Solid Bw Side Support Nov 21, 2019 23:06:03 GMT
Post by snowcat on Nov 21, 2019 23:06:03 GMT
Is the reason that solid Bw receive side support against enemy foot from Bd, but not other heavy infantry such as Sp, Pk because:
Sp, Pk formations are too rigid to turn or shift a portion of their troops to assist the Bw, whereas Bd are less rigid / more flexible, and can offer some assistance in a more penny-packet individual style of combat (whether with swords or halberds)?
I don't include 4Wb (heavy infantry) in this only because they're probably too focused on what is directly in front of THEM, and lack the flexibility of Bd to offer support while still maintaining formation.
Not sure about where 4Ax fits in here, as they have the flexibility to assist, but perhaps don't offer the Bw beside them the same degree of confidence as Bd? (This may be more of an issue of what 4Ax should represent...and that's a rabbit hole in itself!)
I've read about the whole HYW thing (halberdiers beside longbowmen) being the reason this side support rule was introduced, BUT...PB included it in DBA which means that it is applicable to ALL armies for ALL periods across the global history of warfare covered by DBA - and that's a LOT. It seems unlikely to me that PB could not have foreseen this result, and far more likely that he designed the rule for that express purpose: for all armies, periods, etc. because he believed the effect of the rule was equally applicable to them.
Thoughts? Especially if anyone actually KNOWS why PB introduced the rule and why the side support for solid Bw (against enemy foot) only applies to Bd, and not other heavy foot.