The Great Invasions 375 - 475 A.D.

An ambitious scenario covering the Mediterranean world during the century that saw the transformation of the Western Roman Empire into a series of smaller kingdoms ruled by warrior aristocracies of Germanic origin. Conventionally 'The Fall of the Roman Empire'.
Ignore the automatic calendar - the four years covered by each turn are shown in the News String. Think of each turn as a series of campaigns in that particular province, and remember that it doesn't represent four years of constant warfare. Fighting would be largely limited to the summer months, or a tribe might settle down to farm for several years and there would be no conflict at all.

Small scale map of the Mediterranean and the surrounding areas. Provincial names (in upper case) are accurate, but from an earlier period: by this time the Empire was divided into four huge prefectures, subdivided into about twelve dioceses, and about a hundred individual provinces - none of these would really suit the scale of this scenario. I haven't bothered with the barbarian lands away from the borders as (i) they don't matter for game purposes and (ii) the Romans didn't have much idea of what was there.

The Roman aim is to retain control of as much of the Empire as they can, specifically the cities which are the administrative and cultural centres. There are 95 Victory Points in the Eastern Empire, and 55 in the Western, so even some fairly dramatic losses (i.e. the entire West and some of the East) will still produce the historical result which will show as a drawn game. Don't lose heart as the Romans just because a few border provinces are overrun: the key to survival lies in the East.

The 'Barbarians' aim is simply to take over as much of the Empire as possible. Do note that formation Support is set to Internal only so one tribe can't assist another in combat. There're 10 VP bonuses (not shown on map) for destroying the Western or Eastern Courts.

The tribes are activated on broadly their historical dates (if you're the Barbarian player keep a close eye on the units' status bars), although the smaller raiders and peasant revolts are randomised. At some point in the scenario - again randomised - the Romans will face a full-scale war with Persia: they shouldn't neglect the Eastern Front by sending all the field armies west.

The Imperial and allied forces are shown in dark blue, with icons to distinguish the individual types: black for the Western Romans; red for the Eastern; brown for the Kingdom of Armenia, and blue for hired/allied foederati (some of the latter only available through Theatre Options and costing VPs to represent payments or the granting of land). The Romans also have Theatre Options to buy two or three turns of peace with Persia and some of the tribes, again at a hefty cost in VPs. None of the treaties will last more than a few turns.

The Armenians will remain neutral unless attacked - if their capital falls it's 10 VPs to the Barbarians and one Armenian cavalry army will become available to them. (The Barbarian PO WILL attack Armenia.)

The 'Barbarians' - everyone, in Roman eyes, outside the Empire - although the Sassanid Persian Empire contained cities with a far longer history of civilization than Rome itself - are coloured as follows:

There are POs for either side. The Roman one concentrates on defence, especially the larger and richer (higher Objective Points) cities. The Barbarian one broadly follows their historical paths, with enough leeway to provide some replay value.

The PO will, of course, ignore these restrictions.

Do use the limited sea transport available: the barbarians will need it to bring at least the Scots-Irish and Angles into play, and the Romans to move troops to threatened areas. The great Roman fear - eventually realised in the West - was that the barbarians would break through to the Mediterranean ports and raid the poorly defended inner provinces. If the Barbarians take Antioch the Sassanids will send crews from the Gulf to man a fleet, while if Carthago is lost the Barbarians will seize the grain fleet and its escorts and commence piratical raids. You may only transport to and sea assault port hexes, although the PO may ignore this as well. Shallow hexes are placed to limit sea movement - ships usually hugged the coasts or hopped from island to island, as it was far too uncertain to sail far from land. Harbours from which to operate were critically important.

Fleet 'bombardment' - unavoidable at this scale - represents...er, let me think...either marines being disembarked or the fleet sailing up river...or something. It won't have much effect.

You will need to download the XIXth Century database from www.ruggeddefence.com to access the right troop types - this will give you swordsmen, spearmen, light and heavy cavalry etc., instead of MG Squads and armoured cars. It won't affect your other scenarios.

Romans will reconstitute in their original provinces. Western Roman comitatenses - the infantry and cavalry iconed mobile field armies - will reconstitute as weaker foederati (except the Comes Britanniae who will reappear as 'King Arthur') in their starting provinces. Eastern comitatenses, with access to greater wealth and population, will reconstitute normally in their home provinces.

Barbarians without wagon laagers will reconstitute in their original homelands: those with laagers are aiming to move a lot further and will lose contact with their homelands - they will not reconstitute but have higher supply to compensate. The laagers also act as supply enhancements, and contain engineers and pontoon troops to rebuild bridges and cross rivers. The Imperial siege trains similarly contain engineers and pontoon troops.

The defence of the West in particular was fatally compromised by a succession of revolts, ranging from small scale peasant and slave uprisings (the bagaudae) to all-out attempts by regional commanders to overthrow the existing ruler. Once during the scenario there is a 75% chance that the Western Roman comitatenses (not the Magister Peditum) will revolt (individually) and a similar Barbarian unit will appear in their starting province. There is a 75% chance that they will be killed and disappear in a few turns (all rebels in this period came to an unhappy end). The rebels' names are accurate but they will not appear (and possibly die) on their historical dates. If a revolt occurs the corresponding loyalist Roman unit may (75% chance) be paralysed for a turn. There are also slave and peasant rebellions: small and weak but enough to interrupt supplies and divert units from the front. The East largely avoided similar internal problems, although the Isaurian mountaineers could be a menace and there was the occasional religious uprising.

Most cities act as Supply Points for either side (this is the fifth century), and there are some for the Barbarians in their home territories and at a few ports.

Limitanei and pseudocomitatenses

Roman garrison troops - the limitanei - only move one hex: they can voluntarily abandon their fort, or be driven from it, in which case they become weaker but more mobile: this represents them joining the field armies (comitatenses) when they became designated as pseudocomitatenses: there are no fort replacements (although 'dead' forts may reappear from the Replacement Pool: in which case the pseudocomitatenses have fortified themselves and reverted to limitanei).

There is nothing to stop the Romans abandoning the borders and huddling in the cities: but this will enable the Barbarians to pick off each one individually, and the Romans won't reconstitute once their home provinces are overrun.

This is a very short and simple scenario covering a very lengthy and complicated period in history: it takes the simplistic view that the fall of the West was caused by an influx of tribes that could be neither expelled, destroyed or assimilated. There is a wealth of information on the period in both popular and the academic media for those who are interested (Googling 'Later Roman Empire' will generate in excess of seven million hits!).

Was the Later Roman Empire worth 'saving' by the fourth century? Now that empires are out of fashion many recent authors emphasise the negative aspects - the widespread slavery, the heavy taxation levied on the majority of the population, the growth of the huge senatorial estates worked by virtual serfs, and the regular slaughter in the arenas for entertainment. It can be argued that, out of the fifty million or so imperial subjects, only about ten thousand really benefited: the Imperial family and its extensive court; the Imperial bureaucracy; the senatorial aristocracy and the senior military establishment. Certainly it was increasingly difficult to obtain the taxes and recruits to maintain the approximately 500,000 strong armed forces, even though military service was in theory hereditary and there was extensive conscription: this can be taken to suggest that most of the population didn't really care who ruled them. Most 'barbarians', even the pagan ones, were not the shaggy madmen beloved of the Roman writers: many maintained widespread diplomatic relations, even the supposedly savage Huns, often with the aid of former Roman officials or deserters.

This ignores the religious dimension, which was becoming increasingly important: one reason for the Franks' relative success was that they became Catholic Christians, the same as the Romans, as opposed to the Arian version of most other German tribes, which was condemned as a heresy and alienated them from the conquered provincials.

Still, the period is interesting as a purely military challenge, and it makes a change from pushing your panzer divisions around the USSR.

By this stage the former Imperial military establishment based on 6,000 strong legions with their segmented armour (think 'Gladiator') was long gone. The fourth century army comprised smaller legions backed by auxiliaries, with a more varied, if not larger, range of cavalry than earlier. Limitanei, commanded by duces, defended the border provinces from within their fixed defences - forts, walls, palisades, sand berms, watchtowers, etc., some of which are still standing: they were regarded as of lower quality than the comitatenses - field armies - commanded by comes or the more senior magisters. The latter were usually based in cities behind the frontiers (all now walled), although given that they were largely infantry their categorisation as 'mobile reserves' by modern authors is sometimes challenged. Limitanei could be assigned to the field armies as pseudocomitatenses, which shows either (i) that they remained good, well-trained troops, or (ii) that the field armies were desperate to keep up their numbers. The theory seems to be that the limitanei would deal with any small scale threats but, if overmatched, would defend the towns, granaries, ports, key bridges, etc., while the comitatenses moved up to support them. Military service was unpopular with the citizens and there was much use of barbarian recruits. Contrary to popular belief, these were - if properly trained and officered - very effective. As the barbarian tribes moved, or were forced by circumstances, into the Empire the tax system in those regions broke down and it was harder to recruit, train and pay for regular troops, citizen or barbarian. This led to the employment of barbarians serving directly under their own leaders and presumably far less well trained and disciplined - the foederati - in exchange for grants of land, which merely exacerbated the problem. The situation was easier in the Eastern Empire, which had a larger population, greater wealth, and only one third of the front line to defend. There the main enemy was the settled Sassanid Empire: very dangerous and powerful but not actually a tribe on the march. The final collapse in the West, usually considered to be 476 AD, came not through any military defeat but because the Herul and Scirii foederati comprising the best of the Italian comitatus demanded the same land grants and privileges as their fellow tribesmen had already taken or been given in Gaul, Hispania and Africa. When this was refused they killed the boy-Emperor's father and brother, exiled the child, sent the Imperial regalia back to the Eastern Empire and announced that they didn't need an Emperor. There were still pockets of Roman control in the West, but these turned into independent kingdoms of their own (in northern Gaul and Illyricum): elsewhere the Imperial infrastructure of armies and administration, unpaid and without orders, just melted away.

The Roman navy had pretty well atrophied by the fourth century, having faced no real threat for over three hundred years. There was a fleet based at Constantinople, and one in Britannia as part of the 'Saxon Shore' coastal defence system. River flotillas patrolled the Rhine and Danube, but as much for policing and taxation purposes as battle fleets.

Unit types - generic armies, with Roman comitatenses and Barbarian chieftains' personal followings having higher proficiencies, readiness and supply. The individual troop types are broadly as follows:

• Swordsmen - Roman legions and the better auxilia, and the richer and best equipped barbarian warriors.
• Spearmen - second-class Roman troops, and the great bulk of unarmoured, spear armed barbarians.
• Pikemen - long spearmen and archers (as they're better against cavalry).
• Lancers - the heavier steppe cavalry, or chariots.
• Sabre - standard heavy shock cavalry,
• 'Heavy' cavalry - actually extra/ultra heavy cavalry such as cataphracts, clibanarii, and elephants.
• Indian Raiders - steppe type horse archers
• Camels - used for desert tribes
• Wagon laagers and siege trains are covered above
• Each Roman, Armenian, Persian or Raider 'squad' within a unit represents about 200 men. Each tribal unit contains about 1,000 actual warriors, with their women, elders, children and slaves along for the ride or waiting patiently at home. Make them wait.