|
Post by judebecker on May 13, 2020 15:16:58 GMT
At the hot zone right now. Not much time to respond. There are sort of two threads now overlapping, this, and the new player doing DBR thread. When I played DBA-RRR, the first thing to do was to find an army with the fewest pike. Having a pike element in the line with a factor of 3 against shooting was a weak point which would get hammered by shot at 4-3 with two assisting elements making a 4-1. Do this for 2 bounds and there is now a hole in the enemy line. With 12 elements a side, a hole in your line is usually certain death due to overlap/door closing. The shooting against mounted was powerful enough with 1 or two elements assisting to get from a 2vs3 against knights, down to a 2 vs 1. This has a high chance of killing a knight, and a good chance of disrupting a pistoleer attack. (The shooting factor against foot ignores the fact that by the early 1600's pike are in thinner formations with larger intervals unless they are closing up to charge or receive a charge. The larger intervals provide a potential place for shot to shelter, as occurred as late as Marston Moor.) I forget the author for Exercise of Arms. This book discusses the difference between the Maurice-reformed Dutch infantry and the Spanish Tercio. First, the intervals between Dutch units were 'not large'. The purpose of the second checkerboard line of Dutch units was that they could advance and put a wad of pikemen into the spaces occupied by the shot if needed to stop an attack by cavalry or pike. The overall effect was to get more shot firing relative to the unit frontage than would be presented by a Spanish 'tercio' (a possible misnomer). The Imperial General Montecucolli also discuses this. He is reprinted in 'The Military Intellectual and Battle.' Tilly's infantry formations at Breitenfeld were rapidly appreciated to be obsolete. Imperial formations by Lutzen are similar to Swedish formations, although without the small battalion guns. The Swedish T brigade also rapidly disappeared. Its use is described in English by an English officer in Gustavus' army. Again, the purpose was to get more firepower out of the unit. I'll post that tomorrow. At the DBA scale, it is difficult to recreate the checkerboard small unit tactics. But a couple of things I'd like to see reflected in the game are that a. Pike support was necessary for shot against pike well into the 1500's b. Pike was necessary to protect shot from cavalry certainly up to Marston Moor and the Jacobite rebellions;(Actual battlefield casualties caused by all that shooting were actually small in the ECW, and hard to reconcile with casualty returns from battles like Lutzen in the TYW.) c. Shot could support cavalry. However, I disagree with DBR- I don't think the mounted did a good job of protecting the shot, ex. Breitenfeld, Marston Moor. By the TYW some shot was often happy to close with the enemy; sometimes after a concentrated volley (Breitenfeld; Reid-Gunpowder Triumphant, Montrose Scots). d. It should be more difficult to close the door in this period because units may actually represent intrinsic checkerboard formations which were designed to plug gaps, smoke interfered with command control, units performing rotational firing could not be easily directed to cease fire and charge into a gap-unless trained to do so (Montrose, Swedish GNW, TYW Scots). Its hard to charge into a gap when you are a musketeer peering through the smoke, marching to the rear after firing, unloaded and trying not to set your friend's powder off as you move about. DBA becomes quite the dice off when there are so many shooting elements on the board. I had proposed the multi element infantry units to be able to show the evolution of combat from pike, to pike and shot, to shot and pike by showing three distinct infantry types. The multi element unit allows for gradual attrition before a weak point appears in a battle line mitigating the 1-6, gap in line, hard flank, game over effect. I look forward to seeing what Tony comes up with. Mike Mike, I like this but fear multi element units in a 12 element game will be difficult? What about the idea once proposed here for something like an 8 shot? A single base with pike and shot on the same base. I would help simulate the small Dutch units.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Aguilar on May 13, 2020 19:21:00 GMT
"But then I realized after reading one Slingshot issue I think, that 12 elements means that the army is divided into twelfths and to view each element as not a specific number of men ( I know this concept is troubled by the stated 500 men per element) but a relevant portion of the army in a sort of ephemeral way"
That is how I have always viewed it. Some armies would just not have more than 3 or 4 elements otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Aguilar on May 13, 2020 19:33:18 GMT
A Renaissance version of DBA 3 should not just be "DBA 3 with modifiers" but a DBA 3 inspired game meant for the renaissance. DBA 3 is the most evolved set of rules by far from the DBx family IMO. I couldn't have said it better myself.
|
|
|
Post by mthrguth on May 14, 2020 1:47:18 GMT
I view each element as a 12th of the army frontage. French gendarmes might be deployed in only 1 rank, 'en haye'. If we assume a pike element represents a front of 300 files infantry on a 40mm base, then there is enough base depth (15mm) to claim that there could be 60 to 80 ranks-way beyond the historical requirements for a 7 rank Dutch/Swedish/later Imperialist pike and shot unit. You can conclude that a single base may represent one or two regiments covering the gaps in each other's formation. (A discussion from Slingshot in early days by Roman Szwaba-why base depths are too deep in miniature wargames).
Why the 300 man front? Well, 300x7 ranks equals 2100; 12 of those bad boys gets you to 24000, which means that we are fighting battles and not skirmishes again but using just 12 elements.
I'm going to post some stuff from Turner's Pallas Armata on the Swedish T brigade, and from Marco van Der Hoeven's Exercise of Arms. Turner is actually primary source, and his description of the T Brigades at Breitenfeld is ignored in many secondary sources. van Der Hoeven gives the best explanation of how the Dutch structure gave a more efficient use of----firepower. Still even at Newport in 1600 Spanish units were a mix of larger Tercios and smaller more flexible units but the Tercio was not a Keil by this time. And because of the terrain, shot could fight in some places without a lot of pike support.
Mike
T
|
|
|
Post by judebecker on May 14, 2020 4:03:59 GMT
I would prefer a more zoomed in scale roughly 500 men per element.
|
|
|
Post by hammurabi70 on May 14, 2020 22:02:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 15, 2020 10:59:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by judebecker on May 15, 2020 13:20:53 GMT
Wow, that guy is really prolific! I have a late Roman and Alemanni army from him. Good stuff.
|
|
|
Post by mthrguth on May 15, 2020 18:44:59 GMT
When DBA was first introduced the goal was simple, simulate an entire battle, not an action; using 12 elements. Now PB has changed the rules and scale so that at most we may be representing 5k troops with a DBA army. Not enough for most ancient battles. Could DBA-RRR simulate an entire battle with 12 elements?
I suggest two exercises. First, go to MAA 262, The Army of Gustavus Adolphus vol. 2 Cvalry by Richard Brzezinski and check page 33, GA's battle line at Lutzen. You have 8 infantry briagdes. Then you have cavalry left front and left rear, cavalry right front and right rear. Boom, 12 elements. So, if you want to scale the game to represent an entire battle, you can do it. Your scale is defined each element of foot becomes a brigade. Each cavalry element becomes 6 cavalry squadrons. Combat wise, the cavalry squadrons will also have some shooting ability as they have intrinsic shot, stripped from the infantry brigades which had excess shot to pike; too many pike to be protected from cavalry by the shot. (An important concept-rule authors sometimes fixate on the theoretical pike to shot ratios in the units of different armies, but I stripping shot from brigades was common in the ECW as well, and even in the 80 years war.....).
See the notes also on the figure below on pge 33, which discusses how intervals between brigades were set so hat a squadron of horse could march out betwixt brigades....I'm not sure how accurate the scale is on the Lutzen figure. But I suspect that it would define a ground scale of 1mm equals 1 meter. Notice also that T brigades are depicted for the Swedes. Turner, in Pallas Armata, says that these were not used much after Breitenfeldd.
Another exercise might be to take a map from one of the old SPI TYW quadrigames. Take 12 elements of DBA-RRR troops and superimpose them over the set up area, which has a printed OOB on the hexagonal map. Now you can see how many cavalry or infantry units a DBA -RRR element must represent to allow us to simulate the battle with only 12 elements. It also gives you a clue then of what the movement rates should be for your units, and how big, or rather how small! the playing area should be at this scale to recreate a battle, as opposed to an action.
|
|
|
Post by mthrguth on May 15, 2020 18:47:23 GMT
Dell’arte Della Guerra - campaign and battlefield rules for the Italian Renaissance: I found this on wargamevault.com I have not read it or played it, just the blurb and contents. One of the new 'hotnesses' in miniature wargame design if a pre battle phase. DBX games have a simple pre battle phase, attacker/defender; place terrain, choose side. This set of rules appears to have something more extensive. Peter Pig was famous for this in their Poor Bloody Infantry game. I'm going to have a look. Will report back.
|
|
|
Post by mthrguth on May 15, 2020 19:03:58 GMT
Importance of base depths and ground scale. If a DBA element represents only 400 infantry deployed in 8 ranks or a 50 file front. Then our 40mm base front represents about 40 yards. A 20mm base depth (universal in DBR) is about 20 yards. So the base could represent troops with about 8 ranks of troops is 6 yards, and you have 6 yards in front and 6 in back.
IF we are going to let the base represent a brigade of 1000 men then a 20 mm base depth will be 40 yards (The depth is actually not just 8 ranks, because some of the shot may be in front of the pike). So, we have about 15 to 17 yards of empty space represented on the base in front of the actual combat unit and behind. This is probably not enough to say that ONE element represents two lines of elements deployed one behind the other.
But, for cavalry! The 40mm base depth means that the base represents almost a football field in depth This is enough distance to state that the element represents 2 regiments of cavalry, one behind the other in 3 or 4 ranks, or a regiment divided into checkerboard formation with intervals between units, which we can't depict with our 15mm scale figures.
|
|
|
Post by mthrguth on May 16, 2020 21:12:57 GMT
Combat Results table for pike and shot:
A unit which is beaten becomes disordered and marked with a casualty figure or a puff of smoke
A disordered unit may have the disorder removed in a player's bound for the cost of 1 pip, by rolling equal to or greater than the number of inches between the commander and the unit.
A disordered unit which is doubled is destroyed.
A disordered unit which is beaten by mounted is destroyed.
Two types of foot units. Foot with more pike, foot with more muskets. Troops with more pike have +1 against troops with less pike in close combat. Troops with more muskets have +1 against troops with fewer muskets.
Something to start with. Minimizes the effect of the dreaded 6-1. Morale and discipline now become key features of the battlefield. No longer just a product of the random 6-1. The commander can now decide to lead from the front, or put his effort into steadying his line.
Guth
|
|
|
Post by mthrguth on May 17, 2020 2:11:10 GMT
From James Turner, Pallas Armata, an English officer who served with the Swedes in the TYW; p228 West Point edition:
Regiments or Brigade marshaled a third way:
the Great Gustavus used another way of marshalling his regiments and brigades of foot, whihc taken altogether was not square of front, yet all the four parts or bodies which composed it, were square. The manner was this, Suppose one of his brigades to be 1800 men (as i can assure you he had many weaker) whereof 1200 were musquesteers, and six hundred were pikemen; The Pikes advanced twenty paces before the two bodies of musketeers, who immediately joined to fill up the void place the pikemen had posessed. Then were the pikes divided into 3 equal bodies two hundred to each to each Batallion, the middle body whereof advanced before the other two so far htat is rear might be about 10 paces before the Van of the other two [bodies of pike, we now have a triangle of pike bodies]. The two Bodies of Pikes that staid behind, were ordered to open a little to both hands and then stand still, all fronting one way to the enemy ; by this means the place which the two hundred pikes possessed in the middle , remaining void there were two passages like sally ports between the rear of the advanced body of pikes and the two baatallions that staid behind, out of one [passage] on the right issued constantly one or two or more hundreds of musqueteers, who before ALL THE THREE BODIES OF PIKE [ed. caps} gave incessantly fire on the Enemy, and when the word or sign for a retreat was given, they retired by the other passage on the left hand back ot hte great body of musqueteers, where so many of them as came back unwounded were presently put in rank and file, the fire continueing without intermission by Musqueters, who still sallied through the passage on the right hand; and it is to be observed that the firemen fought thus in small bodies, each of them not above 5 files of musqueteers, and these for mot part but three deep So you may consider that near the third part of the musqueteers being on service, the other two thirds were securely sheltered behind the three battalions of Pikemen who were completely armed for the defensive. These pikes had field pieces with them which fired as oft as they could as well as the musqueteers; This continued till the pikemn came to push of pike with the enemy, (if both parties staid so long, as seldom they did) then the Musqueeters were ot do what they were order'd to do, and the order did depend on emergencies and accidents, which as they could not be then seen, so no certain rules could be given for them. In this order did I see all the Swedish Brigades drawn up, for one year after teh King's death; but after that time, I saw it wear out whne defensive arms first, and then pikes came to be neglected, and by some vilipended.
Why might this be important to DBA RR-It shows that in the Swedish T brigade the shot were actually IN FRONT of the pike. It also makes sense out of diagrams in Brezezinski's work on Gustavus' infantry and cavalry, which challenges a lot of Nosworthy's earlier work on the subject.
Turner's opinion, conforming to the description above, is that 5 ranks of shot can maintain continous fire without difficulty.
He does not explain, in view of the above description; how Gustavus was able to get 6 ranks of troops to fire in volley just before closing with the enemy; although he describes how this was done, possibly by the Mac-Key regiment at Breitenfeld.
Great book.
|
|
|
Post by mthrguth on May 17, 2020 2:14:26 GMT
Turner claims that Giovio describes that 4000 Christian arquebusiers were deployed in 5 ranks against the Ottoman army, supporting his opinion above.
|
|
|
Post by judebecker on May 17, 2020 14:01:05 GMT
Combat Results table for pike and shot: A unit which is beaten becomes disordered and marked with a casualty figure or a puff of smoke A disordered unit may have the disorder removed in a player's bound for the cost of 1 pip, by rolling equal to or greater than the number of inches between the commander and the unit. A disordered unit which is doubled is destroyed. A disordered unit which is beaten by mounted is destroyed. Two types of foot units. Foot with more pike, foot with more muskets. Troops with more pike have +1 against troops with less pike in close combat. Troops with more muskets have +1 against troops with fewer muskets. Something to start with. Minimizes the effect of the dreaded 6-1. Morale and discipline now become key features of the battlefield. No longer just a product of the random 6-1. The commander can now decide to lead from the front, or put his effort into steadying his line. Guth This is a great set of ideas, the only possible issue being the need to place a "marker" which is against the DBx concept of clutter free tables. The need to remember things from turn to turn is something I try to avoid, but then again in DBMM there are no "markers" but the need to recall things like the disheartened command, etc.
|
|