Large units in Shieldwall

Inspired by a recent post (I am nothing if not unoriginal ), I thought I might put together a Dark Ages contest.

After reviewing the shieldwall rules in Version 1.5 of the Advanced Rules (Feb. 18, 2014), I am thinking about tweaking the rules in this manner:

- units wishing to form a shieldwall must pass a discipline test; there is no penalty of disorder for failing to adopt this defensive/offensive formation

- units/groups in shieldwall formation may move a half-speed; they may not take a second or extra move in a turn

- allow units in shieldwall to throw 2d6 worth of “pila” if charged; this is a one-time event

- allow units in shieldwall to throw 1d6 worth of “pila” when moving into contact; this is also a one-time event


Looking at the Danish Vikings list on page 25 of Extra IMPETVS 2, I see that FP Huscarls can form large units. Units of Huscarls have a VBU of 5 and an Impetvs of 3.

If formed as a large unit and advancing into melee, a check of the tables in the rule book and on the QRS (version 6.0), informs that the unit would roll 8 dice.

Casualties would apply to the rear rank unit, but disorder would apply to the large unit as a whole, so subsequent melee rolls would use 7 dice only as long as the large unit remained fresh (i.e., had not suffered any losses).

Thanks for your help .

Chris

Sounds interesting let us know how it goes. Considering it will be pure Dark Ages it'll certainly free up the manoeuvring.

Shieldwall certainly needs "fixing" somehow, or possibly just deleting. The problem is balance as this is a free ability, so there must be some logical reason for it, and it has to have a negative as well as a positive effect.

The acid test is how often does it get used, and I found in previous versions players just ignored it.

As for the suggestion - I'd applaud any attempt to "fix" it. I'm not sure about giving them pilum etc as I always assume there is plenty of that happening anyway whenever 2 bodies of heavy foot meet, but I can live with it. One suggestion - drop the "one time only" restriction as it is too easy to forget, instead tie it to loss of impetus

Shieldwall is not an option, it is mandatory.

A smart enemy can use it to pin your formations and slow your advance whilst putting a counterplan into place.

That is the big downside of Shieldwall (IMHO).

Shieldwall is always entered into voluntary. The trade off is better missile fire protection and melee capabilities versus unit not being able to move. So great for holding ground against a counter attack but not so good for dealing with missile fire and maneuvering armies  armies. In some ways the Saxon and Viking lists already give a shieldwall like benefit by having large units of VBU5 infantry. It doesn't get used a lot since in Impetus armies usually need to keep moving.

Notes from the "front" -
Experiment seemed to work OK. The "pila" rule worked nicely I think even if it did not produce much in the way of damage against the enemy. Perhaps 2 units were disordered. The shieldwall moving (slowly) also worked OK, I think, even though this was just one game and an incomplete one at that. (Ever just lose interest in a tabletop battle?) Oh yes, the additional dice for berserkers worked pretty well.

On the plus side, it has me looking through my rule sets to see which ones allow for berserkers and which ones address the tactical issues of shield walls.

Will have to review this . . .

Chris

Sounds like you have made some good progress, Chris, although I suspect you have lots of testing still to do. I look forward to reading more about it.

You've not posted notes about additional dice for berserkers before. What was your thinking behind this and what mechanism are you using? On the berserker front, you might find the blog posts below of interest. For the sake of transparency, I wrote them all, so they reflect my interpretation based on my research, and they do not accord with received wisdom on the topic. Sorry.
http://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/wordsforwords/2014/03/11/the-viking-berserker/
http://ooh-shiny-complex.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/viking-berserkers-in-wargames-thesis.html
https://ruarighdale.wordpress.com/2014/09/01/did-viking-berserkers-go-berserk/

Greetings R -
Thanks for the note and wealth of information provided on your blogs. Congrats too, on your PhD!

Progress? Perhaps . . . Testing? Definitely.

Apologies for not including the stuff about berserkers. Oversight on my part.

Here is an excerpt of something I'm drafting at the moment - not really a battle report, more of an experiment and commenting on the results.

This was written before looking at your blog information so I imagine that it may very well change.

Thanks again for reading and responding.

Excerpt -
As I was planning on using the IMPETVS rules (readers familiar with my efforts will know that I need the practice) and as the rules do not have any provisions for these “specialist” troops, I had to develop some rule additions. After thinking about it a bit, I decided that the simple approach was best and simply had each side roll 2d6 to determine the number of “Berserker dice” they would have at their disposal. These “Berserker dice” could be added to any melee phase/round, thereby increasing the offensive “punch” of the engaged unit. A limit of 4 “Berserker dice” was established so that the melee would not become too one-sided. Further, it was established that “Berserker dice” were a one-time thing. They were used (added to the original number of melee dice) and that was it. One either rolled 6s and or pairs of 5s with the “Berserker dice” or one did not.

- end of Excerpt

Regards,

Chris

Thank you.

Based on my own research, I would not give any units berserker dice, because I don't believe in the out-of-control warrior paradigm. Instead I would nominate the best quality units as those containing the elite berserker bodyguards and leave it at that.

On the other hand, if you want to add colour to units by adopting the traditional paradigm, why not increase the impetus value of the units with berserkers in? The effect of the berserkers would then be in the charge where it probably ought to be, based on that model, and their deaths are modelled by the loss of impetus when the units are no longer fresh. It would save on record keeping. That said, the berserker dice would be easy enough to set to one side and discard as they are used.

Whichever option you personally would go for, you might find it useful to play to your audience rather than what the research says, because people do have certain expectations and it can be fun to engage with the Hollywood side of history too.

I'm looking forward to reading battle reports for all this now.

I think the presence or otherwise of this type of troops is already represented in the high Impetus factors the Huscarls etc get - no need to add it twice