Help support TMP


"historical set-ups in wargames" Topic


8 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.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Ancients Discussion Message Board


Areas of Interest

Ancients

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Top-Rated Ruleset

Armati


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article

Eureka Amazon Project: The Phalangitrixes

Beowulf Fezian paints the prototypes for the Eureka Amazon Army.


Featured Workbench Article

The Army for Bill: Warband #5

The fifth Warband stand for the Army for Bill.


Featured Profile Article

GameCon '98

The Editor tries out this first-year gaming convention in the San Francisco Bay Area (California).


659 hits since 6 Mar 2020
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Korvessa06 Mar 2020 1:39 p.m. PST

It seems like many of the best generals had a pretty standard army set up for their set-piece battles:
Alexander (companions on the right, Thessalians on the left, pikes in the middle), or
Hannibal (heavy cav on the right, Numedians on the left, infantry in the middle), or even
Gustavus (Swedish cav on right, German cav on the left, infantry in the middle).

When using these types of armies do you do the same? Always set up the same way?

sillypoint06 Mar 2020 1:53 p.m. PST

No.

Personal logo Herkybird Supporting Member of TMP06 Mar 2020 2:08 p.m. PST

Most times, yes!

Personal logo Yellow Admiral Supporting Member of TMP06 Mar 2020 3:04 p.m. PST

If I'm testing the accuracy of rules, playing a very specific scenario, or running a convention game with a reduced decision cycle, I stick closer to the historical deployments. If I want to play the game "What if I were in charge?", I don't.

Deployment decisions are half the battle. Gauging the opponent, using terrain, crafting an overall plan, are all important parts of generalship. (My favorite parts, in fact).

I make som exceptions for particular historical idiosyncracies that define the period – Roman maniples deploy in 3 lines, 1 Roman cohort is bigger, pikes deploy in blocks, Swiss deploy in keils, etc. – but generally, my favorite periods are the ones with some tactical flexibility and experimentation, like the Punic Wars, the Successor period, Charles the Bold's wars, and so on.

- Ix

JJartist06 Mar 2020 4:41 p.m. PST

Depends. Often the Macedonian right strong attack, left strong defense works. Sometimes flip flopping works. Eumenes flip flopped against Antigonos.

If the enemy is solid infantry with no flanks then sometimes deploying cavalry in reserve is best to exploit gaps.

At Issus Alexander had the Thessalians on his right flank, then they shifted to the ocean flank when the Persian cavalry moved there.

Hannibal's typical deployment often does not work in historical games because hindsight allows the Romans to do some rotten tricks (like shift reserve infantry to the flanks) to block the surrounding cavalry.

Uesugi Kenshin Supporting Member of TMP06 Mar 2020 5:03 p.m. PST

Since I prefer historical battles to one-off games I almost always use historical set-ups (when they are known).

When historical set-ups are not known I mirror set-ups for other battles from the same period.

Yesthatphil07 Mar 2020 11:44 a.m. PST

Depends on the type of game thumbs up!

Phil

catavar07 Mar 2020 11:49 a.m. PST

It has often worked out that way for me, especially if the army has a strong infantry presence. Terrain sometimes has dictated otherwise for me though.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.