Use of Auxillia

[5th Lieutenant]

Given the wonderful new Auxilliary troops now available, are there any thoughts on updating Century X's very useful guide on the subject of their use? I understand that they were normally massed in formations of rouhgly 1,000 (4 units on Huge settings) but is it worth making a second mixed stack of Axuillia, missile and cavalry to accompany each Legion? How would they best be used given the RTW engine limitations?

[OctavianIV]

I usually use Auxillia to absorb the initial enemy attack and save my legionaries as shock troops. Auxillia can fire pila as well, so they're quite effective as infantry. Missile cavalry is great if you're fighting Carthage or Parthia, but usually I replace them with archers.

[Binshuy]

put them at your sides auxillias have spear a better anti cavalry legion in the center battle line they can soak up a lot too so in the end minimal casualties missles at the back protected

heres a very crude guide

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[Leeham991]

put them at your sides auxillias have spear a better anti cavalry legion in the center battle line they can soak up a lot too so in the end minimal casualties missles at the back protected

heres a very crude guide

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Thats just phenomenal.... +rep xD

[Spartan198]

put them at your sides auxillias have spear a better anti cavalry legion in the center battle line they can soak up a lot too so in the end minimal casualties missles at the back protected

heres a very crude guide

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Your artistic talent is just breathtaking.

[5th Lieutenant]

I've looked back over some of the books and internet sources about Auxilia and Legions from the Late Republic / Principate and have come up with this suggestion. It might not be 100% historically accurate but hopefully will allow a greater mixture of units available to Rome and thus make the campaign more involving. Comments / criticism most welcome.

In reality a Legion was roughly composed of:
- 1 x First Cohort (1 x 960)
- 9 x Cohorts (9 x 480 = 4320)
- Undisclosed number of light troops (= ???)
- c. 300 Cavalry
- A Legatus / Commander
- 5 Tribunes

An Auxiliary formation (such as Batavians) was:
- 1 - 2 x Cohorts (1 or 2 x 480 - 480 or 960)
- Mixtures of mounted and archer alae and milliariae (numbers unknown)

So how is this possible given the RTW engine limitations?

For a legion it is possible to have:
- 10 x Cohorts
- 1 x General
- 3 x Cavalry

That's 14 of 20 slots, leaving 6. This could be:
- 2 x Auxilia Cohorts
- 2 x Skirmishers (forget the post-Marian name)
- 2 x Archers or light artillery.

That's a fairly small Auxilia contingent, especially if they have to be 'dropped off' as garrison units.

Century X suggested adding Auxilia columns to each Legion and that seems like a really good idea. For the RS 2 named Auxilia I suggest that 2 Cohort march with the Legion followed by a second group of:
- 8 x Auxilia Chorts
- 2 x Skirmishers
- 2 x Archers
- 4 x Cavalry
- 1 / 2 x General
- 2 x heavy artillery

This way you have a strengthened back up column for each legion like Century X suggested complete with equipment for Sieges.

My further idea to build on that is to have a Legionary base for each campaign / period of frontier duty with an accompanying Auxilia base. Instead of each legion being the full 10 Cohorts, you then have to play with the reinforcements and vexilation idea. This reduced your Legion group to which you can then add Auxilia, resulting in a more historical mix of Citizen and allied / alae forces under one commander. An example might be:

Legion Base:
- 2 x Cohorts
- 1 x Archer
- 1 x light artillery

Axuilia Base:
- 2 x Cohrts
- 1 x Archer
- 1 x Cavalry

If you have a lot of commanders, one commander per 2 bases would add another layer of micromanagement

This leaves less forces for an actual march. Further more, it would be interesting to mix the Legion and Axuilia so you do not always have them as discrete columns. I suggest:

Lead Column
- 1 x First Cohort
- 2 x Legion Co0horts
- 4 x Axuilia Cohorts
- 2 x Skirmishers
- 2 x Archers
- 2 x Cavalry
- 1 x Commander
(14 units out of a possible 20 filled)

Second Column:
- 4 x Legion Cohort
- 3 x Auxilia Cohort
- 1 x Skirmisher
- 2 x Archer
- 3 x Cavalry
- 1 x Commander
- 2 x artillery
(16 units our of a possible 20 filled)

I'm not claiming that this is 100% historically accurate in the unit mixture. However, it does reflect the tendency of units to be less than their paper strength, the Roman practice of leaving vexilations behind and the intermingling of units the occurs for unforeseen reason on campaign. It should also help the Romans provide a greater combined-arms force within a single stack on the campaign map as the RTW engine does not really allow multiple stack engagements terribly well.

Just some thoughts. Unfortunately no screen shots until RS2 is out

[rory o'kane]

Just to correct you on a few things about the Roman Legion's make up.
In reality a Legion was roughly composed of:
- 1 x First Cohort (1 x 960800). A First Cohort was made up of five double-strength centuries (i.e. 5 x (80x2) = 5x 160 = 800).
- 9 x Cohorts (9 x 480 = 4320)
- Undisclosed number of light troops (= ???)
- c. 300120 Cavalry (4 turmae of 30 with a decurion in charge of each)
- A Legatus / Commander
- 1 Tribunus Laticlavius ("Tribune of the Broad Stripe") - Senator and second in command of the legion
- 5 x Tribunus Angusticlavius ("Tribune of the Narrow Stripe") - Equestrian officers.
In terms of fighting men, that's 120+800+ 4320, which comes to nominal strength of 5240.

There was no equivalent for auxiliaries - i.e. the cohorts were not "brigaded" together as modern infantry battalions can be. Cohorts and Alae were stationed independently or together at forts, and attached to the legions usually for a specific campaign. The legion possessed NO intrinsic light infantry, other than legionnaires who were ordered to fight as light infantry (hence the Antesignani) as the situation demanded (later, these troops became a permanent fixture in the legions, known as lanciarii. But then, that is taken from the regular cohort strength of the units.

Now, strictly speaking in RTW, you should have, for a legion:
- 1 x General
- 1x 1st Cohort
- 9 x Cohort

- 3 x Cavalry
We don't have legionary cavalry any more (and even if we did, they'd be about a quarter of the strength of a cohort), and they were in general used more as scouts and messengers - however, if more than one legion was present, they could very well have been grouped together into an ad-hoc ala.

That's 11 of 20 slots, leaving 9. This could be:
well, almost anything within reason.
For example:
3 auxiliary cavalry units
4 Auxiliary infantry units
2 units of auxiliary archers.
Gives you a nice balance of infantry and cavalry and archer support. If you want be be a bit more gamey, you go with:
3 Cavalry
6 Archers.
That's how I do it when I'm feeling merciless.

[5th Lieutenant]

Obliged to you, Rory, seems my numbers are a little out

Given what you said above, what is the best way to interpret cirumstances such as the XIIII GMV's long assocation with the Batavians? Would that mean a changing number of Batavian infantry in Chorts or mounted Batavians in Turmae (?) based near and operating with the GMV? Do we know roughly how many men a Batavian infantry contingent would number fighting along side the regular Legion?

Out of interest, how do you see the suggestion of dividing the 10 cohorts in to 2 columns? Wy instinct would be that this happened for the reasons I suggested but I do not have any evidence to hand.

[sithlord447]

i too use century x's guide, and in rs i generally have my 4 auxillia units in the front with a legionary cohort on each side then 6 legionary cohorts behind that and so on, basicly the idea is auxillia soak up all the causalties while i flank behind the enemy, as to sepearte auxillia "legions" i don't use them as much as i did in RS 1.6 as they just don't seem to do aswell as 1 force anymore

[rory o'kane]

Someone's been reading Steven Dando-Collins, i see. He's an entertaining read, but he's not entirely reliable 100% of the time.
Even if they frequently served together for the purpose of several campaigns, the Batavians would still be organised as cohorts, and not "brigaded" together. We don't know how which units were "attached " to which legions for any real length of time, because legions tended to be shifted around the empire quite considerably. add in the fact that you have evidence for as many as eight Julio-Claudian Batavian cohorts (all of which were equitatae i.e. part-mounted), and the Batavian revolt ensured that units tended to be placed all over the place. Auxiliaries were generally grouped together and/or raised and placed under one commander to form an army. The concept of units permanently attached to a "parent" legion is shaky at best.
With regards to the pairing of Legio XIV with the Batavians, as far as I'm aware, that only lasted while the legion was in Britain, and the units were separated not long after the units were returned to the continent. Their association lasted as long as the action in Britannia did for that period between the initial invasion and when the legion returned to the continent after putting down Boudicca's revolt. When the legion was withdrawn to the continent, the Batavians were posted to Germania Inferior, as far as I'm aware (making Civilis' job that much easier). To think of them as a "Batavian contingent" is wrong. To the Palatium, it was a case of 8 separate cohorts. they weren't organised as a separate detachment, with their own commander or whatever. Each cohort was independent, and answered to the legate of the legion, as he was the most senior-ranking officer present. they might as well have been a mixture of nationalities. they were what was available to the legion, and then when the legion was moved from Britain, the troops no longer served together. It's that simple.
To answer your question - there were as many as 8 cohorts of Batavians serving in Britannia in the Claudian invasion force, but those were obviously not always concentrated all the time - obviously, there were forts to be manned and things like that, which is why roughly 2,000 of them (so, 4 cohorts) were in Suetonius Paulinus' army when he fought Boudicca at Wattling Street.

[5th Lieutenant]

Someone's been reading Steven Dando-Collins, i see.

Guilty, I'm afraid, though I was more weaving in what he said rather than swallowing it verbatim

I accept what you are saying and this sounds entirely plausible - if a little sad - from a historic game-play perspective. However, I have one question with regard to your answer:

Auxiliaries were generally grouped together and/or raised and placed under one commander to form an army. The concept of units permanently attached to a "parent" legion is shaky at best

Does that mean, as far as your aware, that more than a single cohort was likely to stay in the same theatre (if not with the same Legion) and opperate in the same campaign as their kinsmen or that various cohorts could operate singly across the entire expanse of the Empire? It strikes me that there might be some efficiencies in keeping ethnic groups closer together for ease of language, morale and so forth (though Civilis' action showed the disadvantage of this as well). Any evidence of such general grouping of similar units for logistical reasons?

[rory o'kane]

Not really. I know wiki isn't 100% reliable, but look at the tables in this link. There's no suggestion of keeping them together (certainly not after the Batavian revolt):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...iary_regiments
you might get a few units of the same origin in the same province, but by and large the units were scattered to the four corners of the Earth, as it were.
And as for your language, morale and so forth - language - easy. You had to be able to speak latin, or you learnt it on the fly.
Morale - not really. The brilliant thing about the Roman military system was the way it generated an espirit du corps in individual units. Morale isn't an issue in this context, and grouping like-for-like wasn't seen as an issue on campaign or if they were stationed at the other end of the empire. it's just happen-stance.
I fail to understand your point about logistics. you are aware that units stationed in a province for a long time just took up local recruits, right? I.e. a batavian cohort stationed in britannia for a hundred years would be about as batavian as a gallic legion stationed in syria? So logistics really doesn't come into it either.

[5th Lieutenant]

That's very interesting, thank you.

I suppose I'm looking at this anachronistically though 19th century Imperial eyes. From what you say it sounds like an Auxiliary cohort - independent of its name or theoretical origin - was a very self-contained entity that had limited interest in being deployed along side its bretheren.

By logistics I suppose I meant similar spares requirements but one again that's a bit of a post-Industrial consideration

If you don't mind continuing the conversation I have a couple of other questions:
- Was the Legion cavalry a standard part of each formation (as far as 'standardisation' is possible in reality) so each Legion would expect to have c. 120 horsemen irrespective of other alae assigned to them?
- Were Legions entirely dependent upon missile troops assigned as auxilia cohorts the same as auxilia infantry? You spoke of unarmoured legionaries and eventual lanciarii but otherwise a pilum is the only organic ranged weapon avilable unless artillery was present?
- Do we have any evidence for Legions fighting with less than 10 cohorts? I know vexilations were detached and sometiese assigned to other Legions but are you aware of any battles when Legion ABC marched on camapign with only 6? I have a notion Varus' response to the uprising in Palestine used partial legions in this manner

[rory o'kane]

That's very interesting, thank you.

I suppose I'm looking at this anachronistically though 19th century Imperial eyes. From what you say it sounds like an Auxiliary cohort - independent of its name or theoretical origin - was a very self-contained entity that had limited interest in being deployed along side its bretheren.

By logistics I suppose I meant similar spares requirements but one again that's a bit of a post-Industrial consideration

If you don't mind continuing the conversation I have a couple of other questions:
- Was the Legion cavalry a standard part of each formation (as far as 'standardisation' is possible in reality) so each Legion would expect to have c. 120 horsemen irrespective of other alae assigned to them?
- Were Legions entirely dependent upon missile troops assigned as auxilia cohorts the same as auxilia infantry? You spoke of unarmoured legionaries and eventual lanciarii but otherwise a pilum is the only organic ranged weapon avilable unless artillery was present?
- Do we have any evidence for Legions fighting with less than 10 cohorts? I know vexilations were detached and sometiese assigned to other Legions but are you aware of any battles when Legion ABC marched on camapign with only 6? I have a notion Varus' response to the uprising in Palestine used partial legions in this manner

You're exactly right about the self-contained bit. The battalion metaphor i've been using doesn't help, because they're part of Regiments, and there's no equivalent for the auxiliaries. Every cohort was completely independent, regardless of origin

You're overcomplicating things with "logistics" - it's not like they had to ship parts in. By and large units were able to get their equipment from the nearest blacksmith to a similar standard to what they already had (and they probably brought a few spares with them as well!) - one great advantage of regularising the auxilia. Things didn't have to be absolutely identical - they just had to be functionally similar. I highly doubt that any Germans in Syria would be too fussed if they were issued with a slightly different replacement helmet from the local smithies at Antioch, only that it was just as hard (and thus Parthian arrow-proof) as the last one. Every item was slightly different (remember, this is pre-mass production), so even large aesthetic variables were looked upon as normal.
As for your other questions
Those 120 cavalry were intrinsically part of the legion.
The missile question is slightly fuzzy, but the general consensus is that javelins were issued to the antesignani (as fore-runners of the lanciarii, this isn't unreasonable) - you make it sound like having the odd javelin lying around is a really odd thing! Vegetius wrote in the 4th century that every legionary should be trained in the arts of slinging and using a bow, but it's doubtful that this would apply to legionnaires in our time period, so by and large, yes, a legion was dependent on auxiliaries in Cohortes Sagittariorum for archer support.

We have plenty of evidence for a legion marching with less than 10 cohorts That's what a vexillation was - a detachment of a few cohorts used either independently or as part of a larger army marching under a vexillum (a square fabric flag), possibly bearing the unit's name. You say "attached to another legion" - that's not right. It's an independent brigade, if you will, and not subservient to any full legion it accompanies, if any! Technically, any part of a legion operating away from its eagle was a vexillation, so when the six cohorts of Legio XXI Rapax marched under Vitellius to kick Otho off the throne in 69 AD, that wasn't a vexillation, that was the whole legion (at the time, Legio XXI Rapax was 4 cohorts under-strength as its replacements had been diverted to replace the losses that Legio IX Hispana suffered during the early stages of Boudicca's revolt), though if it had left a detachment behind on the Rhine (as many of the other legions it marched alongside had), that garrison detachment would technically be a vexillation. This became more and more common throughout the first and second centuries AD as the Empire's frontiers became permanent - Trajan's Dacian campaigns involved not only quite a few full legions, but also vexillations from legions on the Rhine and the East (as the manpower could be spared from those fronts at the time). The vexillations would have been under the command of the legionary legate, and have had just as much autonomy as a full-strength legion in the same army. they just had fewer cohorts and therefore fewer men!

If anyone is familiar with Warhammer 40k they are your Imperial guards and legions being spacemarines, both of them are in a different faction but both serve one God Emperor and that is you

I've played Warhammer 40,000 for years. Your methods are all well and good, but if you try and fight historically, as I do, then yes, you'd rather the auxiliaries die than the citizen Legionnaires, but still, lets not forget that the auxiliaries were historically as well-trained, led, and equipped as the legionnaires themselves, and so were in no way considered cannon fodder. Just look at the battles of Mons Graupius or the Batavian Revolt and you'll see what I mean. Incidentally, in sieges, the legionnaires were usually the first into the breach (cf. the Siege of Jerusalem), and often took heavy losses in the process. that was an accepted risk of assaulting fortified cities. The Romans dealt with it, and so should you!

[5th Lieutenant]

So I supose the Legion was wherever its Eagle went and anyone else was a vexilation.

If the cavalry was an intrinsic part of the legion is there a RS2 unit to represent this given that you mentioned the Legionary Cavalry has been removed?

[Binshuy]

if your world conquering legions get tired use Auxillia food for the enemy. works wonders

[5th Lieutenant]

That was my thought, Binshuy, but from what Rory has said I now realise that the Auxilia were not used like this and I am hoping to mirror Roman operational planning when RS2 arrives

[Binshuy]

why use Auxillia other than city garrisons when the Roman Legion do it better? i usually use them as cannon fodder on sieges with the AI in control while i watch TV or do something better xD

the auxillias lack of spears made them virtually useless in legion combat other than cheap city garrisons and cheap cannon fodder the Roman Legionnaires do it better but if you like roleplay use them as late roman legions when the roman warmachine was crappy and watch as other factions eat up your roman empire

the Auxillias being City Militias they are one tough nut to crack, they have the same ability as your garden variety Legionnaires they are numerous and cheap they are your perfect city garrison but i suggest using the legions in hostile territory or in a rebellious city they can hold out much longer

they also serve good and cheap invasion force paving the way for the real soldiers(Legions) to Finnish up the job, in Germany or Gaul you got to be careful because AI stacks could be anywhere ambushing you. thats is where Auxillia scout parties come in, My methods may be brutal to the short lifespan Auxillias have in my game but they help prevent a Teutoberg masacre

If anyone is familiar with Warhammer 40k they are your Imperial guards and legions being spacemarines, both of them are in a different faction but both serve one God Emperor and that is you

[Beetlecat]

why use Auxillia other than city garrisons when the Roman Legion do it better? i usually use them as cannon fodder on sieges with the AI in control while i watch TV or do something better xD

The tone of this question reminds me of the people who play with entire legions made up of First Cohorts...

[Drowsy]

The tone of this question reminds me of the people who play with entire legions made up of First Cohorts...

I play according to house rules and base my legions mostly on Century's X designs with added info i gather from threads like these, but unlike history we don't suffer from political strife, mass revolts and what not. The people are happy and if some town does revolt its usually a 6 months (1 turn) drinking party followed by swift extermination. Money not being an issue i have no issues depleting a town of its population by mass recruitment to be slaughtered and soften up the incoming enemy or enemies, which is a win win situation due to the added effect of it lowering unrest in the given town In 'real life' this would be totally unacceptable for a number of reasons of course. Until RS2 comes out which adds things to lower population sending in cannon fodder is acceptable in my book