overlaps = disorder?

[stefoid]

I was postulating in another thread that an overlap melee is a localized source of disorder for the files involved (both overlapping and overlapped). because to actually fight, (although not depicted on the tabletop) the overlapping base(s) must turn in on the exposed enemy flank, which of course will be met by the defenders thinning/extending the line and/or turning to face. basically a big mess, unlike the linear pushing match going on in the central part of the melee.

I was thinkng that if both files (not BGs) were treated as disordered for the duration of the overlap melee, it would provide a further 'versatility' point of difference between pointy stick wielders and swordsmen. It would also provide an incentive (historical I think?) for phalanxes to protect their flanks with troops better able to handle the disorder of an overlap melee.

thoughts?

[philqw78]

And spear/pike armies would utterly crumble from being charged at the end of the line. Ooooh. There's the end of the Spartan line. I'll charge it with my cataphracts, I'll be evens at impact and plus in melee.

[stefoid]

And spear/pike armies would utterly crumble from being charged at the end of the line. Ooooh. There's the end of the Spartan line. I'll charge it with my cataphracts, I'll be evens at impact and plus in melee.

more like: Oooh, theres the end of the Spartan line, Ill charge in with my cataphracts, Ill be ... Ouch! I forgot that overlaps only count in the melee phase

but seriously, what mounted in their right mind would charge a phalanx dead on in if a slightly exposed flank beckoned (which is how Id classify an overlap melee)? legitimate tactic I reckon. The defining characteristic of a phalanx is, after all, "very tough head on, but more vulnerable than most on the flanks"

isnt it?

[hammy]

I can see to some extent what you are getting at but giving an aditional advantage for overlap is rather like a double whammy. If it only applies to the end file of a BG then it will only hurt spears and pikes as no other troops would be affected by 2 dissordered bases.

Simply having fewer dice than your opponent is more than enough of a dissadvantage.

[stefoid]

I can see to some extent what you are getting at but giving an aditional advantage for overlap is rather like a double whammy. If it only applies to the end file of a BG then it will only hurt spears and pikes as no other troops would be affected by 2 dissordered bases.

Simply having fewer dice than your opponent is more than enough of a dissadvantage.

Something to think about if pointy stick wielders end up being seen as overly good.

[philqw78]

but seriously, what mounted in their right mind would charge a phalanx dead on in if a slightly exposed flank beckoned (which is how Id classify an overlap melee)? legitimate tactic I reckon. The defining characteristic of a phalanx is, after all, "very tough head on, but more vulnerable than most on the flanks"

Me. Especially if I can hit with ony 2 dice from each, maybe at - or v's pike -- during impact. The odds of losing by 2 hits are low as are the odds of losing a base. I'm happy to do this now with good troops. Then with your change I would be 4 dice at plus, v's 2 dice at - and 2 dice at evens in melee. A very good chance of a win for the mounted. Armoured Impact foot even better. Hit at evens, fight at plus.

What looks like a small change would in fact be massive.

[stefoid]

but seriously, what mounted in their right mind would charge a phalanx dead on in if a slightly exposed flank beckoned (which is how Id classify an overlap melee)? legitimate tactic I reckon. The defining characteristic of a phalanx is, after all, "very tough head on, but more vulnerable than most on the flanks"

Me. Especially if I can hit with ony 2 dice from each, maybe at - or v's pike -- during impact. The odds of losing by 2 hits are low as are the odds of losing a base. I'm happy to do this now with good troops. Then with your change I would be 4 dice at plus, v's 2 dice at - and 2 dice at evens in melee. A very good chance of a win for the mounted. Armoured Impact foot even better. Hit at evens, fight at plus.

What looks like a small change would in fact be massive.

indeed. It would be imperative to protect your phalanx flanks at all costs. which would be historical I think.

[shall]

You need to be careful of the old trap of looking at your figures and thinking they are standing and doing what the real people they represent are doing. This is rarely the case. They are just pretty locators that's all. Each base represents 100s of soldiers doing what they do.

An overlap in reality will have the overlapped troops spinning of soldiers to hold the flank while the main line fights. The overlappers are sort of trying to disorder the line at the end.

All of this is well covered as a game mechanic with the disadvantage of extra dice.

Si

[philqw78]

with the disadvantage of extra dice

I pray for such disadvantages [/code]

[stefoid]

You need to be careful of the old trap of looking at your figures and thinking they are standing and doing what the real people they represent are doing. This is rarely the case. They are just pretty locators that's all. Each base represents 100s of soldiers doing what they do.

An overlap in reality will have the overlapped troops spinning of soldiers to hold the flank while the main line fights. The overlappers are sort of trying to disorder the line at the end.

All of this is well covered as a game mechanic with the disadvantage of extra dice.

Si

Oh, I agree a combination of extending the line and turning to face would happen, when invariably the thin line would have to give ground, especially one made of spear/pike, which rely more than other troops on support from rear ranks.

[stefoid]

You need to be careful of the old trap of looking at your figures and thinking they are standing and doing what the real people they represent are doing. This is rarely the case. They are just pretty locators that's all. Each base represents 100s of soldiers doing what they do.

An overlap in reality will have the overlapped troops spinning of soldiers to hold the flank while the main line fights. The overlappers are sort of trying to disorder the line at the end.

All of this is well covered as a game mechanic with the disadvantage of extra dice.

Si

Should Pikes get a POA for 3rd and 4th ranks if they are spinning those ranks off to fight overlappers? well, 'should' is a loaded term. I still think that if pikes were considered too uber, something like this to represent their deficiencies would be intersting

[willb]

You need to be careful of the old trap of looking at your figures and thinking they are standing and doing what the real people they represent are doing. This is rarely the case. They are just pretty locators that's all. Each base represents 100s of soldiers doing what they do.

An overlap in reality will have the overlapped troops spinning of soldiers to hold the flank while the main line fights. The overlappers are sort of trying to disorder the line at the end.

All of this is well covered as a game mechanic with the disadvantage of extra dice.

Si

Should Pikes get a POA for 3rd and 4th ranks if they are spinning those ranks off to fight overlappers? well, 'should' is a loaded term. I still think that if pikes were considered too uber, something like this to represent their deficiencies would be intersting

It is only a small portion of the unit and below the scale of the game, which is why the overlap provides extra dice and the pikes do not lose the extra rank advantage.

[stefoid]

You need to be careful of the old trap of looking at your figures and thinking they are standing and doing what the real people they represent are doing. This is rarely the case. They are just pretty locators that's all. Each base represents 100s of soldiers doing what they do.

An overlap in reality will have the overlapped troops spinning of soldiers to hold the flank while the main line fights. The overlappers are sort of trying to disorder the line at the end.

All of this is well covered as a game mechanic with the disadvantage of extra dice.

Si

Should Pikes get a POA for 3rd and 4th ranks if they are spinning those ranks off to fight overlappers? well, 'should' is a loaded term. I still think that if pikes were considered too uber, something like this to represent their deficiencies would be intersting

It is only a small portion of the unit and below the scale of the game, which is why the overlap provides extra dice and the pikes do not lose the extra rank advantage.

theoretical 'reality' and changes to the game are two seperate things. I mean, in 'reality' if you are extending the line with enough troops to offer significant resistance, you must be taking a significant number of troops out of the rear ranks. You cant have it both ways - either significant numbers of troops are extending the line, in which case your rear support is going to suffer, or you are only offering token resistance and the enemy is going to press in on your flank. either way, its a bad situation for a pike block to be in, even if they are getting an overlap of their own on the other side.

I would make a bet, without having done any sort of systematic research, that pike blocks invariably had troops better able to respond to overlaps on both flanks - spears probably

[stefoid]

Actually just as a few points of interst, I read in a book somewhere about a battle between legions and macedonian pike that the romans resolved to attack the phallanx in small groups in a (succesful) attempt to disrupt it. i.e. effectively trying to manufacture rough terrain by offering themselves as speed bumps In game terms this amounts to offering overlaps I suppose. Interesting. Imagine the situation where the phallanx is presented with alternating blocks of enemy instead of the consistant line it normally enjoys running over... there would be a natural inclination for those unopposed to either surge ahead and/or turn inward on the 'unprotected' roman flanks. surging ahead would expose the flank of that file to roman blades so not a great outcome, whereas turning inward, whilst less dangerous, would get pikes facing at all angles and cause the kind of disruption that the romans could exploit, as indeed thet are supposed to have done.

But this is just one account. I suppose phalanxes faced with this kind of tactic on an ongoing basis would have to adjust their own tactics in response and maintain the line when faced with inconsistant resisistance. Perhaps the roman win on this occasion was more of a gimick than anything historically repeatable.

In another book I recall the natural inclination of phallanxes to drift to the right as each man tried to get behind the protection of the shield held by his buddy on the right, and that this natural veer was accounted for when steering battle lines into contact.

The following is my own assumption, but perhpas that is why the macedonians always put their elite dudes to the left of the phallanx, as this is where they were ost likely to be overlapped due to 'driftage' of the enemy line. On the other flank they put lighter infantry better able to take advantage of their own overlap on that side.

One more point, for anyone bored enough to have read this far - charges in foG step into contact with non-parallel enemy by staggering their line, and in fact must do so. This to me seems another form of disorder peculiar to pikes because it either exposes the flanks of files to attack, or more probably results in the phalanx having to conform to the diagonal front presented by the enemy in an order to avoid exposing said flanks. Again, not as bad as exposed flanks of files, but still not ideal with various files pushing in different directions to conform.

I wonder if there are accounts of how the swiss managed these various disruptions.

[stefoid]

A quick look at Wiki indicates that the swiss used 'pike squares' which, rather than offer a huge monolithic block of pikes to the enemy, deployed as individual squares of 100 men (10x10) who were trained to manouver and respond rapidly as an individual unit to threats in all directions.

actually sounds a bit like a roman maniple in that regard.

I suppose with suficient coordination between squares, such a 'phallanx' could adapt to irregularly spaced/angled opposition without becoming dangerously disurpted.

Wiki cites several cases of classic matchup between blades represetned by spanish sword and buckler men and pikes, and as usual, if the pikes could be disrupted somehow, the blades won, and if they couldnt, the pikes won.

I just wonder if there is any way to manufacture this disruption without the pikes having to enter broken terrain, which of course on the tabletop is never going to happen.

[nikgaukroger]

I just wonder if there is any way to manufacture this disruption without the pikes having to enter broken terrain, which of course on the tabletop is never going to happen.

The vagaries of the combat dice and CT cover this.