# Which Army Best Represents Ancient Rome?



## mynameisgrax

I really like Ancient Roman history, and I'm looking to start a 'counts as' fantasy army with 25mm Roman troop models, mostly because I want to paint and use them.

This raises the question though, what army should they count as?

Roman soldiers were either very well armored and equipped 'citizen' elites that used swords and javelins (no ranked spearmen), or poorly equipped 'non-citizen' conscripts. The conscripts also fulfilled a lot of the 'support roles', such as cavalry (both heavy and light), archers, sling users, and such.

Although Rome is always closely tied to chariots, they didn't use them in battle except in very early Roman history. Chariots were just used for races. 

Rome had relatively sophisticated (for the time) catapults, that could fire large rocks, giant bolts, or even fire (not explosive, but meant to set wooden buildings ablaze).

Rome also eventually used elephants in battle, allowing for more 'mostrous' units in the army.

Magic would be fine, as Rome had their Gods/Priests they followed, but they hardly dictated the course of battle, so a non-wizard general would be a must have.

So this gives us (unless I've forgotten something):

Heavily armored elites w/ shields & swords (should be a core choice)
Poorly equipped conscripts
Archers/Sling users
War Machines (non-cannon)
Light/Heavy Cavalry
War Elephants


Chaos Warriors seems tempting at first, but they don't have any ranged attacks, and the Romans used a lot of bows, slings, and javelins.

Bretonnians don't really work either, because in Rome the powerful elites all fought on foot, not on horseback.

Lizardmen are surprisingly well fitting, since its divided between solid heavy infantry and lightly armored specialists, except that they don't have the war machines, and rely on 'spell casting leaders', rather than close combat focused generals.

Beastmen aren't a bad fit either, but the Romans generally didn't ambush.

As far as I can see, the best choices are either:


Empire (no cannons or mortars though)

Orcs & Goblins 

Dwarves


Any other thoughts?


----------



## Jacobite

I don't know how long you've been playing but there was an older army called Dogs of War, who were just mercenaries - their primary unit were pikemen but they several different model versions of the unit many of which were very Roman/Greek, so I would take a look at them, bit out of date though.

http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat500025a&prodId=prod1140038
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat500025a&prodId=prod1140046
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat500025a&prodId=prod1140042

That said out of all the army's you've listed I would say Empire


----------



## mynameisgrax

Dogs of War would have been the best fit, but they eliminated them with the 8th edition rules. Too bad, as they otherwise would have been my first choice.


----------



## neilbatte

http://www.westwindproductions.co.uk/catalog/popup_image.php?pID=1043
I think these could answer your question although I think perry historicals could pass as Empire


----------



## GrizBe

I'd have said warriors of chaos myself... but thinking more, Dwarfs may fit better as the romans tended to be something of a 'turtling' army, relying on heavier armor and sheilds then their opponants to protect them...

Chaos Warriors would be a great fit, if they had bowmen, or more war machines then their cannon.


----------



## mynameisgrax

Yeah, it's a shame, since Chaos Warriors themselves would make perfect Roman Centurions, but the army itself doesn't have the 'support' that the real Romans had.


----------



## neilbatte

It may not have the artillery support that the Romans had but marauders would make great auxillary legions as would the marauder horsemen.


----------



## dragonkingofthestars

what about the Tomb kings? they could repsent a Romen army that come back to life, I mean not all the tomb kings came form the south. just don't take spears when it a option or charriots, you got heavy calv, light calv, heavy infanty light infanty monsters you preist, seems they got it all. ok there dead, still its a idea.


----------



## Son of Freyr

I have difficulty looking at the Empire as a Roman style army as its more Romanesque i.e central European later middle ages -pre reformation
Although not human I feel the Elves have the feel you could utilise
For a start armies are made up from the citizens only (as republican Roman forces before they had to take on mercenaries)
Elves have use of bolt throwers, chariots (if required), cavalry (light and more heavily armed as cataphracts), ranked spearmen / swordsmen and archers
I would look at an elves style army pre sundering so you can use a bit of the Dark elves over indulgence and excesses as well as the cleaner cut elves (always there in the Roman psyche)
Finally i'm sure you could use a few Brittonian siege pieces with a bit of modelling to romanise them


----------



## Vaz

Empire. In Warhammer Ancient History, it was known as the Republic of Remas.

http://warhammer-empire.com/warroom/general/reman-legions/the-reman-legions-army-list/


----------



## Flindo

I'd have to go with Highelves, because they just have a roam like armour and they also have a lion Chariot.


----------



## dragonkingofthestars

to clarife your asking about play style, or looks, if playstyle then i can't top what i said about tombkings, if looks then you want high elves.


----------



## Vaz

Empire would wor. You don't need to use Great Cannons as per - you could use Ballista's as Great Cannons, and Onagers as Helstorms/Mortars.

Perhaps a Steam Tank as a Sassanid Mercenary War Elephant?

Heavy Cavalry could be Sarmatian Knights, while Parthian Archers could be Pistoliers.

Infantry - obviously Spears with Shields or Swordsmen. Auxialiary Archers could be Free Company Archers or Huntsmen.

Naturally, if you forgo Gunpowder Completely (either as counts as or whatever), then you'll lose much of Empire Strength, but a highly characterful army.

As to High Elves and Empire, I don't see at all where they are equivalents in rules terms as equivalents.


----------



## mynameisgrax

Thanks for the help everyone!

I should have been more specific, I'm planning to use non-GW models for the roman troops (obviously, I don't plan to use them competitively), so the look actually doesn't matter at all. I'm just trying to figure out which army book best suits them.

All Chaos Warriors are missing are archers, but unfortunately, that was a very important part of the Roman army.

High Elves aren't a bad fit, but they mainly use spears, and Roman soldiers generally didn't use them. The only non-spear using core choice are archers, and although Romans used them, they wouldn't comprise 25% of the points in the army. High Elves would make better Spartans.

Tomb Kings are a better representation of ancient Egypt (obviously). They aren't 'bad' for Rome, but their focus on chariots doesn't fit well. Also, they don't have a heavy armor/shield troop in core.

Nobody thinks Orcs and Goblins are a good fit? Well, we can probably nix that choice then. Now that I think of it, they aren't that good a fit. Although the legionnaire/peasant difference fits well with Orc/Goblin troop types, the well armored Orcs are special troops, and so you couldn't have many of them.

I'll have to add to the first post that the legionnaire unit (heavy armor, shield, sword) should be a core choice. That might narrow the field a bit.

Wait a minute, Empire doesn't have core choices with heavy armor. I thought they did, but swordmen just have light armor + shield.

Hmm...if you go by that, the only armies that I can see that have core units that accurately represent legionnaires are Dwarves, Lizardmen, Skaven (a surprise), and Warriors of Chaos.

I'll have to think on it a bit more.


----------



## dragonkingofthestars

umm that a tough call, heavy armor tends to be saved for the special slot,, i have serched my colection custom dexs for a fix and the only one i can find is armybook Norse. no archer though, but on a second look army book Nippon might have what you want, they have core chioce with heavy armor.

the link to all this guys (excelent) armybooks is here
http://battlereporter.freeforums.org/warhammer-army-books-fan-made-unofficial-f88.html


----------



## mynameisgrax

After looking over the army books, the only one of the four armies that I listed above (with heavily armored core) that fits even remotely well for the army are Chaos Warriors. 

All in all, it definitely looks like the choice will either be Empire or Chaos Warriors. Either way it won't be perfect, as Empire won't have heavily armored core and Chaos Warriors won't have archers, but both armies fit relatively well.


----------



## Calamari

I would have to go for High Elves. They have a very well trained core of infantry. Lothern Sea Gaurd would fit, the bows counting as Javelins. Also the the Romans rotated the front ranks often to keep everyone rested, this could be used to explain the spears/extra figting rank rules. Reavers could be the light cavalry, with Silver Helms being heavy and Archers would be the auxillary archers/slingers.


----------



## Vaz

mynameisgrax said:


> Thanks for the help everyone!
> 
> I should have been more specific, I'm planning to use non-GW models for the roman troops (obviously, I don't plan to use them competitively), so the look actually doesn't matter at all. I'm just trying to figure out which army book best suits them.
> 
> All Chaos Warriors are missing are archers, but unfortunately, that was a very important part of the Roman army.
> 
> High Elves aren't a bad fit, but they mainly use spears, and Roman soldiers generally didn't use them. The only non-spear using core choice are archers, and although Romans used them, they wouldn't comprise 25% of the points in the army. High Elves would make better Spartans.
> 
> Tomb Kings are a better representation of ancient Egypt (obviously). They aren't 'bad' for Rome, but their focus on chariots doesn't fit well. Also, they don't have a heavy armor/shield troop in core.
> 
> Nobody thinks Orcs and Goblins are a good fit? Well, we can probably nix that choice then. Now that I think of it, they aren't that good a fit. Although the legionnaire/peasant difference fits well with Orc/Goblin troop types, the well armored Orcs are special troops, and so you couldn't have many of them.
> 
> I'll have to add to the first post that the legionnaire unit (heavy armor, shield, sword) should be a core choice. That might narrow the field a bit.
> 
> Wait a minute, Empire doesn't have core choices with heavy armor. I thought they did, but swordmen just have light armor + shield.
> 
> Hmm...if you go by that, the only armies that I can see that have core units that accurately represent legionnaires are Dwarves, Lizardmen, Skaven (a surprise), and Warriors of Chaos.
> 
> I'll have to think on it a bit more.


Legionnaries rarely wore full full segmentata - much was chain jersey's, the plates, etc. Legs and the like are completely left open aside from a greave. When looking at Heavy Armour - compare Breton Knights and the like to what a standard Legionary wore.

I have some info about a Warhammer Historical if you're into Roman influence - fancy working on a fan dex for Remas?

Bows were fairly ahystorical as well for Rome, much of their archer power was auxiliary Parthian or Scythian - although that was mostly mounted as well.


----------



## mynameisgrax

The auxiliary was a very large portion of the Roman army. Depending on the time in history, they might have even matched the numbers of citizen soldiers.

Yeah, after looking around, I have to agree that although Roman armor was superior to that of the auxiliaries', it isn't good enough to qualify as 'heavy armor'. That pretty much puts the final nail in the coffin for Chaos Warriors, which are more a representation of how Hollywood portrays the Roman soldiers, and not how they really were.

Since that is the case, then I believe the choices have clearly whittled down to two:

Empire
High Elves

I hadn't considered high elves initially, since they rely heavily on spears, but the shifting of the lines, to constantly change which soldiers are in the front row, could be used to explain why they fight in so many ranks, and as the lothern guard also have bows, that can represent their thrown javelins. 

Both these armies could definitely work. I have to figure out exactly what models I want to be in the army, and then figure out which army will work better from there.

(Don't worry, no mortars/cannons, or Teclis ^_^)


----------



## GrizBe

Actually, by today, or even Medieval standards, Roman Armor might not count as heavy, for its day it was. when your average legionaire was equiped with a tower sheild, helmet and armor that covered his forearms, shins, torso and groin, with chainmail underneath... when the average troop they were up against was either naked, had a wooden sheild, wore thick leather or had chainmail at the most...


----------



## Master WootWoot

Empire, because you can play them in a variety of ways. For romans, don't rely on knights and cannons, but at shield-armed spearmen and swordsmen, with some archers. Also take some bretonnian allies for the roman cavalry (Yeomen?) and the trebuchet.







Voilà!


----------



## blackspine

orcs and goblins.
I'd make the Orcs as the tetsuedo.
even the 'black orks' could be roman elite legionnaires.

the goblins, well, they're the auxiliary.


----------

