I read with great interest the article in the January 2001 SAGA, Death by Wedge as I enjoyed it almost as much as Dennis A. Leventhal's other article on “The Battle of Sishui. 621 C.E.”. The reason for writing is not to dispute what Dennis stated but to lend some support to a fellow gamer and let him know that he is not alone. There are some points I want to discuss in the interest in moving some of the issues brought forth along.

It is not easy recognizing the army you lovingly have worked on for 1-2 years is not a “tournament army”. In the article Dennis used a Khazar 15mm army to fight Crusaders, Sicilian Hohenstauffen and Sicilian Normans during the Medieval Warfare tournament. Talk about your difficult days! Still, Dennis pointed out what everyone who participates in tournaments sees; he learned the rules better, got to play other players and learn from them, and perhaps gained some insight as to the technological edge some armies have over others. He mentioned that all his opponents had full mailed knights in wedge and his heavy cavalry were no match for them.

Up until then I just nodded while reading this and said to myself, “Wedged knights are formidable and going straight up is a quick way to loose - clearly Dennis found this out.” I started this article when I read that Dennis is contemplating building another army with some real 'technological” punch for tournament usage.

This strikes me as the way not to go. Oh, don't get me wrong I never would stand in the way of a gamer looking to delve into another army/period. I generally subscribe to the saying, “One can never have too much lead.” Still, one of the things I have found over the years is that tournaments tend to get the same armies or types of armies. This was true in WRG but it doesn't have to be true for AW/MW tournaments and I would suggest that we are better off if it doesn't happen. Usage of the same armies happens over time when the participants find that the rules set favors a particular type of troop. In this particular case I am sure Dennis believes that wedged knights have a distinct advantage over his heavy cavalry and maybe over some other troops as well. The good news is that this isn't completely true - all troops have their advantages and just as importantly their disadvantages. One has to just look closely.

Let's take those wedged knights. What do we know about them? Straight up in wedge they are a match for anyone on the field of battle. Dennis pointed out that his 4 stands of HC were battered by 2 stands of FMC in wedge. In relation to points that means that each unit of HC cost 13 points a piece for 52 total points of Noble, HC, Veteran L/B/Shield. Lets look at the Sicilian Hohenstauffen knights. Their unit of 2 cost 14 each for 28 points. This gives them Knights, FMC, Veteran with Lance and Shield - but they can wedge and that is the key ingredient because otherwise they are only better by -1 due to the FMC versus the HC. The knights will be in wedge while the HC will be two ranks of two. The only time this makes sense is if you can get the battle to go to the second round when the other two HC elements can make an impact.

If they have lost the first round the Knights are still at two and the HC are now able to use a second stand (though not the rear ranks). At this point all they have done is even out the odds a bit. As noted, putting them in Conrois offsets the knights two elements with 1.5 elements of HC during the first round. Of course losing the first round is critical as you will come out of wedge or conrois.

In Ancient Warfare you could cut the HC unit in half (make two units) and fight in one file as the knights in wedge will only be able to fight with 1.5 elements. You've eliminated a quarter of the enemies fighting power and doubled your maneuver elements. Since most of the opponents have about the same amount of knights as your HC you can equate better on the field of battle. Sometimes seeing lots of wedged knights is disconcerting when you have only half that number.

But your still losing. After all just cutting him down by a quarter doesn't get you a win and this only in AW. Your right. Most of the time I see players who maximize their opponents capabilities while downplaying their own. What's funny is that after the game the other player is thinking the exact opposite. Wedges have some big problems too. They fall out of wedge when they become disordered. They do not have to loose a battle to do that although this is one way to precipitate the loss of wedging cohesion.

What does that mean to you?

That means that if neither he or you are disordered he has the advantage. If he is disordered and you are not you have the advantage. If he is disordered and you are disordered his advantage is lost. You can use terrain in such a way as to disorder his troops if they attempt to charge you. In short, you can put your HC in light terrain and if the wedge charges into that terrain they will be disorderd and loose wedge cohesion (the same goes for conrois). What blasphemy and rules lawyering is this. I play historically, you might say. Yet the same thing was probably muttered the first time 100 Years War English knights were told, “Get off your horses and put your contingent next to that rabble. Cut down your lances and await the charge of the French knights.” They must have thought the CinC had gotten into a cask of mead.

Wedges also have problems with turning; specifically a non wheeled turn. They can not do it and so it behooves you to try to get his relatively inflexible wedges put into a position where they have to either charge or get shot up. Wedges also take on an extra burden when shot at. Yes, they are hard to hit but an arrow hitting the target of a wedged cavalry unit is of greater consequence because the wedged knights are small (and can be fragile). Your HC have bows and his do not - make them work for you. It certainly helps to win the initiative and let him go first. This will allow you to get within Effective Range or even Short Range. With adjustments for Wedge, Full Mail, and Shielded you should have 2 or perhaps 4 shots at either 7 or 9. Not great shots but he is not shooting back. At this point you should be either 4” or 2” away from the wedge.

The next order you give yourself is retreat. Why? It really doesn't hurt you and he may charge you. If he charges you there is a better then even chance he will fail to hit as he goes 3” plus a D6. You retreat the same amount and while he may nail you in the rear he will think hard on trying this as his non hitting (falling out of wedge troops) become ordinary type knights.

Add some additional shooting to this and no longer is this so one sided of a situation. Are there risks - yes. You need to maintain the initiative; not a given. You need to be mildly lucky - but that helps any army. Countering force with force does not always work but allowing the ebb and flow of the battle to dictate when you are bold and when you retreat usually offers better opportunities. As a note those retreats should be backed up by reserves or other forces and by cutting some of your cavalry units in half you should have the additional forces to work with. While not getting into every limitation of wedged troops I think you can see that by minimizing a threat you can go after the weaknesses (and all armies have them) your opponent's army has. The key is that if your opponent has the edge in one troop type (just like in one section of the battle) using your best troops might not be good enough. In that case use a secondary troop type and offset his strength.

I have thought about this for a while but for every argument for there is one against. I have never been at ease with the technology issue when armies fight outside their time frame. The ideal is to fight a tournament within the subsection of time set up in the army lists. We are not there yet, however, and the norm will be to try to get the ideal met while realizing that battles outside of the subsection will happen. With the setting up of 4 subsections of time within the context of both AW and MW it might be a good idea to give the player with the earlier army some benefit. Perhaps to offset the 'technological edge' that later armies have. The general problem with this is there are some armies in particular time periods that do not utilize those advantages. The other problem is how do you make it equitable while not penalizing any particular player.

One thought could be a one time addition to the total points of all armies depending on what time period they are in. The higher points would be given for the earliest armies but no points would be given for the last army group. Thus, the first (earliest) group would be given 3 points which equates to one point a game. Is it perfect - no. Fighting a Burgundian Ordonnance army is more difficult than fighting an Anglo Norman army, especially if you have an Early Slav army, but at least you get a point either way.

Finally, I hope that we can have a variety of armies in the AW/MW tournaments as the variety adds to the flavor of the event. There is always something nice about fighting an army you have only seen in an army list. All armies have their particular way and finding that way sometimes takes a person on a road less well traveled. In the end they are the better for it.