Military units movement

[Gary Thomas]

Keegan in 'A History of Warfare' refers to the 'cross-country chariot' (p165 in the paperback version). It "could be driven across rough ground". Chariots of this type were also used for hunting.

I have now got Keegan's book and checked the reference. It is clear that he actually means "off-road" rather than cross country. There is no suggestion that these chariots were up to travelling hundreds of kilometers over rough terrain. Somewhere (I can't remember where) I read that chariots actually fell apart after a relatively short time. I know that the sulkies used in harness racing are incredibly fragile.

On another subject, and totally against my deepest beliefs, I put a fudge factor in the movement system - all tick times required are multiplied by 2.5 in order to allow time for foraging, finding the best route, general disorganization, and so forth. This figure can be reduced for elite troops when we implement that aspect.

This brings the movement rates down near those you wanted.

Cheers.

[Mark_Everson]

Chariots: I still don't agree that your interpretation is necessarily correct. But we can see how yours plays out first or wait for a more definitive reference.

Fudge Factor: Well, It'll do for now. We will endevor to get rid of it by D6!

[Gary Thomas]

Chariots: I still don't agree that your interpretation is necessarily correct. But we can see how yours plays out first or wait for a more definitive reference.

I have been trawling through my references, so far on Egyptian chariots (which were only introduced after the Hyksos invasion). Invariably there is a ratio of about 10 to 1 of infantry over chariots, and the army travelled at the rate of the infantry.

The following is a contemporary account of a visit to a chariot repair shop, taken from "Egyptian Warfare and Weapons" by Ian Shaw. He is quoting an Egyptian charioteer of the 19th Dynasty.
"You are brought into the armoury and workshops surround you - you do all that you have wished. Take care of your chariot so that it is no longer loose. Your pole is freshly trimmed and its attachments are fitted on. They put bindings on your collar piece ... and they fix up your yoke. They apply your ensign, engraved with a chisel, and they put a handle on your whip and attach a lash to it. You sally forth quickly to fight at the pass and accomplish glorious deeds."

The chariots were little more than wicker frameworks, with no provision for supplies for the two horses or the two crew. Again, the chariot, over any distance such as 100 km, would travel at the rate of its support.

I repeat, the chariot was a short range attack weapon, not a long range scouting weapon.

Cheers

[Gary Thomas]

A bit more information, this time from "Armies of the Pharaohs" by Mark Healy.

The battle of Megiddo took place in 1479 BC or 1482 BC depending on which source you believe. Megiddo was in what is now northern Israel. It took nine days for Tuthmoses III and his army to reach Gaza from the border of Egypt, suggesting a marching rate of about 15 miles per day (for the whole army). This is equivalent to 1.38 ticks per square, or 7.2 squares per turn. And this is the infantry rate!

Thereafter the speed fell to 8 miles per day, presumably because of the possible presence of enemy forces.

The book describes the approach to Megiddo in detail. Tuthmoses had a choice of three routes, an easy one, a hard one, and an impossible one. Reasoning that the Canaanites would defend the easy route, and probably the hard route as well, he over-ruled his generals and elected to take the impossible route. This meant single file, and carrying the chariots over a steep hill trail. They did it, deployed the army on the plain and chased the enemy back into the city.

The point here is that, again, the chariots moved at infantry rates, they were not self sufficient in their operations.

Understand, I am not talking about tactical speed, just strategic.

Cheers

[Mark_Everson]

I never suggested chariots could move quicker than infantry strategically... I'm not sure how you got the impression that I meant that. All I was questioning is that your spec *Prohibited* cross-country movement of chariots (wheel) over rolling terrain! That doesn't match the facts as I understand them. Hopefully now that you fully understand my position we don't have a disagreement. Anyway these things are trivial to change after playtesting, so lets not debate about it too much...

[Gary Thomas]

I guess you are right. The chariots that went from Egypt to Megiddo certainly didn't travel on roads.

Cheers

[KrikkitOne]

Originally posted by Gary Thomas
I guess you are right. The chariots that went from Egypt to Megiddo certainly didn't travel on roads.

Cheers

Actually, the way to model that might merely be to say that chariots are "foot" units. (assuming that classification only affects the movement calculations) If the chariot's wheels are only useful tactically, then their wheels should only show up in "attack /defense" values, ie the actual combat between units in the same square.

[Gary Thomas]

That is a good point. I understand (in a foggy sort of way) that units have another movement factor called "mobility". This is the one used for combat. So chariots could have a low movement factor, but a high mobility.

Cheers

[LDiCesare]

Yes. Mobility is tactical, as opposed to movement which is strategic. That would probably work.
What about modern wheeled units, though?

[Gary Thomas]

Yes. Mobility is tactical, as opposed to movement which is strategic. That would probably work.
What about modern wheeled units, though?

That is a problem which will need to be worked out. Essentially we have THREE types of movement, tactical, strategic, and "logistic". The last is what limits chariots.

On the other hand, does modern wheeled (as opposed to tracked) transport operate off-road?

Cheers