Slitherine

If I send a mounted force (that has the ability to dismount) on a flank march, I understand I don't need to decide if they are mounted or dismounted until they arrive. However once I have decided does this effect the straggling role? Eg if they are cavalry dismounting as MF do they take the straggle role as mounted or do they take it as MF with a -1? I've heard that different rulings have been made at different tourneys and wanted to clear this up. It seems to me quite logical that troops would use their mounts to get to the battle and so the straggle role should be as mounted.
Regards
Martyn

The BGs only count as dismounted once they make their first move on the table.

They can't make their first move on the table until they have passed a straggling test.

Ipso facto they are mounted when they test to straggle.

Well done for posting the question Martyn.

Interestingly Steve gave almost exactly the same answer in 2012....

As an arriving flank march is the first time a flank marching BG (that is permitted to dismount) is first deployed on table, ipso facto it can arrive dismounted.

But we never did receive any further clarification.

http://www.slitherine.co.uk/forum/viewt ... 00#p318087

Hopefully most people would agree that this is reasonable since you have paid the points for mounted troops.

But have paid nothing for 'Free Dismounting'

I don't know the answer to the original question (though it seems reasonable that they could deploy dismounted) but I imagine it is going to be rare that this would help. One of the biggest benefits of a flank march coming on is that it can wrong-foot the enemy and do a lot of damage before they can react. Since foot are slower than mounted in the open you'd lose this advantage.

It would also be sensible if you flank march troops like Macedonian Foot companions who can be HF Pike or MF light spear to deploy as MF so they can surprise enemy in mountain fortresses as they did historically.

I imagine though it could be useful where there is an 'obvious' open flank to march on and a more cluttered flank. Particularly if you can dismout as MF.

With the Macedonian foot I can see an argument for making them decide what equipment to take before going on the flank march. However I'm particularly thinking of the Ord French upgraded longbowmen to Cav Prot, Lance Sw which dismount as MF longbow sw. Seems perfectly reasonable for these boys to use their horses to get on a flank and then dismount to fight in the local terrain when they get there.

[quote="grahambriggs
It would also be sensible if you flank march troops like Macedonian Foot companions who can be HF Pike or MF light spear to deploy as MF so they can surprise enemy in mountain fortresses as they did historically.

quote]

Does this mean when you pick troops who can be MF or HF you do not have to decide which they are until you first deploy them?
( It is mostly all one or the other of course. )

So after the initiative has been determined and terrain has been laid -whether they are flank marching or not ? Seems remarkably generous to me. You sure about that? Very handy if so.

It could be helpful for, say, Early Medieval German cav that can be purchased as average cav, but dismount as superior armored HF Offensive spear. 3 BGs of 6 under a FC could do some damage. Assuming you could catch them.

MikeHorah wrote:Does this mean when you pick troops who can be MF or HF you do not have to decide which they are until you first deploy them?
( It is mostly all one or the other of course. )

So after the initiative has been determined and terrain has been laid -whether they are flank marching or not ? Seems remarkably generous to me. You sure about that? Very handy if so.

I don't thikn Graham meant 'carte blance', he meant in the specific case of Macedonian Pike who can be either/or.

In the case of (for example) Gauls, who can be MF hill tribes or HF non-hill tribes, no - you definitely have to choose at the time the list is made as they are either hill or non-hill. It's not a change in style of combat, it's an entire way of life.

gozerius wrote:It could be helpful for, say, Early Medieval German cav that can be purchased as average cav, but dismount as superior armored HF Offensive spear. 3 BGs of 6 under a FC could do some damage. Assuming you could catch them.

I was thinking of these guys, and it made me wonder.

Can (if you choose) you dismount them before the flank march?

Superior Infantry get to re-roll 1's. Average Cavalry don't!

I have used Early Medieval Germans precisely for this flexibility. Purchased as average cavalry and can dismount as superior HF. I have only ever flank marched with them once. They tested for straggling as (average) cavalry and walked on the board as (superior) HF.

Deploying dismounted on the side table edge is really little different in concept to them walking on the base edge at initial deployment as dismounted HF. IMO the RAW are quite clear on the sequence and mechanics of this.

ravenflight wrote:

MikeHorah wrote:Does this mean when you pick troops who can be MF or HF you do not have to decide which they are until you first deploy them?
( It is mostly all one or the other of course. )

So after the initiative has been determined and terrain has been laid -whether they are flank marching or not ? Seems remarkably generous to me. You sure about that? Very handy if so.

I don't thikn Graham meant 'carte blance', he meant in the specific case of Macedonian Pike who can be either/or.

In the case of (for example) Gauls, who can be MF hill tribes or HF non-hill tribes, no - you definitely have to choose at the time the list is made as they are either hill or non-hill. It's not a change in style of combat, it's an entire way of life.

I can see it with troops who may dismount as either type as you have already deferred a mounted/foot decision as the rules lay down and have paid for them as mounted thus voluntarily giving up a capability if you dismount .And with the Germans you can have both anyway as long as you treat one as allies and as a different tribe -so you can hedge your bets ( I also like to have both in my collection as I can use the MF as Gauls and the HF as Galatians. They don't look soooo different)

But what about Thurephuroi which are usually all MF or all HF ? And Principate Auxiliary Infantry? The latter one might argue had the ability to operate in either fashion and to order.

That said I am not arguing one should have that option in the FOG(AM) system just really trying to be clear what the interpretation and practice is - in case I have missed something!

I would no appear consistent however to say the outflanking infantry ( not dismountable cavalry) of a type that can be MF or HF have the choice on arrival on table when previously deployed optional MF/HF on the table did not .

I have always played it that you have to choose when you first do your list.

MikeHorah wrote:But what about Thurephuroi which are usually all MF or all HF ? And Principate Auxiliary Infantry? The latter one might argue had the ability to operate in either fashion and to order.

That said I am not arguing one should have that option in the FOG(AM) system just really trying to be clear what the interpretation and practice is - in case I have missed something!

I would no appear consistent however to say the outflanking infantry ( not dismountable cavalry) of a type that can be MF or HF have the choice on arrival on table when previously deployed optional MF/HF on the table did not .

I have always played it that you have to choose when you first do your list.

That's a different case Mike. For Principate auxiliaries you can either buy them as HF or MF. You have to make that decision when you write your list. Macedonian Foot Companions are a little different, because the army list has a special rule in it. You can buy them as HF pike - 6pts a base- in which case that is how you must use them. However, if you pay 7pts (the MF price) then, just for those troops in that list, you get the option to either use them as MF (Light spear sword I think) or as HF pikemen.

The reason for the different approach is that there is debate as to how best to represent the Principate auxilia on the table. But in the case of the foot companions they really did change their battlefield role dependent upon circumstances.

grahambriggs wrote:

MikeHorah wrote:But what about Thurephuroi which are usually all MF or all HF ? And Principate Auxiliary Infantry? The latter one might argue had the ability to operate in either fashion and to order.

That said I am not arguing one should have that option in the FOG(AM) system just really trying to be clear what the interpretation and practice is - in case I have missed something!

I would no appear consistent however to say the outflanking infantry ( not dismountable cavalry) of a type that can be MF or HF have the choice on arrival on table when previously deployed optional MF/HF on the table did not .

I have always played it that you have to choose when you first do your list.

That's a different case Mike. For Principate auxiliaries you can either buy them as HF or MF. You have to make that decision when you write your list. Macedonian Foot Companions are a little different, because the army list has a special rule in it. You can buy them as HF pike - 6pts a base- in which case that is how you must use them. However, if you pay 7pts (the MF price) then, just for those troops in that list, you get the option to either use them as MF (Light spear sword I think) or as HF pikemen.

The reason for the different approach is that there is debate as to how best to represent the Principate auxilia on the table. But in the case of the foot companions they really did change their battlefield role dependent upon circumstances.

Thanks Graham. How interesting. I had not spotted that for Foot Companions - not an army I have used as it happens so that is why. Was this an attempt to clarify what the Hypaspists were? Old WRG rules 5th/6th had them as LMI as I recall. Well as I say I have been doing it right

For the Alexandrian Macedonian list there is a specific rule to allow this, 5th bullet point:

“Foot companions and hypaspists listed in a player’s army list as heavy foot pikemen can instead be
deployed at the start of the battle as medium foot with javelins – as in the army list below. This is only
permitted if the pikemen were in battle groups of 8 bases. This option can only be used if they have been
paid for at the points cost of the medium foot.”

This is copied from the errata but it shows that it is a specific exception for them.

I see Graham had already mentioned this while I was typing

Cynical wrote:For the Alexandrian Macedonian list there is a specific rule to allow this, 5th bullet point:

“Foot companions and hypaspists listed in a player’s army list as heavy foot pikemen can instead be
deployed at the start of the battle as medium foot with javelins – as in the army list below. This is only
permitted if the pikemen were in battle groups of 8 bases. This option can only be used if they have been
paid for at the points cost of the medium foot.”

This is copied from the errata but it shows that it is a specific exception for them.

I see Graham had already mentioned this while I was typing

And thanks to you too good Cynical.

MikeHorah wrote:Thanks Graham. How interesting. I had not spotted that for Foot Companions - not an army I have used as it happens so that is why. Was this an attempt to clarify what the Hypaspists were? Old WRG rules 5th/6th had them as LMI as I recall. Well as I say I have been doing it right

I think what it is Mike is that there happen to be enough historical texts that cover the campaigns of Alexander that there is very good evidence of both roles. i.e. big formed battle like Issus; form in line of battle as a pike taxies. Scampering around hilly terrain winkling out petty kings from forts; leave the pike in camp and take something more flexible.

I would imagine many troops who spent several years campaigning developed that kind of flexibility; it's just that we don't necessarily have the clear and detailed sources that cover it.

grahambriggs wrote:

MikeHorah wrote:Thanks Graham. How interesting. I had not spotted that for Foot Companions - not an army I have used as it happens so that is why. Was this an attempt to clarify what the Hypaspists were? Old WRG rules 5th/6th had them as LMI as I recall. Well as I say I have been doing it right

I think what it is Mike is that there happen to be enough historical texts that cover the campaigns of Alexander that there is very good evidence of both roles. i.e. big formed battle like Issus; form in line of battle as a pike taxies. Scampering around hilly terrain winkling out petty kings from forts; leave the pike in camp and take something more flexible.

I would imagine many troops who spent several years campaigning developed that kind of flexibility; it's just that we don't necessarily have the clear and detailed sources that cover it.

Yes we wargamers look for precision and exactitude within which to constrain ourselves not infrequently where history and records (unhelpfully ) often have failed to take our rather exacting needs into account If only more of the Ancients had thought to leave some written drill and training manuals lying around Like Xenaphon's or the Hittite/Mitanni chariot horse trainer Kikkuli!

So just to be clear- if I turn up to Britcon with Arab Conquest I have an army where the list allows the Jund cavalry to dismount as superior spear men. I elect at the correct part of set up to flank march 2 units of these on the left flank.

When (if) they successfully arrive I can choose, at that time, whether they are coming on as HC or as HI?

Muz

muz177 wrote:So just to be clear- if I turn up to Britcon with Arab Conquest I have an army where the list allows the Jund cavalry to dismount as superior spear men. I elect at the correct part of set up to flank march 2 units of these on the left flank.

When (if) they successfully arrive I can choose, at that time, whether they are coming on as HC or as HI?

Muz

Correct. In my opinion you have the choice of coming on as HC or HI.