Monday, 1 December 2025

Deploying foot battalia in the Thirty Years War

 At the point where I sat down to write this post I had two other posts part completed.  One about the various German and Imperial armies in the TYW and one about a particular battle.  Part way through the first drafts of these I realised that a key point in both was a need to understand how the Infantry formations of the period were drawn up.

As I'm interested in the various German and Imperial forces at the moment, lets start by looking at what we know about the major influence on Early Imperial and Catholic League infantry formations: the Spanish.  My main source here is Gerat Barry and his work 'A discourse on military discipline', published in 1634.  Barry goes into a lot (and I do mean a LOT) of detail on the use of square roots to determine how to draw up an infantry escuadron (aka a battalia).  Seeing that we can now work square roots out on a smart phone I will not bore you with the excruciating depth and detail of using the period square root tables.  If you are desperate to know there are facsimile copies of the work on a couple of free to use academic sites.  For our purposes lets just slim the process down.

Barry's basic formation starts with a square  of pikemen, by which I mean an equal number of ranks and files.  This is considered the core of the Escuadron  and it is a square so it can fight with equal ability to the front, rear or sides.  This body is then surrounded with musket or caliver armed men to an equal amount all around, for example it might be four files on each wing plus four ranks ahead and behind (of both the pike block and the shot wings.  He recommends that the depth of shot be no more than 5 ranks or files as that is the maximum number who can shelter under the pikes.  Barry uses square roots to determine how many ranks and files of shot are required to fully enclose the pike centre.  This formation is called a squadron square by Barry but it isn't one of the four tactical formations he states were most often used by Spanish Infantry (see this post for details Small but Perfectly Formed: 17th Century Armies - The Spanish part two  ). I'm assuming that it is the default starting formation that is adjusted to create the actual tactical formation desired.

Battle of the White Mountain 1619 by Snayers

You have seen this painting of the Battle of the White Mountain before, as it is used in the article I linked to above.  If you look at the infantry in the foreground they seem to be deployed in the formations Barry is describing as a Squadron Square, so perhaps it isn't a starting formation but one used in combat.

Barry then describes how to amend the basic squadron Square to create formations which are wider than their depth or alternatively deeper than their width.  Again this uses a set of tables (the man did like a complicated set of arithmetical tables) but we can ignore those and just accept that the Spanish could and did form bodies of various depths and widths and these were all encased in a ring of shot in Barry's time.  As an aside Barry also notes that excess soldiers who don't fit into the neat formations are to be used to guard the colours.  This suggests that officers and colour parties etc are additional to the men in his formulas and possibly they formed a rank in addition to those arrived at by his tables.

I have looked at two versions of Barry's work one is converted to a modern type face and lacks the images while the second is a scan of an original copy which includes them.  In neither version can I find  any evidence for the use of the four corner mangas of shot.  Plus he only touches on the four standard formations in passing.

Faced with all the tedious business of calculating all those square roots I can begin to see the appeal of a system with a fixed number of ranks as devised by the Dutch.  As these formations only had shot on the flanks of the pike block it was probably easier to devise tactics which focussed on fighting to the forward arc of the formations   This in turn means that you need a different way of defending in depth and this gives birth to brigade formations.  This may also go some way to explaining why Tilly drew up his large battalia in a single line rather than in a chequer board (but I digress, but I will return to that point later).  

One interesting formation is discussed this is the "Cross Battell".  Essentially the main body of the Escuadron's pike is divided into four bodies.  As shown below.  In the worked example given by Barry this consists of 512 pikemen and 904 musketeers.  The Pike being drawn up in blocks of eleven ranks and eleven files each, which gives 121 pike men in each of the four blocks.  The mathematically inclined amongst you will have worked out that 4 x 121 = 484 pikemen, which means 28 pikemen seem to be getting the day off!  I'm assuming they are being used to guard the colours somewhere within the formation.  Barry shows the four blocks in corner to corner contact as below, this gives problems when he discusses deploying the shot though.


Here is the text from Barry on dealing with the shot, complete with period spelling:

"Nowe for the divison of youre propounded number of shott.  Double the one flanke of eache one'of the 4 batteles of pikes, whiche double will by 88. this 88. = the double flanke of the 4. batteles of pikes divide by 904 youre propounded number of musketes, and the number in the quotient wilt by 10:.and 24. musketes remayninge, and say that the two flankes of eache of youre 4 batteles of pikes are to by lined withe 11; rankes of ten musketes in eache ranke as by the figure; deutiones folowenge yove may playnely ce, and withe the observation of this rule withe any other, number eyther greate or smale yove ſsall withe facility kno, we how to proportionably divide yovre shott for' to guarinsh the two flankes of yovre squadron of pikes."

I have highlighted the part which causes me to wonder how a cross battell was actually deployed.  Working through the above text it creates eight blocks of 110 shot deployed in blocks of 11 ranks by 10 files.  That leaves 24 musketeers joining the surplus pikemen guarding the colours .  Placing a block to each flank of the four pike blocks with the pike in corner to corner contact means we are trying to get two musket blocks into the central space, but there is only space for one of them, and Barry previously says that space is useful for holding baggage and injured men. So something has to give!

This seems to be what Barry means.  Red blocks are bodies of shot

The above is entirely my supposition so it could be complete spheroids!  It looks remarkably like a four squadron Swedish Brigade in layout but with smaller component parts as each pike and shot is only 220 shot and 121 pike.  Given that Barry was writing after Breitenfeld he may just be theorising on what the Swedes had done or he may be trying to claim the idea was a Spanish one, or perhaps it actually was their concept all along!

The one thing we can take from Barry (and the Snayers painting) is that Manga formations deployed on the corners of pike blocks were not a thing for the Spanish armies in the TYW. and formations were probably rectangular with shot all around the pike until at least 1633.  For me the Jury is definitely out on the existence of the cross battell. However, it does give a starting point on looking at the other combatants infantry deployments.

So lets move on a little.  The Catholic League forces under Tilly used what I have seen called a double battalion formation (Guthrie uses this term so spheroids may come into it again).  A double battalion had twice as many files as ranks which gave them more combat capability in the forward arc., so was wider than the basic Spanish Infantry formations.  

I have read that Guthrie (I can't afford to buy his works) states that Spanish Musket and by association Catholic League ones under Tilly didn't form in neat ranks and files but instead operated in a loose swarm around the formed pike centre.  This seems to be more spherical rubbish to me.  Barry goes on (and on, and on) about how to form shot in ranks and files and the duties of NCOs in keeping formations of shot in their proper ranks and files.  I'm comfortable in saying that Tilly was at least as obsessed with maintaining formations in good order as Barry was.  Tilly is also supposed to have said that the shot wings of an infantry should not exceed 20 files as more than that meant the outermost musketeers couldn't easily run for shelter under the pikes.

Steven's Balagan blog (William Guthrie on Tilly's Big Tercios - Steven's Balagan) has a useful comparison between Tilly's big battalia and the equivalent Imperial formation showing how he considers these two formations were drawn up at around the time of Breitenfeld in 1632.  I won't steal Steven's thunder by repeating all the detail of his analysis, I recommend following the link and reading it for yourselves.  In a nutshell Tilly deployed units that were double the size of the Imperial formations but as they were far deeper they had almost the same frontage as you can see from his illustrations below (Imperials at the top and Tilly's Catholic League at the bottom)

Here are Steven's rather nice images of how the two formations were deployed
Yellow area shows the pike block, red musketeers and the sand tone the arquebusiers

I'm still of the opinion that Tilly was slightly stuck in the past and after his death the Catholic German states moved to smaller battalia as had Wallenstein.  That doesn't mean he stuck with the Spanish formations detailed by Barry I think he did adapt but probably not fast enough.  But more about that when I discuss the Armies of Germany and the Hapsburg Holy Roman Empire in a future post.

Thursday, 20 November 2025

Remote Reconquista - Zallaqah 1086

It's been a while since I did any gaming over the internet.   However, in response to my post where I confessed to doing very little actual wargaming Jon Freitag (He of the excellent Palouse Wargames Journal blog) invited me to take part in an online game of Basic Impetus.  This is a version he has adapted to work on a hex gridded tabletop which makes it much easier to deal with via a PC monitor.  The game was a refight of the Battle of Zallaqah 1086 CE.  As it was a remote game I entirely failed to take any pictures or make any screen grabs...Doh!  So I have 'borrowed a couple of images from Jon's write up (found here Palouse Wargaming Journal: Zallaqah, Again).  Besides Jon acting as umpire and game manager we had three players all called David being myself, David of the Ragged Soldier Blog and David of the Serener Skies Blog, plus one Chris (Nundunket of the Horse and Musket gaming blog)

I have played basic Impetus a couple of times before and enjoyed the experience.  Jon's adaption to a hex grid worked really well and once again I really enjoyed the game.  I was cast in the role of one of the two Commanders of King Alphonso VI's army.  It was clear from the start that this would be an uphill task as the Almoravid  and Andalusian forces outnumbered us.  Now this is a period and location which I really don't know a great deal about so I had no idea as to the relative strengths and weaknesses of the two armies.  One major issue was that the Muslim Infantry were equipped with long spears which meant that the Spanish Heavy Cavalry couldn't attack them frontally without sacrificing their additional Impetus combat dice and they had bow support behind the rank of spearmen.  Offsetting that was the fact that the Muslim infantry were at the same disadvantage against our heavy horse.  The second was that even if we were able to beat their first line a second, equally strong infantry force formed a second line behind it and lastly we were deployed with our heavy cavalry as a front line directly facing their heavy Infantry blocks.  This would be a tough nut to crack.

The initial deployment for the Christian army.....

... and that of the Muslim army.   You can begin to see our issue?

After a very quick planning session my fellow Spanish commander and I decided to avoid the Muslim centre and try to re deploy our cavalry to the flanks where we would be facing a more favourable set of opponents.  All we had to do was pull off redeploying in the face of an aggressive enemy with substantial archery assets!  As expected while attempting this we were peppered with arrows, fortunately this caused more disorder than deaths and after two turns we were starting to look like we had managed to reposition at least some of the cavalry.  Two units stayed in the centre to deter the enemy (that's my story anyway in reality it felt too dangerous to move them in the face of the enemy infantry as getting hit in the flank often leave a messy pile of bodies).  This seemed to give our opponents pause and there was a delay before they decided to advance and engage which gave us time to get stuck in on the flanks.

We had the better of it against the Arab and Moorish cavalry at least initially.  But eventually as knights often do they pushed too far and the inevitable counter attack hit them.  At the same time the Muslim centre rolled forwards.  This was messy one of my Knights held on for far longer than I expected and reduced the attacking infantry to a single stand before being destroyed.  This gave me what looked like a fairly easy target but could I roll a decent di roll, of course not!  I did eventually destroy it and my light cavalry was pushing down the right but there was still the little matter of what was pretty much a second army to fight and that was starting to push forwards on our left wing.

At this point we were told that both armies were on the cusp of breaking!  The enemy decided to go for broke and went after a weakened unit of knights over on the left ....and bounced.  The loss was enough to break them leaving us one point away from breaking, so the result was a draw!  

After the game was over Jon explained that the historical result was a near annihilation of the Christian army, so I am even more pleased at the outcome.  All in all a great game and very well run by Jon.

Wednesday, 12 November 2025

Trying to hit a moving target

This is not a post about the odds of hitting something with a projectile weapon, but a reflection on the wargaming  targets I set myself for this year.  You see they moved, I wasn't looking and suddenly my priorities changed.  Or possibly I became side tracked.  I don't have a laser focussed, hard edged focus on my targets so it was bound to happen.  This year my interest in creating 2mm armies for Strength and Honour was replaced by an interest in completing my 6mm pike and shot army.  If I do anything with those rules I will actually go with my existing 6mm armies.  My focus on DBA armies which are contemporary with my Late Imperial Romans has remained and my wish to build up some Goths and other assorted migration period Germanic types has also survived.  

As a result my painting time has been given over to painting Goth Warbands and 17th century Bavarian Cuirassiers of late.  I'm here to tell you that painting that blue and white checked Bavarian flag is damn tricky in 6mm too.  I'm reminded of the early versions of the FIFA football video game where the graphics were incapable of showing Blackburn Rover's blue and white halved shirts so they instead used an average tone of pale blue all over!  I tried I really did but I just can't get the lozenges the right shape, and that's my story and I'm sticking to it.  My Bavarians will have to live with some dodgy diagonal stripes on their flags.  Still progress has been made and so far this month I have finished two bases of ten Cuirassiers and three of 16 Goth foot warriors.

The Goths as they currently stand (or for the cavalry sit)

Adding those to earlier figures I painted earlier in the year gives me the army shown above.  These can be any flavour of Goth or even Vandals I suppose.  They can fight alongside a Hunnic force as allies and at a pinch stand in for Franks or early Saxons.

Hopefully this will be the Roman view of them, from behind as they retreat

This painting output has had the bonus effect of pushing me over my painting target for 2025, yes folks the lead pile is currently 30 figures smaller than it was on 1st  January.  I'm not 100% on target as I have slightly more foot figures than I started with but the amount of cavalry and miscellaneous stuff like artillery and dragoons I have completed has taken me over the total figure count target.  That includes adjusting for the number of figures bought during the year as well.

But what about the moving targets?  Well I have taken some items off the list and added a couple to it.  The plan to extend my DBA armies out to being basic ADLG army size is no longer a priority.  I doubt I will have time to finish my Hunnic or Moorish DBA forces either.  I do have all the figures for the Moors but would need to buy more Huns to get me over the line on that one.  So I have punted all those down the road for the moment.  I'm still torn over what do about the Early Byzantinian DBA army.  At the moment it is entirely made up of proxy figures, but I am very tempted to grab some of the new Baccus figures to replace the current infantry, who would then revert to their Sassanid allegiance.  I suppose I might just get the Moors over the line if I get some serious painting time in, but then again I might not as there are a lot of light cavalry to work through.

It's good to be flexible I suppose, and important to be realistic about what I can achieve over the next few weeks.  Watch this space, as they say, although it is unlikely I might just surprise all of us before 31 December comes around.

Saturday, 1 November 2025

Helion's Bavarian Armies during the TYW - a review

I'm a bit of a fan of the Helion Century of the Soldier series as it covers one of my core periods of interest, the 17th Century.  I have three or four on my bookshelf already including another by Laurence Spring the author of this book.  It is only cost which prevents me having many, many more.  They are best thought of as an step up from Osprey's offering as they are of a higher page count so can go deeper into their subjects.  I'd normally go with Osprey as an introduction on a topic and then the Helion if I then want to delve deeper.  As a bonus Helion have opened a second hand section to their webstore where books both second hand or with minor cosmetic damage (as was the case for this purchase) are offered at a discount.  With this book I made an offer of £7.50, which included postage, against a list price of £25.00 for a new copy and it is the latest updated second edition.

Looks interesting

I have wanted this particular volume for a while now as my re-enactment unit within the Sealed Knot has a connection to Bavaria in the Thirty Years war due to our links with the Memmingen Pikeniere who invite us to join them in the four yearly 'Wallensteinfest'.  If I'm going to take part in a Bavarian Thirty Years War event I felt that it would be nice to have some background information.  This book gives me that, in spades.

My copy is softback but quite robust.  Excluding the rather useful bibliography the main text runs to 212 pages including 16 pages of colour illustrations.  the contents page shows the main areas covered.

There is a lot of information crammed in here

From a tabletop wargamers perspective not all of those chapters are of key importance although for creating a living history background for a re-enactor the information is a gold mine of detail.   So for example Chapters 8,9 and 11 and 12  cover things that don't see much coverage when the dice are being rolled but will add a lot of depth to a living history persona.  On the plus side the plates have some lovely illustrations of colours carried by the Bavarians.  The chapters on "The rank and file and "Organisation" give clues on unit headcounts at various points in the war.  The appendix on Regiments of the Bavarian army gives a potted biography of every unit, even the minor unit we recreate (not brilliantly it has to be said) when over there.  The bibliography is useful even if it does cite a couple of Osprey titles amongst the primary sources.

Now for the not so good points.  For a book subtitled 'The backbone of the Catholic League" it doesn't give a chronology of the League or any information on it's composition.  I had to turn to Wikipedia to for that.   There isn't an index, to me this is a major omission in what is significant reference work.  Then, despite having chapters on Organisation and Tactics it doesn't give me all the detail I had hoped for to allow me to create a table top representation of the units that make up the Bavarian army and to show it's combat deployments, unit formations and battlefield tactics.  I was hoping to have a run down on how Tilly organised and fought his forces and how those things changed after his death.  After all we know Tilly favoured larger infantry combat formations but very little detail is provided.  In fact Tilly is hardly mentioned after the short biography in Chapter 1!  I'd tell you exactly how few but there isn't an index to let me easily do that.  Some information on how the Army fought is there but it is a pretty broad brush approach over all.  We do get some data on unit sizes and pike to shot ratios but very little of the depth and width of infantry formations.  Period military textbooks are quoted but these range from late 16th century material, Gerat Barry's description of the Spanish formations from the early 1630's, through to English sources and post Thirty Years War material without any explanation of what might be relevant and why.

I know hard information is difficult to come by but it would be nice to have comments to say this author writing in 1600 gives us an idea of where tactics stood at the outset of the war, this from 1632 despite detailing Spanish doctrines may show what influenced Tilly.  Such and such a source although written in 1650 may be showing us the final tactical developments.  From a wargaming perspective I have seen this stuff done in much better ways.

Like the other Helion book I have by this author (In the Emperor's Service which covers Wallenstein's armies) it has the feel of an academic paper rather than a book aimed just at wargamers alone.  For anyone doing living history it is a treasure trove of background information on Bavarian forces.  For the pure wargamer it is a little light on the nitty gritty of formations and tactical usages, but still a good source.  I suppose I bring my own bias to the book as what I really want is guidance on how to portray the army on a wargames table and which tactics to use with it.  After reading it I'm still unclear on how (for example) Tilly deployed a foot Battalia and how this changed after First Breitenfeld, There is too great a relance on sources that even at the time would have been considered a secondary source and there are sources used that have no direct bearing on the Bavarian army.  Those are used to show general trends in tactics but if you are buying a book about a single army in a single period it's likely that the reader knows that stuff already. Overall I'd score this book as a 7/10 and I'm glad I obtained it at a deep discount.

Monday, 20 October 2025

Through the square window QRS

 I'm a big fan of a QRS, I suppose it goes back to those days of orange card WRG ancients QRS.  I find that once the core rules are well established all I really need is a set of the relevant charts and tables in one place.  So with TTSW not having an official QRS I set to and tried to make my own.  

This is the current version.  I can't post it as a link so I'm placing an image here and I will post a file on the Face Book 17th century wargaming page.  If you want a copy as a Word document, but don't do Face Book put a comment on this post with an email address I won't publish the email address or keep it on file.

Through the Square Window – QRS

Sequence of Play

1.     Test Army Command (both players) [s8 p5]

1.1.  Mark units which are out of command range (15cm 30cm for Cin C to subordinates)

2.     Test Army morale (both players) [s9 p5]

3.     Take tests to rally routers [s15 p12] and pursuers [s16 p13]

3.1.  If passed - mark as rallying for the rest of this turn

3.2.  Make any pursuit moves where routs continue (unless rallied from pursuit)

3.3.  Test for return of off table units

3.4.  N.b. Any resulting melee is worked out at step 7

4.     Test for initiative. 1D6 each. Winner chooses to act first or second

5.     First player moves and shoots

5.1.  Declare charges, chargers take reaction test.

5.2.  If permitted chargers may shoot before making charge.  N.b. Melees are fought at step 7

5.3.  Test target reaction to being charged.

5.4.  Player two makes any available emergency actions [s11-j p7]

5.5.  Make any resulting rout or retirement moves required of target of a charge.

5.6.  Make all Player one moves including charges and follow ups/pursuits if target routs, retires or evades.

5.7.  Player one shoots and targets take resulting reaction tests. N.b. Pursuers and chargers and may not shoot even if the charged failed.  Make any required pursuit or follow up moves.

6.     Second player acts as outlined at step 5 above.

7.     Melee combat.  Both players units fight with results applied simultaneously.

7.1.  Adjust strength points

7.2.  Make any rout, retirement pursuit or follow up moves.  Mark pursuers.

7.3.  Pursuers who have contacted a new enemy fight melee again

Actions (s11 p6-7)

1.     Move up to 10 cm (except Heavy Guns)

5. Shoot

9. Take emergency action if charged.  See below. 

2.     Foot/cavalry retire up to 5cm maintaining facing

6. Limber/Unlimber light guns

10. Act in difficult terrain.  i.e. all actions cost a second action

3.     Change formation

7. Re-lay Heavy Guns (may not advance or retire more t)han 2.5cm

 

4.     Turn about

8. Dragoons mount/dismount

 

Emergency actions. Require an action to be available. Player one would have to have saved actions from their previous movement phase (charged after their movement phase), while player two would have to use actions from it’s coming movement phase (as they are charged before moving this turn).

Available Emergency Actions [s11- j p7]

Troop type

Available Action

Pike and shot units

Form a defensive ring

Cavalry (including those who have the evade option) and charging infantry (e.g.Highlanders)

Counter charge

Skirmishers, gunners, mounted arkebusiers or light cavalry

Evade

Morale tests

Trigger Morale Events - roll 1D6 for each [s18 p14]

1.     Attempting to charge, except non skirmishers into skirmishers

2.     Being charged

3.     For each hit from shooting this turn but see rules for units of initial strength 16 or more

4.     Under close range musketry fire (except from skirmishers)

5.     General KIA within 15cm or their corpse being removed from field passing within 15cm


 

Roll an additional D6 for any of the following which apply

1.     Fired on from behind flank

2.     Charged from behind flank

3.     Foot attempting to perform an emergency action (except skirmishers)

4.     Any Friends routing or destroyed within 10cm this turn or last

5.     At half strength or less

6.     Tercio pike block within 10cm advancing on testers

7.     Cavalry attempting to charge/charging the front of a unit with pikes

8.     Poor quality troops

Deduct 1D6 for any of the following which apply

1.     Cavalry with general attached

2.     Well trained troops

3.     Tester in cover or defending works

4.     Testers are stationary and uphill of all enemy with 20cm

5.     Tester is in a defensive ring (units with pike bases only)

Morale test result – use the lowest scoring dice.  Scores of one are cumulative [p14]

Score

Effect

3 to 6

No Effect

2

Well trained troops – No effect.

All other troops.  Chargers fail to charge.  no advance this turn or next but may retire.  Otherwise, retire 10cm facing the enemy, no advance next turn but may retire

1

Chargers fail to charge as above.  Others if advanced at least 5cm last movement phase halt, no advance this turn or next, but may retire.  Otherwise rout.

Firing [s12 p 8]

See unit cards for number of D6 rolled per stand but note that poor quality infantry cannot salvo or counter march so only get 1D6 per stand.  Only the front rank stands of an infantry unit may fire. Caracoling cavalry may fire outermost stands of the second rank to the side.

Shooting dice modified as below

Well Trained musket only stands in either a linear battalion or a Spanish Tercio

Plus 1D6 per stand

Salvo Firing

Plus 1D6 per stand

Target is more than one stand deep

Roll one extra D6

Target in cover or skirmishers or deployed artillery

Roll half the total number of D6

 

Ranges and to hit values

Weapon

Close 5-6 to hit

Long 6 to hit

Muskets etc

10cm

20cm

Early Cuirassiers

10cm

N/A

Charging Cavalry /Late Cuirassiers

 

10cm

Other cavalry

10cm

20cm

Heavy Artillery

20cm

70cm

Light Artillery

10cm

40cm

Melee [s13 p10]

Only front rank stands fight except in Tercios where the first two ranks of the pike block fight but the musketeers don’t.  Roll 1D6 per strength point of the engaged stands.  Tercios only take off hits to the pike block.  A score of 6 on any D6 rolled is a hit.

Each stand adds or subtracts D6 as follows

Add 1D6

Lose 1D6

Won last round of same combat

Not rallied

Charging cavalry charging or counter charging (including during pursuit)

Attacking works/town/defended terrain/opposite bank of stream etc

Charging Cavalry’s first charge or counter charge of the game

Poor quality

Well trained cavalry not halted or retiring through morale

Halted or retiring through morale result

Add 2D6 for each of

Lose 2D6 for

Attacking flank or rear

Cavalry attacking a pike ring/Tercio pike block

 

Outcomes after melee [s13.2 p10-11]

The side scoring the highest number of hits wins.  If the outcome is a draw a cavalry attacker withdraws 10cm

Combat type

Looser

Winner

Cavalry vs Cavalry

Retire 10cm or 20cm if LC.  If retiring unit is blocked by a friendly unit halt and both units take a hit unless LC. Halt facing the winner. If beaten by Charging Cavalry or Later Cuirassiers who charged or counter charged: rout 20cm if doubled and received 1 hit per stand or more.

May follow up & melee again next turn.  If contact a second enemy unit while in pursuit

Infantry vs infantry

Retire 10cm unless defending an obstacle.  If outscored by three times rout 15cm.

Follow up if possible.

Cavalry vs Infantry (and vice versa but only if foot with pike stands))

Cavalry outscored or drawing retire 10cm.  If cavalry outscore foot by 2:1 (3:1 if pike bases present) infantry routs 15cm.  On lower margins Cavalry may retire 10cm or stay in contact and fight again next turn

Infantry do not follow up or pursue cavalry.

Artillery (special case)

Artillery crew will run up to 10cm to the nearest friends or cover on being contacted in melee unless the attackers are skirmishers.  They may choose to fight only if defending an obstacle where they are treated as skirmishers

Rout and pursuit [s14-17 p12-13]

All rout moves

Initial pursuit moves

Infantry 15cm

Infantry & Cuirassiers 10cm plus 1D6cm

Cavalry 20cm

Charging Cav & Arkebussiers 15cm plus 1D6cm

 

Light Cavalry 20cm plus 1D6cm

Skirmishers, dragoons, Lt cavalry and all infantry except poor may halt pursuit at any time.  Otherwise test

Rally from Rout

 

Rally from Pursuit

Score 1D6

Result

Score 1D6

Result

1,2 or 3

Unit disperses

3 or more

Well trained cavalry halt

4

Rout continues, test again next turn

4 or more

Trained cavalry halt

5 or 6

Halt, spend rest of turn rallying.

6

All troops halt

Well trained add 1 to di roll.  Poor troops never rally

Charging cavalry deduct 1 from di roll