|Royalist foot- all formed 4 ranks deep both pike and shot. Equally 2 ranks deep for a smaller unit would be fine|
Now perhaps some perspicacious chap can answer me this. Why in some rules do the "game designers" allow silly formations and mad organisations. Now I'm only talking about historical wargaming here . I don't care if your Dwarfs form up in the famous King Ankelbyter XIV's pigs arse formation or of the Fartenberg Fusiliers use the inverse square- with all the bayonets pointing inwards. No I'm talking about rules purporting to be historical and allowing patently non- historical formations . In this instance specifically English Civil War.
|A better view of my prefered 4 ranks deep- but all forming the same depth- which is the real point. The additions to the base depths are simply to protect the charged pikes. This unit did several tours of duty in the OGUK display case|
|Parliamentarian Cuirassiers 2 ranks deep to represent the 6 ranks they normally used early in the war.|
Equally when I began ECW gaming in about 1976 or so I started with small units of 6 pikes 12 shot or 8 pikes 16 shot but all formed up 2 ranks deep. Rules were with Derek Sharamns or later Gush and I suspect that under Gush is where- for me at least the rot began. Under those rules Pikes received a rank bonus in melee but shot could fire only a maximum of 2 ranks deep- I played tournaments at the time so .... However I have grown up since then and would not choose to be so unhistorical now.
|A Royalist Brigade is"Swedish Brigade". 3 regiments of foot .|
Now I am aware of the abstraction argument - and as always some level of abstraction is unavoidable simply because we are using little metal men on a table and not big flesh and blood ones in a field, dice and not actual gunpowder and we are not, normally, attempting to maim and kill one another.(Though I have seen fits of picque at Tournaments)
|The rather more complicated version as depicted by De Gomme no where are the shot depicted at half the depth of the pikemen.|
So my question Ladies and Gentlemen
How has this "incorrect convention" become almost normal and why - despite the historical evidence to the contrary and as I am sure has occurred more than a few times. How many other bits of non historical silliness that did not happen of a battlefield do we take for granted merely because"they make a good game" .