Now, I realize (being a wargamer) that hexagons fit very nicely with each other. But would this be a good use of manpower? The Greek hoplites massed together (if I recall my Greek history properly) because they had long spears which could be used in ranks and large shields, neither of which made them very maneuverable. La Grande Armee massed its soldiers, partly because they didn't have the training (and officers) to do elsewise, but also for the psychological & melee advantages it gave them. The British army of the same era use thin lines because of the firepower advantage it gave them. (I hope I have remembered all this correctly. No doubt numerous people will let me know if I haven't! :-) )
So, would the DH army use the hexagon all the time, only against cavalry (as a version of the Napoleonic infantry square), or what? Also, why not 14 people, with pairs of fighters at each apex of the hexagon and two chappies in the middle? Pairs fighting together would be able to look out for each other, and if one person went down, the formation would not be broken. Also, one of the middle folk could be the commander while the other could be the magic type.
Are there any medievalist fighters (such as would belong the Society for Creative Anachronism in the U.S.A.) on the Digest who would be willing to try a hexagonal formation? Sometimes I wonder if all our armchair designing is akin to the staff chappies sitting safely at HQ (or the War College) and dreaming up completely impractical ideas which look good only on paper.
Cheers,
james polk
Powered by hypermail