Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Frank Gilson]

Scott hates this...but conceded my point for Historicon.

Page 60, 6.45 Skirmish Formation -
Paragraph 5: "A unit adopting skirmish formation may do so with up to two elements more or less frontage than the prior formation. This is NOT the same as a maneuver to change frontage, it is part of the maneuver to change to skirmish formation." (emphasis NOT mine, rather in the rules)

Page 38, 6.123 Changes in Frontage -
"A body cannot use the maneuver Change in Frontage twice in the same move unless both maneuvers are for the same purpose (i.e. both to expand or both to contract)."

Nowhere does it say that I cannot combine Skirmish with Change in Frontage to, say, contract two elements, and then skirmish with two more elements frontage to the other side of the unit. The body must be regulars capable of skirmish, of course.

In this manner, my unit can 'slide' along the face of the enemy. The rules actually appear to be written clearly and to permit this.

Frank Gilson

[chrisbump]

a few years ago Don Coon asked Jon this very question.
Basically can a unit expand or contract, move an inch (or not) and then expand or contract frontage while forming skirmish formation?

Jon's response was that such a move was legal. Contact Don, becasue he saved the post to ensure (back when we were still playing Warrior) that Jon would not reverse his decision or claim that he had never made such a ruling.

Chris

[Ewan McNay]

I didn't even know that this was controversial. [Yes, it is legal, if regular and steady, to both change frontage as part of forming skirmish *and* contract/expand, as far as I can see.]

[wargame692000]

Yup, this one couldn't be clearer in my opinion. Skirmish and expansion/contraction are not mutually exclusive. I have used this one many times.
Best used by 6 element, regular units to alter (directly to front) shooting opponents.

Paul Collins.

[joncleaves]

Well, I certainly am glad Scott "conceded"....