""It's all in the Deployment"" Topic

I've been reading through various ancients rules lately and one thing that comes to mind is the amount of control that is given to the players during the course of a game. I understand the reasons behind this; it lets you have control of the battle, you get to make decisions throughout the game and it keeps it fun and engaging.

However, I've been thinking… what about a rules system (or even something to modify an existing rules syetm like the brilliant DBA!) that still gives you a high level of control, but shifts the focus from during the battle to pre-battle.

For example, rather than letting you control every single action of all the units in your army, you're given more detail and control on things like the position of your army in the days leading up to the battle, deployment etc. I suppose you could call it a written orders game, where (as in real life) you would come up with a battle plan before hand, inform your generals and hope that all goes well on the day.

I think this could still be a fun game, I'm not suggesting that all the players would do it deploy their armies, write down a few movement orders and then just 'watch' as the game unfolds. Combats would obviously still be resolved with dice, and you'd have direct control of certain units, essentially you are physically represented on the table by the general figure. This way you could still lead daring attacks into the enemy lines just like Alexander at Guagamela for example.

This wouldn't everyones favourite way of playing a wargame I know, but personally I'd quite like that extra realism, knowing that a pre-battle plan is essential to victory!

Too many rules claim that "planning is key" but in reality it's all to easy to ajust the positions of a few units and recover from a mistake early on in the battle.

I'd love to be able to replicate battles such as Cannae on the tabletop, where it was Hannibals sheer brilliance in his deployment and battle plan that won him the day. Not the ability to just rearrange his entire army as and when…

Your thoughts?

EDIT

'Deployment' in the title shouldn't have a capital 'D'

It is incredibly rare for any general to redeploy and get away with it, battles ancient and modern are pretty much all about deployment and flexibility of reserves.

Wargames tend to crown the table so that reserves are rarely needed, and give the player godlike control power.

Have you played "Tactica". It's the closest I've seen to what you want.

Check out Augustus to Aurelian, by Dr. Phil Hendry and published through Too Fat Lardies. It uses a card-driven command and control system and unit manoeuvres are not easy. As the author says, "the only time you have full control over your force is during deployment". And in some scenarios, not even then (for example if on the receiving end of an ambush).

It seems to me like that take is directly in line with what you're suggesting.

I agree with Rapier Miniatures completely about the tendency for wargames to give players too much control over the game and have an artifically narrow battle-zone that is easy to crowd.

I personally like the games like A2A where the players have a very limited ability to 'micro-manage' their forces and have to plan tactics ahead. I use that sort of rules, and 6mm armies on big boards to try and get the full period feel. I often feel like I'm in a small minority locally, though!

Tactica does have many of the features you mentioned. I would like to be as gifted as Hannibal too. Only one thing stopping me and its not the rules!

Definitely take a look at Lost Battles by Prof. Phil Sabin. He deals with the deployment aspects as well as the battle itself.

Thanks for the replies guys, I'll take a look at the sets you've mentioned.

I like Tactica, if your deployment is bad bye bye!! Mike Adams P.S. I am still waiting for Tactica 2!!!!!

I believe I read that the RFCM rules of the square bashing sort (including their ancients game) have a pretty involved pre-game meta-game. Might be worth looking into in addition to those mentioned above (of which I'd definitely second Tactica and Lost Battles).

Doug

Rally Round the King does this quite well. Deploy and hold a reserve is the best you can hope for.

Our group plays Armati 2, and we always have a hidden deployment, usually a curtain or we draw an map.
We have found that the initial deployment can sometimes win or loose a battle.
It's always fun the see the reaction of your opponent when we look at each others deployment.

Most of our sources for ancient warfare lack detail so we assume armies were lumbering and generals impotent to direct change during battle, but sometimes authors give us an insight into the control possible.

I think it's Hieronymus of Cardia's description of one of Pyrrhus' battles where the general initially deploys his elephans as a central reserve, then orders them to attack the Roman cavalry on one flank and then later in the battle withdraws some or all of them to go and deal with pesky Romans that were attacking his baggage.

Regards

David F Brown

There is clearly an evolution in ancient times away from the very powerful, but rigid Hellenistic phalanx formations towards a more flexible system introduced by the Romans.

Alexander used his army to pin down the enemy and he would use the troops under his direct command to find a weak spot and exploit it.

The successors lost much of the flexibility because they often lacked that skilled leader who could manage his forces in such a way to strike a decisive blow and relied increasingly on setup to win the day, just look at how they experimented with different troop types and mixes to create the winning battle line.

The Romans understood that flexibility was a critical feature, but the Hellenistic formations lacked this so they created their own system that allowed commanders to have plenty of reserves, and it allowed troops to quickly make an exploitation that didn't rely on an exceptional commander to perform.

The triplex acies system was special because it created great depth without sacrificing flexibility and allowed Roman commanders to manage their troops more efficiently than the phalanx system.

'Lost Battles' models just the sorts of things you are talking about, initial deployment is key and is part of the first game turn, but certain armies and generals can be more flexible than others thereafter.