"Battlefield intervals during Pike and Shot and DBx rules" Topic

For some time I've wondered about the look of battles in real life and how they are depicted in period art and how we ought to strive to represent this on the tabletop. I've been lucky enough to have many conversations with Brent Nosworthy who has published extensively on Horse and Musket era unit tactics, and now has finalized an extensive book on Pike and Shot warfare from the turn of the 16th century to about 1670 or so. Reading this groundbreaking work has reinforced and reawakened my thoughts about how no DBx system (DBR, DBA-RRR, DBMM) really depicts the look of any pike and shot battlefield since we are rewarded for moving in groups which ends up being one long line of elements rather than regiments that have intervals between them let alone the issue of how to show horns or sleeves of shot relative to blocks of pike.

For example in the 80 years war, Maurice of Nassau along with Wilhelm Ludovic pioneered the re-adaptation/re-birth of Roman Grand Tactics by using these ideas to array the regiments of the Dutch in smaller units with files ten men deep. The Dutch sergeant major was now faced with a much simpler task of arraying the battle line since he was told simply the number of men per regiment and had now only to divide by ten (i.e. 572 men in this regiment, then make 57 files and the rest of the men can fall in behind). The old roman numeral based math required to form a colunella or tercio of the old days with its complexity was no longer needed. Of course the concept of zero was not widespread yet in Europe it being an Arabic convention.

These small and nimble regiments after quickly arraying "en bataille" were the birth of the linear system and they found themselves capable of outmaneuvering the slow and unwieldy Spanish Pike Blocks although they were composed of better equipped trained soldiers. Gustavus, later totally adopted this during the 30 years war.

This important reality with its unit intervals ought to be modelled in the upcoming DBA-RRR or in DBR.

I recall once long ago talk of groups in DBR being more than 4 elements being penalized, but I can find no such rule in 2.0.

There might be other incentives to create a line of battle with unit intervals in the rules or ways to add them.

From DBR 1.1, p.16:

"1 PIP is expended to: Move a group of up to 4 elements wide and of any depth… 3 PIPs are expended to: Move a group more than 4 elements wide…"

I don't have later editions, so I don't know if any changes were made; this does make it a LOT more difficult to maintain linear integrity of large groups. Maybe not a problem if you intend to stand on the defensive.

I've always thought that the 4 element limit tended to encourage maneuver by "regiments".

Thanks for that rule, I might use it in my DBR 2 games. This rule doesn't exist in any form in that version.

Is DBx meant to model individual units and their sub-units?

If you want to game at that level of detail then surely using a different rule-set would be an idea?

After looking at the normal scale DBR, it seems an element should be around 100 infantry men. So that seems like a tactical scale rather than grand tactical. If you take four elements together it's about the field strength of a "battalion" or their predecessor of the 17th c. But, you are right, DBx has always been a bit more abstract. Still, I say when looking a general wargame layout, they should look like the period they represent without looking at the troops too much. DBx does this well for ancient warfare, long lines of almost unbroken troops, but any engraving of pike and shot warfare from contemporary artists shows the checkerboard look.

I do not play DBx games, but I am always a bit concerned about how unit organization often gets extrapolated into tactical realities. Small units did not mean that the Dutch could run around the field. For a start, the Dutch themselves fought scarcely any battles. But their system clearly had an impact on those that did. But were all those "battalions" actually operating independently or did they have a place in the line? It seems the latter. So, again, not a DBx player, if the rules are meant to represent higher level organizations I would be inclined to not represent the individual battalions but rather the "brigades", "battles", or "lines" of which these battalions were a part. If the action is small and the rules tolerate lower level actions, then, OK represent the battalions or call what is on the table, a battalion.