Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

Greetings

Note that the 2HCT is not only a halberd but also other cut and
thrust polearms including bills, guisarme, partisan, yari or naginata.

Speaking from English experience the effect on Scottish foot at
Flodden (once the pike blocks had been brought to a halt) seems to
have been very significant - both to the armoured front ranks and the
less armoured rear ones. My book withd an account of Flodden is
under dustsheets.

Regards

Edward

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, ewan.mcnay@y... wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Mar 2005 Quahog25@a... wrote:
> > So, yes, the halberd should be better against SH troops than
the pilum , as
> > I stated. But against ferociously charging poorly armoured
barbarians, can
> > you really argue it would be better than the pilum gladius
combination?? The
> > Roman has a huge shiled, is covered in armor, breaks the impetus
of the charge
> > with pila then uses his stabbing sword from 'concealment'. The
halberdier is
> > swinging this 5 foot axe, virtually unprotected.
> > The Roman system was designed to fight barbarians, the halberd
was
> > designed to fight armoured knights. - Tom
> >
>
> Tom - I think your arguments (and certainly your discussion) have
been
> extremely cogent; just a couple of comments.
>
> First, the tournament viability of Irr LMI armies has not been good
at any
> time over the past 20 years, with the exceptions of (1) highly-
buffed,
> HTW-using Spanish, and (2) Gauls when the player is using loaded
dice.
> They can be fun, but there are just too many things they have
trouble
> against. Now, you suggested that there has been a shift in the
balance
> against halberdiers, and I agree; I think that the Scots-English
battles,
> with Highlanders on one side and billmen on the other, may come
closest to
> possibly offering insight (but I don't know enough of the period to
know
> what it would be!). Certainly, as a Pict player, i can see the
> disheartenment (is that a word?)
>
...
> e