Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Chris Bump]

who knows what you are going to do. Imagine a boxing match against
someone
who always throws a left hook.

John the OFM

Don't like this analogy. Pat is talking about army formation, not tactics. The
left hook would be a tactic. Army formation would be more akin to the
traditional postion of side stance, jabbing hand forward, other hand protecting
face, knees bend and back slightly hunched. This formation is used almost
exclusively in boxing, and tactics from this FORMATION vary from boxer to boxer,
match to match. So Pat if you were to look at Hanibal's army formations, you
would always see cav to the flanks and fighting foot in the center Skirmishing
types bridging the gap between cav and combat foot. LI screens to the front of
the foot only. Positioning of various units or unit types vary from battle to
battle, but the formation is still pretty dramatically the same. Pick your
poison and you will find that armies tended to line up the same from battle to
battle and then the generals applied variable tactics from there. This all
started to change as we saw the introduction of command staffs and then general
staffs.
Chris

[Patrick Byrne]

Chris, you are correct with what you've written below. It is not the
onfield tactics that I would like to see written about, only the Army
formation deployment, a summary as to why, and summary about how the battle
went.
-PB



> Pat is talking about army formation, not tactics.
> The left hook would be a tactic. Army formation would be more akin to the
> traditional postion of side stance, jabbing hand forward, other hand
> protecting face, knees bend and back slightly hunched. This formation is used
> almost exclusively in boxing, and tactics from this FORMATION vary from boxer
> to boxer, match to match. So Pat if you were to look at Hanibal's army
> formations, you would always see cav to the flanks and fighting foot in the
> center Skirmishing types bridging the gap between cav and combat foot. LI
> screens to the front of the foot only. Positioning of various units or unit
> types vary from battle to battle, but the formation is still pretty
> dramatically the same. Pick your poison and you will find that armies
> tended to line up the same from battle to battle and then the generals applied
> variable tactics from there. This all started to change as we saw the
> introduction of com!
> mand staffs and then general staffs.
> Chris
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>

[Greg Regets]

This is only mildly on this topic, but possibly worth sharing.

One of the most useful things I have ever done since I started playing ancients
was to make a sheet metal and magnet deployment board. What I did was take a
small piece of sheet metal about 10x16 inches and grid it off in a graph by
scratching the surface with the back of an exacto blade and a ruler. I then made
small units to scale out of 1/4 inch thich bass wood with magnet strip. Terrain
is made with magnet strip with sheet metal attached to it, so your units will
stick. Paint the whole mess and it doesn't look half bad. Then make yourself a
little ruler to scale.

This lets you try sample deployments without laying out tons of figures, and
even try deployments for armies you are considering, before you buy the figures.
You can also practice marching, so as to keep from snagging yourself, and learn
new ways to disguise your movements to combat. You can do this with figures of
course, but using this board lets you do it much more quickly (and in the
bathroom or by the pool, haha). You can even shoot photographs of formations
that work well for your army. Lastly, its great for drawing deployment in games.

Before I made this thing, I was not a particularly good player, usually going
1-1-1 at most tournaments. What I learned with this tool let me take my game to
the next level.

Take care and have a great day ... Greg

----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, June 17, 2002 8:46 AM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] HIST Armies


Chris, you are correct with what you've written below. It is not the
onfield tactics that I would like to see written about, only the Army
formation deployment, a summary as to why, and summary about how the battle
went.
-PB



> Pat is talking about army formation, not tactics.
> The left hook would be a tactic. Army formation would be more akin to the
> traditional postion of side stance, jabbing hand forward, other hand
> protecting face, knees bend and back slightly hunched. This formation is
used
> almost exclusively in boxing, and tactics from this FORMATION vary from
boxer
> to boxer, match to match. So Pat if you were to look at Hanibal's army
> formations, you would always see cav to the flanks and fighting foot in the
> center Skirmishing types bridging the gap between cav and combat foot. LI
> screens to the front of the foot only. Positioning of various units or unit
> types vary from battle to battle, but the formation is still pretty
> dramatically the same. Pick your poison and you will find that armies
> tended to line up the same from battle to battle and then the generals
applied
> variable tactics from there. This all started to change as we saw the
> introduction of com!
> mand staffs and then general staffs.
> Chris
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



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