"180 man pike block deployments - which is better?" Topic

Simple question, linear or square?

link

OR

9 deep. Damn impressive.

I prefer DEEP to WIDE.

Who said size doesn't matter?

Deep looks better to me. Well done.

The broader formation is certainly intimidating; more so than the deeper ranks.

Very nice.

The deeper formation. Although the whole question is basically showing off… ;-)

Jaz
6sided.net – why use blogspot and fight for visitors? Start a blog on 6sided and we send them to you!
6sided.net/wargaming-blogs – Start a blog now
6sided.net/activity – latest from our bloggers

The wider formation looks like two units, while the deep looks like only one.

awesome either way

nicely played

They both look impressive! Lots of painting there.

Once you get past 4 deep, the pikes in the back are useless.
Go wide and sweep all before you.

Square ….

Just to serve you right … I hope they take their first morale test and flee from the table ….

As always your stuff is fantastic!!

Mike B

Well done figures.

The deeper formation. Although the whole question is basically showing off… ;-)

Jaz

I'm not opposed to blowing a trumpet now and then, but in this case the question is a honest one. I normally field my pike 6 ranks deep – I normally play with a 1:50 figure scale – but this game has a figure scale of 1:20ish and consequently the pike squares are substantially bigger than usual.

Square looks the more formidable of the two in terms of visual impact. Lovely figures of course.

Deep is historical. Even back then it was knowns that only the first six ranks or so counted, but the step to change the formations accordingly was not made.

You could embed the odd line of helbardists to emulate the actual deployment.

Great unit (in more then one sense of the word)!

Puster,

I know from Frundsberg's writings (about 1520) that he considered only the first 6 ranks really effective.
But what real proof is there that before this time and als after the about square formation was a kind of standard?

Duc

By the way, did these 3.500 Swiss really fight in one block?

> But what real proof is there

- no reports of linear deployment in major battles
- accounts of battles (at least up to Ceresole) of square formations
- contemporary depictions of square deployments both for actual battles, on the march and in idealized situations
- Manuals containing calculations to achieve squares depending on the available number of soldiers

Actually I think you would be hard pressed to justify any linear deployment of pikes in the field by sources, though I am quite sure Daniel can find half a dozen reports of actual incidents :-)

Historically dept of pike seemed to be the best use of the weapon system. Regardless, I am in awe of your painting and number of figures. I thought I was a good miniature painter but clearly I have far to go. What rules are you using?

What rules are you using?

Hell broke loose.

By the way, did these 3.500 Swiss really fight in one block?

The answer is, probably. Pike fought in huge blocks during this period. At Marignano (1515) 15,000 Swiss fought in three squares. At Bicocca (1522) and Agnello (1509) they fought in two blocks of 4000 each. At Novara (1513) they were playfull, and deployed in three blocks, one of 1000, one of 2000 and one of 6000.

At Ravenna, Landsknechts, according to some accounts, deployed in a single block of 9,500 strong.

Thanks Puster and Olicana for your answers.

Olicana by the way we were purely accidentally discussing how to deploy our future Landsknecht and Swiss pike-blocks: in 6 deep squares or in more rectangular formations which will gain more benefit from most wargames rules.
Seeing your (very beautiful) deep formations convinces me that the visual aspect has my preference, especially if this formation also is the most probable one.

Duc

Definitely Square.

Peter

Square.