I read your recent article about God Wealth and Honor with great interest. I agree completely that a good set of tactically oriented rules for the Dark/Middle Ages is long overdue. DBM has touched off a Renaissance of historical understanding and interest in this period after the long Dark Age of WRG 7th which may help pave the way for a more detailed tactical game.

DBM is equal part subtlety and cold historical reality which unfortunely does not appeal to all tastes. Many players miss the subtleties of the game and others, really mislead by goofy WRG 7th don't understand the hard realities of a medieval battlefield so brilliantly reflected by DBM.

Consequently a more "hands on" less abstract tactical simulation would be a most welcome addition. In any case, your approach is far more constructive than just endlessly whining about the demise of silly WRG 7th. If you don't like DBM put together your own historically based system (and you will discover it is much harder than you think!).

I have the great good fortune to have my own set of tactical rules, Battle, so don't feel as acute a need for a new rule set. For most gainers, however, I expect a good set of tactically flavored medieval rules would be most welcome. Why should Warhammer garners have all the fun?

The recent spate of medieval movies, combined with the demise of dreadful WRG 7th has had a great revival of interest in this period. The rules principles you laid out in SAGA 56 appear very sound. I have long used order chits in Battle and also use the convention of requiring advancing troops to move at least one half their movement allowance. Your also quite correct that the decisive factors in melee where troop quality, armor and physical presence of a leader (in roughly that order).

My only quibble with your concepts regarding melee, concerns "frenzied foot" attacking mounted troops. You state: "If anyone is foolish enough to place mounted troops too close to frenzied foot, he has only himself to blame.. In a real battle troops are not "placed" anywhere but instead continue to move forward in one continuous motion. Only a convoluted sequence of play (like WRG 7th s) forces them to artificially stop part way to the target and be charged by the foot. All mounted troops come "too clos" to foot as the mounted troops advance to charge the foot.

If your argument was correct all foot could then charge mounted as they come within range. Foot could of course charge mounted but the loss of formation would be fatal to the foot's chances of survival. Only a tight pact shield wall offers any hope of survival. Consequently a charge by "frenzied foot" would work entirely to the advantage of the mounted troops.

No amount of frenzy will allow a charging human to hve much impact on a 1500 pound war-horse. Not surprisingly "frenzied foot" disappeared from battlefield once knights appeared in large numbers I hope you do not repeat this fundamental misunderstanding which plagues WRG 7th.

Similarly your comments reading missile combat was incisive and accurate with one major exception. Your quite correct that massed formations of archers were far superior to scattered skirmisher (as DBM reflects and WRG 7th does not). Likewise the range of the bow/crossbow made them reflect missile weapons to crude javelins. My only complaint concerns troop quality. You dismiss it as a factor in missile combat when in fact, at least regards bows, it was the most important factor. The size of the bow (and consequently its range and power) and rate of fire are direct functions of the quality of the archer. A crossbow was much easier to learn and even more powerful than the longest practical bow, but could not achieve the same rate of fire of a trained experienced archer.

Against peasant archers crossbows could more than compete but against the crack yeoman of England even the best crossbow armed troops were blasted off the field. The English said that unless someone had taken up the bow by 14 they would never reach their full potential. The need for such life long training make it virtually impossible for most nations to field high qualify uchers. Consequently such troops as the Cretan archers and English yeomen remained highly paid specialist troops throughout the period. Your system will have great difliculty simulating battles of thc late Middle Ages without accounting for this factor.

These quibbles aside, I can't express how delighted I am that your adding to the outburst of historical simulations which are at long last throwing new light on this most interesting and colorful of periods

[Ed. Thanks for your interest in FGWH, Tom. So far as the ability of 'Frenzied' foot to charge cavalry goes, I only have to use the Battle of Bannockburn as an example of its success.

Normally, though, I agree with you and do not feel that most Medieval generals would attempt to attack mounted opponents with foot. However, if you have the nerve to try, and try is the operative word, you can endeavor to make the morale roll needed to succeed.

It is not a given chance if you attempt to make the morale roll, you may end up either standing still and being disordered, or worse, running away in panic (Did that idiot really expect us to charge? Well... I'm getting out of here! As the cavalry ride you down.

A much more intelligent response would be to put your troops in a Defend mode which will make it harder for the mounted troops to defeat you {you are prepared with spears butted into the ground, shields locked, etc.) The logical simulation (as FGWH is, I truly hope) allows you, as the general, to make decisions, whether to take a chance or to play it safe is up to you, but it is your choice to make.

The second point Tom made is also addressed to some extent by the rules as they currently exist. Better quality archers have less chance at morale failure when faced with attack. Let's face it, missile fire at any but close range was extremely inaccurate and did little damage to targets. When attacked, however, or when an enemy moved up in preparation to charge, any but the better quality missile troops often had problem keeping their order in fear of the better armored and armed attackers. This fact is reflected in the morale rules. I'll let the playtesters give me their impressions though, and perhaps some changes will have to be made as we move along.]

This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com