BB 30

[John Watson]

I'm with Stewart on that. 4 zones and deploy over 3.
Alternatively make central zone twice the width of the two flank zones, so 12", 24", 12". Then allow half the army's units to deploy in the centre with the remainder split between the two flank zones.

[Nick]

I do think the 4 zone width would be worth a try out to give the attacker a bit more tactical flexibility and some options in how to deal with getting around the scenery.

Nick

[Leman (Andy)]

From my reading of battles in the WoR they seem, in general, to be remarkably unsophisticated in terms of battlefield manoeuvre, as opposed to strategical manoeuvring before the armies clash. Thus my understanding of the second edition of BB was to replicate this on the tabletop with the three battles in position ready to clash, thus getting away from the DBX style of nippy little units going here there and everywhere.

[John Watson]

Leman you are right about the lack of sophistication. Armies camped within earshot of each other before the battle and formed up just out of long bow range, so there was little or no room for manoeuvre. Advanced tactics included abushes (Towton), trying to outflank (Tewkesbury) and arriving late (Towton). None of the super flexible armies that you see in FOG battles.
Most of the skill in winning a battle seemed to be having a greater weight of numbers in one place whilst holding on elsewhere on the battlefield. Troop quality also played a major role as at Mortimer's Cross. Numbers also counted for a lot such as at Hexham.

[Stewart 46A]

Martin, Rob and I played a four zone game this afternoon with deployment in 3 zones.
An enjoyable game with a little tactical manoeuvreing. A lot of miner changes to scenery and a few other things. Martin has it all in hand and will no doubt be up late re-writing.