Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

I'm rereading Mark Stone's skirmisher tactica, most specifically in
regards to my previous posts about using LC in conjunction with LI and
HC. I have a couple of questions.

At one point, the essay mentions that if a unit is impetuous, it
cannot be replaced in combat by another unit charging through in a
legal interpenetration. Is this true? I can't seem to find the rule
anywhere. Could someone point out to me where this is stated?

In a previous post concerning LC and HC, Mark suggested that an ideal
command setup is with LC and LI alternating on a line, and with HC
backing up the LI. If anything ends up behind the LC, it should be at
least 480 paces back to account for an evade and long rout move. How
far should the HC be behind the LI? Exactly 240 paces to provide
support and to take into account a 120 evade and a 120 pace rout?

Thanks

Peter

[John Murphy]

Skipping the rules question for Jon to handle... I can offer an
opinion on the tactics question though Mark (or anyone really) would
be a better person to answer this.

My reading of the tactical rules implications and of the "Taktika of
Mark Stone" is that you get, in a sense, the benefit of the depth of
the LI unit here as well. You measure the support distance from the
front of the HC (in this case) to the back of the LI. But any pursuit
moves by the enemy are measured starting from the front of the LI
where they hit, even on a breakthrough move.

So I would imagine, depending on circumstances, you would want the
front edge of the HC to be at least double the move of the likely
enemy unit from the front edge of your LI but no more than the
support distance of 240p from the rear edge of your LI. With an
enemy move of 120p this amounts to simply the depth of the LI
for "slop". With a 160p enemy move this can disappear entirely and
you need to look carefully at lateral placement as well. That is
kind of how I figure it at least when I play.

And of course that is also affected by wether the enemy is someone
your HC is simply willing to rush through and take right on in which
case maybe you want to be closer to be in charge reach instead
(possibly changing LI frontage to accomodate as needed). Since
lately I use Irr A HK for what you are using HC there are a few
things that come after my LI which I _want_ them to just bust thru
and go after.

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Celella" <pcelella@c...>
wrote:
>
> I'm rereading Mark Stone's skirmisher tactica, most specifically in
> regards to my previous posts about using LC in conjunction with LI
and
> HC. I have a couple of questions.
>
> At one point, the essay mentions that if a unit is impetuous, it
> cannot be replaced in combat by another unit charging through in a
> legal interpenetration. Is this true? I can't seem to find the rule
> anywhere. Could someone point out to me where this is stated?
>
> In a previous post concerning LC and HC, Mark suggested that an
ideal
> command setup is with LC and LI alternating on a line, and with HC
> backing up the LI. If anything ends up behind the LC, it should be
at
> least 480 paces back to account for an evade and long rout move.
How
> far should the HC be behind the LI? Exactly 240 paces to provide
> support and to take into account a 120 evade and a 120 pace rout?
>
> Thanks
>
> Peter