Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Frank Gilson]

This rules section doesn’t seem to properly govern or apply to partial replacements, where not all of the replaced body is so replaced…which often occurs when a mounted lancer unit one element wide charges through a friendly LI unit to hit a unit more than one element wide (perhaps LC.)

This would also occur in situations like circulating combatants for Romans or Central/South American troops where a small one element wide unit charges through a two or three element friendly unit to hit one element of an enemy body, but not the other(s).

I'm interested to see clarification regarding partial replacements and how they operate once that round of combat has ended.

I know we'll need to wait post Historicon...

Thanks!
Frank

[Steve]

Hello Frank,

Hopefully as it's now post-Historicon, you have the answers you want.

Fwiw, here is my purely personalview.

6.523 clearly allows a body to interpenetrate a body in contact with the enemy and replace it. (No mention of partial replacement)

Also, the body replaced is moved to behind the charger the minimum distance necessary to be clear. (No mention of partial replacement)

The target (enemy body) is not considered at first contact.

So, trying to blend a lack of understanding of real h-t-h; the physical impossibility of two units being able to occupy exactly the same spot on the table at the same time; and the rules/mechanics necessary to govern all this, I think along these lines.

Jon, has on more than one occasion, give us glimpses into what Warrior is trying to recreate, namely FHE's understanding of ancient warfare on the grand-tactical level (here read Scott's article on 'a spear is a spear' I believe it was titled) . Hence, his past explanations of why a mounted body in rout can freely choose to subtract distance and why charging units are not automatically obliged to echelon elements forward into contact.

The rules themselves use both bounds and phases to control the continual ebb and flow of combat that goes on, below the radar as it were. Every set of wargame rules must pitch themselves at a certain level of command. Warrior is Army Level, and, following the proviso that a good commander knows the whereabouts of those units two levels below him, this means you control only your commands and the individual units that make up those commands.

As per the way the rules mechanics choose to portray units in skirmish formation is I think a clear example of this. You know where your LC units are, you know they are following your orders, but the exact formations/tactics those units adopt is not your immediate concern. It is handled at the level above army by 'national doctrine' and at the level below unit by their (hopefully competent) officers and N.C.O's.

This is only part of my reasoning, but I will stop now, because I don't wish to presume to speak for FHE themselves and I may be spouting utter bulls..t. As I said, it is purely my personal take. If you do want to know more and if I'm not totally off beam, let me know.


Steve