Home Forums General Game Design The Battle Column

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 119 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #198385
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    In my gaming system infantry lines don’t wheel. IMHO battlelines of infantry or cavalry never wheeled in history. Ever. Those troops that were sufficiently drilled could change orientation by forming columns. I replicate this using a battle column mechanism. More on my blog here.

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198387
    Avatar photoBandit
    Participant

    IMHO battlelines of infantry or cavalry never wheeled in history. Ever. Those troops that were sufficiently drilled could change orientation by forming columns.

    That’s demonstrably false, but to each their own.

    #198388
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    Feel free to demonstrate. 🙂

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198389
    Avatar photoBandit
    Participant

    Feel free to demonstrate.

    I’m not the one setting the premise, you are. I’m saying your premise is incorrect. You’re convinced no troops in the history of warfare have, while formed in line, wheeled. OK. Demonstrate that. Support your premise.

    Go read Hardee’s Right and Light Infantry Tactics (published 1861) and available here: https://archive.org/details/hardeesrifleligh01hard

    Paying close attention to: “Lesson IV. WHEELINGS. General principles of Wheeling.” beginning on page 19 of the PDF of the digitized version linked to above.

    And explain how these instructions that refer to “wheeling” and describe how to perform it actually constitute forming a column.

    Alternatively, as I said: To each their own. You’re designing your own game system, you can make up whatever parameters you want for that game. And if you say you are just representing your premise and not reality, then OK, nothing wrong or internally inconsistent with that.

    #198390
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    IMHO battlelines of infantry or cavalry never wheeled in history. Ever.

    🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

    Get a copy of this.

    And this

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #198391
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    @ Bandit

    explain how these instructions that refer to “wheeling” and describe how to perform it actually constitute forming a column.

    Sure.

    “378. Wheeling on a fixed pivot takes place in passing a corps from the order in battle [i.e. battleline] to the order in column, or from the latter to the former.”

    This only makes sense if it is square-shaped subunits that each wheel in place.

    Let me make clear that I don’t dispute infantry wheeling. What I dispute is infantry battlelines wheeling as battlelines, i.e. a line of men a kilometer or more in length all wheeling around a point on either flank. This was impossible to execute.

    However smaller formations like squads or companies could wheel individually, and did so as this manual and manuals from Antiquity describe, to allow a line composed of subunits to transition from line to column and vice versa. I do animations of this in my YouTube video here.

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198395
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    No sane real life commander would attempt to wheel an entire front. I don’t know any rules that allow it to happen either. Are you suggesting that there are?

    If the manouevre were possible, why would it be attempted? If it was a response to a threatened flank, the enemy to the front hasn’t gone away.

    Flank threats are one of the reasons real and toy soldier commanders keep a reserve.

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #198396
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    No sane real life commander would attempt to wheel an entire front. I don’t know any rules that allow it to happen either. Are you suggesting that there are? If the manouevre were possible, why would it be attempted? If it was a response to a threatened flank, the enemy to the front hasn’t gone away. Flank threats are one of the reasons real and toy soldier commanders keep a reserve.

    Not suggesting, just stating the obvious. Every single ruleset that isn’t grid-based allows lines of any length to wheel. DBA, DBM, Triumph, Field of Glory, l’Art de la Guerre, Mortem et Gloriam, etc., etc.

    My take is that the largest unit that is historically recorded as being able to wheel is the Macedonian syntagma, a unit of 16 x 16 men (cf Asklepiodotus, Arrian, Aelian). Each man occupied a frontage of 3 feet in intermediate order, so the syntagma was about 16 yards wide. In DBM, say, an inch or ‘pace’ represents 50 yards, so a single stand represents a unit a little less than 100 yards wide. No way it could wheel, never mind a line of stands.

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198399
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    ‘Lines of any length’ suggests a single, solid line, shoulder to shoulder. Real armies don’t deploy like that, and good rules shouldn’t encourage it either.

     

    Try it with a horse and musket army and Bad Things will happen.

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #198402
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    ‘Lines of any length’ suggests a single, solid line, shoulder to shoulder. Real armies don’t deploy like that, and good rules shouldn’t encourage it either. Try it with a horse and musket army and Bad Things will happen.

    Depends on your army. A pike phalanx could deploy in close order, each file 18″ wide which was virtually shoulder to shoulder. The Saxon troops at Hastings deployed in a shieldwall, also close order, the men packed so tightly together the dead could not fall.

    However the standard default was intermediate order: one yard or 3′ per file, which gave the men room to used their shields and weapons. But whether in close, intermediate or even open order (2 yards per file) a line of infantry or cavalry or anything that was anything beyond 16 yards wide did not wheel. Which will annoy every wargamer, but what can I say?

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198404
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    You made a blanket statement(s).

    IMHO battlelines of infantry or cavalry never wheeled in history. Ever.

    a line of infantry or cavalry or anything that was anything beyond 16 yards wide did not wheel.

    All of your examples are pre-medieval.

    Are you seriously saying that a Napoleonic regiment in line can’t wheel? At all?

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #198405
    Avatar photoMike
    Keymaster

    Every single ruleset that isn’t grid-based allows lines of any length to wheel. DBA, DBM, Triumph, Field of Glory, l’Art de la Guerre, Mortem et Gloriam, etc., etc.

    What do you mean by a line?

    My armies in my games deploy in a line (mostly), but that line is made up of several units.
    The individual units may wheel as required, but the line as a whole may not.

    #198407
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    Every single ruleset that isn’t grid-based allows lines of any length to wheel. DBA, DBM, Triumph, Field of Glory, l’Art de la Guerre, Mortem et Gloriam, etc., etc.

    What do you mean by a line? My armies in my games deploy in a line (mostly), but that line is made up of several units. The individual units may wheel as required, but the line as a whole may not.

    a line of infantry or cavalry or anything that was anything beyond 16 yards wide did not wheel.

     

     

     

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #198411
    Avatar photoMike
    Keymaster

    That did not help me NCS, sorry.

    Are we saying both of these are lines?
    Or just one, and if just one of them is a line, which one?

    #198412
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    That did not help me NCS, sorry. Are we saying both of these are lines? Or just one, and if just one of them is a line, which one? image pending

    Any unit of infantry or cavalry with a frontage over 16 yards wide didn’t wheel.

    That’s just about every Napoleonic unit then.

    Clear enough I thought, and I’m a bit fick.

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #198414
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    You made a blanket statement(s).

    IMHO battlelines of infantry or cavalry never wheeled in history. Ever. a line of infantry or cavalry or anything that was anything beyond 16 yards wide did not wheel.

    All of your examples are pre-medieval. Are you seriously saying that a Napoleonic regiment in line can’t wheel? At all?

    Sure it could. But by company, not by the entire line. Individual companies would wheel individually to the right/left and then advance to rejoin each other and reform a new line facing a different direction. I’ve seen it in a manual somewhere. I believe only the best trained troops could do it.

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198416
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    That did not help me NCS, sorry. Are we saying both of these are lines? Or just one, and if just one of them is a line, which one?

    Both are a line. In the first case the line is composed of subunits, in the second it’s just a mass of men, for sure with a file and rank structure, but no subunits. The former could form column if the subunits were square-shaped; the latter could not. Neither could wheel as a complete line.

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198417
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    That did not help me NCS, sorry. Are we saying both of these are lines? Or just one, and if just one of them is a line, which one? image pending

    Any unit of infantry or cavalry with a frontage over 16 yards wide didn’t wheel. That’s just about every Napoleonic unit then. Clear enough I thought, and I’m a bit fick.

    How many ranks and files in a Napoleonic company? They may well exceed 16 files and still wheel, but the main point stands – the entire line did not wheel as a line.

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198418
    Avatar photoMike
    Keymaster

    Every single ruleset that isn’t grid-based allows lines of any length to wheel. DBA, DBM, Triumph, Field of Glory, l’Art de la Guerre, Mortem et Gloriam, etc., etc.

    OK , well in that case the rules I use do not allow the top row which is a line to wheel.

    #198420
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    You made a blanket statement(s).

    IMHO battlelines of infantry or cavalry never wheeled in history. Ever. a line of infantry or cavalry or anything that was anything beyond 16 yards wide did not wheel.

    All of your examples are pre-medieval. Are you seriously saying that a Napoleonic regiment in line can’t wheel? At all?

    Sure it could. But by company, not by the entire line. Individual companies would wheel individually to the right/left and then advance to rejoin each other and reform a new line. I’ve seen it in a manual somewhere. I believe only the best trained troops could do it.

    I agree that Napoleonic regiments/battalions wheeled by echelon of companies. A full strength infantry company was more than 16 yards wide though. Not many modern Napoleonic rules have a company as the smallest unit either.

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #198421
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    Every single ruleset that isn’t grid-based allows lines of any length to wheel. DBA, DBM, Triumph, Field of Glory, l’Art de la Guerre, Mortem et Gloriam, etc., etc.

    OK , well in that case the rules I use do not allow the top row which is a line to wheel.

    Every single ruleset that isn’t grid-based allows lines of any length to wheel. DBA, DBM, Triumph, Field of Glory, l’Art de la Guerre, Mortem et Gloriam, etc., etc.

    OK , well in that case the rules I use do not allow the top row which is a line to wheel.

    I think it would depend on your game scale. Phil Barker’s DBM for example makes an inch equal 50 yards, so a single stand is a little less than 100 yards wide and it should not be able to wheel as a line. You need a rules mechanism to convert it into a column – i.e. its subunits are presumed to wheel 90 degrees left or right and the whole stand is now considered to be in column (even if physically it is still a line). Ideally you need square-shaped stands – the individual figures in Warhammer are perfect.

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198425
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    You need a rules mechanism to convert it into a column – i.e. its subunits are presumed to wheel 90 degrees left or right and the whole stand is now considered to be in column (even if physically it is still a line)

    That’s a given in most rules anyway. You seem to be contradicting yourself.

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #198426
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    You made a blanket statement(s).

    IMHO battlelines of infantry or cavalry never wheeled in history. Ever. a line of infantry or cavalry or anything that was anything beyond 16 yards wide did not wheel.

    All of your examples are pre-medieval. Are you seriously saying that a Napoleonic regiment in line can’t wheel? At all?

    Sure it could. But by company, not by the entire line. Individual companies would wheel individually to the right/left and then advance to rejoin each other and reform a new line. I’ve seen it in a manual somewhere. I believe only the best trained troops could do it.

    I agree that Napoleonic regiments/battalions wheeled by echelon of companies. A full strength infantry company was more than 16 yards wide though. Not many modern Napoleonic rules have a company as the smallest unit either.

    I have a sneaking suspicion that the actual wheeling was done by subunits of the company who, immediately after the wheel, first redressed ranks before the entire company then advanced to its new position alongside other companies. But it’s just a theory as the most practical way of doing it.

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198427
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    You need a rules mechanism to convert it into a column – i.e. its subunits are presumed to wheel 90 degrees left or right and the whole stand is now considered to be in column (even if physically it is still a line)

    That’s a given in most rules anyway. You seem to be contradicting yourself.

    Not really. You want a column that is as wide as the line was deep and as long as the line was wide (a problem with 20x40mm stands), and you want that to be the only way a stand or line of stands can change orientation. I manage it with a square grid battlefield.

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198428
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    There was no smaller manouevre unit than a company.

    The situation in earlier 18th century armies (WSS, GNW, WAS etc.) was even more limited. The smallest manouevre group was the battalion/regiment, but they could still wheel, and wheel they did.

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #198429
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    There was no smaller manouevre unit than a company. The situation in earlier 18th century armies (WSS, GNW, WAS etc.) was even more limited. The smallest manouevre group was the battalion/regiment, but they could still wheel, and wheel they did.

    Can you give me a source for a regiment/battalion wheeling?

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198433
    Avatar photobobm
    Participant

    Whilst many rule systems do allow wheels by an entire battleline I think they do this because they also allow units to be touching their neighbours when in reality there would be gaps.  With touching units you can’t wheel them individually unless the rear of your (out of scale) base clears its neighbour, which could be a considerable distance with some troop basing systems and the angle rotated through be far more than you’d wish for.

    Those same rules often allow multiple unit wheels to require less command input than moving the troops individually…i.e. a single PIP.

    Manoeuvring with toy soldiers can be a tricky business at times.  A fair few rules systems adopt gridded battlefields to overcome some of these difficulties.

    There's 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who don't.....

    #198434
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    Whilst many rule systems do allow wheels by an entire battleline I think they do this because they also allow units to be touching their neighbours when in reality there would be gaps. With touching units you can’t wheel them individually unless the rear of your (out of scale) base clears its neighbour, which could be a considerable distance with some troop basing systems and the angle rotated through be far more than you’d wish for.

    Actually, the tacticians in Antiquity cater for this. Before wheeling right or left, a subunit first contracted from intermediate to closer order, hence creating space between one subunit and the next. The subunits could then easily wheel without bumping into each other.

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198448
    Avatar photoBandit
    Participant

    Wow. I am really confused.

    IMHO battlelines of infantry or cavalry never wheeled in history. Ever.

    This is an insanely broad statement which you immediately replace with an incredibly narrow – and strange – premise:

    What I dispute is infantry battlelines wheeling as battlelines, i.e. a line of men a kilometer or more in length all wheeling around a point on either flank.

    I don’t know what this undefined “battleline” is supposed to be, but you claim it has a minimum length of .62 miles and you would seem to imply in places that it may contain no intervals, though in other places you seem to imply it may contain intervals.

    Are we saying both of these are lines?
    Or just one, and if just one of them is a line, which one?

    Are you just ignoring intervals and their purposes? You seem to be combining “contract/reduce/close files [of a sub-unit]” with “form column”. Which I guess is awkward but fine? But:

    1) Intervals between subunits are there exactly to address the concern you have about subunits not colliding as their parent unit perform various changes of orientation and formation.

    2) When you say “as a ‘battleline'” do you mean an arrangement where all subunits are formed in line, there are no intervals, and neither of these circumstances can change to perform the wheel?

    But whether in close, intermediate or even open order (2 yards per file) a line of infantry or cavalry or anything that was anything beyond 16 yards wide did not wheel.

    This contradicts:

    However smaller formations like squads or companies could wheel individually, and did so

    A company commonly has more than a 16 yard frontage when deployed in line. So according to your earlier statement, a company in line can wheel, as you said that explicitly, and because it does not constitute a “battleline” which is apparently a line of 1KM or more…

    But then, you say, no it can’t… because it is greater than 16 yards of frontage.

    Similarly, your use of ‘wheel’ seems to be an exercise in ‘purism’ in that different sizes of elements can’t accomplish a wheel by different methods or else it is not a “wheel”?

    I agree with others that you are *very* fixated on the ancient world – which is fine – but a rectangle does have different geometry than a square, an element that is 1-3 files deep is going to have different options than one that is 16 files deep. Similarly, an element with intervals between subunits is going to have different options than one with no intervals.

    Can you give me a source for a regiment/battalion wheeling?

    I mean… I’m pretty sure some internet searches of marching bands on parade grounds can dispel that a line only less than 16 yards of frontage can wheel…

    Lastly, as to your “infinite lines” can’t wheel because a line of up to only a specific seemingly random length can wheel notion – that would seem to ignore geometry. We’re actually talking about methods for command & control in order to maintain order and not just the geometry correct?

    It is fair to say I am incredibly lost. I can’t tell if you are a) making an insanely pedantic argument, b) ignoring that tabletop miniatures games include abstraction (i.e. intervals, subunits altering their exact circumstance in order to coordinate a larger action by the whole, etc… c) just contradicting yourself outright and/or defining terms and conditions on the fly however is convenient.

    #198450
    Avatar photoNot Connard Sage
    Participant

    I can’t tell if you are a) making an insanely pedantic argument, b) ignoring that tabletop miniatures games include abstraction (i.e. intervals, subunits altering their exact circumstance in order to coordinate a larger action by the whole, etc… c) just contradicting yourself outright and/or defining terms and conditions on the fly however is convenient.

     

    Or indeed all three. At the same time…

    I’m tired of the moving goalposts, so.

    Obvious contrarian and passive aggressive old prat, who is taken far too seriously by some and not seriously enough by others.

    #198452
    Avatar photobobm
    Participant

    I’m possibly alone in not feeling confused here…

    I think what’s being pointed out is that drill books show wheeling by sub-units of the whole (which then creates a unit in column with a width of whatever the particular sub-unit was) and not multiple units all pivoting on a single, potentially distant, point and thereby maintaining a continuous frontage across all of them whilst moving through a desired angle.

    However I may be misunderstanding.

    There's 10 types of people in the world. Those who understand binary and those who don't.....

    #198453
    Avatar photoBandit
    Participant

    I’m possibly alone in not feeling confused here…

    I think what’s being pointed out is that drill books show wheeling by sub-units of the whole (which then creates a unit in column with a width of whatever the particular sub-unit was) and not multiple units all pivoting on a single, potentially distant, point and thereby maintaining a continuous frontage across all of them whilst moving through a desired angle.

    That’s reasonable until all the statements are added together, then, as NCS says, there appears to be some goal-post moving, or at least some inconsistencies/contradictions. And the broad sweeping statement still doesn’t become accurate.

    #198458
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    Ok, let’s see if I can clarify things….

    1. As Bandit said I am interested primarily (“very fixated”) in Antiquity. Napoleonics and 19th century warfare are not my speciality. So, reading the tacticians of Antiquity – Asklepiodotus, Arrian, Aelian – plus the Byzantine manuals, I deduced that infantry lines didn’t wheel but square-shaped subunits did. By “infantry lines” I mean the entire battleline which for a standard 4-legion consular army was about 800 yards wide and for a Macedonian phalanx about a kilometer wide.  Other infantry lines of sizeable armies were comparable in width. All clear thus far?

    2. The same tacticians make clear that wheeling was done in 90 degree increments. This was partly because a 90 degree wheel by subunits in a line turned it into an instant column, and partly because opposing lines didn’t engage each other at funny angles anyway.  Everyone fine?

    3. The subunit described as doing wheels was the syntagma, a 16×16 man formation, but one can extrapolate that to the 8×8 man century of the Roman legion and the 8×8 man pentecosty of the Spartan phalanx. The point was that the subunit needed to be as wide as the line was deep. All on board?

    4. Infantry lines along with their constituent subunits were continuous. There was no such thing as a line punctuated with gaps (the exception being Renaissance pike blocks which were actually a row of mini infantry squares). The quincunx was an invention of historians. But that’s another matter and really needs a separate thread.

    5. In the Napoleonic era an infantry line didn’t wheel as a line either, but by companies. I’m waiting for primary source evidence that units larger than a company wheeled. The evidence supplied by Bandit (Hardee’s Right and Light Infantry Tactics) demonstrates that subunits smaller than companies – i.e. subunits as wide as a battleline was deep – could also wheel to transform the line into a column and vice versa. See posts 3 and 5 in this thread.

    A company is wider than a syntagma though I would hypothesize that it was the subunits of a company that wheeled then immediately reformed the company. Companies could wheel through any angle, not just 90 degrees. Napoleonic infantry were more flexible than their forebears because what mattered to a Napoleonic line was its field of fire, not hand-to-hand combat. Things would go very badly for a battleline in Antiquity (or the Middle Ages) that charged another stationary battleline at an angle. I cover this in my video.

    Thus far the goalposts seem to have stayed pretty much in one place.

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198459
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    I’m possibly alone in not feeling confused here… I think what’s being pointed out is that drill books show wheeling by sub-units of the whole (which then creates a unit in column with a width of whatever the particular sub-unit was) and not multiple units all pivoting on a single, potentially distant, point and thereby maintaining a continuous frontage across all of them whilst moving through a desired angle.

    Exactly.

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198461
    Avatar photoKitfox
    Participant

    You guys owe me five minutes of my life back!

    Death to all fanatics!

    #198462
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    You guys owe me five minutes of my life back!

    Sorry….

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198530
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    Some interesting input from TMP. One poster had this to say:

    I used to be in a re-enactment society, we once successfully wheeled a 6 deep formation across the width of the parade ground at RMA Sandhurst; which I’d been told only a few hours earlier by 2 guards brigade drill sergeants you couldn’t do [well what they meant was the guards couldn’t do it]. Based on the size of the square I’d say we had a frontage of 40-45 ‘men’.

    Given that a typical Napoleonic company was 30 men wide that would argue for a company wheel being done by subunits, especially in non-ideal battle conditions, though a company might just have done it as a single entity.

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198531
    Avatar photoMartinR
    Participant

    Well that was fun.

    So we’ve finally clarified that we are talking about “Ancient” battles, and not all the other periods where infantry formed lines.

    “Ancientc is pretty large period of time, and some people might take issue with the assertion that entire armies deployed without any gaps.

    Anyway, I use grids too, and as I generally only fight entire battles, I’m not too fussed about how the individual companies are managed, just the overall effect on formations manouverability and combat effectiveness.

     

     

    "Mistakes in the initial deployment cannot be rectified" - Helmuth von Moltke

    #198534
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    @MartinR: Well, we are now talking about infantry from all periods up to and including the 19th century. A Napoleonic (and by extension later) infantry line could change orientation by company-sized subunits wheeling individually then advancing to a new frontage. Pre-gunpowder infantry didn’t do that as they had no reason not to face each other flat on from the get-go.

    It does rather spoil things for me. I can’t take any Ancients ruleset seriously that allows battlelines to wheel, though they’re still fun as a game. It’s tedious being a purist.

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

    #198535
    Avatar photoJustin Swanton
    Participant

    Ancients is pretty large period of time, and some people might take issue with the assertion that entire armies deployed without any gaps.

    Which raises the question of the quincunx (or checkerboard formation of the Roman legion). We beat that one to death on the Society of Ancients forum. I cover it in my book. Basically, it never existed.

    Late Mediaeval and Renaissance pike block are fine. They’re not really a battleline, just a row of individual infantry squares. Antiochus tried that disposition at Magnesia to protect his elephants. It didn’t work.

    https://wargamingwithoutdice.blogspot.com/

Viewing 40 posts - 1 through 40 (of 119 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.