Logo
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Wed Jun 26, 2019 3:02 pm



This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 22 posts ] 
Useful Military Formations and tactics 
Author Message
Silver Khaine Winner
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 7:04 pm
Posts: 2492
Location: Contemplating the construction of my fleet.
Reply with quote
As promised after doing a bit of research I have looked up a number of formations that may or may not be useful in warhammer. "X" represent friendly units. "x" represents enemy units. Now not being very tactically adept at explaining the usefulness of said formations I'll do my best but hope for some serious imput.

Flying wedge/ Vee formation/ wedge:
xxxxxxx
....x
..X...x
X.......x


This formation usually is lead by a really really tough unit that is designed to punch through an enemy line. Once through it can wheel to support either ends of the line that are having difficulties with the enemy. Things like Steam tanks are good here. Monsters for their increased mobility once they are through and heavy cavalry are all good choices.

Disadvantages are that it is particulary vulnerable to a pincer movement or double envelopment as weak troops in the centre make way in front of the powerful line breaker unit.

Pincer movement or Double Envelopment:

x....xxxx...........x
..x......xxxx......x
......x.............x

This tactic involve moving out onto the flanks of an enemy formation and hitting it from both sides. The double envelopment can grow out of a number of different formations specifically the inverted wedge or a line formation. Fast moving wings are key to having the double envlopment work and ensuring your army gets local numerical superiority is important to this tactic.

Disadvantages are that often times fast moving units are not strong enough to break the flanks of the enemy. Dark Elves are also low in numbers and can have difficulty getting around the enemy with smaller numbers of troops.

Single pincer:

XXXX.......x
............x
.........x
xxxxx


This tactic relies upon destroying/enveloping one flank of the enemy while the rest of your battle line advances upon his. Fast moving and hard hitting troops can be deployed as the enveloping force but missile troops as the standing force combined with normal infantry envelopers can work just as well in certain circumstances. Works well with a refused flank formation.

Disadvantages are that the enemy can smash aside your centre and end up enveloping your pincer manouver, especially if you have nothing strong enough to protect your opposite flank.

Echelon formation:

XXXXXXXXXXX

...............xxx
........xxx
xxx


Essentially an angled formation with units approaching the enemy not in a straight unbroken battleline but at a diagonal to each other. This formation is not as useful IMHO in fantasy battle as it is in real life. Echelons are OK for allowing overlapping feilds of fire and flexability for a missile troops. The units are also able to move into flanking positions well should a leading unit become charged or flee from a charge. This formation can string out a horde and cause them to become disjointed.

Disadvantages are that if not done properly units are unable to support each other and can get in each others way. Gaps in your line appear very readily should a unit panic or be destroyed especially on the tail end of the diagonal, where enemy units can possibly get around you. Best used with a strong punch at the forward end of the echelon and a tough anchor at the tail end.

Inverted wedge:

XXXXXXXXXXXX
XXX.........XXX
.......XXX


This formation allows for the centre unit to support either of the side units should they need it. This is a particularly intersting formation if you have a chariot or hydra, as they are often screened or out of charge range to your larger infantry blocks. Should those blocks be attacks then the support unit jumps out to flank charge or support charge assuming the enemy doesn't break your unit. I'm not entirely sure how to use this formation offensively but I bet it can be done.

Disadvantages are that offensive operations with this formation are more difficult than other formations. Also this a small unit deployment strategy and is not possible to do on an army wide scale. (though multiple units with this formation can be possible).

Line formation:

Pretty obvious this one, I think most people use this the most in their games of warhammer and then move into another formation depending on the deployment of the enemy.

Things to work on from others...

Crescent formations
reverse crescent formations
castling
refused flank
refused centre
any others I cannot think of.

_________________
Image


Mon May 15, 2006 7:16 pm
Report this post
Profile
Cabal without a cause
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:49 am
Posts: 1798
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Reply with quote
Post 
An interesting article, and I hope I can try out some of those ideas sometime. I have just one thing to add, and that is that one should probably try to develop these formations out of a normal line, so that the enemy doesn´t immediately see what you´re up to. That would reduce some of the weaknesses as it gives the enemy less time to exploit them.

_________________
It´s nice to be important, but it´s more important to be nice.


Mon May 15, 2006 8:15 pm
Report this post
Profile ICQ
Malekith's Pet Cat
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 7:26 pm
Posts: 1452
Location: Prowling around the streets near London, England.
Reply with quote
Post 
This is very helpful, thanks. Should be useful for trying out new things, and now I know exactly what Kel means when he talks about crescent formation, castle etc... :oops: Or at least hopefully I will soon. This should be a good resource for trying out new battleline techniques etc, and I've already started thinking how I could use them with my monster list. :twisted:

_________________
"Purrrrr...."

Venkh wrote:
I wish i had been told about the "A-Team effect" that druchii experience with their shooting.

i.e. move into position, huge ammounts of shooting, nobody gets killed.


Mon May 15, 2006 8:38 pm
Report this post
Profile WWW
Malekith's Personal Guard
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2002 2:06 pm
Posts: 975
Location: Locked in a bunker with only a HE player for company
Reply with quote
Post 
Nice one Underway.

Proper military terms an' all.

What I refer to commonly as crescent formations are akin to wedge formations.

The single pincer formation is what you'd try and set up in a hammer and anvil ploy like my recent Ghrond list. Echelons equate to refused flanks in operation, whilst the double pincer would be similar to a refused centre set up.

As a rule of thumb I would look to use echelons and wedges with infantry and pincers are better suited to cavalry based armies. though neither of these is exclusive.

_________________
Life is short, death last for ever like a journey on British public transport!


Tue May 16, 2006 2:46 pm
Report this post
Profile WWW
Silver Khaine Winner
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 7:04 pm
Posts: 2492
Location: Contemplating the construction of my fleet.
Reply with quote
Post 
Refused flank and refused centre:

These tactics essentially mean that you are going to refuse to meet the opponent and fight them in these areas. A refused flank usually means that you are trying to inhibit an opponent their ability to gain your flank.

This can be done using terrain such as a water feature or using the table edge itself. It is very difficult for a Dark Elf army to refuse both flanks to the enemy. Hordes can occationally do this as they can reach from table edge to table edge. Be careful using terrain to refuse a flank or centre as some armies will use this terrain to their advantage. The banner of elyrion, skirmishers, beastmen and chaos spawn can make your refused area a haven for enemy troops and weakenss in your battle line.

A refused centre can be done through speedy manouver, terrain and sometimes a flee reaction. I often put a unit of spearmen in the centre of my battle line only to have them flee from a charge. By refusing battle in the centre of my line I can often tie up an enemy powerhouse unit or a couple of enemy units. Also if you deploy two fast cavalry units in the centre of your line they can quickly be redeployed away from the centre to one or both flanks, thus causing your opponent to have essentially wasted a deployment slot with a big unit of troops or heavy cav. Using terrain to refuse the centre can be risky as you army in now split into two seperate forces unable to support each other.

Quote:
As a rule of thumb I would look to use echelons and wedges with infantry and pincers are better suited to cavalry based armies. though neither of these is exclusive.


Is this due to the inate movement difference in those lists. For example a pincer relies upon fast movement and gaining the enemies flanks. Wedges rely upon mutualy supporting units dealing with the enemy attacks upon your battleline.

I just thought of an interesting usage of a inverted wedge/ echelon. C for chariots, BG for Black Guard and S for spears.

SSSS
SSSS
SSSS
SSSS
.....CC
.....CC
..........BGBGBGBG
..........BGBGBGBG

Now the diagram looks a little odd but bear with me. Spears are on the flank hopefully with some protection from terrain or the table edge. The chariot is placed in such a way that it is behind and slightly to the right of the spear unit. That way the spears block it from being charged and it can still charge out from it's position. The BG are behind and away from the chariot.

Should an enemy charge the spears they either hold or flee as the case may be. Hopefully a failed charge makes the enemy vulnerable to a BG or Chariot charge. If the BG are charged they hold and the chariot smashes into them the next turn (hopefully in the flank). If an enemy unit charges the spears and the spears hold the chariot can charge that unit to support the spears.

The BG are very strong on recieving flank charges as well and protect the side of this formation from the other direction. If placed properly it will be very difficult for an enemy to charge both the BG and the spears at the same time. However if this does happen one can pretty much guarantee the BG will hold come what may and the chariot can support either unit they deem necessary to support.

Add a BSB to the chariot and the line become even stronger and the chariot even more deadly with a rank breaking US of 5.

_________________
Image


Tue May 16, 2006 4:00 pm
Report this post
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 8:50 am
Posts: 1099
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Reply with quote
Post 
I tend to combine a single pincer with a line formation, i.e. I usually have one flank where my aim is to sweep in on the enemy...

I'm also a fan of the standard pincer formation. I like to put a couple of repeaters in the middle, if the enemy wants to take out the repeaters, he will be exposed from both sides, if he tries to take out a flank with fast units, e.g. cavalry, you will have a decent chance for flank shoots...

Another Idea that I have been toing with concerning pincer formations is to have an infantry msu list with a couple of repeaters and a dragon. The repears would be deployed near the middle, as outlinded above, and most of the army on one flank, the dragon is then probably placed on the other flank. The role of the dragon is two fold: the first is to soak missle fire, so that you have a more solid battle line on the other side, the other is to herd the enemy, i.e. if he runs straight towards your pincer side with his entire army, he will present loads of flanks and a few rears, put this into context with the dragons streanght and damage potential... The oponent will al of a sudden not be so prone to hinder you from fasing half of his army, it also means that the part of his army left to deal with the dragon is rendered partly useless, since he can easily fly over/past them...

One of my first dark elf list used a wedge formation, but I had big blocks of spearmen in the front and chariots on the side, the idea was that the spearmen should hold and the chariots then countercharge, I had two unit of 28 spearelves... One was unbrakable and the other was within 12 from BSB and had a highborn... that was however long ago, and I do not find it very usefull today... the wedge however is usefull for empire, with their detachment rules, i.e. mother unit in the front...

The inverted wedge that you have outlined underway would work verry well, you do however not necicarily need black guards, a unit of spearelves with general and BSB can hold to many things, the black guards are ofcource optimal though...

Keledron I have had great sucess with both single and doble pincer formations with infantry (MSU), shure they are not as fast as cavalry, but the nature of MSU means that you can easily sacrifice them.

If the charge a unit that is not on the edge, it will flee, and the will thus be countercharged, if they have enough movement to outmove your flank and charge a unit near the table edge, it will flee, and assuming that they do not run of the table (since you probably would have been able to charge them then), they will be side charged by a unit from your center...

And with an infantry army I ofcource mean with a couple of units of dark riders (is an army with out fast cavalry truly elven? ;) )

A very nice initiative :D

_________________
[CENTER]Image[/CENTER]


Tue May 16, 2006 5:13 pm
Report this post
Profile
Malekith's Personal Guard
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2002 2:06 pm
Posts: 975
Location: Locked in a bunker with only a HE player for company
Reply with quote
Post 
@Underway - yes., as a slowly moving pincer formation in effect becomes an echelon formation as nothing moves fast enough to break up the mutual support positioning.

In a pincer move you would lead with the fastest elements with the aim to encircle a point on the battle field into which the enemy is moving the units can be totally independant of each other but are mutally support by proximity to the point on the battlefield at which your assault is focussed.

In the echelon the units always remain contiguous and are permanently supporting one another rather than a pointon the tabletop they are able to bring the power of the assault together at any point whilst with a pincer move there maybe times in which this is not possible.

@Waerik - I can certainly see how you've used those formations with an MSU list, which to a certain extent is designed around the principles of a pincer attack formation by default.

_________________
Life is short, death last for ever like a journey on British public transport!


Wed May 17, 2006 10:36 am
Report this post
Profile WWW
Silver Khaine Winner
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 7:04 pm
Posts: 2492
Location: Contemplating the construction of my fleet.
Reply with quote
Post 
So that brings me to what type of formations are good against each other.

It seems to me that an echelon is good for breaking up an opponents attack, as they hit your line in a disjointed fashion. The leading elements get hit while the supporting elements are out of range/unchargeable. As this happens you can countercharge with your own units to support those that were hit, thus creating local asymetry and superiority. This allows for the DE to take advantage of thier strengths of good fighters and reduce weaknesses.

If your opponent holds the line and wants to be defensive (Castling) how do you break it down? You need to have some fast elements in your army and switch to a pincer type manouver or a wedge type of situation, where a unit tries to puch through? Personaly the pincer seems much more druchii in nature being that CoK the best line breakers are unreliable and expensive at best. Either that or you could place your most hitty RnF at the front of the wedge and chariots in support to smash through the line. But dwarves and empire might have something to say about this working so well.

Part of the problem of formations as well is the vulnerability to missile fire. DE really cannot take missile fire to well, and as such I can see concentrated missile fire breaking up a charcterful formation.

_________________
Image


Wed May 17, 2006 4:02 pm
Report this post
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:49 am
Posts: 1388
Reply with quote
Post 
While in the real world, all these formations have a great deal of use and importance, in my experience, they don't translate that well into Warhammer. I think there are a couple of reasons for this. First and foremost, warhammer battlfields are not realistic. They are small and prevent serious manuvering. In addition, terrain rarely reflects real world complexities.

Secondly, in real life, you don't have time to order every single unit to do exactly what you want in response to unfolding events. In warhammer, we have lengthy periods to ponder, with omnipotence, the outcome of every single event, and to react with complete control accordingly. Warhammer has no Fog of War, and it is the fog of war that really makes formations so incredibly important. The fog of war is what makes prebattle organization and planning so essential in the real world. In warhammer though, units respond like you want them to for the most part, and when they don't it is for reasons that are predictable (panic, lost combat, fear, etc). In addition, you can respond on the spot to things like gaps in your lines and flanking opportunities. Because of all this, I've found that a sort of fast and loose style of play is preferrable to a rigid battle plan. Rigid battle plans are more a means of dealing with the unpredictability of warfare by creating a predictable strategy. Warhammer already is fairly predictable (relative to real warfare anyway), with a set number of variables, and calculatable outcomes. I can assess my opportunities and risks on the fly in a way you simply can't in the real world.

That said, I think it is useful, especially for beginners, to have a general awareness of these types of formations, because they give you a solid fairly reliable battleplan. If you aren't good at assessing things on the fly, having a preset formation sort of answers any problems that arise by default. If you are using a wedge/vanguard formation, and you punch a line in the enemies center, you don't have to think a whole lot about what you do next. The response is more or less built in to the formation.

Personally though, I prefer to play flexibly myself and respond as things take shape. The advantages in this style are unpredictability, since your opponent will have much greater difficulty making our your intent, and adaptability, allowing you to respond to unexpected moves by your opponent without sacraficing an overall battleplan. Still, that style of play takes a lot of time to get good at, since you really have to have the ability to calculate your odds, assess the risks, and think a couple turns ahead.

_________________
"I'd never join any club that would have the likes of me as a member."


Thu May 18, 2006 2:16 am
Report this post
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 8:50 am
Posts: 1099
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Reply with quote
Post 
Archdukechocula: one of the great advantages of using battle formations is that your oponent can read how you will act, or think he can. :twisted:

As said before I tend to use the singel pincer formation some whith dark elves, if it works it is fine, but if your enemy is responding to your formation, you simple let him belive that he has got you for a turn, and then you break the formation and attack him in unpredicted was, works preatty well, i.e. you may use a formation to fool your oponent that you fight in a rigid way, and then gain the advantage by changing tactics in the middle of the battle...

The ability to drasticly change your battle plan in the midst of the fight is a trait of a decent general...

What I'm saying is that formations are usefull, but especially as an elf it is important to be able to adapt to the situation, since one of our advantages is having a small fast army (relativly anyways)...

_________________
[CENTER]Image[/CENTER]


Thu May 18, 2006 10:00 am
Report this post
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2002 2:46 pm
Posts: 1152
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Reply with quote
Post 
I'v been advocating a mix of Echelon formation and Flying wedge for years. Using the classic infantry tactics of the great generals do work in warhammer, with some minor modifications I might add.

Echelon deployment is fairly simple. You need a big units of stubborn or unbreakable troops and a BSB(if stubborn). Chariots, fast cav and heavy cav.

Basicly you move the stubborn/unbreakeble units up in the ceterflank alowing some chariots and/or fast cav to fall behind and suport it form below. While you spearhead with something like Heavy cav lead by a hero/lord and some CR generating banner.

This will requier that you make sure to occupy the opponent on the other flank aswell. I'v found a Hydra and 1-2 units of fast cav can effectivly keep up to 4-5 units away from your Flying wedge/Echelon formation in the center. I'v done this agains a friends Skaven hord(300+ rats). And it works very well I might add.

/Johan R

_________________
You don´t snuggle with Max Power, you just strap on and feel the G´s!

Swedish ranking page and forum


Thu May 18, 2006 12:22 pm
Report this post
Profile
Silver Khaine Winner
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 7:04 pm
Posts: 2492
Location: Contemplating the construction of my fleet.
Reply with quote
Post 
@archdukechocula:

I completly agree with your description of what works and what doesn't regarding using ancient tactics for warhammer. There are a few confounding factors regarding ancient tactics such as flyers, magic and the much greater prevalence of missile fire in warhammer compared to the real world. And also the lower ability to manouver as per your point. Rome Total War is a much better environment to be dealing with the specifics of ancient deployment and manouver.

However reading about ancient tactics and discussing it here makes me more confident on creating and seeing a battle plan further into the future. I also have some better ideas regarding the usages of different units and how to make my infantry line more effective without having to resort to MSU which I find a little annoying and difficult to master.

As for usage of a flying wedge/echelon I have yet to truely try this out. I'm thinking also that I need to try out the Grand Artillery strategy with a wedge in combination. Perhaps ignoring my normal targets of RBT's and hammering a single unit for two turns as my units advance might be better. Thus weakening the centre unit and ensuring the punch through happens. I really need to get on the battlefield this long weekend and try some of these out.

_________________
Image


Thu May 18, 2006 5:35 pm
Report this post
Profile
Cold One Knight
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 3:00 pm
Posts: 222
Location: Canada
Reply with quote
Post 
I've been toying around with the inverted wedge, just measuring out distances and thinking some things up. It looks very promising, especially against alot of cavalry. Amazing potential for an msu list.

I think a great way to implement formations of the army on the table would be to mix it up and add in transistions.

An echelon on the left flank, with an inverted wedge 2/3's of the right, almost resembles a single pincer, but with an added protection to the weak flank.

Or a basic formation that with planning, can move into a new formation on turn 2 or 3, could really throw the opponent off his entire gameplan.

btw, this is a great topic of discussion.

_________________
If it weren't for rules, we'd all be sitting up in trees, flinging our crap at each other -- Red.


Fri May 19, 2006 1:59 am
Report this post
Profile
Silver Khaine Winner
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 7:04 pm
Posts: 2492
Location: Contemplating the construction of my fleet.
Reply with quote
Post 
Vid wrote:
I've been toying around with the inverted wedge, just measuring out distances and thinking some things up. It looks very promising, especially against alot of cavalry. Amazing potential for an msu list.

I think a great way to implement formations of the army on the table would be to mix it up and add in transistions.

An echelon on the left flank, with an inverted wedge 2/3's of the right, almost resembles a single pincer, but with an added protection to the weak flank.

Or a basic formation that with planning, can move into a new formation on turn 2 or 3, could really throw the opponent off his entire gameplan.

btw, this is a great topic of discussion.


I was doing a bit of the same. Having a formation work well in warhammer seems to me a good deal of very good estimation of distances and measurements. Taking into account enemy charge ranges and such your would really be better able to dictate how your plan works.

I have also toyed with the idea of making a table 6" wide and trying out manouver warfare that way. I did this once before and the speed of the elves was really telling with a larger playing surface. It also seems more "grand army" to me with troops arrayed across the battlefield and formations running here and there, you really get the feeling of a massive army fighting each other.

It seems to me that the larger the table the more effective formations can become as you have more room and space to make them work and set them up.

_________________
Image


Fri May 19, 2006 5:07 pm
Report this post
Profile
Cold One Knight
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 3:00 pm
Posts: 222
Location: Canada
Reply with quote
Post 
Ouch, 4' by 4' tables suck for large games. I've always played on 6' wide when playing large battles (1.5-2k). There is much larger degree of tactics on these surfaces.

_________________
If it weren't for rules, we'd all be sitting up in trees, flinging our crap at each other -- Red.


Fri May 19, 2006 5:56 pm
Report this post
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2002 2:46 pm
Posts: 1152
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Reply with quote
Post 
I think Undy is talking about 6*6 bords, or maybee even 6*8?

Anyway, the speed of the elves work best when they have room to fall back on. This is why you should always, always move your units 8-10" out of your deployment the first thing you do. Alows you alot more room to manouver and will puch back your opponent so he will feel cornerd.

/Johan R

_________________
You don´t snuggle with Max Power, you just strap on and feel the G´s!

Swedish ranking page and forum


Fri May 19, 2006 7:20 pm
Report this post
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:49 am
Posts: 1388
Reply with quote
Post 
I have to agree that table sizes make a huge difference. When I play on my large ping pong table, which is 5 by 7, which gives enough extra room to really allow more serious maneuvering, larger game sizes, and reserves as a serious consideration. When I play 3000, I am much more inclined to keep a couple units of elites or a few large blocks of warriors sitting back in reserve waiting to finish off a unit at an opportune moment, or fill any gaps in the line. These tactics aren't really that plausible when you have only 7 or 8 units on the table, and the table is 4 feet long.

_________________
"I'd never join any club that would have the likes of me as a member."


Fri May 19, 2006 10:41 pm
Report this post
Profile
Silver Khaine Winner
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2003 7:04 pm
Posts: 2492
Location: Contemplating the construction of my fleet.
Reply with quote
Post 
Thats an excellent idea as well, I completly forgot about reserves and issues regarding them. I have actually played more games with 6x8 in 40k and let me tell you them Eldar are a real pain in the behind on that size of a board. Good thing I play eldar!

Yes in real historical battles reserves were integral parts of the battle plan and in a number of cases the proper deployment of them resulted in victory for one side or the other. I'm thinking of Alexander the Greats first battle against the Persian King, the battle name and name of the king escape me. Either way its in Wikkipedia if someone is interested.

Does anyone else here feel that reading about classical military battles improves there warhammer skills, I certainly do.

_________________
Image


Sat May 20, 2006 2:53 am
Report this post
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:49 am
Posts: 1388
Reply with quote
Post 
The king was Darius the III. I had a D&D mage named after him ages ago heh.

As for the helpfulness of historical battles, I would say for me it has been mediocre at best. I pretty quickly came to the conclusion that what works in real life doesn't translate so well into warhammer. Some of the rules accomodate real world dynamics, but they have a long way to go in the realism department. But, that is to be expected in a game based on fantasy type battles. Also, as I mentioned earlier, you have far more control in Warhammer than is ever possible in the real world. Real world battles were vastly more chaotic, the outcomes far more random, and based far more on decision made before battles even began. Napoleon wasn't a brilliant general because of what he did on the batllefield. He was brilliant because of decisions he made <em>before</em> battles ever begun. Things like realizing the full potential of artillery outside of the navy, professional long term well trained units, and basic deception helped Napoleon win battles like Austerlitz where he was heavily outnumbered. Even in the 19th century generals had very little real control of the course of the battle once it commenced.

So, in real life battles, there was a major premium on planning, much less on adaptation and responsiveness, except as it existed at the divisional and lower levels. The nigh omnipotence of warhammer, combined with various rules that dont much reflect reality, results in a distortion of historical realism, and a focus on turn by turn adaptability. I think that, what is applicable are usually tactical elements of the real world (flanking, concentrated fire, exploiting temporal weakness, and so forth), and what doesn't translate well are overall battle plans or strategies. Those things which I have felt have provided some use in warhammer have been almost entirely tactical, which in practice means things that can be incoporated in choices in any given turn rather than for the whole battle.

_________________
"I'd never join any club that would have the likes of me as a member."


Sat May 20, 2006 5:08 am
Report this post
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2002 2:46 pm
Posts: 1152
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Reply with quote
Post 
The thing I'v got from looking at historic battles and from my own army training is more some basic concepts and a feel for synnergy aswell as a feeling for when it's time to gamble and when it's time to stick to your plans.

Anywas, anyone ever seen the show on discovery where two modernday generals take control of different generals armys and fight it out in a simulator? I saw one where they used the forces of Alexander and Hanibal(no elephants). And using the old tactics employed aswell as some minor changes.

I thought it was really good. Gave an indeapth look at why differen things worked and why others did not...

/Johan R

_________________
You don´t snuggle with Max Power, you just strap on and feel the G´s!

Swedish ranking page and forum


Sat May 20, 2006 9:02 am
Report this post
Profile
Malekith's Pet Cat
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 7:26 pm
Posts: 1452
Location: Prowling around the streets near London, England.
Reply with quote
Post 
Yup, that would be time commanders. I believe they're basically just playing Roman Total War, but only the battle part. It is good for seeing military tactics in action though.

I completely agree with Archdukechocula as well, that many (perhaps most) historical battles were won due to planning before the battle, and randomness during the battle. That's the difference, in Warhammer tactics come mainly during the battle IMO, unless you set up the same way for every opponent. I think if it were to be done in the style of the ancient battles, battle plans would be made before the battle, and would probably be followed through, but could be changed during if something happened. Also I suppose it would be played on 2 different tables, and then a "gamemaster" or some overlooker would announce when units drew close, and which units could see who. Damn it would be complicated! Perhaps that's why it's only done on computer games, where the third party is the computer itself, although even then you move troops during the battle.

So I think that's the problem in terms of military battles - they were fought in a different way (more like Warmaster than Warhammer). Still, tactics could be relevant, but since the opponent can see all of your units, they can't be pulled off int he same way as in historical battles.

_________________
"Purrrrr...."

Venkh wrote:
I wish i had been told about the "A-Team effect" that druchii experience with their shooting.

i.e. move into position, huge ammounts of shooting, nobody gets killed.


Sat May 20, 2006 9:22 am
Report this post
Profile WWW
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2002 2:46 pm
Posts: 1152
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Reply with quote
Post 
The Liger: Hidden games are really cool. I'v got some basic rules for this if you'd like to try. Basicly both commanders have a look at the battle field and the mark on paper where they deploy there armys then copy it for the GM/GM's. Then you mark on paper where you move the units and such. The only things you can see are stuff on hills that or at ground level and a max of 18" away from any of your own troops. Warmachens and such needs spotters to find targets for them, so if your cannons want to shoot at something you need to have a unit start the turn within 18" of it to relay the possition of the enamy.

This alows you to hide fast units and flyers who are not large behind your battle line as well as reservs. Scouting units that are in woods are hidden unless your wihin 8" of them and can see them. The games are also played on larger tables such as a 6*8 table to give more room to manouver.

All units of both armys are kept hidden in different rooms and brought forward when the GM tells the players that they have been sighted.

When playing like this you roll for Initiativ(using the tactical values of the armys + D6 OR the leadership of the general +1-5 depending on where your army is on the army strength table from the NE GT pack) and then the player who won the roll of gets to to chose if he wants to do his movment first, then his opponent or let his opponent go first. Repeat untill all phases are done.

It will take twice the time of a normal game if not more but it's alot of fun and since you cant be sure about your enamy deployment if you don't scout it can bring some really fun twists.

I'm trying to get some players for next sunday and I'll try to get a digi cam and make a battle rep with all the rules included. However it'll take some time before it will be up and running due to work and real life issues :(

/Johan R

_________________
You don´t snuggle with Max Power, you just strap on and feel the G´s!

Swedish ranking page and forum


Sat May 20, 2006 10:29 am
Report this post
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.   [ 22 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software