Here the designer of Epipolae: The Athenian Expedition in Sicily, 415-413 BCE (P500), presents his thoughts on why the Levy & Campaign system works well for ancient settings. (All images are public domain from the Illustrated History of the World, 1881.)

Levy & Campaign

The Levy & Campaign (L&C) series of games was designed from the ground-up to model operational-level medieval military campaigns. This includes some modeling of the feudal system of Lords and vassals, obligations and fealty, and organization and service. [1]

Key features in the series include each turn of the game consisting of a Levy phase and a Campaign phase. Each Levy phase is used to muster allies, vassals, capabilities, transportation, and supplies. Each Campaign phase allows players to plan and command the movement and various actions of their Lords and armies, subject to the logistical constraints of the previous Levy phase(s). Each game board has two features: a calendar and a map. The calendar serves as a turn record track that is used to track the availability and service of various Lords and vassals. Each map is point-to-point, where Locales are connected by Ways, which control movement and supply routes. Victory conditions vary, but can be achieved through conquering strongholds, defeating enemies in battle, and ravaging and plundering. [1]

Key Features

• Levy Phase – mustering allies, vassals, capabilities, transportation, and supplies.
• Campaign Phase – plan and command Lords and armies subject to logistical constraints.
• Calendar – track availability and service of Lords and vassals.
• Map – control movement and supply routes.

Ancients Era

While specifically designed for the medieval era, the L&C model is also sufficient to represent the dynamics of ancient operational-level campaigns.

Levy. While various ancient cultures did not have a medieval European-style feudal system of fealty and service obligations, the Levy mechanics work equally well for the Greek city-states of Athens and Sparta, or Persia, Carthage, Rome, and Egypt.

Campaign. Similarly, the “plan and command” mechanics of the Campaign phase are able to recreate ancient campaigns with little imagination: the campaigns of Demosthenes during the Peloponnesian War [2], Hannibal crossing the Alps with Elephants during the Second Punic War [3], Caesar’s campaigns (pick your favorite)[3], and so forth. The actions of these armies – marching, foraging, ravaging, besieging,  battling, and so on – differ from their medieval descendants only in size, temporal scale, and technological effectiveness.

Calendar. The time scale of ancient operational-level campaigns varies. Some are short and swift raids, while others are prolonged sieges or expeditions [2, 3]. Some ancient campaigns lasted years or decades, but typically service was seasonal and expectations of soldiers was to be home before harvest (perhaps an expectation-no-more by later professional armies such as the Romans).[2,3,4] Depending on the campaign, each turn could be 40-days, or seasonal, or perhaps something else, but this presents no special difficulty for the L&C system.

Map. The map scale of ancient operational-level campaigns varies from a single peninsula or valley, to an island such as Sicily, or perhaps the entire Mediterranean region. Sea transport dominated the ancient world, but trackways and later roads all eventually become prevalent. Maps should scale with the Calendar appropriately.

Levy

In the feudal system, land was granted by a lord to their vassals in exchange for military service and other obligations. This allowed lords to raise and support large armies by drawing on the resources of their vassals, who were required to provide taxes and soldiers for military campaigns. The loyalty of vassals may have been divided between their lords and the king (or other supreme ruler of the time), possibly leading to unreliable alliances or even treachery and conflict. [5]

The specific details of ancient levy systems varied. In Athens, for example, all male citizens were required to serve when mustered for a military campaign – the type of service reflecting what they could afford. Aristocrats with a horse served with the cavalry, or if very rich, they had the honor of furnishing and outfitting a Trireme. Citizens wealthy enough to own a set of bronze armor served with the Hoplites. Poorer citizens or other freemen served as baggage carriers, light troops, or rowers in the cities fleet of Triremes. In Sparta, where military service was the central organizing principle of society, all male citizens existed in a specialized warrior class of Hoplites. [2, 3, 6]

In Carthage, the armies primarily consisted of large and varied mercenary cohorts, while their navy was manned by citizens. It was common for a Carthaginian army to consist of mercenaries from Numidia, Iberia, Libya, Gaul, and Greece. Both mercenaries and citizens were mustered for campaigns, rather than perpetual professional service.

The Egyptian levy system was based on districts called nomes or sepat. The number of districts changed throughout history, but the rulers of these districts reported to the pharaoh, and were essentially vassals with the requisite obligations.

The Persian system was also based on districts called nomes or satraps. The districts were bound into alliances by gifts, favor-exchange, and marriages. The districts collected tax and tribute (sometimes as horses for cavalry) for the king and were used to pay troops and foreign mercenaries (often Greeks). Each satrap was also responsible for stock-piling supplies, food, and equipment (including arrows) for their forces. [4, 7]

In Rome, the levy system was based on Tribes and the concepts of centuries and later the legion. Each Tribe was required to provide a number of armed and outfitted soldiers, smiths, carpenters, trumpeters and buglers, quartermasters and scribes. The Roman system evolved over numerous historical reformations, becoming more organized and professional over time. [3]

The use of slaves as soldiers or oarsmen in military ships is a topic of historical debate [3, 6]. There is evidence and arguments that slaves were not used by Greek navies [6]. Carthaginian navies were manned by citizens.

Campaign

Just as in the medieval era, ancient commanders had to carefully plan the objectives of their upcoming campaign season within the constraints of their mustered logistical capabilities. While messengers and scouts did exist, they were not as effective as modern communications, so as the campaign unfolded, commanders would have to adapt their plans on the fly.

In ancient times, military campaigns often involved long marches through difficult terrain or extended sailing expeditions [2, 3, 4], so it was important for armies to be able to transport supplies with them. The specific methods used to transport supplies varied.

All ancient armies probably used a combination of pack animals and carts while traveling on land, while Athens and Sparta also made use of baggage carriers.[2, 3, 8] For Sparta, the baggage carriers were Helot slaves [2]. For Athens, they were either citizens, poor free men who did not have citizenship, or possibly slaves.

Athens, Carthage, Persia, and Rome also transported supplies quickly and efficiently by ship.[2, 3, 7] Ships typically traveled close to shoreline, as crossing deep sea was a risky proposition. Egypt used boats to move supply up and down the Nile River. Persia had an organized collection of storehouses throughout its empire, but its armies often traveled with large trains of non-combatants (slave, servants, concubines) which probably slowed their march.[3, 5, 8] While Persia and Rome constructed wide networks of roads for carts and wagons, a majority of transportation of supplies in the broader ancient world (in terms of time and geography) was likely by ship or boat, followed by foraging and plunder.

These details do not present any special difficulty for the L&C system, which already features rules for various types of transport (carts, mules, boats, ships), pathways (sea, river, road, track), provender, foraging, and ravaging.

Naval Combat

As many ancient operational-level military campaigns took place on, or were adjacent to, the Mediterranean sea (or major rivers like the Nile, Tigris, or Euphrates), any game on the subject would likely included naval transport and supply. Modeling naval combat would also be likely, as many powers of the time featured significant navies including Athens, Carthage, Rome, and Persia – and many campaigns and wars were determined by naval engagements.[2, 7]

L&C already has rules for approach, withdrawal, and battle – all of which are appropriate for naval actions. The specific details of naval units and capabilities would vary by game, if applicable.

If not L&C…

What would designers do if they were not constrained by the L&C system?

Assuming L&C did not exist, or L&C did exist but could not be reused for whatever reason, designers would likely attempt to model ancient operational-level campaigns reusing established patterns. For example, pick a style of map (hex, area, or point-to-point). Add a traditional turn record track. Add counters for leaders and units. Either represent supply with either counters or abstract it away to a traditional supply line. Pick a sequence of play (I-go-you-go, chit-pull, initiative, etc.) and an activation system (all-of-my-guys, card-driven, action points, etc). Pick rules for movement, combat, supply, and victory. Of course, these choices should be influenced by the historical situation being modeled.

Given that L&C does exist (thankfully), and the overall model is well suited for operational-level ancients, what would a designer need to change? Only what is needed to model the specific conflict and belligerents during the historical setting they are attempting to model. This would vary to the extent that medieval L&C games vary – in the map and calendar, in the types of transport and pathways, the forces, capabilities, and events, and in some cases actions.

The requirement or choice to either (1) create a custom system or (2) reuse an existing system like L&C comes down to several criteria…

• Popularity of a system (e.g., L&C, or CDG, or COIN)
• Suitability of a system for a specific historical campaign
• Player familiarity with a system, ability to play faster with less to learn
• Ability to reuse the system
• Ability of a designer to effectively recombine various game mechanics into a custom design
• Ability of a designer to innovate meaningfully, not just innovate for the sake of being different.
• Ability of a new designer to convince players to try a new design.

---

As the designer of Epipolae, I am excited how wonderfully the L&C system adapted to the Sicilian Expedition during the Peloponnesian War, and to the ancient era in general. Additional details can be found on the P500 page, including an interview that goes into more specifics on mechanical adaptations for the game.

Selected Sources

1. Ruhnke, Volko. Nevsky, 2019.
2. Thucydides. History of the Peloponnesian War, 5th Century BCE. Translated by Richard Crawley, 1874. Edited by Robert B. Strassler, 1996.
3. Delbrück, Hans. Warfare in Antiquity, 1920. Translated by Walter J. Refroe, Jr. 1990.
4. Xenophon. Anabasis, ~370 BCE. Translated by David Thomas, Edited by Shane Brennan and David Thomas, 2021.
5. Ward, Matthew. Divided Loyalties in the Medieval World, 2019. https://www.historytoday.com/history-matters/divided-loyalties-medieval-world
6. Hale, John R. Lords of the Sea, 2009.
7. Manning, Sean. Service and Supply in the Achaemenid Army, 2013. Unpublished Master’s Thesis. University of Calgary.

---