Sun Tzu said "Having paid heed to the advantages of his plans, the general must create situations which will contribute to their accomplishment." (1) I have been playing ancients now for twelve months, all with WRG 7th Edition. My battle plans have evolved from simple avoidance of total disaster, to instilling some form of order, to now planning to win. This article articulates my current level of thinking regarding battle plans which I suspect will continue to evolve.

Battle plans for ancients gaming must reflect the capabilities of both armies in the environment of the battlefield terrain. This article describes five types of battle plans. Selection of one of these will be limited by the army's composition. Selecting the right one is related to the enemy's army composition as well. Selecting and placing terrain is the final segment of planning that can set the stage for a successful battle.

Each of the five plan types is described below. There are two variants each of frontal and flanking plans and a fifth, which is a hybrid approach. The various army lists are best suited to one or more of these plans. All plans assume an offensive posture, as I cannot personally fathom a purely defensive or reactive plan.

The first and most simple plan is the straight ahead hammer blow on a single point on the opponent's line delivered by superior forces. The lists that feature some type of "superman" (Late Romans and Teutonic Knights come to mind) are best suited for the hammer; elephants and scythed chariots may also work. Terrain selection should emphasize flank security or front reduction to protect the vulnerable sides of the hammering force. Woods or major water are useful.

The other frontal variant can be called a mixed order attack on a broader front. Rather than supermen, the list would include lesser infantry units plus combat capable heavy cavalry (or perhaps massed firepower). These would be deployed in some checkerboard order to deliver a 1-2 punch or absorb an enemy thrust and then counterattack. If the infantry is LMI/LHI, the cavalry must keep opposing cavalry from forcing waiver checks. Terrain will be needed for flank protection, however rough and hills may work instead of woods if your list includes appropriate troops.

The third plan is the classic envelopment. It requires a central pinning force and something to cover the unengaged flank. Rather than mixing infantry and cavalry for a frontal assault, the infantry is separately grouped for pinning while the cavalry is segregated for the envelopment. Balance is required as each group must be capable of operating independently. LMI/LHI may not be appropriate, the cavalry will need missile support.

Terrain (woods) can be used to cover the other flank rather than light cavalry. Non-steep hills are useful in the central sector to improve pre-order writing intelligence (all visible troops are placed on the table before writing initial orders, and hills improve visibility), stiffen defense and provide momentum for charges by the pinning force. Open space on the opposing target flank is essential.

The alternate flank variant is the double envelopment. This high risk plan requires a thinly held center (perhaps on a hill) and two marginal flanking elements to hit both flanks simultaneously. By its nature, it violates the primary military axiom of force concentration. The list selected must emphasize mobility, multiple commands and high morale for unsupported operation. An off-table flank march may be interesting. Terrain selection must result in open flanks for the opposition.

The final plan can be described as a cascade of light cavalry, hitting the entire opposing line, seeking an opening for follow on heavy cavalry. The LC must have bows to create openings. If the HC also have bows they will surely beat opposing bowlers HC. Infantry is a waste of points. Terrain consists solely of open spaces in the opponent's sector. (In my experience, this is nearly unbeatable).

Many lists are flexible enough to allow the use of more than one battle plan and its accompanying terrain plan. Making a choice is a matter of personal preference and knowing your enemy. Flank moves in the face of superior mobility will not work. Frontal attacks against the proverbial immovable object will also be questionable. You must plan to create advantageous matchups against your opponent.

In conclusion, pick a battle plan that your army list can execute. It must avoid your opponent's strengths and exploit weaknesses. Terrain should be selected and placed to support your plan. Time invested in advance planning will yield handsome dividends.

Note: (1) The Art of War chapter I, vs 16.