucid and Ptolemaic armies.

"Silver-Shields" or guard Phalangites can be used as Alexander's Argyraspids, can represent the Agema Pezhetairoi (the guard regiments before they were outfitted with silver shields), and can also be used as Seleucid Argyraspidai easily enough. One box of Warlord's Royal Guard Phalangites provides 24.

Warlord's Macedonian Royal Guard

Two boxes of Warlord's Phalangites provides 80 figures (a very economical way to build a big phalanx fast), which can be divided into the three units of 24 with eight extras. And Victrix miniatures' Peltasts and Unarmoured Hoplites sets will take care of the Agrianians, the peltasts, the Peltophoroi, the mercenary hoplites, the Cretan archers, and the Rhodian slingers.

And, finally, Victrix' (as yet unreleased) Greek and Macedonian cavalry sets will take care of the Companion and Thessalian cavalry (12 to a box), for a total of 24 heavy cavalry who can be split into three units of 8 for the Successor armies.

Victrix Miniatures "Macedonian Cavalry" renders

The rest of the later units are (currently) more difficult to find a plastic alternative for (except the additional Phalanxes, which I intend to procure from Victrix, for variety; they also have an option for Eastern Phalangites wearing pants in their Successor kit), but I will focus on getting the Alexandrian Macedonian army up and running, and then see about Victrix' conversion sprues that were mentioned on their facebook page, which may make units such as light Hypaspists and Thureophoroi much easier to implement in plastic. I am also holding out hopes that Victrix will eventually release an unarmoured Greek/Macedonian cavalry set, which could be used as Prodromoi and Tarantine cavalry.

With a starting point fixed for each of the four armies, I next need to sketch out a plan for purchasing, building, and painting the figures, which will be the subject of my next post. 

The Plan: Part II

This installment in my series on mapping out my four-army Macedonian and Punic Wars project will focus on the Punic Wars contingent — Hannibal's Carthaginian army, and a Republican Roman force to oppose him.

With an ambitious scheme forming, I went back to my initial Cannae project. These two armies (Hannibal's Carthaginians and Republican Romans) would constitute half of my four-army project, and half of the factions in my planned campaign.

Map of Cannae, courtesy of livius.org

Order of Battle

First I determined an OOB for Cannae by choosing reasonable troop-estimates from the (often self-contradicting) Wikipedia article (because yes, I am that lazy), and boiling those down to numbers which I felt would work equally well in Hail Caesar, Warhammer Ancient Battles, or any other ruleset suitable to large numbers of 28mm figures, which gave me:

Hannibal

Heavy Infantry — 8,000 Libyans; 8,000 Iberians; 16,000 Gauls (half left out of action as camp-guards); 5,500 Gaetulians

Light Infantry/Skirmishers: 8,000 (Including Balearic Slingers and "mixed nationality spearmen")

Cavalry — 4,000 Numidian; 2,000 Iberian; 4,000 Gallic; 450 Liby-Phoenician

Varro

4-8 Roman Legions with accompanying Latin Auxilliary Alae

1 Legion: 1,200 Velites/Leves, 1,200 Hastati, 1,200 Principes, 600 Triarii, 300 Equites [1];
Total: 4,200 infantry, 300 cavalry

1 Latin Ala: Identical, but with 900 cavalry rather than 300.

(Polybios [2] asserts that the legions were raised at "emergency strength" of 5,000 infantry and 300 cavalry; Alae at 5,000 foot and 900 horse).

The Roman figures are difficult to pin down for two reasons: firstly, the practice of using "emergency-strength" legions, with more men than the standard, and the fact that losing 90,000 men in a single battle stretches the boundaries of plausibility. That said, every source agrees that Hannibal was heavily outnumbered, so I essentially decided to just fudge the specific numbers and make sure the ratios were correct-ish.

As for Carthage, the precise ratios (1:1:1:1 Libyan/Iberian/Gallic/Skirmishers) makes coming up with a representative army-plan simpler, but there are still a few sticking-points. For instance, the Gaetulians. I had a devil of a time figuring out who precisely they were — a North-African Berber tribe, probably not too-dissimilar from the Numidians, except even less civilized, and notorious for wearing animal skins and living off milk and raw meat. Most representations of them seem to depict them as fast-moving, unarmoured warriors, practicing a skirmish-centric combat style (again, much like the Numidians). Why then are they listed under heavy infantry?

As best I can tell, this is a fairly accurate depiction of Gaetulian Infantry. From the Ancient Empires mod for Total War: Attila

Since there are no options for Gaetulian figures of which I am aware, I decided to simply erase them from my army-plan for the moment, and drop the extra 5,500 men into my Light Infantry total.

Which brings us to the next sticking point, Light Infantry being described as "mixed nationality spearmen". I presume this is due to the difficulty of Polybios referring to Javelinmen as ""Peltasts" or "Peltophoroi" and "Peltophoroi" being confused with pelta-bearing Phalangitai. This has led to many translations of Polybios referring to "Light infantry and pikemen" being sent on missions that should be given to skirmishers, such as occupying hills in front of the main body of troops. Luke Ueda-Sarson wrote an excellent, convincing, and exhaustive pair of articles on this subject.

Suffice it to say, I feel comfortable counting these as light infantry and skirmishers, and slotting in the Caetrati here so I can have more Iberians since they are my favorite component of Carthaginian armies. Alongside the Caetrati and Balearic Slingers (of whom 8 is probably far too high a number, since most armies had fewer than 1,000 slingers, but any fewer than 8 figures wouldn't feel or look right on the table, so I'm comfortable fudging this) a contingent of Libyan Javelinmen is included as well (wouldn't be "mixed nationality" if they were all Iberian!).

Victrix Unarmoured Iberians equipped as Caetrati; Photo from the Victrix Store-Page

After playing around with the numbers a good deal, I arrived at the following figures:

Carthaginian

Heavy Infantry: 48 Liby-Phoenician Spearmen, 48 Gauls, 48 Iberian Scutari
Skirmishers: 16 Libyan Javelinmen, 8 Balearic Slingers, 16 Iberian Caetrati, 16 Gallic Javelinmen
Cavalry: 24 Gallic Cavalry, 24 Numidian Cavalry, 12 Iberian Cavalry (the 450 Punic cavalry would be represented by Hannibal and his standard-bearer)
Total: 260 miniatures (200 Infantry, 60 Cavalry)

Republican Roman

Infantry: 2 Roman Manipular Legions and 2 Latin Alae Socii each consisting of roughly 12 Velites, 24 Hastati, 24 Pincipes and 12 Triarii per legion/Ala for a total of 48 Velites, 96 Hastati, 96 Principes, and 48 Triarii
Cavalry: 6 Roman Equites and 18 Allied Equites (deployed as 2x12 Equites
Total: 312 miniatures (288 Infantry, 24 Cavalry)

Getting the Armies on the Table

The feasibility of such a vast undertaking, as I mentioned previously, hinged on the large (and increasing) variety of plastic kits available. For the Punic Wars half of my project, I decided I would rely primarily on Victrix miniatures, supplemented with Warlord Games and the beautiful Agema Miniatures legionaries and Velites boxed-sets.

Agema Miniatures' Princeps, Hastatus, and Triarius

In particular, Victrix's releases of Iberian infantry and cavalry, and Numidian cavalry would be essential, as would their current Carthaginian and Roman sets. Since I find the Agema legionaries far more aesthetically pleasing than the Victrix, I decided that I would use three boxes of Agema legionaries (each provides 16 Hastati, 16 Principes, and 8 Triarii) for the two Roman Legions, and Victrix's Pectoral and Allied Auxiliary sets, each providing 60 figures including Leader/Standard/Musician commands, of which all can be constructed as Hastati/Principes, up to 18 as Velites, and 18 long spears for Triarii/Extraordinarii, for the Allied Legions (Alae Socii).

Victrix Italian Allies, from the Victrix store-page

The trick to the Victrix Roman sets is their versatility. Each sprue comes with six armoured bodies (chainmail, pectoral, or a mix for the Allied box) and two unarmoured, 2 bucklers and 8 scutum shields. So the unarmoured bodies can be given javelins, bucklers, and skirmisher heads to operate as Velites, or scutae, pilae, and legionary heads, to operate as unarmoured Hastati (the different units of the legion being most easily differentiated by including a mix of unarmoured and pectoral for Hastati, pectoral/chainmail for Principes, and chainmail/musculata cuirass for Triarii). This means you can build up to 18 Velites, or use all the unarmoured bodies as legionaries, and so on.

In order to get 48 Hastati, 48 Principes and 24 Triarii out of two Victrix Roman sets, the latter is the route I would have to go, and as such this necessitates the additional purchase of 3 boxes of Agema Velites (48 total, 12 per legion/ala).

Victrix has a running army deal called the "Victrix/Aventine Roman Infantry and Cavalry Deal" which includes any two Roman legionary boxes plus 12 (excellent-looking) Aventine Miniatures Equites for about $100 (dependent on the fluctuating USD/GBP exchange-rate). This is perfect for the project, as it provides almost half the Romans I need for a very affordable price.

Victrix/Aventine Deal

Victrix's newly-announced Greek/Macedonian Cavalry set will provide figures wearing bronze musculata cuirasses and Boeotian helmets, with options for spined cavalry shields and javelins/shorter spears (shorter, that is, than the Companions' Xyston) which could easily be made serviceable as Republican Roman Equites. The Republican cavalry are thought to have switched from bronze cuirass to chainmail sometime around the end of the 2nd Punic War, but it is very likely that both would have appeared side-by-side during the 50-year or so transition period, particularly since pre-Marian Roman soldiers purchased their own equipment. Depending on how Victrix's plastics scale up with Aventine's metals, it may even be possible to put a mix of figures in my two units of Equites. Warlord has also just released a Caesarian/Late Republican Equites set, which is another option for the second half of my needed Roman cavalry (though Warlord only provides 10 figures per box).

 For Hannibal's army, the Victrix Carthaginian box contains 48 Liby-Phoenician heavy spearmen (24 "Veterans" in Roman equipment, and 24 "regulars" in Hoplite panoply) along with 14 Libyan Skirmishers, which nearly covers the African infantry contingent.

"Hannibal's Veterans" by Victrix Ltd.

Two boxes of Victrix Iberians (one armoured, one unarmoured) would provide enough for 2x24 Scutarii and 2x16 Caetrati (slightly more than I need, but I really like Iberians so I'm not complaining), with one-quarter (8) of the Caetrati wearing armour, and one third (16) of the Scutarii unarmoured (by combining the two boxes) for a more realistic and aesthetically pleasing variety within the units.

Two boxes of Warlord Games Celts would give me 80 Gauls, more than enough for the 48 Warband and 16 Skirmishers I would need; the excess can be built with a higher proportion of shirtless torsos and painted with blue pants and white/blue shields and provide a Galatian contingent (though Victrix has let slip on their Facebook page that they will probably be releasing their own Gallic Celt sets, probably including cavalry, so I may bide my time and see what they look like before choosing between the two manufacturers).

For the Balearic slingers (of whom I want more than were probably present at the battle because they're cool) I had a couple of options, but will most likely use the slingers which come with the Victrix Peltast set (which I need to buy for my Successors armies anyway); alternatively, Victrix makes their own Balearic Slingers, but these don't look that different from the Greek slingers, and 12 of the Balearics come to a set, which is more than the 8 I need. I may eventually buy proper Balearic Slingers anyway, but the goal is to get these armies up and running ASAP, so in the meantime, Greeks will suffice.

Victrix Iberian Cavalry, courtesy of Victrix Facebook page

For the cavalry, Warlord Gauls (10 per box) and Victrix's Iberians and Numidians are the only options in plastic, and both companies' offerings look great. At roughly $24 USD (£19.95) for 12 cavalry from Victrix, their pricing blows metal competitors out of the water (Warlord's are a bit pricier and are plastic/metal hybrids, but still more affordable than the metal options I've been seeing).

572 miniatures, and that would only be two of the four total armies! Obviously, this would have to be more of a long-term goal, in the immediate term, simply getting armies that were large enough to use would have to suffice.

With these plans laid out for my Western factions, I will next turn to the Eastern Mediterranean...

DISCLAIMER: I am not a paid spokesman for any of the miniatures manufacturers whom I have linked in this post; I am linking to anything I refer to that I think someone might want to easily learn more about, because this series of intro-posts is intended to be a useful source of information, particularly for people who are new to historical wargaming and interested in getting started in this era.

Sources:
[1] Nic Fields: Roman Republican Legionary. Osprey (21-22)
[2] Polybius: Histories. 3.107.

The Plan: Part I

[Read my Project Intro post first]

Initially, I intended to attempt a recreation of the Battle of Cannae, because it is one of the most impressive (and mercifully well-documented) heroic victories in military history. This would mean collecting both a Carthaginian army and a Republican Roman army of relatively large sizes—at least 1-200 figures per side.

But, the more I thought about it (and the more I read about the Diadochoi) the more it appealed to me to aim at a four-player campaign (i.e. moving armies around a map and playing tabletop miniatures games to resolve battles when opposing forces meet) featuring Rome, Carthage, and eternal arch-enemies the Seleucid Empire and Ptolemaic Egypt (it helps that my core gaming group consists of three other players!).

Courtesy of Wikipedia

These four armies/empires have the benefit of 1) creating two sets of "historically-appropriate" opponents, 2) if not sharing borders, at least occupying the four quadrants of the Mediterranean (so allowing "What-if" battles naturally to occur as a result of territorial expansion), and 3) all operating in the same historical period (the 4th-2nd centuries BC).

It also occurred to me that this ambitious goal might be in reach, budgetarily speaking, due to the fact that there is a wide (and ever-widening) range of plastics covering this era, and because the multi-national nature of all four factions' armies meant there would be significant overlap in the forces I would need to build.

For instance, Hannibal's 2nd Punic War Carthaginian army relied heavily on Gaulish allies (and the Carthaginians made extensive use of mercenary Gauls in the 1st and 3rd Punic wars beside), so a good number of Gaulish infantry and cavalry would be obligatory; however, the Romans also fought alongside the Gauls on several occasions — including against Hannibal. So any Gaulish units which I purchased for the Carthaginians could also be used as allies for the Romans, if needed.

In addition, after the Eastern Celt rampage through Greece and Macedon, finally ending in a mass-migration to central Anatolia in the 270s BC, "Galatian" mercenaries became extremely popular throughout the armies of the entire eastern Mediterranean world, fighting for Antigonid Macedon, the Epirotes, the Seleucids, the Pontics and Pergamon, and even the Ptolemies, who encouraged thousands of Galatian Celts to settle in military colonies throughout Ptolemaic Egypt.

Galatians floating down the Nile — by Angus McBride (I think)

So, every unit of Gauls which I assemble has the potential to fit into any of these four target armies (and, potentially, future armies from the same era should I ever expand the project). Further, these elements of allied Gaulish forces would form a core which could be expanded into a standalone Gaulish army later on.

The same principle would apply to Iberian, Samnite, Greek, Anatolian, Thracian, and Persian contingents of these four armies, in that each category can be used in at least two armies.

Versatility is, therefore, one of the key advantages of the era and armies that I have chosen, and I decided to design these armies with versatility in mind, particularly because, if I was clever enough about it, I would eventually be able to construct additional armies primarily or entirely out of components procured for the Big Four—for example, Phalangites, Indian Elephants, and Companion Cavalry from the Seleucid army might be combined with Tarantine Cavalry, Samnite Infantry, and Gaulish mercenaries from the Carthaginian army to create an Epirote army.

To an extent, minor aesthetic/tactical changes throughout the 3rd century BC (which is spottily-documented anyway) could be fudged to create armies in nearby eras. If my Seleucid and Ptolemaic Phalanxes are not too explicitly Hellenistic in design, they could be used in an Alexandrian Macedonian army, or an early Successors/Diadochoi-era army, and the eastern auxiliaries of the Seleucids could be combined with (mercenary) Hoplites and used as the nucleus of a Late Achaemenid army to oppose Alexander (or used to beef up Diadochoi armies).

Are these Alexandrian Macedonian Phalangites or Later Successor Phalangites? You don't ask, and Warlord Games won't tell

This planning principle will be kept in mind throughout the project as I build a collection from the ground up, and I have covered it in such detail because I think it is a very useful principle to contemplate for other gamers that may be entering or considering the Historical Wargaming hobby as an alternative to fantasy and scifi wargaming, because it helps make collecting multiple armies more affordable and less time-consuming, and a versatile collection will allow its owner to more easily recreate the big, cinematic battles that got every history-buff hooked in the first place. 

So, with my era selected, and the armies I wish to collect chosen, I now needed more specifics for my plan, as far as which units to compose each army from.

To be continued...

Project Origin

It all started summer 2015, when a certain well-known wargaming fantasy setting was "reborn" as something which I consider an abomination.

Ages 3 and up

  Without getting into too many details, I found myself seeking a new tabletop wargaming platform, and discovered the world of historical miniatures wargaming as a result.

I was aware that this sort of thing went on, of course, but I didn't fully grasp how the field had changed over the past eight years or so (in the early 2000s historical wargaming seemed rather an esoteric field, in the States at least). Having grown up with Warhammer and 40k, I was accustomed to (and had come to expect) a wide range of detailed, multipart plastic kits in 28mm scale, and until recently, this was something which was not available to historical wargamers.

I had experimented with 1/72-scale kits in the early- and mid-2000s, but they didn't really compare, and it's hard on the eyes to paint these smaller figures to the standard which I enjoy painting. I also tried getting into Flames of War, but quickly decided the scale was too small for me. It had to be 28mm or larger for my tastes.

However, with the advent of the Perry Brothers, Warlord Games, Victrix Miniatures, and several other manufacturers, there are now a ton of options in this scale for historical wargaming, a wide variety of eras to choose from, and plenty of rules-systems for almost all of them.

Feeling enthusiastic about the idea of a new world of miniatures wargaming, I now had only to choose an era, and being a history buff this was quite difficult, so I set a few "ground rules": the era had to interest me, have an existing rule-set or two for me to use, and have a wide miniature range, with lots of plastic options.

Why all the focus on plastic? Although many find plastic kits frustrating due to the required assembly and occasionally fiddly nature of small components, I actually prefer the customizability — it's rare to find a plastic box-set with less poseability and variation than a metal range, and even if you do you can still swap things around with judicious use of a craft-knife. With multipart kits, one also has the option to "kitbash" by mixing and matching heads, accessories, weapons, shields and so forth from different sets to create entirely unique figures, or represent unit-types for which no satisfactory miniatures are available.

Fiddly? Versatile!

Budget is also a significant consideration for me, and plastic (especially in the historical field) tends to be far, far more affordable than metal. In my humble opinion, plastic sets often (though not always) have a higher standard of sculpting than many of the most popular metal ranges to boot (though shallowness of detail is a common complaint particularly in older platic ranges).

So, with these guidelines in mind, I did some research. After considering Dark Ages (Saga), WW2 (Bolt Action), Thirty Years War (Pike and Shotte), and various Black Powder-eras (Napoleonic, Victorian/Colonial, Seven Years War, War of Spanish Succession), I initially became particularly interested in the Wars of the Roses, firstly because it was an era I hadn't studied thoroughly, secondly because of its semblance to a real-world Game of Thrones, and third (most importantly) because of the excellent Perry Brothers range for it.

Perry WotR Infantry

However, whilst reading about internecine dynastic struggles (like the WotR and, to an extent, the Hundred Years War) I came across an account of the events immediately following the death of Alexander the Great. I had read a great deal about Megas Alexandros in the past, but at the time was more interested in earlier Hellenic history (the Peloponnesian wars, the Persian wars, the Iliad, and so forth) so I never put much thought into what happened after his death, semi-consciously imagining a blank space in history between 323 BC and the Caesarian Era of Early Imperial Rome.

I immediately became captivated by the struggles of the Diadochoi, the wars which began with dozens of Alexander's generals as satraps (rapidly transitioning into warlords) vying for the scraps of his empire, and concluded with only a handful surviving to establish lasting dynasties.

Around the same time, I discovered Olicanalad's blog and was deeply inspired by his Punic Wars project — he proved to me that historical wargaming with massive armies at 28mm scale was possible, and inspired me to research another era I had neglected, that of the Punic Wars (which happened to occur during the Hellenistic Era). I'd read a bit about Hannibal and the second war, but mostly focused on the Caesars and the Imperial period of Roman history.

Nobody can ever complain about project-fatigue as long as Olicanalad is in business

The multinational nature of the Carthaginian Empire and Army (and, to an extent, their Republican Roman counterparts) captivated my imagination, and as I read about these two nations (as well as the Hellenistic Successors) it slowly dawned on me that here was an era where several powerful empires coexisted and competed while being very distinct from one another aesthetically, tactically, and culturally. In essence, the "factions" in this era were about as distinct as the factions in the average fantasy setting.

Macedonians, Samnites, Galatians and Elephants — all in the same army! Pyrrhic Troops, illus. by Johnny Shumate

The same could not be said about most of the other eras I considered. Certainly, there were cultural differences between, say, early 18th century Prussia, France, and Spain, and uniforms/military aesthetics/tactics differed somewhat as well, but at the end of the day a guy wearing coattails and a tricorn hat carrying a flintlock can only be so distinctive from his peers. 

Aesthetic variation is important to me as a hobbyist, because it helps prevent boredom and project-fatigue from setting in whilst constructing, painting, and basing dozens of figures en-masse, and is in my opinion one of the major draws of fictional settings, from Game of Thrones to Warhammer to Lord of the Rings. This is not to put down eras of military convergence and relative standardization, but as someone transitioning from fantasy/sci-fi wargaming to historical, this is one element which I find a convincing selling-point.

It also allows for players with very different tactical tastes or approaches to enter historical wargaming without worrying about ahistorical (and potentially assymetrical) contests. A horde of Gauls fights differently from Iberian ambushers, who fight differently from Roman legionaries, who fight differently from Hellenistic Phalangites, who fight differently from Persian horsemen, and so on.

My next post will continue where this one leaves off, and begin a series on the full plan of this Hellenistic and Punic Wars project.

Note: It turns out I wasn't the only one to come to these conclusions: http://www.talkwargaming.com/2015/09/editorial-warhammer-9th-is-called-hail.html

Mission-Statement

I am starting this blog as a long-time Fantasy/Sci-Fi tabletop wargamer who is transitioning to historical miniatures wargaming, for various reasons. I have formed a detailed plan for building a large, four-army collection, as a way to entice my gaming group into switching as well (collecting opposing sides in a period generally being advisable anyway, since there are no guarantees of running into a historically-appropriate opponent at a game shop), and intend to do so affordably and methodically.

I hope that chronicling this project will inspire and help other "youngbloods" like myself who, for whatever reason, have become dissatisfied with the "Big Names" in Sci-Fi/Fantasy wargaming and are interested in historicals as an alternative to giving up the hobby.

I also intend to show how certain aspects of the hobby which are characteristic of Sci-Fi/Fantasy wargaming but tend to be a bit neglected in the historical field, such as conversion, kit-bashing, and new painting techniques and materials, can be applied to historicals with great results, and which may make historical wargaming seem more appealing to these transitioning hobbyists.