Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Sword_of_Spirit Jan 18, 2012 15:02:09	I'm creating my own system for D&D mass combat, and I have a couple questions for the experts on medieval and ancient warfare out there.  The system is intended to be pretty simple, and roughly emulate the results I would get if I actually played through the battles at standard D&D scale (comparison tests will be conducted to verify). The main questions that I have are regarding how close soldiers would typically stand in a battle or formation, and how much did that vary based on troop types.  I prefer not to set my baseline any closer than the standard 5' squares, but I need to know if that was anywhere near the norm, or if there were common formations with a lot more space involved. The second related question is what sorts of unit sizes were standard? I'm going to make a unit based system where they either take up a specified area (ie, A' X B') or they include a specified number of troops.  I'll include another one or two alternate levels of abstraction where larger "units" are used, but I need a baseline before I can move beyond it. Thanks for any advice or suggestions!
#2 saladman Feb 22, 2012 19:31:57	A soldier in formation typically took up 3 feet of facing.  Spreading out would have negated advantages from shield walls or pike formations, and just generally left gaps in the line against a tighter formation.  (Then again, magic-common worlds would likely figure out skirmish formations as a defense against fireballs, but that's another level of complexity.) Early D&D nodded at this by allowing 3 men to fight abreast in a 10' corridor (assuming appropriate weapons).  5' squares are very much a game abstraction, although not a bad one at all, especially for individual melee as opposed to formation fighting. Unit sizes varied widely by culture, nation and time.  Wikipedia is your friend here; Roman legions are a good place to start since things are satisfyingly decimal.  But classically feudal-medieval societies didn't have standardized units at all.  Armies were surprisingly small compared to the modern and Roman eras, and a lord's retinue could vary widely based on how many vassal lords and knights he could call on.
#3 Sword_of_Spirit Feb 23, 2012 16:42:02	Thanks! That 3' figure is what I need to know.  I always figured that 5' was a bit high for a close formation. I'll stick with 5' for purposes of simplicity, but it helps to know what happened historically. How about more spread out skirmish formations? Would is make sense to space troops out 10'? Yep, I looked around wikipedia for unit sizes. There were definitely a lot of different sizes. After taking a look at some mass combat systems out there, I finally decided to go with standardized mass combat battlefield squares as 100' x 100'. Still working out details on that, and exactly how many standardized units can fit into one of those (which of course, requires a clear assignment of standardized units first).
#4 demouse May 24, 2012 17:52:26	Thanks! That 3' figure is what I need to know.  I always figured that 5' was a bit high for a close formation. I'll stick with 5' for purposes of simplicity, but it helps to know what happened historically. How about more spread out skirmish formations? Would is make sense to space troops out 10'? Yep, I looked around wikipedia for unit sizes. There were definitely a lot of different sizes. After taking a look at some mass combat systems out there, I finally decided to go with standardized mass combat battlefield squares as 100' x 100'. Still working out details on that, and exactly how many standardized units can fit into one of those (which of course, requires a clear assignment of standardized units first). It really depends on the formation and weapons used. Zweihandliers or Viking raiders for example kept a good meter or more between them. Whereas pikemen or men in a shieldwall faught shoulder-to-shoulder. There isn't a universal rule for this stuff. you have to take it on a case-by-case basis.
#5 StevenO May 24, 2012 19:44:02	I know that some of the various DnD games have had mass combat systems while other things have taken a look at close formation fighting. Something I seem to remember seeing when building a tight formation is that while you can put "extra" men in the line that line will then gain a facing where it is of course stronger in the front but has a vulnerable backside as well.
#6 willo1001 Feb 16, 2015 0:06:11	I Also think that it depends from the formation, But I would recommend to stay between 3-5' , as a general rule.