Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

Dear list--More rules questions from the recent past.

One of the most hotly debated issues in our games (campaign,
tournament, and fun) is the "fit" rule as applied to deep columns
charging a flank.

First, an assumption that may be false. Most of us play that deep
columns that wheel do not "whip around" but rather develop a "bend" at
the point of the wheel. This allows for consistency of movement and
prevents the tails of 6 element long columns from "whipping" gross
distance. However, this assumption may, itself, be a false one--one of
those habit a club develops that should not be allowed. So question
1--Can a column be "kinked" at the point of a wheel, rather than
"whipping around?"

Second, if the answer to the first is "yes" (a column may be kinked
or bent) then, second, how does this affect "fit?" This question arises
again and again, where a charging unit, whether or not it starts behind
the enemy's flank, has room and distance to make the charge and room to
fit at the moment of contact--sometimes even room to "fit" even after
all elements have lined up--but the "whip" of the rear elements in the
charging formation (these are usually deep cavalry columns) EITHER will
not "fit" due to the presence of friendly or enemy units in the line
(but would easily fit with a kink in the column at the point of the
wheel) OR does fit, but now the column itself blocks other charge
declarations and responses.
So there are 2 sub-questions to this subject.
2a) Is it sufficient for "fit" in the case of a columnar charge for
the front elements to contact legally and have "fit" with a kink in the
column at the point of wheeling to charge
and/or 2b) If a column must ALWAYS swing fully behind it's lead
element (especially on a flank charge) can this movement cancel other
charges?

I'd love to draw a diagram, but I lack the skill. However, for the
sake of clarity, imagine that unit A, the charger, is a 6E unit of
Persian HC in column six elements deep, and the defender is unit B, a
Macedonian pike phalanx of 12E, 3 wide and 4 deep, and that A charges B
to make legal, but initially angled, contact on B's left flank--and that
A's charge move has sufficient movement to reach B and line up, but that
a further unit, C, is 125 paces from A's left flank and will prevent A
from "whipping around" on line up. Is A's charge cancelled because it
cannot fit? Or is the charge legal and left as it was at the point of
"impact" and lined up later?

Thanks,
Christian


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[joncleaves]

There's no bending of units in Warrior. I am pretty sure that fact answers every
question in this mail.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Christian and Sarah <cgc.sjw@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 13:00:28 -0500
Subject: [WarriorRules] Cavalry Columns


Dear list--More rules questions from the recent past.

One of the most hotly debated issues in our games (campaign,
tournament, and fun) is the "fit" rule as applied to deep columns
charging a flank.

First, an assumption that may be false. Most of us play that deep
columns that wheel do not "whip around" but rather develop a "bend" at
the point of the wheel. This allows for consistency of movement and
prevents the tails of 6 element long columns from "whipping" gross
distance. However, this assumption may, itself, be a false one--one of
those habit a club develops that should not be allowed. So question
1--Can a column be "kinked" at the point of a wheel, rather than
"whipping around?"

Second, if the answer to the first is "yes" (a column may be kinked
or bent) then, second, how does this affect "fit?" This question arises
again and again, where a charging unit, whether or not it starts behind
the enemy's flank, has room and distance to make the charge and room to
fit at the moment of contact--sometimes even room to "fit" even after
all elements have lined up--but the "whip" of the rear elements in the
charging formation (these are usually deep cavalry columns) EITHER will
not "fit" due to the presence of friendly or enemy units in the line
(but would easily fit with a kink in the column at the point of the
wheel) OR does fit, but now the column itself blocks other charge
declarations and responses.
So there are 2 sub-questions to this subject.
2a) Is it sufficient for "fit" in the case of a columnar charge for
the front elements to contact legally and have "fit" with a kink in the
column at the point of wheeling to charge
and/or 2b) If a column must ALWAYS swing fully behind it's lead
element (especially on a flank charge) can this movement cancel other
charges?

I'd love to draw a diagram, but I lack the skill. However, for the
sake of clarity, imagine that unit A, the charger, is a 6E unit of
Persian HC in column six elements deep, and the defender is unit B, a
Macedonian pike phalanx of 12E, 3 wide and 4 deep, and that A charges B
to make legal, but initially angled, contact on B's left flank--and that
A's charge move has sufficient movement to reach B and line up, but that
a further unit, C, is 125 paces from A's left flank and will prevent A
from "whipping around" on line up. Is A's charge cancelled because it
cannot fit? Or is the charge legal and left as it was at the point of
"impact" and lined up later?

Thanks,
Christian


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Ewan McNay]

For context, though: there was, once, and so rulebooks that have not had
errata inserted will indicate that there should be. That's likely the
cause of the debate .

JonCleaves@... wrote:

> There's no bending of units in Warrior. I am pretty sure that fact answers
every question in this mail.
>
> Jon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christian and Sarah <cgc.sjw@...>
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 13:00:28 -0500
> Subject: [WarriorRules] Cavalry Columns
>
>
> Dear list--More rules questions from the recent past.
>
> One of the most hotly debated issues in our games (campaign,
> tournament, and fun) is the "fit" rule as applied to deep columns
> charging a flank.
>
> First, an assumption that may be false. Most of us play that deep
> columns that wheel do not "whip around" but rather develop a "bend" at
> the point of the wheel. This allows for consistency of movement and
> prevents the tails of 6 element long columns from "whipping" gross
> distance. However, this assumption may, itself, be a false one--one of
> those habit a club develops that should not be allowed. So question
> 1--Can a column be "kinked" at the point of a wheel, rather than
> "whipping around?"
>
> Second, if the answer to the first is "yes" (a column may be kinked
> or bent) then, second, how does this affect "fit?" This question arises
> again and again, where a charging unit, whether or not it starts behind
> the enemy's flank, has room and distance to make the charge and room to
> fit at the moment of contact--sometimes even room to "fit" even after
> all elements have lined up--but the "whip" of the rear elements in the
> charging formation (these are usually deep cavalry columns) EITHER will
> not "fit" due to the presence of friendly or enemy units in the line
> (but would easily fit with a kink in the column at the point of the
> wheel) OR does fit, but now the column itself blocks other charge
> declarations and responses.
> So there are 2 sub-questions to this subject.
> 2a) Is it sufficient for "fit" in the case of a columnar charge for
> the front elements to contact legally and have "fit" with a kink in the
> column at the point of wheeling to charge
> and/or 2b) If a column must ALWAYS swing fully behind it's lead
> element (especially on a flank charge) can this movement cancel other
> charges?
>
> I'd love to draw a diagram, but I lack the skill. However, for the
> sake of clarity, imagine that unit A, the charger, is a 6E unit of
> Persian HC in column six elements deep, and the defender is unit B, a
> Macedonian pike phalanx of 12E, 3 wide and 4 deep, and that A charges B
> to make legal, but initially angled, contact on B's left flank--and that
> A's charge move has sufficient movement to reach B and line up, but that
> a further unit, C, is 125 paces from A's left flank and will prevent A
> from "whipping around" on line up. Is A's charge cancelled because it
> cannot fit? Or is the charge legal and left as it was at the point of
> "impact" and lined up later?
>
> Thanks,
> Christian
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Mike Bard]

In other words, for a unit of 12 chariots, in a column 1 element wide and 12
elements deep, to flank charge an enemy body, and to "fit", there must be
960mm of space on the flank of the enemy body -- almost a metre.

Are you sure?

To aid in this, I've uploaded a diagram:
http://f6.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/QFoDROcGrMCLKwbDQ9YQaRCIx6hYQyK9QkEVekfI9a-RrY_WOPD\nCdDfx5dEVhLRTgQg9SuquH8hSIsarD6mADSLvU58/Rules%20Questions/charge%20fit%20diagra\nm.gif

Admittedly, this is an extreme case, but you can change the measurements and
unit sizes and run into the same situation.

Unit A and Unit B are HI bodies of player I. Unit 1 is a HCh body of player
II. As shown by the dotted line, Unit 1 is behidn the flank of Unit A, and
is easily within charge distance (60 paces and 120 paces from corner to
corner). 720 paces away is another body, Unit B. (This could just as
easily be the edge of the table, or terrain impassable to chariot, or even
disabling terrain if Unit 1 was elephants or cavalry).

Can Unit 1 "Fit" (6.165, page 43 -- lining up and fitting in the case of a
flank charge). Or, is a charge declaration by Unit 1 on Unit A legal?

Michael Bard
That Greek Hoplite Guy

P.S. Hopefully the diagram works properly -- it IS in the files section in
the folder where question diagrams shoudl go, and is called "charge
diagram.gif".


> There's no bending of units in Warrior. I am pretty sure that fact answers
every question in this mail.
>
> Jon
>
> Dear list--More rules questions from the recent past.
>
> One of the most hotly debated issues in our games (campaign,
> tournament, and fun) is the "fit" rule as applied to deep columns
> charging a flank.
>
> First, an assumption that may be false. Most of us play that deep
> columns that wheel do not "whip around" but rather develop a "bend" at
> the point of the wheel. This allows for consistency of movement and
> prevents the tails of 6 element long columns from "whipping" gross
> distance. However, this assumption may, itself, be a false one--one of
> those habit a club develops that should not be allowed. So question
> 1--Can a column be "kinked" at the point of a wheel, rather than
> "whipping around?"
>
> Second, if the answer to the first is "yes" (a column may be kinked
> or bent) then, second, how does this affect "fit?" This question arises
> again and again, where a charging unit, whether or not it starts behind
> the enemy's flank, has room and distance to make the charge and room to
> fit at the moment of contact--sometimes even room to "fit" even after
> all elements have lined up--but the "whip" of the rear elements in the
> charging formation (these are usually deep cavalry columns) EITHER will
> not "fit" due to the presence of friendly or enemy units in the line
> (but would easily fit with a kink in the column at the point of the
> wheel) OR does fit, but now the column itself blocks other charge
> declarations and responses.
> So there are 2 sub-questions to this subject.
> 2a) Is it sufficient for "fit" in the case of a columnar charge for
> the front elements to contact legally and have "fit" with a kink in the
> column at the point of wheeling to charge
> and/or 2b) If a column must ALWAYS swing fully behind it's lead
> element (especially on a flank charge) can this movement cancel other
> charges?
>
> I'd love to draw a diagram, but I lack the skill. However, for the
> sake of clarity, imagine that unit A, the charger, is a 6E unit of
> Persian HC in column six elements deep, and the defender is unit B, a
> Macedonian pike phalanx of 12E, 3 wide and 4 deep, and that A charges B
> to make legal, but initially angled, contact on B's left flank--and that
> A's charge move has sufficient movement to reach B and line up, but that
> a further unit, C, is 125 paces from A's left flank and will prevent A
> from "whipping around" on line up. Is A's charge cancelled because it
> cannot fit? Or is the charge legal and left as it was at the point of
> "impact" and lined up later?
>
> Thanks,
> Christian

[joncleaves]

I have the diagram.

From it, I can see that the charging unit is already behind the flank of the
target. In this case, it only has to pivot/line up as much as it can (which is
still quite a 'move' by the end element) although that will bring it very close
to the second enemy unit.

If this chariot unit was starting this flank charge from a position not already
behind the target flank, the charge would be illegal.

Now, an 'editorial' comment.
12 deep chariot columns are not battle formations. Yes, it is 'legal'. But if
you choose to run such units, Warrior will make it hard on you in many places.
That is deliberate.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Bard <mwbard@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 15:14:38 -0500
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Cavalry Columns


In other words, for a unit of 12 chariots, in a column 1 element wide and 12
elements deep, to flank charge an enemy body, and to "fit", there must be
960mm of space on the flank of the enemy body -- almost a metre.

Are you sure?

To aid in this, I've uploaded a diagram:
http://f6.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/QFoDROcGrMCLKwbDQ9YQaRCIx6hYQyK9QkEVekfI9a-RrY_WOPD\nCdDfx5dEVhLRTgQg9SuquH8hSIsarD6mADSLvU58/Rules%20Questions/charge%20fit%20diagra\nm.gif

Admittedly, this is an extreme case, but you can change the measurements and
unit sizes and run into the same situation.

Unit A and Unit B are HI bodies of player I. Unit 1 is a HCh body of player
II. As shown by the dotted line, Unit 1 is behidn the flank of Unit A, and
is easily within charge distance (60 paces and 120 paces from corner to
corner). 720 paces away is another body, Unit B. (This could just as
easily be the edge of the table, or terrain impassable to chariot, or even
disabling terrain if Unit 1 was elephants or cavalry).

Can Unit 1 "Fit" (6.165, page 43 -- lining up and fitting in the case of a
flank charge). Or, is a charge declaration by Unit 1 on Unit A legal?

Michael Bard
That Greek Hoplite Guy

P.S. Hopefully the diagram works properly -- it IS in the files section in
the folder where question diagrams shoudl go, and is called "charge
diagram.gif".


> There's no bending of units in Warrior. I am pretty sure that fact answers
every question in this mail.
>
> Jon
>
> Dear list--More rules questions from the recent past.
>
> One of the most hotly debated issues in our games (campaign,
> tournament, and fun) is the "fit" rule as applied to deep columns
> charging a flank.
>
> First, an assumption that may be false. Most of us play that deep
> columns that wheel do not "whip around" but rather develop a "bend" at
> the point of the wheel. This allows for consistency of movement and
> prevents the tails of 6 element long columns from "whipping" gross
> distance. However, this assumption may, itself, be a false one--one of
> those habit a club develops that should not be allowed. So question
> 1--Can a column be "kinked" at the point of a wheel, rather than
> "whipping around?"
>
> Second, if the answer to the first is "yes" (a column may be kinked
> or bent) then, second, how does this affect "fit?" This question arises
> again and again, where a charging unit, whether or not it starts behind
> the enemy's flank, has room and distance to make the charge and room to
> fit at the moment of contact--sometimes even room to "fit" even after
> all elements have lined up--but the "whip" of the rear elements in the
> charging formation (these are usually deep cavalry columns) EITHER will
> not "fit" due to the presence of friendly or enemy units in the line
> (but would easily fit with a kink in the column at the point of the
> wheel) OR does fit, but now the column itself blocks other charge
> declarations and responses.
> So there are 2 sub-questions to this subject.
> 2a) Is it sufficient for "fit" in the case of a columnar charge for
> the front elements to contact legally and have "fit" with a kink in the
> column at the point of wheeling to charge
> and/or 2b) If a column must ALWAYS swing fully behind it's lead
> element (especially on a flank charge) can this movement cancel other
> charges?
>
> I'd love to draw a diagram, but I lack the skill. However, for the
> sake of clarity, imagine that unit A, the charger, is a 6E unit of
> Persian HC in column six elements deep, and the defender is unit B, a
> Macedonian pike phalanx of 12E, 3 wide and 4 deep, and that A charges B
> to make legal, but initially angled, contact on B's left flank--and that
> A's charge move has sufficient movement to reach B and line up, but that
> a further unit, C, is 125 paces from A's left flank and will prevent A
> from "whipping around" on line up. Is A's charge cancelled because it
> cannot fit? Or is the charge legal and left as it was at the point of
> "impact" and lined up later?
>
> Thanks,
> Christian




Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Tim Grimmett]

Jon--

I thought light chariots were the only light troops that didn't need to start
behind the flank as they can frontally charge any target.

Tim


JonCleaves@... wrote:
If this chariot unit was starting this flank charge from a position not
already behind the target flank, the charge would be illegal.


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[joncleaves]

True.

Wasn't what Mike was asking, as far as I could tell. His was a question about
fit.

The restrictions are different between a charge that starts in front of a unit
and seeks to hit the flank and a charge that starts already behind the flank.
the former is way more restricted.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Grimmett <grimmetttim@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:38:09 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Cavalry Columns


Jon--

I thought light chariots were the only light troops that didn't need to start
behind the flank as they can frontally charge any target.

Tim


JonCleaves@... wrote:
If this chariot unit was starting this flank charge from a position not
already behind the target flank, the charge would be illegal.


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Mike Bard]

To clarify...

If a charge starts BEHIND the flank of a target, then only 1 element must
"fit". The rest are just pivoted/lined up "as much as they can".

If a charges does NOT start behind the flank of a target, then the entire
body must "fit" after lining up, otherwise the charge is illegal.

Is this correct?

Michael Bard
That Greek Hoplite Guy

P.S. Yes, I know that a 12 element column of chariots is silly, and will
never be seen. It was just the most extreme example I could think of, and
that I choose intentionally, for the question.


> I have the diagram.
>
> >From it, I can see that the charging unit is already behind the flank of
the target. In this case, it only has to pivot/line up as much as it can
(which is still quite a 'move' by the end element) although that will bring
it very close to the second enemy unit.
>
> If this chariot unit was starting this flank charge from a position not
already behind the target flank, the charge would be illegal.
>
> Now, an 'editorial' comment.
> 12 deep chariot columns are not battle formations. Yes, it is 'legal'.
But if you choose to run such units, Warrior will make it hard on you in
many places.
> That is deliberate.
>
> Jon
>
> In other words, for a unit of 12 chariots, in a column 1 element wide and
12
> elements deep, to flank charge an enemy body, and to "fit", there must be
> 960mm of space on the flank of the enemy body -- almost a metre.

[joncleaves]

Yes and yes.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Bard <mwbard@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 16:24:48 -0500
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Cavalry Columns


To clarify...

If a charge starts BEHIND the flank of a target, then only 1 element must
"fit". The rest are just pivoted/lined up "as much as they can".

If a charges does NOT start behind the flank of a target, then the entire
body must "fit" after lining up, otherwise the charge is illegal.

Is this correct?

Michael Bard
That Greek Hoplite Guy

P.S. Yes, I know that a 12 element column of chariots is silly, and will
never be seen. It was just the most extreme example I could think of, and
that I choose intentionally, for the question.


> I have the diagram.
>
> >From it, I can see that the charging unit is already behind the flank of
the target. In this case, it only has to pivot/line up as much as it can
(which is still quite a 'move' by the end element) although that will bring
it very close to the second enemy unit.
>
> If this chariot unit was starting this flank charge from a position not
already behind the target flank, the charge would be illegal.
>
> Now, an 'editorial' comment.
> 12 deep chariot columns are not battle formations. Yes, it is 'legal'.
But if you choose to run such units, Warrior will make it hard on you in
many places.
> That is deliberate.
>
> Jon
>
> In other words, for a unit of 12 chariots, in a column 1 element wide and
12
> elements deep, to flank charge an enemy body, and to "fit", there must be
> 960mm of space on the flank of the enemy body -- almost a metre.




Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks, Jon. And thanks to Mike Bard for putting the question better.