Evolution of English armies in the late Middle Ages

[Erpingham]

What makes a less abstracted solution 'better' than a more abstracted solution?

Depends. Some people are happier with something more tangible, or more granular. For them, a less abstracted solution may be better. The interaction of defined and delineated troop types may be particularly important in relating the gaming and historical sides.

[Adrian Nayler]

What makes a less abstracted solution 'better' than a more abstracted solution?

Depends. Some people are happier with something more tangible, or more granular. For them, a less abstracted solution may be better. The interaction of defined and delineated troop types may be particularly important in relating the gaming and historical sides.

Quite so. Personal preference is absolutely key and we should  all choose a game-type that suits our perceptions. My point was directed at the notion that by abstracting away some or all of the lower-level detail that the result is necessarily topsy-turvy, nonsensical and/or a product of distorted logic.

[Imperial Dave]

I don't care if you have whistle the star spangled banner and do somersaults through hoops at the same time as long as the end result feels right

[Jon Freitag]

I don't care if you have whistle the star spangled banner and do somersaults through hoops at the same time as long as the end result feels right

You can whistle the Star-Spangled Banner?  Impressive!

[stevenneate]

Looking glass solutions? Whistling the Star Spangled Banner? I think I may have entered the Twilight Zone for wargamers? Seems odd to me that for this high medieval period in Britain, where we know everything about everything (remember, I play early Bronze Age) we still cannot game longbows or mixed formations?

Pearing through that looking glass, I subscribe to the theory where if you know the draw weight of a longbow, you can accurately predict the jock-strap size of the archer and hence predict if they have the requisite nerve to stand up to the charge of French chivalry. Some archers get a d20 whilst others only a d6. A simple abstract mechanism.

[Dave Knight]

'm most comfortable with archers in front of melee troops who can either withdraw or be forced to withdraw behind their own lines as armies close. They then become supporting second rate melee troops without shooting powers for the duration.

Neatly describes Test of Resolve Wars of the Roses mechanisms

[Erpingham]

Neatly describes Test of Resolve Wars of the Roses mechanisms

I didn't say I was an original thinker  Your system uses cards to achieve ammunition related withdrawal, does it not?

[Erpingham]

we still cannot game longbows or mixed formations?

We can game them, but it can risk being a bit of a fantasy. We don't know mixed formations existed, let alone how they worked if they did. We do know that troops might be raised in "mixed retinues", containing bows, bills and men-at-arms. These may have fought together on the battlefield or may have all been brigaded off with similar troop types within larger formations, where such existed. Scale may matter. Edward Woodville's retinue at Loja in 1486 fought as a mixed formation (men-at-arms leading, longbows backing up) but it was a small scale fight during a siege. Warwick seems to have led a mixed group in his attack at First St Albans, but it was a small scale "scuffle in a street".

[Imperial Dave]

I don't care if you have whistle the star spangled banner and do somersaults through hoops at the same time as long as the end result feels right

You can whistle the Star-Spangled Banner?  Impressive!

Its on my cv

[Denis Grey]

I don't care if you have whistle the star spangled banner and do somersaults through hoops at the same time as long as the end result feels right

So long - and thanks for all the fish.

[Imperial Dave]

 

[Dave Knight]

I didn't say I was an original thinker  Your system uses cards to achieve ammunition related withdrawal, does it not?

In Test of Resolve archers withdrawal and transformation into a weak melee company formed up behind a friendly full melee company happens in 4 ways (all rolls are on a D12)

1) Rolling a 1 when shooting
2) Rolling 1 - 4 on a missile supply card
3) On an enemy advance to contact  - they can fall back, still able to shoot, until there is no space left in front of a friendly melee company
4) When a friendly melee company advances through it


Earlier in the battle missile companies can only advance until they are at standoff distance, - 9 inches for archers.  When enemy melee troops close that distance they automatically maintain the 9 inches gap but can allow it to close under 3 above.

[Nick Harbud]

As I'm a bit thick I asked an AI to explain the Looking Glass to me.

It is based upon a quotation from Lewis Carroll Through the Looking Glass.

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master—that's all."

Looking Glass clauses are well-known to those who scrutinise proposed legislation.  Typically, these are provisions that allow a minister or official to simply state how, when or to whom a law will apply based solely upon their own opinion on a given day rather than on any form of precedent, common sense or reference back to the legislators.

In wargaming terms, they tend to manifest as rules without any connection to underlying mechanics of what is generally perceived as happening on the historic battlefield.

[Imperial Dave]

An example which being...?

(Asking for a friend)

[Nick Harbud]

A couple of the less logical examples from 7^th Ed and DBR were noted in my earlier email and one could add many more.