Melee distance - DungeonDevil

[chicagowiz]

I didn't want to derail the thread about the roots of Chainmail, but I wanted to make note of something DungeonDevil said:

Apr 12, 2011 2:51:40 GMT -6 DungeonDevil said:

MELEE RANGE
* CM: up to 3" (p. 15, 16, 25; 36 [under Water Elementals])

This has bedeviled me as I've been trying to suss out Chainmail's particulars.

Chainmail pg. 15
Missile troops interspaced with other footmen forming a defensive
line may "refuse" combat and move back 3" out of melee range.

Chainmail pg. 16
Units within 3" of a melee may be drawn into it if the player to whom they belong so desires.

Chainmail pg. 25
When two figures are within melee range (3")

Chainmail pg. 36
fighting within or in 3" of a large body of water (river or lake).

That's pretty d**n convincing and I wish I had seen that earlier, as I had ruled melee happens within 1" range. I've had conversations with other CM players that rule it's on base contact. Here's why the 3" deal bothers me...

Chainmail pg. 16
2. All types of troops are considered to control the space 1 " on either side of themselves to stop infiltration.

This phrasing here leaves open some interpretations.

1. The melee range is for front facing only. Enemy units moving within 1" to either side of an opposing unit are considered in melee and must stop (not flank) and melee.

2. Melee range is 3" front and side. The 1" deal above is a red herring.

How have you ruled it?

[aldarron]

Melee distance means the distance within which you can close with the enemy and fight without having to go to another turn. It's always been 30 yards, in the direction you are facing (forward of line or column or on all sides of a square).

10 yards is the distance within which you are actually "closed" i.e. engaged - the Zone of Control - regardless of facing. Thus no enemy can move closer than 10 yards, nor can they move past or through any gaps of 10 yards or less.

A horseman could for example, attempt to move through a 20 yard gap between two enemy units, but being within melee distance the horseman would be subject to attack and could be trapped altogether if the enemy units are able to close the gap by 10 yards.

Similarly, a troop of cavalry could attempt to move behind and past a column of foot within 20 Yards of them. To engage the cavalry, the foot would have to change facing.

Mind you - I am drawing on a wargaming background to answer here, not CHAINMAIL per se, but these would be things generally understood back in the day I believe.

[chicagowiz]

aldarron - So you are saying that if two units are 3" or less apart, they will melee? Bases don't have to touch? That's an interesting concept - probably because my wargaming background is either hex-based board games or DBA, this is a new concept for me.

[DungeonDevil]

I always thought a 3" melee range was pretty big, but I understand that pretty much the way Aldarron has stated above. If the enemy is at or within that range you can close to base-to-base contact without taxing or exceeding your move allowance (AFAIK). There is an appreciable amount of 'wiggle-room' with regard to the interpretation of CM. YMMV.

[aldarron]

Apr 12, 2011 14:43:00 GMT -6 DungeonDevil said:

I always thought a 3" melee range was pretty big, but I understand that pretty much the way Aldarron has stated above. If the enemy is at or within that range you can close to base-to-base contact without taxing or exceeding your move allowance (AFAIK). There is an appreciable amount of 'wiggle-room' with regard to the interpretation of CM. YMMV.

Yep, CHAINMAIL combat doesn't seem to bother with "touching bases", that's why melee distances are given. So its all about using your measuring tape. 3" or put another way 60 feet, while it seems a little long at first blink isn't all that far - especially in a 1 minute round. 60 feet is about the length of a tractor trailer or maybe more relevant, the distance from pitchers mound to home plate in major league baseball. I think everybody has seen a batter make it to that pitchers mound in a matter of seconds when he's hit by a bad pitch.

[chicagowiz]

It's interesting to see how different camps take the 3" - over at K&K, the thought has been bases need to touch and if you're within 3", you can just move to base/base contact. I kinda like how you have to wrangle the rules to get to something you like.

[howandwhy99]

My take on why the common distance between troops is 3" for affecting other troops:

A figure is within the square it stands and has a zone of control in the 8 squares surrounding it. The farthest apart any line of troops can be without undefended gaps is 3". An example of 4 troops or 4 individuals (2 dimensional):
_#__#__#__#_

If a assisting troop breaks or an enemy combatant borders you, they are a maximum of 3" away. So the rules refer to different effects upon a troop or individual based upon others actions up unto 3" distant.

[Matthew]

Might also be related to troops standing 1 inch apart creating gaps of 3 inches when one is removed, into which enemies can move:

[Stormcrow]

With enough figures, you may get a multi-round melee in a single turn. If it happens that the front rank of figures are killed during a round, but the melee continues, other figures within 3" have to be able to reach each other to continue to fight.

1" represents a"zone of control," within which enemy troops cannot pass without being caught by the nearest figure.

Although touching bases is never mentioned, I think the idea is that figures within 3" may move to melee during any melee round this turn if they have enough movement left to touch bases, and figures within 1" cannot pass each other unless the opposing figure allows it (attempting to pass triggers melee, which stops movement except within 3" while melee lasts).

[Matthew]

That is a good point. Although base-to-base contact seems the most reasonable interpretation to me, I am also amenable to the idea that all figures within 3" of one another fight in the mêlée somehow. However, the fact that units within 3" can move up to 6" to join an existing combat does suggest something more like what you are saying, where after each round figures are rearranged so that the maximum number within 3" of each other are in base-to-base contact. So, for instance:

Initial Contact



The blue unit on the right has moved to attack the red unit on the right, whilst the blue unit on the left has moved up in support.

Mêlée Round One



The two opposing units are moved into contact, all ranks are within range of the mêlée. On the left, the supporting blue unit is moved up to six inches to contact the red unit in the flank.

Mêlée Round Two



Casualties are removed and previously unengaged excess figures are moved into contact with the enemy as long as within half of their move distance. Note that the rule says excess troops are unengaged if there are no enemies directly in front of them, and can be moved from the flanks or rear ranks, which implies that even if the enemy is directly in front of rear ranks they are unable to fight [i.e. something approximating base-to-base contact is suggested here].

[thorswulf]

The three inch melee might have it's origins in really early rules from Jack Scruby. He put out a booklet for novice gamers that mentions a zone of melee being equal to one infantry move (If memory serves) upon point of contact. Only those figures ( About a 6"-8" diameter) in the zone get pulled into melee. Not sure if this is the source but I have seen pictures of wargames being played in Lake Geneva circa 1966. Many of those games are based on Scruby, Morschauser, Featherstone, and Bath era rules I would guess.

[DungeonDevil]

What's the date on the Scruby rules?
(Morschauser's book was 1962.)

[thorswulf]

Wow, good question! I'm not sure but Mike over at Historifigs might know. This is the company that is now producing the Scruby miniature lines. At a guess, I'd say they are contemporaries time wise. Chainmail's archery system certainly seems related effect wise to rules as far back as Little Wars!

[cooper]

Matthew,

in this picture:




is each square 1 man? or 1 unit?

I think only units can flank or move up during a round not individual men. Maybe that's what you are saying and I'm just misunderstanding you.

If you have this:



Then the back row can spend movement points after contact is made to "swing around" as you said to flank or even get behind the enemy unit like this:



...but individual men are not removed, only entire units or figures representing multiple men. It's not about turning 10 men in a line into 2 columns of 5 men, but turning 2 units of men in a line into 2 units of men in a column.

pg. 16 CM



from this:



to this:



In either case the whole unit attacks, not just the 2 men or 5 men in the "front row".

The "previously unengaged figures" is the 2nd row unit behind the first row. Not the 2nd row of "men" behind the 1st row of men within the same unit.



Along the same vein.

this:




is what the rule on missile fire means when "two ranks" of missile weapons can fire. That's full units regardless of how the individual men are portrayed.






Only the first two ranks of these guys could fire if they were archers for example.

[Matthew]

Each square is one figure. If I am following what you are saying correctly, I think that you are mistaken in your understanding of how units are set up and interact in Chain Mail. When the rules talk about ranks and files, they are literally referring to ranks and files of miniature figures, not to the units they might be formed up into. If figures are mounted on bases as groups (which in the photographs of play they appear not to be) it is only for convenience of movement, and kills are certainly indicated by the removal of figures during individual rounds of mêlée.

So, for instance, at 1:10 scale we have two units of armoured foot consisting of 240 men or 24 figures beginning mêlée with one another it might look something like this:

Contact



The blues (let us call them the villainous French) are charged by the reds (let us call them the heroic English).

Round One



The French inflict two casualties, and the English also inflict two casualties. As both sides are equal, the result is a draw (Chain Mail in fact provides on guidance in this instance, though it would be a possible interpretation to count both sides as being that with the least casualties and most remaining troops) and mêlée passes to the second round.

Round Two

Up to one excess figures from each side of the rear ranks could be moved to extend the line at this point, as movement of 3" would allow it. However, neither side is inclined to do so.



The French inflict no casualties, and the English inflict two casualties. Now morale is tested. The French have lost 4 figures and the English have lost 2 figures, so the difference is 2, which is multiplied by the result of a six-sided die (in this case 4) to score a total of 8. The English have 22 surviving figures and the French have 20 surviving figures, so the difference is 2. The surviving figures are then multiplied by 7 for being armoured foot, the result being:

English: (7 x 22) + 8 + 2 = 164
French: 7 x 20 = 140

The total difference is 24, meaning that the French forces retreat half a move in good order and mêlée ends.


Now sure, I could be wrong in my interpretation in some particulars, but I am relatively confident that this is 95%+ correct.

[cooper]

I think I understand my confusion. I am in the habit of incorrectly calling a figure of men, a unit of men.



The above is 1 unit. 8 figures, 80 men. Correct?

[Matthew]

Ah, no. ;D

I was confused by this initially in Swords & Spells as well. There are eight "trays" of 10 figures or miniatures each pictured there, so 80 figures representing 800 men. See page 2 of S&S where it is "suggested that troops be mounted on stands which accommodate ten figures, five files, two ranks, 100 scale creatures."

[Deleted]

One thing to consider is that the plastic 40mm Elastolin figures had very small bases... in many cases the figure actually overhung the base in one or more direction. Therefore melee based on bases touching simply wouldn't work.

I think the 3" rule also was to prevent "I'm .001 millimeters away from you, neener neener neener". The "bases must touch" thing astounded me the first time I encountered it.

Gronan/OG/Michael

[Deleted]

This topic is related to a question I had about Chainmail/LBB:

To preface, my exposure to tactical movement in DnD has been pretty much limited to the square grid of 3.5 and 4e.

When miniatures are being used, in your experience are distances measured (1) from the nearest edge of the base in the direction of movement/action, (2) from the center of the base with the measuring device displaced to an edge with perpendicular to the direction of movement/action, or (3) from some arbitrary place near the base in the direction of movement/action?

Also, how frequently do you use measuring devices versus "gentlemen's rules" (ie "That looks like an inch, so they're in melee." "Okay.")?

[DungeonDevil]

1) frontage of base to frontage/destination. I've never overthought this.
2) Rulers mandatory. One could, to simulate realism, estimate arty ranges without the benefit of a ruler. Some wargamers do this, and then the ref later measures.

Welcome, Colonel Sir!

[aldarron]

Jul 10, 2011 23:47:36 GMT -6 @colonelgraff said:

This topic is related to a question I had about Chainmail/LBB:
.....
Also, how frequently do you use measuring devices versus "gentlemen's rules" (ie "That looks like an inch, so they're in melee." "Okay.")?

This bit I think I can answer. In my experince, I can probably count the number of Old School RPG games I played in, in which minis were actually used, on one hand. Even then, they are just placed on a piece of paper or something or even bare tabletop just to illustrate general relative position and marching order, etc. I have never seen a ruler present in a game or anyone try to make some argument about range based on where thier little led figure was, or bother to move them around much.

These kinds of things are usually just handled verbally. The DM knows how big an area is and players simply say where they are and what they are doing.

[Deleted]

Jul 10, 2011 23:47:36 GMT -6 @colonelgraff said:

This topic is related to a question I had about Chainmail/LBB:

To preface, my exposure to tactical movement in DnD has been pretty much limited to the square grid of 3.5 and 4e.

When miniatures are being used, in your experience are distances measured (1) from the nearest edge of the base in the direction of movement/action, (2) from the center of the base with the measuring device displaced to an edge with perpendicular to the direction of movement/action, or (3) from some arbitrary place near the base in the direction of movement/action?

Also, how frequently do you use measuring devices versus "gentlemen's rules" (ie "That looks like an inch, so they're in melee." "Okay.")?

Playing CHAINMAIL as a wargame, it tends to be "center of nearest figure to center of nearest figure" if they're individual, or "center of stand to center of stand" if they're on stands. Most miniatures rules since the early 80s that I've seen specify where measurement is to be done.

Measurement for movement is pretty much the rule.

[Malchor]

Jun 11, 2011 16:55:17 GMT -6 thorswulf said:

Wow, good question! I'm not sure but Mike over at Historifigs might know. This is the company that is now producing the Scruby miniature lines. At a guess, I'd say they are contemporaries time wise. Chainmail's archery system certainly seems related effect wise to rules as far back as Little Wars!

All About War Games, by Jack Scruby, 1957

The Melee (or hand to hand combat)

1. The Melee occurs at the discretion of the player making the move. To cause a melee the player places a soldier within half an inch of an opposing soldier, and announces that this is the melee point of contact. The player then may move in all troops within legal range, around this point of contact. From the point of contact a melee circle (360 degrees) is measured, with is an infantry move in diameter. All troops within this circle (whether friendly or enemy) are "caught" in the melee, and must stand and fight. Troops outside the circle are not in the melee.

Underline and capitalization are as in the book.

[retrorob]

Malchor

nice catch! As far as I understand, the attacker can compel all units inside the circle into melee. In Chainmail though:

Units within 3" of a melee may be drawn into it if the player to whom they
belong so desires.

So in CM the defender can just "refuse" combat, am I right?

[Malchor]

May 11, 2020 12:38:37 GMT -6 retrorob said:

Malchor

nice catch! As far as I understand, the attacker can compel all units inside the circle into melee. In Chainmail though:

Units within 3" of a melee may be drawn into it if the player to whom they
belong so desires.

So in CM the defender can just "refuse" combat, am I right?

There is missing context here.

"Units within 3" of a melee may be drawn into it if the player to whom they belong so desires. However, the unit that joins a melee cannot have been moved over one-half of its normal movement during that turn. The unit joining the melee may move up to 6" into battle."

This is if unit A moves in to fight with unit B, and unit C happens to be with 3" from where these other two clashed, or happens to move half of it's movement and find itself within 3" of battle.