jacar
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 343
|
Post by jacar on Apr 23, 2015 19:49:40 GMT -6
]Serious question: Who is this "referee" of whom you speak? Having had a few days, and more sleep, I want to say that this is a really awesome question. The notion that "the referee designs the scenario" goes back to the 18th Century, but as you point out, nowhere does CHAINMAIL mention this. For that matter, Tony Bath's "Setting Up A Wargames Campaign" doesn't say that the book is aimed at the referee, but it makes no sense otherwise. Many miniatures games still assume the presence of a referee. Referees have always been a part of miniatures wargaming. Jon Peterson's Playing at the World talks a lot about this. Fish have no word for water. I think this really has a huge effect on a LOT of things. It is a good point. Most miniature wargames these days can/are played without a referee. If I setup a game for my friends and we have an odd number, I am usually the referee. So, in pickup games, they don't seem to be used much anymore. Go to a miniature game convention however and you will find the game organizer is the referee while all others play. Very rarely will you find a referee playing in a game, unless he is short a player. Even in tournaments, the tournament organizer is the referee. The players can normally manage the games on their own without too much fuss but the organizer is there to settle any rules disputes. Chainmail certainly would work head to head without a referee but definitely works better if one is present.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2015 20:54:10 GMT -6
Not to mention that pre-1973 or 1974, the nickel copier wasn't ubiquitous, and many miniatures gamers used homebrewed rule sets, which means that often the referee was the only person who knew the rules. Free Kriegspiel.
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Dec 22, 2015 9:01:20 GMT -6
So I went out and bought a bunch of figures and am gearing up to run a game between someone other than myself. I was surprised to find that the Zvezda hundred years war figures (1/72 scale, and 25mm exactly) work really well, and are super cheap @ $5-$12 per box of 50 figures. They need to be mounted on wider 1 inch bases, and they do take some time to assemble (because you need canvas glue), but they are fun and way better than trying to assemble a warhammer(or 40k) army. I ended up buying 2 boxes of english infantry, 1 box of english knights, and 1 box of french infantry. Here are pictures from the back of the box and what my counts are. I spent about $27 altogether since an old model shop nearby had most of what I needed, and I only had to order the box of frenchmen. English Infantry Box
- 21x Longbowmen (Light Foot)
- 12x Halberdier (Heavy Foot)
- 1x Knight (Armored Foot)
- 9x Men-at-arms (Heavy Foot)
- 1x Bannerman (Heavy Foot)
- 1x Musician (Light Foot)
English Knight Box- 21x Knights (Armored Foot)
- 6x Mounted Knights (Heavy Horse)
- 6x Mounted Knights w/Lance (Heavy Horse)
French Infantry Box- 3x Light Foot w/Lucern & shield
- 3x Archers (Light Foot)
- 12x Crossbowmen w/Shield (Light Foot)
- 1x Commander (Heavy Foot)
- 6x Spearmen (Heavy Foot)
- 12x Halberdiers (Heavy Foot)
- 4x Men-at-arms types (Heavy Foot)
- 1x Bannerman (Heavy Foot)
- 1x Trumpeter (Light Foot)
None of the three boxes comes with an adequate amount of regular archers (shortbow). I believe I'm missing some other unit types as well in this collection, like: light foot men-at-arms and peasants, light horse, and medium horse. I don't really need harquebusiers. Overall it was a neat find.
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Dec 22, 2015 9:37:42 GMT -6
I do still have several questions popping up as I prepare for the game.
Question 1: Are armored foot used in open-field combat or are they reserved for stronghold defenses only? At least in the D&D setting, the unit list in Wilderness & Underworld lacks armored foot as an option. This leads me to believe that armored units would almost always be mounted and would only become armored foot when they dismount or are found within a stronghold.
Question 2: How do I group missile units? Missile rules state that "groups of missile troops which are larger than the maximum number shown on the [missile fire] table must be into two or more equal groups so as not to exceed the maximum. Groups not exceeding the maximum which are firing at the same target may not be divided into smaller groups." If I plot out higher numbers of missile troops on a chart, this method really warps the results. For example: At 15 men, I split it into 3 equal groups of 5, which gives me a minimum of 6 or a maximum of 9; while at 16 men I split it into 2 groups of 8, which gives me a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 8. I would be penalized for having 1 more man. Also, using this rule as stated, what happens when I can't evenly divide a number into groups less than 10? I have to either divide it by 2 and have one number higher and the other lower. What I found works, is that I allocate numbers into 10's first, and then the remaining amount into a group less than 10. This preserves the consistent progression.
Question 3: On the post-melee morale table, how far is "back 2 move" or "back 1 move"? Does this replace their next action or is it an extra move they make as a result of melee?
Question 4: Can friendly units move through each other? I had a line of archers out in front of halberdiers in one battle, and they routed against a cavalry charge but were right up against the other infantry to begin with. Would they flee through my men (or be able to do that missile troop 3' move back thing) or would I need to order my line of troops in an alternating pattern of infantry/missile/infantry/missile/infantry?
Question 5: Does wooded area prevent movement of my figures since they are like 10 men in a unit and marching in a microcosm formation?
Question 6: What is the best way to track fatigue? I could understand if it was a point system, but it looks too inconsistent to convert it to something like that.
Question 7: Should I assume that anywhere it mentions the word pike, that polearms of any type like halberds, glaives, lucerns, etc. also apply?
Question 8: Is a lance considered a pike as well and already factored into the melee charts of a heavy horse or is that something I need to account for?
Question 9: What occurs when a unit must rout or retreat but is surrounded and unable to do so? I find it hard to believe that any body of soldiers would rout when completely surrounded, and do anything less than fight for their lives. edit: Found the answer to this one while I was typing but left it in. They immediately surrender.
Question 10: While travelling, did armies wear their armor or did they store them and wait to dress before battle?
Edit: I haven't even made it to integrating the fantasy sections into the game yet, but I think it is awesome that heroes and superheroes are one-man armies at this scale. I mean, it doesn't seem like the alternate combat rules translate to chainmail at all, but they are fun as heck as long as the appropriate ruleset is used for combat. Even a level 1 fighting-man player character should be a single figure on the field at 10-man-per or 20-man-per figure scale, because you know what? They are fated by the gods to at least put on a show, not to mention changing scales makes these rules super easy to use.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2015 20:41:32 GMT -6
I do still have several questions popping up as I prepare for the game. Question 1: Are armored foot used in open-field combat or are they reserved for stronghold defenses only? At least in the D&D setting, the unit list in Wilderness & Underworld lacks armored foot as an option. This leads me to believe that armored units would almost always be mounted and would only become armored foot when they dismount or are found within a stronghold. Question 2: How do I group missile units? Missile rules state that "groups of missile troops which are larger than the maximum number shown on the [missile fire] table must be into two or more equal groups so as not to exceed the maximum. Groups not exceeding the maximum which are firing at the same target may not be divided into smaller groups." If I plot out higher numbers of missile troops on a chart, this method really warps the results. For example: At 15 men, I split it into 3 equal groups of 5, which gives me a minimum of 6 or a maximum of 9; while at 16 men I split it into 2 groups of 8, which gives me a minimum of 6 and a maximum of 8. I would be penalized for having 1 more man. Also, using this rule as stated, what happens when I can't evenly divide a number into groups less than 10? I have to either divide it by 2 and have one number higher and the other lower. What I found works, is that I allocate numbers into 10's first, and then the remaining amount into a group less than 10. This preserves the consistent progression. Question 3: On the post-melee morale table, how far is "back 2 move" or "back 1 move"? Does this replace their next action or is it an extra move they make as a result of melee? Question 4: Can friendly units move through each other? I had a line of archers out in front of halberdiers in one battle, and they routed against a cavalry charge but were right up against the other infantry to begin with. Would they flee through my men (or be able to do that missile troop 3' move back thing) or would I need to order my line of troops in an alternating pattern of infantry/missile/infantry/missile/infantry? Question 5: Does wooded area prevent movement of my figures since they are like 10 men in a unit and marching in a microcosm formation? Question 6: What is the best way to track fatigue? I could understand if it was a point system, but it looks too inconsistent to convert it to something like that. Question 7: Should I assume that anywhere it mentions the word pike, that polearms of any type like halberds, glaives, lucerns, etc. also apply? Question 8: Is a lance considered a pike as well and already factored into the melee charts of a heavy horse or is that something I need to account for? Question 9: What occurs when a unit must rout or retreat but is surrounded and unable to do so? I find it hard to believe that any body of soldiers would rout when completely surrounded, and do anything less than fight for their lives. edit: Found the answer to this one while I was typing but left it in. They immediately surrender. Question 10: While travelling, did armies wear their armor or did they store them and wait to dress before battle? Edit: I haven't even made it to integrating the fantasy sections into the game yet, but I think it is awesome that heroes and superheroes are one-man armies at this scale. I mean, it doesn't seem like the alternate combat rules translate to chainmail at all, but they are fun as heck as long as the appropriate ruleset is used for combat. Even a level 1 fighting-man player character should be a single figure on the field at 10-man-per or 20-man-per figure scale, because you know what? They are fated by the gods to at least put on a show, not to mention changing scales makes these rules super easy to use. 1) Are you speaking historically or fantasy? Fantasy, whatever you want. Historically, before about 1475 "armored foot" would be dismounted knights. After that the technology of metallurgy got better and plate armor became more common. By 1500 you'd see troops like this. www.google.com/search?q=armored+landsknechts&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiLp7ns9_DJAhUM5CYKHaKCABwQ7AkIMg&biw=1280&bih=864#imgrc=rX3PkHR4RotRHM%3A2) Missile troops should be grouped in as large numbers as possible. 15 troops should be a group of 10 and a group of 5, not 3 groups of 5. 3) Whatever the normal move for that troop type is. Next turn movement is unaffected. 4) No, you may not move through friendly troops. See "Contact with another unit" in page 16 of 3rd edition. The "interspersed" missile and melee troops are the only exception. 5) I don't know what this means. 6) Each unit tracks its own fatigue. 8) No. A pike is a pike, a spear of 18' or greater length. Polearms are much shorter. 9) You answered it. 10) Anything but light armor would be carried, not worn. The baggage train is immense.
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Dec 22, 2015 23:07:38 GMT -6
Thanks for the answers Gronan.
5) What does is the effect of Wooden terrain? Can a unit pass through wooded terrain?
11) What is the best method to move a unit? Figure by figure, or starting with the bannerman/leader of a unit and then placing the men next to it in the same formation and facing as before?
I'm going to be running two sessions of chainmail on New Year's Day here in town, and all this info is really going to help. I just need to find some cheap monsters to use and to cut out some cardboard templates for quick measurements in play.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2015 8:52:59 GMT -6
Oops, I skipped Question 7.
7) No. A pike is a pike, a spear of 18' or greater length. Polearms are much shorter.
8) No. A lance is considerably shorter than a pike. That was the point of the pike. A lance is about 14 feet long. The attack factor of Heavy Horse on the 1:20 table takes lance into account.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2015 8:56:47 GMT -6
5. A unit passing through wooded terrain is Disordered and must take 1 turn to rally after they are out of the woods. The rules don't say what happens if they're meleed or shot at during that turn, I'd treat it as "troops taking losses after rout" on page 16.
11. Whatever works for you. ON a sand table we usually measure and draw a line. Other than that moving the banner first usually does it quickest.
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Dec 30, 2015 10:14:26 GMT -6
5. A unit passing through wooded terrain is Disordered and must take 1 turn to rally after they are out of the woods. The rules don't say what happens if they're meleed or shot at during that turn, I'd treat it as "troops taking losses after rout" on page 16.11. Whatever works for you. ON a sand table we usually measure and draw a line. Other than that moving the banner first usually does it quickest. This is a really good tip. Should I apply this to other disorganized units, like lets say...Orcs?
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Jan 5, 2016 10:00:30 GMT -6
So I ran a New Years Chainmail game. I had 5 players, and I filled in for a 6th; each player controlling a unit of men. The two armies were composed of Team 1: - 20 Longbowmen
- 20 Halberdier
- 20 Knights on Foot
Team 2: - 22 Longbowmen
- 20 Men-at-Arms
- 10 Mounted Knights
At the start of the game, one of the players decided he wanted his men-at-arms to be two units instead of one. Movement across the board and positioning resulted in learning how to house rule a few things. Rotating a formation and changing the facing of individual figures was considered to cost the same amount of movement equivalents. I also house ruled that changing the formation shape was free as long as it remained 2 figures thick (for column) and 1 figure thick (for line). Square formation was assumed to be turning all units to face outwards. How to start a melee was not clear either, so I made it that base to base contact starts melee combat. Each round of melee, I let either side move their figures, which resulted in a line of melee combatants, but only allowed the charging unit to advance into the enemy line. Team 1 formed a defensive line with two fronts. One front was composed of knights on foot, taking shelter behind the elevation of a hill (shown as a raised but flat piece of greenery). The other front was composed of longbowmen interspersed between halberdiers. Meanwhile Team 2 had a unit of men-at-arms running ahead of longbowmen stationed at the base of another hill, while another unit of men-at-arms was beginning to turn the corner and ford a stream. A unit of mounted knights was passing through a narrow canyon in the center of the battlefield, and decided to wait to make their charge.Units were layed out like this the turn before first casualties were sustained:Overview of the TableThe next turn, those longbowmen in the back began plinking away at the halberdier/longbow formation, and two turns of that, caused the longbowmen to flee having only taken 6 casualties. The men-at-arms on the left side kept moving towards the left edge of the table, and found themselves to the left of the hill, just as the knights on foot turned to charge them for a flanking attack.A couple things to note here: The first two ranks of longbowmen were allowed to fire directly, since the men-at-arms obstructing them were more than 3' distant. Also, flanking was only allowed for the first round of melee, after the men-at-arms held their first round, they turned and were able to move and form a line in melee. I also had to house rule that interspersed troops were of the armor class of the higher troop type for ranged units firing against them. I made the mistake of letting the attacker choose which figures were removed, which caused the longbowmen to check morale much faster than if the defender had chosen them. I think in the future, defender should always choose which figures are removed.The halberdiers moved to meet the knights in the canyon after taking casualties. They formed a narrower column during movement in order to enter the canyon. The following turn they gained initiative and charged the mounted knights pictured here:Knights in the CanyonI won't go into much more detail about how the rest of the game resolved. The halberdiers were completely inneffective against the mounted knights, and immediately retreated 2 moves in good order. They also couldn't stand against a charge of the knights when those guys finally moved. The men-at-arms surrendered at the end of the melee with the knights on foot. When the knights on foot tried to advance upon the longbowmen, they were easily reduced in number and failed unit cohesion and were withdrawn from the field.Only the winning team enjoyed the game, the losing team was tremendously disappointed with the rules and the entire experience. They felt that combat was unsatisfying because of how frequently units fled or retreated, and how much stronger armored units (especially heavy horse) were. Also, they didn't like that each melee round required calculating morale. They felt that the morale check thresholds were set too high. They really hated the disconnect with how time during melee was handled compared to movement during the rest of the turn; they really didn't get that melee units could move around so much and even move 2 full movements away without allowing the normal movement of the opposing team in mean-time. They also didn't like the fact that I was pretty much the only one who knew how the rules should work, and that I kept having to house rule actions since they weren't specified by the original rules. They felt it was confusing and that I was making it up as I went.
I will probably run one more session using the fantasy supplement, but given how the players responded I can't see myself running this again. I was disappointed, since I really do get what the intent of the rules were: each battle should be taken as a smaller part of a whole, where retreat and routing are part of continuing war and retaining men in your army between conflicts as part of a larger campaign. I think I could really enjoy the game if the rules were spelled out a bit clearer and the really tedious unfun things like morale check during melee were somehow addressed.
|
|
|
Post by makofan on Jan 5, 2016 11:18:26 GMT -6
I have never played chainmail, so I would love to see a veteran respond to the issues you had and rulings you had to make. Thanks for posting.
On a related note
this sounds like players not understanding the realities of combat
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Jan 5, 2016 12:51:07 GMT -6
To be fair, as a gameplay mechanic, morale magnifies any strength disparity between units and can produce some strange results. For example: 1 mounted knight figure could cause a unit of 50 or more heavy infantry to flee it's charge. The melee morale check in particular led to a weird situation where the halberdiers charged the stationary knights in the canyon and weren't able to inflict any casualties (but took 2 of their own), which caused them to retreat 2 moves back in good order. In hindsight, maybe I should have used the optional stationary horsemen fight as a disadvantage rule, but I wasn't looking to make use of that or the prisoner rules. That player was pissed that his 20 halberdiers not only couldn't kill a single knight, but that they became effectively routed for the rest of the game because the knights could then charge them and break them. Edit: There were also quite a few other rule oddities I had to work out. I'll try and mention them here: - Archers may fire missiles while resting. Since the rules only say that movement and melee prevents resting.
|
|
|
Post by derv on Jan 5, 2016 19:48:38 GMT -6
A couple of things stick out to me.
Two ranks are permitted to fire as long as "the first rank are missile troops". Additional ranks are only allowed to fire if "they are on significantly higher ground".
Firing over the heads of intervening troops, whether friendly or enemy, is considered "indirect fire". This reduces the range by 1/3 and classifies the target at the next higher rank.
The Post Melee Morale result "20-39 difference" is a misprint in your copy. It should read "Back 1/2(half) move, good order"
Sounds like some of these bugs you're encountering could be worked out through continued play. Other issues may have simply been the players lack of understanding of the capabilities of the different figures.
Longbows and Heavy Horse are both game deciders at times. Also, there's really no way for AF knights to oppose longbows of the same size unit, all on their own. Knights on foot are slow and longbows have a 21" range.
Though, I personally don't see a problem with the fatigue rules, as written, that allows stationary bowmen who are not meleed to continue to let arrows fly. Why would they be fatigued?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2016 8:55:06 GMT -6
I only have a moment, but yeah, Derv is right about indirect fire. I spotted a couple of other things but I'll have to reread more carefully when I'm not rushing out the door.
Also, maybe I'm misunderstanding, but it looks like you totally ignored the rules about changing formation and house ruled it.
Also also, that looks like a very small battle to me. Did you figure point values for the armies? In a battle that small, 10 heavy horse are going to sweep away any enemy because the enemy lacked sufficient units to hit the heavy horse from the front and flank simultaneously.
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Jan 6, 2016 11:17:47 GMT -6
Team 1 was a 60 man army worth 190 points, Team 2 was a 52 man army worth 190 points. Team 2 was the only team with horsemen. If I recall correctly, the rules for changing formation only stated transitions from: - Column to Line
- Column to Square
- Line to Column
- Line to Square
- Square to Column
- Square to Line
With my understanding that line was defined as a single row of figures, column as multiple rows of figures facing a single direction, and square as equal rows on all sides with figures facing outwards from the center.
I play lots of Total War games on PC (sacrilege bringing up video game mechanics I know), and the rules on unit rotation and changing the number of ranks and files within a unit are completely undefined as far as I can see within the rules. Given how difficult it was to maneuver my own units into position before the battle was joined, I house ruled that changing rank and file was free unless the unit was completely thinning out into a line or forming around a core facing outwards in square formation.
Figure spacing limits and costs for changing unit spacing weren't defined, so I made that a free action and limited spacing to 2 inches.
Another thing that wasn't clear was if strafing was allowed for a unit; i.e. moving it left or right without changing facing. We left it as disallowed, but my god did that prove to be a nightmare when we were trying to reposition our defenses.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2016 12:53:17 GMT -6
LINE is any formation wider than is long. 4 ranks deep by 10 figures wide is still a line. COLUMN is a phallic symbol ... Any formation is a column if it's longer than it's wide.
Square is any formation where all troops face out, but it should be approximately square but does not need to be exact.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2016 12:57:39 GMT -6
You cannot move a unit straight left or right without changing facing... Thin of trying to do that with 500 guys. You can oblique up to 45 degrees.
Strafing is something an airplane does.
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Jan 6, 2016 13:22:46 GMT -6
So do I understand correctly that a unit can change rank and file as long as it doesn't change the formation into another category? That still leaves me clueless on how to adjudicate rotating a unit of figures, movement spacing, advanced maneuvers such as interspacing a melee unit with a unit of archers, and how movement resolves (for combatants) between morale checks during melee. Regarding that last part: - Who is allowed to move on a "melee continues" result?
- How are they allowed to move? Rigid forward movement, change of facing, change of formation, etc.
If someone could provide me a short scenario of how movement would play out in a melee that would be even better.
|
|
|
Post by derv on Jan 6, 2016 17:10:19 GMT -6
Regarding that last part: - Who is allowed to move on a "melee continues" result?
- How are they allowed to move? Rigid forward movement, change of facing, change of formation, etc.
If someone could provide me a short scenario of how movement would play out in a melee that would be even better.
Melee continues until it is resolved. There are no set number of rounds in Chainmail. So, if after the first round there are casualties, you perform a Post Melee Morale check. If the result is "melee continues", then roll the dice again until more casualties result. Wash, rinse, repeat. The only movement that might happen during this whole opperation is after the first round. "Excess troops (figures unopposed by an enemy directly before them) from the flanks and from rear ranks may be moved so as to overlap the enemy formations flanks and even rear if movement at one half normal will allow." If you have a Post Melee Morale result such as "back 1 move, good order", then you would move that formation back- 9" for HF as an example. Let's say some LH charged them and won the first round of melee that caused them to back away. If the LH only moved 10" initially, they would continue their charge now. An additional 9" would bring them into melee with the HF again. Resolve another round of melee and perform Post Melee Morale. Maybe the HF now retreat 1 move. LH continue their charge another 9". They have a 30" charge move. Now they're attacking the rear of the HF. It's all over. Finish the remaining 2" of charge movement. Quick question about your Halberdiers above, did you remember to give them an extra die for attacks? (see footnotes at bottom of Combat Tables p.40).
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Jan 6, 2016 18:04:11 GMT -6
Regarding that last part: - Who is allowed to move on a "melee continues" result?
- How are they allowed to move? Rigid forward movement, change of facing, change of formation, etc.
If someone could provide me a short scenario of how movement would play out in a melee that would be even better.
Melee continues until it is resolved. There are no set number of rounds in Chainmail. So, if after the first round there are casualties, you perform a Post Melee Morale check. If the result is "melee continues", then roll the dice again until more casualties result. Wash, rinse, repeat. The only movement that might happen during this whole opperation is after the first round. "Excess troops (figures unopposed by an enemy directly before them) from the flanks and from rear ranks may be moved so as to overlap the enemy formations flanks and even rear if movement at one half normal will allow." If you have a Post Melee Morale result such as "back 1 move, good order", then you would move that formation back- 9" for HF as an example. Let's say some LH charged them and won the first round of melee that caused them to back away. If the LH only moved 10" initially, they would continue their charge now. An additional 9" would bring them into melee with the HF again. Resolve another round of melee and perform Post Melee Morale. Maybe the HF now retreat 1 move. LH continue their charge another 9". They have a 30" charge move. Now they're attacking the rear of the HF. It's all over. Finish the remaining 2" of charge movement. Quick question about your Halberdiers above, did you remember to give them an extra die for attacks? (see footnotes at bottom of Combat Tables p.40).Yeah, I gave them the extra dice. He was only able to fit 3 wide into a canyon though, so he couldn't flank, and he wasn't able to score any successes with his 6 dice. The knights got 9 dice and like 3 successes if I remember correctly (or not). During melees, I had both defender and attacker moving their figures towards the enemy unit each round. That's probably what caused it. So if enough units have been killed that no more bases are in contact, but both sides maintain morale, does melee continue or end?
|
|
|
Post by derv on Jan 6, 2016 18:43:29 GMT -6
So, three HF wide in contact with three HH 3 ranks deep? HF are listed as "1 die per four men" vs. HH. Since they are halberds that would be 2 die per four men. Here the ref would have to make a call since there are only 3 HF. I'd probably give them 1 die. The HH get 3 die per man, so 9 dice. Tactically, this is not an optimum situation for the halberds. Melee is resolved using only the first rank (see p.15 "Number of Ranks Fighting"). Casualties are removed from the back. This assumes soldiers would be filling in as casualties occur. Think about it in a real life situation. Everyone's bottle necked on a bridge and these footmen don't expect to be ran over by fully armored knights with lances? gronanofsimmerya might have some more tips for you. I think there's just a couple small misconceptions that are leading to some of your difficulties. When those things are worked out, it should all click together and you can go give it another try
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Jan 6, 2016 19:27:57 GMT -6
Ooo nice. Remove from back. Also who removes casualties? The one receiving the casualties or the one dealing the casualties? When those archers were firing into my interspersed men, I allowed them to choose casualties, and of course it was the enemy archers they wanted to remove.
|
|
|
Post by derv on Jan 6, 2016 20:10:21 GMT -6
Casualties should be removed of equal quality to the ones being engaged in melee when melee casualties occur.
As far as missile fire goes, it's up to the ref how he would handle a situation with troops interspersed. I personally don't mix different troop types. But, I would suggest doing it on an equal ratio to how many of each type are on the field.
Let's say you have 10 HF crossbows mixed in with 20 HF polearms. I would remove 1 crossbow for every 2 polearms.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2016 21:14:55 GMT -6
5. A unit passing through wooded terrain is Disordered and must take 1 turn to rally after they are out of the woods. The rules don't say what happens if they're meleed or shot at during that turn, I'd treat it as "troops taking losses after rout" on page 16.11. Whatever works for you. ON a sand table we usually measure and draw a line. Other than that moving the banner first usually does it quickest. This is a really good tip. Should I apply this to other disorganized units, like lets say...Orcs? I don't understand what you're saying here. Please elucidate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2016 21:19:05 GMT -6
So do I understand correctly that a unit can change rank and file as long as it doesn't change the formation into another category? I don't understand what that means. In fact, I don't understand most of what the next part is either. That still leaves me clueless on how to adjudicate rotating a unit of figures, movement spacing, advanced maneuvers such as interspacing a melee unit with a unit of archers, and how movement resolves (for combatants) between morale checks during melee. Regarding that last part: - Who is allowed to move on a "melee continues" result?
- How are they allowed to move? Rigid forward movement, change of facing, change of formation, etc.
If someone could provide me a short scenario of how movement would play out in a melee that would be even better.
As it says in the rules, excess figures can move up from behind. But movement during melee is otherwise prohibited, and change of facing or formation during melee makes no sense. If a unit falls back, the victorious unit can pursue only if it has enough movement left from its turn, similar to a charging unit needing to move its full charge.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2016 21:20:41 GMT -6
Also, disabuse yourselves of the notion that medieval units practiced modern close order drill; they were not marched so much as herded. As Prof. Bernard Bachrach of the University of Minnesota Medieval History Department said, "Tactics was things like 'go to that tree and turn left.' "
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Jan 6, 2016 23:11:09 GMT -6
Nevermind about the first question. I found the answer to it on that page you told me. I was thinking about applying it to fantasy creatures and maybe peasants who are very disorderly. For the other questions, I drew this to illustrate: In the first example, I'm still a line (or column) but decreasing the thickness. Would there be a movement penalty to change formation in this way? In the second example, what does the facing movement cost apply to; the individual figure facing, or the facing of the unit? Not pictured is my question about how much it costs to move your unit from loose spacing between figures (2 inches between bases) to tight spacing between figures (bases touching).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2016 9:00:51 GMT -6
There is a difference between "not well drilled regulars" and "disordered." Disordered units are considered "flanked," and if you applied that to orcs and peasants, etc, constantly, they'd be useless. The fact that they are not well disciplined regulars is accounted for in their fighting strength and morale.
For example 1, as referee I'd simply call it 1 turn for simplicity's sake. If it's a particularly small unit, 10 figures or less, maybe 1/2 turn.
Example 2 is called a "wheel." As referee I'd measure the distance that the figure moving the furthest moved, and simply apply regular movement rate.
|
|
|
Post by countingwizard on Jan 7, 2016 10:01:02 GMT -6
Fwhew, thank you guys so much. I think this clears up all my questions. Now to rewrite the chainmail rules write up my house rules so that my players can understand how to play.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2016 12:29:33 GMT -6
Start by having everybody including yourself read Oman's "Art of War in the Middle Ages,"
|
|