I think we "got there" in terms of re- learning the rules. :)
Some more notes.
1. Units cannot pass through the sqaure of another unit . The exception is skirmishers who can be pushed aside by their own units.
2. Village templates can touch when deployed.
3. Stewart had a good idea. If you have an inferior unit, stick a levy in the front rank and hope he gets killed (harsh but fair).
4.Refusing/declining a challenge is not too costly.
5. When a unit assaults a skirmish unit it gains a -3D6 fatigue marker, but does not lose it's first fight bonus, as there was no proper fight.
6. A successful berserker can swing the whole fight result. A gamble but certainly worth having a berserker/ champion.
7. With plenty of action D6 it is better to drop the shield wall, shoot twice and then put the shield wall up again (I reckon).
martin :)
Some nice tactical tips there!
Simon
I don't think sticking the levy in the front rank is in the spirit of the age! Warriors wanted to be in the front rank to win glory and armbands.
Richard
Maybe you can interpret the levy in the front as the wannabes who think they're hard enough, Richard? :D
Simon
Simon,
I think they would rapidly have been hustled back through the ranks!!
Richard
If it's not in the rules already - which I thought it was - it should be implicit that the front rank of a battle line / shieldwall is always made up of your best troops. If not, you should instantly lose the fight by default.
Richard
Is there not also an argument for some good troops to be at the back to make sure that the rabble nearer the front stay in line...?
Simon
Simon,
Units maybe. But it would not have been done within a unit. It would have been against the spirit of the age and tactical madness - putting your worst armed and defended troops in front is deliberately weakening your line and giving weak. Spot for enemy to rush through. You'd try it once and be dead!!
Richard
A Viking wouldn't be much of a Viking if he lead from the back! Probably a questionable Saxon tactic.
John
Richard and John,
Fair enough. I will stop trying to defend the indefensible as a devil's advocate!
However, as a general point, I do like the normal RFCM approach of not banning folk from doing stuff, but rather making it painful if they do decide to do silly things ;)
Simon