Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Doug]

But is this actually anything close to what the Romans really did?

>Or better yet, on a larger scale, run those Romans in eight figure
>units with an occasional 8 figure Auxilia unit in the mix. The
>Auxilia would be back at 120p in a gap the Gauls can't pass (less
>than 80p) so the Gaul could not declare on the Auxilia. The Auxilia
>would charge and cancel the impetuous charge of the Gauls. At best
>the Gauls could counter charge.
>
>Factor it that way. More fun for the Romans!
>
>These matchups of one unit on one unit are worth nothing if you ask
>me. That takes all the advantage away from the Roman player, so it
>is not apples vs. apples.
>
>Greg

[Patrick Byrne]

Is your question simply a query on whether these tactics were actually used,
or is it a comment as to why fight with ahistorical formations and tactics?

Sounds like the old argument here, Are we fighting a historical battle? or
Are we using historical armies to try to accomplish what historical generals
either couldn't or fight in a way they didn't conceive?
-PB


>
> But is this actually anything close to what the Romans really did?
>

>> Or better yet, on a larger scale, run those Romans in eight figure
>> units with an occasional 8 figure Auxilia unit in the mix.

[Greg Regets]

Patrick ... that was very well said. How many 'reps' at fighting large set piece
battles, do you suppose a period army commander got in a lifetime? With all our
new players in San Antonio, many of us here are getting one 'rep' per week. Our
learning curve is not ahistorical, it is just higher than what was available at
the time.

Greg
----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2002 8:47 AM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Legions v. Gauls, gamesmanship


Is your question simply a query on whether these tactics were actually used,
or is it a comment as to why fight with ahistorical formations and tactics?

Sounds like the old argument here, Are we fighting a historical battle? or
Are we using historical armies to try to accomplish what historical generals
either couldn't or fight in a way they didn't conceive?
-PB


>
> But is this actually anything close to what the Romans really did?
>

>> Or better yet, on a larger scale, run those Romans in eight figure
>> units with an occasional 8 figure Auxilia unit in the mix.


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]

[Doug]

Both are relevent.

> your question simply a query on whether these tactics were actually used,
>or is it a comment as to why fight with ahistorical formations and tactics?
>
>Sounds like the old argument here, Are we fighting a historical battle? or
>Are we using historical armies to try to accomplish what historical generals
>either couldn't or fight in a way they didn't conceive?
>-PB
>
>
>>
>> But is this actually anything close to what the Romans really did?
>>
>
>>> Or better yet, on a larger scale, run those Romans in eight figure
> >> units with an occasional 8 figure Auxilia unit in the mix.
--

Doug
The price of freedom is infernal vigilantes

"The tyranny of the legislatures is the most formidable dread at
present, and will be for long years. That of the executive will come
in it's turn, but it will be at a remote period." James Madison, 15
March 1798 (_Papers of J.M._ vol 12, p.14; LC call no. JK.111.M24)