Help support TMP


"What was the footprint of skirmishers v formed infantry?" Topic


11 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please be courteous toward your fellow TMP members.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Basing Message Board

Back to the Ancients Discussion Message Board


Areas of Interest

General
Ancients

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Ruleset


Featured Workbench Article

The Alpha 54mm Painting Contest

Five finalists are in the painting rounds of the Alpha 54mm Painting Contest (sponsored by Alpha Miniatures). Who will prove themselves masters of painting 54mm scale Ancients?


Featured Profile Article

Poker Set at Dollar Tree

Poker chips are back at the dollar store!


Current Poll


Featured Book Review


1,568 hits since 18 Apr 2017
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

ether drake18 Apr 2017 2:02 a.m. PST

How much surface area would a group of skirmishers cover on a battlefield compared to an equivalent number of formed infantry?

Specific example: in the Republican Roman manipular legion there were often equal numbers of velites, hastati and principes. The velites may have skirmished. If so, how much area would they cover relative to the hastati?

This is a question that arose out of contemplating multi-basing.

Would it be better (from the standpoint of covering a representative proportion of the battlefield) to have a thin line of skirmishers relative to formed infantry, or have bases of similar depth but with fewer skirmishing figures?

Personal logo BigRedBat Sponsoring Member of TMP18 Apr 2017 4:33 a.m. PST

In the case of the velites, there were a heck of a lot of them- as many as the formed hastati behind them. Mine will as numerous as the hastati, and occupy twice their footprint (so twice as deep).

kodiakblair18 Apr 2017 6:38 a.m. PST

I did my legions at 1:1 figure ratio,even in 2mm Velites take up a lot of space.

TKindred Supporting Member of TMP18 Apr 2017 7:09 a.m. PST

It isn't the numbers, but the mission that matters. Skirmishers will expand or contract to cover the frontage required of them. It's what they do. They screen the advance of your own forces, in order to disrupt your enemy's scouts and officers from getting a true picture of your forces. They also work to force your enemy to halt and deploy before he is ready to do so, to sting him with arrows, stones and javelins so that he reacts in anger if at all possible.

But as to footprints, they screen the front of the formation(s) behind them. That's how wide their formations are.

ether drake18 Apr 2017 8:04 a.m. PST

Thanks for the responses. I was thinking of both breadth and depth. Though with my plans to go with a big multi-base I'm looking at a middle ground between closed and open order to cover the feel of a skirmish screen if not all its moments in exactitude.

@Simon, the question actually came to me whilst going through TtS! and trying to establish a mutually compatible basing system with Hail Caesar.

I was wondering how to fit a 6cm wide x 12cm deep elephant in a 15cm x 15cm box with a light infantry/skirmishing unit 12cm wide (the width of a standard unit).

How do you handle light infantry escorts for nellies when playing a 15cm grid?

Personal logo BigRedBat Sponsoring Member of TMP18 Apr 2017 9:27 a.m. PST

Hi ether – I have skirmishers on 6cm square bases that I use alongside the elephant either on one side (15cm grid) or both sides (20cm grid). Here's a 20cm grid unit: -

picture

One could have a system for velites, say, where there was a front base of skirmishers in dispersed order, and behind them the remaining skirmishers closed up in a line on a narrower base, as supports. This would fit in well with the "combined lights" rule and reduce storage space. In fact, it's a heck of a good idea! :-)

Jcfrog18 Apr 2017 10:13 a.m. PST

Would thonk they also have depth as in nappy period as need reserve, rest, resupply missiles. If doing one to one, hardly more than 1/2 be in first line.

ether drake18 Apr 2017 10:51 p.m. PST

Simon, that 6cm square system looks good. The elephant looks great and is distracting me from the Punic Wars!

Interesting idea about the dispersed and close order velites. Would that be considered two standard light units of equal width and different depths, or just one (in order not to over-represent the combat power of the velites)?

Can you point me to the location of the "combined lights" rule?

Personal logo BigRedBat Sponsoring Member of TMP19 Apr 2017 1:50 a.m. PST

Hi ether, I've published a free "supplement" of additional rules- you can download it from here:-

link

There's a new rule for lights supporting cavalry which I'm quire pleased with.

Re your question, both units of velites would act as lights- it's just that the rearmost one would be depicted in a line.

I suspect velites were quite powerful- their importance is often understated.

williamb19 Apr 2017 4:54 a.m. PST

The ancient tactical manuals have open order as twice the depth and width of close order or six feet by six feet per man.

ether drake19 Apr 2017 5:50 a.m. PST

Thanks, Simon. Downloaded. Good to see the light infantry plus cavalry rules. Look forward to trying them out on my Greeks and Spaniards.

@williamb, thank you for the reminder. I'd forgotten about Asclepiodotus (whom I am assuming you are referring to).

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.