I was watching the Little Wars TV refight of Hastings, and it occurred to me that in this particular game the Normans had unlimited supply of javelins all day
https://youtu.be/31rh_8spPj0?si=3hG1_rGPUE8J00jQ
Which got me wondering, how come ancients rules don't have ammunition supply limits, or javelin/arrow resupply wagons/horses? Is this a commonly overlooked theme and completely unrealistic, or is there something else going on?
Simple answer - Booking.
Some rules do have restrictions on ammo, To the Strongest for example has some
But as the green one suggests most wargamers hate bookkeeping
Very similar comments can be made about most wargaming rules although Genral Quarters does cater for tracking main battery ammunition for the ships
Javelins are probably the main exception since they are usually restricted to only a couple. For archers/slingers running out of ammo wasn't usually a huge concern as there'd usually be enough in the baggage to restock and there would be plenty of people carrying backup arrows and doing resupply runs, so it would be very unlikely to run out before the lines actually clashed and their utility diminished.
Saying that, most javelin skirmish troops carried 2-3 javelins and since they were fighting in open formations they weren't firing in "volleys" so could assume that any one round of "firing" of javelins wouldn't actually include everyone firing at once. There's also a good chance that the enemy was throwing javelins back that you could pick up and throw back at them, bolstering your supplies. So running out while performing harassing actions then running away is unlikely. You might also swarm in on a segment of the enemy line that got broken up from the others for some light close-quarters combat. Most rules tend to abstract this okay to the point that it doesn't feel like they have an infinite ammo cheat code on by making them generally weaker and vulnerable to being driven off.
The ammo rules in TtS is one of rules I'm not entirely happy with because of the book keeping aspects and the difficulty that provides ranged armies that would have otherwise been quite effective. I know some rules have an "out of ammo" event if you roll a particular result that requires a resupply action, which can sometimes work, but overall I'd rather ammo and supplies be more abstracted within the rules than explicitly managed.
@ mmcv, that all makes sense, thanks.
So in the example wargame I linked to, the Norman (heavy?) cavalry spent hours throwing javelins at the shield wall, alongside supporting crossbow fire from foot troops. Yet those cavalry units never appeared to retire to camp to restock. As they were doing a historical refight, wouldn't it sqew the results somewhat?
Quote from: sultanbev on 26 September 2023, 10:36:32 AM@ mmcv, that all makes sense, thanks.
So in the example wargame I linked to, the Norman (heavy?) cavalry spent hours throwing javelins at the shield wall, alongside supporting crossbow fire from foot troops. Yet those cavalry units never appeared to retire to camp to restock. As they were doing a historical refight, wouldn't it sqew the results somewhat?
It's an interesting hypothesis that the 'Norman' HC threw javelins. The general consensus is that they had a spear and used it over arm as an impact weapon (even at Hastings). Also the numbers of crossbow were probably tiny, as against the larger numbers of Norman skirmishing foot archers.
It was probably the significant Breton allied contingent supporting the Normans that had javelin armed HC and a more skirmish orientated ethos in combat. I also suspect that when we see a base of HC (on the table) we have a single line (in our minds eye) but the reality is that our tabletop models represent many ranks and that they probably circulated forward and back allowing the troops at the front to throw their javelins/short spears and then retire. Javelins have a very short range, even when mounted, unless the cavalry has a good enough run-up to impart the necessary momentum.
The ancient Battle of Lechaeum - between Spartan hoplites and Athenian peltasts is an often quoted example of how lighter troops can destroy heavier ones, using skirmishing javelins tactics, especially when the heavy troops are unsupported by their own lighter troops. What is interesting is that there is no mention of a supply or resupply issues for the peltasts in the historical accounts of the battle.
I'd also agree that most gamers hate book-keeping and once you start with ammo supplies its a slippery slope.
Also, at Hastings, if we are to take the Tapestry as any kind of historical representation, the Saxons are also depicted throwing javelins/short spears and even improvised clubs (stones tied to sticks) down the hill at the Norman/Breton cavalry in reply. Not that I suspect that the Normans or Bretons would have benefited from these very much, even if their own skirmishing light infantry were able to collect them.
Cheers
Mark
Hi
I'm sure that there is fairly well known military saying that has the words 'amateurs, tactics, professionals, logistics' in it somewhere. ;)
Bearing in mind that the 'To the Strongest!' rules are marketed as a fast play set of rules I personally think that the ammo rules work really well and certainly the group I regularly play them with do not find them onerous or take any of the fun out of playing.
I think the main point regarding having ammunition rules (or not) for me is that, using the battle of Hastings as an example, and assuming that in a wargame I am in playing William, then I would not have fought the battle the way he was obliged to do if I had had unlimited ammunition supplies. I think this very much impacts on how much we want our 'wargames' to reflect the kind of things that commanders in real life had to wrestle with rather than it simply being a 'game' (rather than a 'wargame').
Just my tuppence worth of course! :)
Cheers Paul
Quote from: mmcv on 26 September 2023, 07:58:09 AMThe ammo rules in TtS is one of rules I'm not entirely happy with because of the book keeping aspects and the difficulty that provides ranged armies that would have otherwise been quite effective. I know some rules have an "out of ammo" event if you roll a particular result that requires a resupply action, which can sometimes work, but overall I'd rather ammo and supplies be more abstracted within the rules than explicitly managed.
In "To the Strongest" I use one of Pendrakens dice frames stuck to a 15mm base with a dice in it indicating the ammo left. Minimizes the book keeping
Quote@ mmcv, that all makes sense, thanks.
So in the example wargame I linked to, the Norman (heavy?) cavalry spent hours throwing javelins at the shield wall, alongside supporting crossbow fire from foot troops. Yet those cavalry units never appeared to retire to camp to restock. As they were doing a historical refight, wouldn't it sqew the results somewhat?
It depends how much you wish to abstract things. The Norman heavy cavalry are represented by a handful of figures showing the heavily armoured proto-knights. What isn't represented is the various squires, men at arms and attendants that would have followed them into battle with spare horses and equipment for them. While some were in the front of the line chucking spears others retired back a bit for some light refreshments and a restock, while I'm sure there were young squires and runners nipping back and forth to the baggage to bring resupplies. We often think of battles as just the men at the front, but there's always a whole network of supporting people behind them, keeping them supplied, adding some extra weight to their charges or just running along afterwards mopping up survivors.
QuoteIn "To the Strongest" I use one of Pendrakens dice frames stuck to a 15mm base with a dice in it indicating the ammo left. Minimizes the book keeping
I use small dice for it though can be fiddly still. It's more I find it puts quite severe limits on ranged focused armies, somewhat by design I think to keep things moving quickly and decisively. But running out of ammo is not something that often comes up in historical reading.
Most of the time ammo was 'recycled' or fired back.
That's why the pilum was so nasty.
Also, Towton, one side retired out of bow range, then advanced and used all the spent arrows after theirs
I tend to favour abstract mechanics in place of book keeping.
I always felt that the ammunition (and things like heroes) were the warts on the elegant To the Strongest initial rules.
I've since witnessed (with horror) the (fourteen I think) rules updates, providing ever greater grist for the rules lawyers.
I hope that a second edition will tidy up and eliminate many of the "seemed like a good idea at the time" ideas.
If I were designing a set of ancients rules, I'd consider some sort of "low ammo" roll which would either stop or disadvantage that unit's shooting.
Other designers might find a happy medium where tracking ammo takes less game time than evaluating the many one-in-a-thousand shots that wargamers insist on taking.
"Ahh, but the attached general has a horse-bow, one archer shooting at heavy infantry .....".
Quote from: steve_holmes_11 on 29 September 2023, 11:15:03 AMIf I were designing a set of ancients rules, I'd consider some sort of "low ammo" roll which would either stop or disadvantage that unit's shooting.
Yes, Fire & Fury has the ubiqitious roll a 10 on a D10 when firing and you go low on ammo if its more than half the unit firin g (half firing from then on in). For our Napoleonics we added that if you fielded a battery without a limber model, a 10 means you run out totally. But we do allow ammo wagons, where a unit spending a full activation halted alongside can replenish ammo.
I'd be looking at something similar for an ancients set. As regards Roman pilums, I can't remember if they only carried one, so presumably they are a one shot thing?
Carried a pair - thrown in the charge.
I certainly expect a ruleset to make pila one-shot weapons. They were designed to be impossible to reuse on the same day.
Quote from: FierceKitty on 29 September 2023, 12:45:57 PMI certainly expect a ruleset to make pila one-shot weapons. They were designed to be impossible to reuse on the same day.
I totally agree - but I think we also need to look at how Roman formations worked (or we think they worked).
It seems highly unlikely that all the legionaries all threw their pila at once. In fact it is probably impossible for more than a couple of ranks to throw pila in a single round of combat. e.g. the front rank advances (probably at the run or at least a trot) & throws pila at the enemy, continuing to advance to contact drawing their gladicus on the way in. Whilst they are advancing to contact, the second rank also throws their pila (over the heads of their front rank - one would hope this was done with skill and accuracy!) and then advances and draws their own gladicus and enters the melee to support the front rank. I'd suggest that ranks 3+ remained at a reasonable distance but not engaged directly, as Roman tactics appear to have been based on line relief. So that if ranks 1 & 2 needed to be relieved they would break off from the enemy and retire through 3 & 4 (etc) - and so 3 & 4 could repeat the whole process.
So the idea that the pila is a 'one-shot' weapon is debatable.
Most sets of rules cannot cope with this sort of granular activity - so they tend to give the pila a significant 1st contact + factor. But it appears (from what little we know about Roman tactical structures) that they were really good at grinding an enemy down in combat. Throwing the pila gave them a means of overcoming the advantages of a long spear or a pike against them - but once they were in, under the points (so to speak) of their enemy, they were primarily very well trained swordsmen.
Javelins are very different as they are a distance/missile weapon & I'd suggest that whilst each man may have only carried 2 or 3 of them - it was all about a constant barrage of missiles - wearing down the enemy.
Cheers
Mark
Quote from: FierceKitty on 29 September 2023, 12:45:57 PMI certainly expect a ruleset to make pila one-shot weapons. They were designed to be impossible to reuse on the same day.
True, however I would guess the back ranks who hadn't had a chance to use them at the initial clash would either come forward or pass their Pila forward.
Quote. . . than evaluating the many one-in-a-thousand shots that wargamers insist on taking. "Ahh, but the attached general has a horse-bow, one archer shooting at heavy infantry .....".
Well, they're daft then, aren't they.
Everyone knows you have to wait for the million-to-one shot. Good news is they crop up nine times out of ten.*
* With apologies to Mr. T. Pratchett.
I think the one-shot weapons: Pila, and to some extent Javelins (how many can you practically carry) run into some classic Catch 22 game situations.
As Big Insect says, only a couple of ranks can throw, but we tend to weight effect as through every soldier has thrown their weapon.
This is a hold-over form the numbered WRG sets, where precise weapons and ranks able to fight were considered important.
Many rules have moved away form this unit organisation, but unwittingly preserved the dynamic.
The good news is that there are simple alternatives.
DBA's "Nobody shoots unless they're dedicated ranged shooters", simply factors close shooting into combat.
Some like the simplicity, others are bewildered that their chariots, or light horse can't shoot down an opponent from range.
I play very little ancients, but accounts of battles provide some interesting, and perhaps surprising insights.
Generals are frequently surprised when their missile troops run out of ammunition.
I observe that missile troops were rarely the decisive arm of the army.
This may also reflect that ancient shooters lacked the detailed fire discipline of modern infantry.
Some javelinmen (I'm thinking here of Greek Psiloi, but also Numidian foot and Roman Velites) were able to contest whole phases of battle without running out of ammunition.
Here I speculate form ignorance...
Lacking timestamps, it may be that the opening "battle of the Javelins" was actually far shorter than we imagine.
Alternatively, when Javelinman meets Javelinman, perhaps they're picking up the enemy weapons and throwing them back for an extended exchange.
Neither case really explains Greek javelin Psiloi successfully driving off enemy archers or slingers.
Maybe they simply closed at a run, and didn't get into an exchange of missiles.
Finally: How to represent smaller volumes of shooting in "one base per unit" games.
We generally don't want a coupe of rank's worth of Pila to destroy a deep opposing formation.
I certainly don't want to spend half the game evaluating combat phases with very limited outcomes.
One answer is to impose a temporary "condition" on the shot formation, one that causes a melee penalty during the rest of the turn.
This is very similar to disorder in older rulesets, but very quick to operate.
We can also adjust the severity of that condition for different targets: Pikes and shielded warband are liable to suffer disorder, spears also, loose order skirmishers far less and are probably already evading as a line of heavies approaches. *
* Barkerese for the ancients grognards here.
There is little evidence that the Romans threw the pilum as a volley in a single use, I'm sure at times it was used as part of the charge but others as an attrition weapon to break apart enemy formations. It was also used as a melee weapon at times too. I think some rules tend to over emphasise them. They were not vastly different from javelins and spears of others. There's still a lot of debate on the bend vs break thing and whether that was even a design feature or a happy accident. They probably had a little better piercing power than other designs and a bit harder to reuse, but if you're modelling fairly abstract combat then don't need to get too into the nuances beyond either giving them some short range ability or abstracting it into the melee itself.
Wargame rules have been responsible for conflating spears with javelins for approximately 40 years. They are not the same. A spear is heavier and you only have one and often have a counterweight at the rear so they can be carried with more of the sharp end forward of the hand grip position. javelins are light with a small head and need good ballistic properties to keep the pointy end on target. Norman Milites are spear armed cavalry on the Bayeaux Tapestry.
Wargamers love shooting phases so will choose to shoot entirely based on "within range" rather than on "will this be a waste of ammunition". There are instances in history where troops had a similar attitude to wargamers (Russsians in the Netherlands in 1799 shot until out of ammo more than once) but it wasn't common. Long range volleys were generally seen as the domain of raw troops.