In his latest book, he points out that, starting with the Macedonians, ancient warfare consisted of four combat arms: Light Infantry (missile-armed), Heavy Infantry, Light Cavalry (missile-armed), and Heavy Cavalry. These have a very specific interrelationship, which has been demonstrated in numerous battles throughout history (up till the invention of the pistol).
"Offensively Superior" means that the combat arm is able to
defeat its rival in an attack -- though the "attack" may not look
much like one. The classic example is Light Cav vs. Heavy Cav. The
Light Cav constantly retreats during an action, so it can't be
caught, but it is offensively superior because it can force an
action upon the Heavy Cav, who can't get away from the faster, more
loosely-organized horse archers.
"Defensively Superior" means that the combat arm's rival is
not able to successfully overcome its rival in an assault.
Light Infantry is offensively superior to Heavy Infantry. Light Cavalry is offensively superior to Heavy Cavalry Heavy Cavalry is offensively superior to Light Infantry Light Infantry is defensively superior to Light Cavalry Heavy Infantry is defensively superior to Heavy Cavalry
When fortifications are involved, of course, these relationships change. Cavalry becomes useless, and the offensive superiority of light infantry is cancelled out.
Also, if heavy cavalry can get to the flank of heavy infantry, they can triumph. This was one of Alexander's techniques - -- by pinning down the enemy hoplites with his own, and thus keeping them from maneuvering, he could take his Companions and charge the enemy mass from the side or rear.
Note that at Hastings (for instance), the Norman knights were unable to penetrate the Saxon infantry line until they'd broken it up with repeated small charges and sustained archery, thus slowly wearing down the Saxons.
NOTE: light infantry and light cavalry normally take much longer to reach a decision when offensively superior than do the heavies. This is because light troops have to run away when the heavies charge (usually they can do this, because they're faster), then run back when the heavies try to flee. This continual ebb and flow takes quite a while, but the decision is no less certain than when heavy cavalry smash into a batch of slingers -- just slower.
There are exceptions to this general rule, but not nearly as many as you might think. Some well-known sample exceptions are below:
"At Marathon, Athenian heavy inf defeated Persian light
inf." The Athenians were able to close with the Persians, whose back
was up against the sea. Under normal circumstances, the Persians
should have been able to flee while keeping up harassing fire upon
the Athenians. There were many cases in which peltasts were able to
destroy unsupported hoplites. Obviously, if lights (cavalry or
infantry) can be trapped so as to prevent retreat, the heavies have
it all over them. But this is the exception.
"At Crecy, English light infantry (longbowmen) defeated
heavy cavalry." In fact, the French did not attack the longbowmen,
but instead charged the main English line, basically heavy infantry.
The infantry was well able to resist the charge, especially after
the archers had sowed confusion. On those occasions when cavalry
charged longbowmen, the longbowmen ran away, were massacred, sought
shelter among accompanying heavy infantry, or were saved by a
countercharge from friendly cavalry.
"The Romans managed to rule an entire empire, relying
entirely on their excellent heavy infantry". The Roman infantry
_was_ excellent. But the Romans also had significant numbers of
auxiliaries serving as light infantry. In addition, they invariably
had locally-recruited cavalry forces, normally the equivalent of
heavy cavalry. They did generally lack light cavalry, and this
showed in their Parthian campaigns.
NOTE: "heavy" cavalry does not necessarily mean heavy armor. It just means they're trained to fight in large masses in a melee rather than in the Parthian style. For example, during the Crusades, the Crusaders learned to hold off Saracen horse archers by using crossbowmen (using light infantry to defeat light cavalry) for their heavy infantry and cavalry to shield behind. The Saracen light cavalry was trained to fight both with bow and sword, and thus could "switch" over to a heavy-style melee combat. On occasions that the Crusaders crossbowmen did not have support from nearby heavy infantry or cavalry, the Saracen cavalry was able to charge and, despite their light arms and armor, disperse and kill the crossbowmen. In effect, they could act as light or heavy cavalry. Of course, if they had to face genuine Crusader knights, the Saracens couldn't hold up in melee with these horsemen. Instead, they evolved their own form of genuine heavy cavalry, which was still not as good as the Crusaders, but a heck of lot better than nothing.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN TO GLORANTHA?
It enables us to figure out some things about the various
nations and peoples of Glorantha.
THE LUNAR EMPIRE
The Lunars, who use an Alexandrian style of warfare, have all four
types: heavy infantry (the Heartland corps), light infantry (Thunder
Delta Slingers), light cavalry (Erigians), and heavy cavalry
(Cavalry Corps). Plus magician units, of course, whose function
appears to be threefold:
PRAXIAN TRIBES
The Praxian tribes are, in effect, cavalry. There are few
large bodies of infantry among them. When such bodies do show up, as
with the Cannibal Cult, Sun Dome Templars, or Men-and-a-Half, they
demonstrate significant dominance over the nomads.
Now, there is a large difference between the Praxians and the Earth analogue. Namely, the Praxians don't ride horses. This means that their interactions with one another are not quite the same as the typical Light Cavalry > Heavy Cavalry set up.
For one thing, the "heavy" and the "light" warriors of the various tribes wear about the same amount of armor. The only real difference is that bow-armed warriors generally don't carry shields (though javelin-armed ones might). This means that heavy and light Praxian mounted warriors are about the same speed, which would appear to invalidate my theories. HOWEVER, light cavalry normally fights and moves in a rather open, relaxed order. Heavy cavalry, to be at its most effective, must fight in a close-ordered mass. This mass, of necessity, must move more slowly than a mob of individuals, because they must keep their order. In addition, to form up into the mass takes time. As a result, Praxian light warriors can generally get away from heavies, unless the heavies are willing to break up their formation and run, in which case the lights are still just as fast (and so hard to catch), plus if the heavies do catch the lights, the lights can pull out axe or club and fight back with almost equal facility to the heavies! The only way heavy Praxian warriors can keep a melee advantage over light ones is by maintaining formation, but if they maintain it, then they can't catch up to the lights. It's a catch-22.
Let's look at the major tribes.
The minor tribes all have troubles.
RHINO RIDERS: pure heavy cavalry and as such vulnerable to light cavalry. They're so heavy, however, that they can even bust up heavy infantry. Still, it's easy to see why the rhino riders are so few, since bust-upable heavy infantry are rare in Prax, and there's heaps of mounted archers.
BOLO LIZARD & OSTRICHES: pure light cavalry. One would think they could do as well as the impala riders, but sadly no, because they are both tied to helpless eggs during the laying season. A baby impala or bison can walk within minutes after birth, and can run within an hour or two. But an egg just sits there, vulnerable. Hence, during the laying season, the bolo lizard folks and ostrich folks are forced to stay put and defend fixed positions, no easy task for light cavalry which by its nature emphasizes the fighting retreat. And they're totally unsuited for use as heavies. No wonder they're a minor tribe.
THE FOOT "TRIBES": Cannibal cult, baboons, basmoli, and men-and-a-half all act as stout heavy infantry, to withstand the charge of the animal nomads. Presumably each group also includes some missile troops, to protect themselves from light cavalry. These tribes have two major handicaps. First off, they have no herds to support them, and must exist solely by hunting and gathering (which limits overall numbers). Second, though they can usually beat off mounted attackers, they can't carry the battle _to_ those mounted attackers. Which means that the animal nomads can choose the time and place when they want to pick a fight. Hence, despite the foot warriors' defensive advantage, the animal nomads need only fight when circumstances make it apparent that the odds are evened out, or are in the nomads' favor. Again, this is not a recipe for success.
Thus, we can see why certain tribes have prospered, and why certain tribes have failed to prosper.
THE ART OF AMBUSH IN PRAX
Some may wonder how an ambush is carried out with mounted
warriors. How can a high llama ever ambush anyone in the treeless
wastes of Prax? Of course, these "ambushes" aren't the same nature
as we're used to seeing in films about the Vietnam War.
Instead, you'd find sable riders squatting within a mass of brush, forcing their mounts to crouch while they lay prone atop their backs, waiting for the enemy to get closer, closer, until they spring up, shouting their war songs, far too near for the enemy to flee. Or Bison riders sitting inside a depression in the ground, or a gully, and charging up and out when they spot the foe. Or rhinos behind a hill or hummock, waiting and waiting and waiting. There are enough brush, gulleys, dry riverbeds, sinkholes, ridges, and hummocks in Prax for the old-style ambush to work.
Even if your steed is faster, a mounted ambush works because you're surprised, your bow is unstrung, your steed is just ambling along, your khan has to formulate orders quickly, and shout them out and you have to understand them and then react ... ambushes are bad.
You don't have to be all that close to an enemy to ambush them. For instance, your sable khan, cunning in the ways of Prax, knows that the high llama people in the area will need to use this waterhole for watering their beasts soon. So he stations a war party several kilometers away, in a cluster of skullbushes, or behind a ridge. When his scouts spot the high llamas, the war party waits till they're drinking at the hole, then rides out and around to attack the high llamas from the west. If the high llamas run east, they'll hit a 10 meter deep gully. They can get through it, but it will take time, and by the time they're through (esp. herding their beasts), the sables will be upon them. If they run north or south, to get around the gully, the sables can cut across and cut them off. You get the idea.
Also, ambushes work real well if the enemy is not a war party of its own, but has herd beasts, since the herd necessarily runs more slowly than the mounted animals.
End of Glorantha Digest V2 #151
WWW material at http://hops.wharton.upenn.edu/~loren/rolegame.html
Powered by hypermail