Strathclyde Army - Infantry question

[aligern]

I suspect hat Dave is mostly right there. In Spain the locals form dense skirmish lines and then quickly form a wedge to attack. Maybe Romans learn to do that, but it would be a local response to a local situation. I could see that troops might well close up to face cavalry or form testudo ( Germans do that against Caesar) but isn't that different from operating in one order and then moving to operate in another?  Forming up properly with the right people in the right places takes time and I doubt that major formations could do that at the drop of a hat.

[Erpingham]

From a gaming point of view, it is interesting to explore.  I think it is possible that troops loosen up to move.   I also suspect they could close up tighter (a shieldwall seems to have been able to tighten to overlapped shield order when halted on the defensive).  But are these formation changes as such or just a standard response to circumstances?  Do we even model them but just assume in our move distances and combat factors this is what happened? 

One we might consider is if strathclyde infantry might be allowed to form a circular anti-cavalry formation (the later Welsh could do it , some say Picts did and, of course, later lowland Scots).  But again, the point about forming such a thing mid-battle would come into consideration.

[Dave Knight]

Perhaps there is an analagy with Napoleoinc era troops.

Most rules that allow infantry to form square also allow for the option of the square not being properly formed if they leave it too late.

Perhaps allow some troops to try to change formation mid battle but allow for the possibilty of failure ?

Then again is the benefit of such an option greater than the added complexity it brings to a rules system? 

[Patrick Waterson]

This presumably depends upon the tactical level at which the system is set: if the basic units are c.100 men, like a later Greek lochos, such considerations do matter.  If the basic unit is c.5,000 men - a Roman legion - such nuances can be built into higher movement costs and the assumption that subunit commanders will err on the side of caution rather than try to get clever within enemy charge reach.

[Mark G]

It would be worry looking at wan on this

I have a memory of a wab player at Brit con bemused when he charged knights or something into picts in loose order to get them out of the way.

Neither player knew in advance that some special rule for picts allowed them to react by forming some fancy anti cavalry spear formation, which trounced the chargers.

Neither guy seemed happy with the outcome, but they had to play it as it was competition rules

Very hard to start along a line of reaction formation changes without ending up with such super special troop types emerging

[Erpingham]

Neither player knew in advance that some special rule for picts allowed them to react by forming some fancy anti cavalry spear formation, which trounced the chargers.

The issue maybe is a question of time taken, and perhaps, as Patrick says, scale of action.  Assume a dozen horsmen crest a rise and spot two dozen picts (and vice versa).  It is possible those Picts could clump together in all round defence before the cavalry reach them.  What if 200 cavalry surprised a thousand Picts?  I think the cavalry would be on them before they sorted themselves out. 

In the absence of evidence though we are speculating on analogous cases.  Scottish infantry at Bannockburn (day 1) seem to have moved into a position and formed an all round defence  to block the advance of English cavalry, for example, and Swiss infantry formed a circle at Laupen as the enemy approached.  In neither case would I say in charge reach of cavalry but while cavalry approached.  So, possibly, a reaction-driven move might be valid with some risk of not completing but within the time taken for a charge, no.

[Justin Taylor]

An excellent idea, I have seen it done by a test being required, perhaps a morale test (that allows better troops to have more chance of succeeding).

[Patrick Waterson]

Such a formation should ideally (going by Anthony's historical guidelines) be adopted before opponents came within charge reach and hence not need a test in normal circumstances.

For non-normal circumstances, or dilatory play, some mechanism for establishing whether a last-minute scramble produces an effective formation would be required.  If one has, say, 2-minute turns, then the mechanics, movements and timings of such evolutions have to be quite precise.  Either the men make it or they do not - the tape measure can decide the outcome.

If one has, say, 20-minute turns, then there is some latitude for divergent possibilities because of the abstract nature of time-and-motion relationships.  A reaction roll (modified by both sides' leadership rating and troop quality) can decide the question of whether the defenders begin forming their spear-hedge in good time or leave it too late in the circumstances.

[Imperial Dave]

some good considerations and suggestions here

my own take on it would be loose formation allowed to close up after a reaction/morale test. if passed they would close up over the course of 2 phases. If caught after phase 1 would be in disorder and penalised on the factors for combat dice

just my 2 penneth worth but having been a reenactor for many moons, even irregulars would be able to shift from "loose" formation to "shieldwall" and believe me, its instinctive when there is a large body of troops coming towards you!

[aligern]

I don't doubt that people can clump up quite rapidly. However, the big problem is whether they can retain the ability to fight effectively. That might be impacted through the leaders being wrongly positioned or because they are too close together for effective weapon use. This happens to the Romans against the Nervii at the Sambre, it happens to Crassus men against the Parthian cataphracts. (I suspect that Patrick could supply us a quote there).
So ye s they can condense quickly, but perhaps they should lose fighting e defective ness as a result?
Roy

[Imperial Dave]

yes, would depend on the troop type and their familiarity with the maneuver. Could have a distinction between inferior, ordinary and superior troops for DBx or good old fashioned A,B,C (D/E) troops for other systems

I suspect that missile effectiveness would definitely suffer if "ad-hoc" closing up but actually think that hand to hand combat would improve (defensively anyway) - think Arrian and order of array against the Alans or Scots schiltron

Regulars would be better at it than irregulars

offensive and defensive values for troops rather than just bog standard generic combat factors?

[Mark G]

Which was my point, Roy.

Emergency reactive defensive formations should make themselves harder to hurt, but never be capable of hurting the thing they were so frightened of that they had to make an emergency reaction in the firstplace.

Else they become a winning tactic.

Charge a real key force with utterly vulnerable dross, then pass the reaction and magically change into the formation to beat it.

Which is just nonesense.

[Patrick Waterson]

Emergency reactive defensive formations should make themselves harder to hurt, but never be capable of hurting the thing they were so frightened of that they had to make an emergency reaction in the firstplace.

If we look at a (maybe) similar formation, the Scottish schiltron, this was well capable of hurting the 'thing they were frightened of', but only if that 'thing' obliged by charging home.

So if a troop type is permitted to react to form a 'hurtful' defensive formation, such as a spear-hedge, perhaps its opponent should be permitted to attempt a reaction to halt its charge or to manoeuvre to avoid the new defensive formation.

[Mark G]

Schiltrons were not formed as a reaction to being charged

Not unless Mel gibson is personally directing

[Patrick Waterson]

Good one, Mark - my basic point was that if the target changes from soft to spiky, maybe the attacker should also get a chance to change his mind.