Cavalry Globus?

[andypandy]

On page 30 it mentions the use of a single element of cavalry becoming impetuous as a "globus", could someone explain to me what exactly a globus is, and it's tactical purpose?

Thanks.

[toby]

I believe it is an original technical term meaning a unit in an unorganized mass, as opposed to being in ranks and files. So a blob or milling mass. It has absolutely no effect on the rules and the word is only in there because Phil is showing off.

[foxgom]

Hi

would not quite agree...

A globus consisting of a single element of cavalry faces whichever way you fancy when you spring your ambush, which is not the same as a conventional ambush.

neil fox

[landmeister]

A globus consisting of a single element of cavalry faces whichever way you fancy when you spring your ambush, which is not the same as a conventional ambush.

Please, excuse my ignorance but why this happens with a Cv element only? Why not a LH one? Or a Bd?  As you may suspect, I'm not a native English speaking user. I've been reading that sentence in a literal way! 

Sorry,

[andypandy]

Sounds interesting! Has anyone used one in a game? Surley the tiny globus would be extremley vulnerable all on its own! I guess it might have it's uses.

[Barritus]

Hi

...

A globus consisting of a single element of cavalry faces whichever way you fancy when you spring your ambush, which is not the same as a conventional ambush.

neil fox

G'day Neil

Could you point out where it says this in the rules? The rules about ambushes are explained on page 17, but globuses aren't excused from the need to specify which direction they're facing.

[Barritus]

A globus consisting of a single element of cavalry faces whichever way you fancy when you spring your ambush, which is not the same as a conventional ambush.

Please, excuse my ignorance but why this happens with a Cv element only? Why not a LH one? Or a Bd?  As you may suspect, I'm not a native English speaking user. I've been reading that sentence in a literal way! 

Sorry,

G'day Landmeister

You are quite right to read the sentence literally - only a lone element of Regular Cv can be placed as an impetuous element in ambush which can be held for 0 PIPs. (I am assuming the sentence you are referring to is the 5th dot point under Spontaneous Advance.)

Why not LH or Bd? My understanding is that, according to Phil Barker, the only troops which were used this way were troops we would classify as Regular Cv. Presumably this means Romans or Byzantines, given Phil's particular biases.

[Barritus]

Sounds interesting! Has anyone used one in a game? Surley the tiny globus would be extremley vulnerable all on its own! I guess it might have it's uses.

I've used small ambushes, but never that small!

The key to making an ambush effective is placement and timing. And remember, a defender can have two ambushes, so you might use one ambush to screen the other.

The other important thing to understand about ambushes is that troops hiding in difficult going can move out of their ambush position using their good terrain speed, as long as they end their move in good terrain. This means that a lone element of Cv could potentially move up to 240 paces, and as long as that's good enough to contact an enemy element, you can then slide into correct corner-to-corner contact.

[foxgom]

Hi

I cannot find any that specifically states so in the rules, but if you look up "globus" in a dictionary it says:
"A round or spherical body".
Perhaps it?s my training as a physicist, but what direction does a spherical body face?
The only reason I can see for using the word "globus" is to imply a small group of soldiers ready to spring out in any direction.

I could see it being useful under the following circumstances:

1. if you have a face-off situation with similar numbers of troops  standing opposite each other, it makes a big difference if a single element suddenly jumps out behind one of those groups.

2 You could potentially delay someone?s marching with a surprise Cavalry element.

neil


G'day Neil

Could you point out where it says this in the rules? The rules about ambushes are explained on page 17, but globuses aren't excused from the need to specify which direction they're facing.
[/quote]

[landmeister]

G'day Landmeister

You are quite right to read the sentence literally - only a lone element of Regular Cv can be placed as an impetuous element in ambush which can be held for 0 PIPs. (I am assuming the sentence you are referring to is the 5th dot point under Spontaneous Advance.)

Why not LH or Bd? My understanding is that, according to Phil Barker, the only troops which were used this way were troops we would classify as Regular Cv. Presumably this means Romans or Byzantines, given Phil's particular biases.

Yes, I was worried about the 5th dot. Thank you very much for your axplanation 

[MikeCampbell]

IIRC "Globus" is in the rules because of discussions by Duncan Head and Brendan Moyle - a Crusades era enthusiast who wrote "Shattered Lances" for gaming that period off list - maybe on the TNE group?

Way back in 2005 Duncan wrote

"Cuneus" sometimes seems to be used to mean globus or drounggos - a cavalry
unit charging at speed with no attempt to keep order.

it's used for single elements of cavalry because Phil figured that was the main thing that differentiated it from "normal" useage - ie when small (2-300?) groups of Byzantine cavalry would be set out in ambush.  From such an ambush their tactic would be the charge as fast as possible to scare eth shirt out of hte enemy - not to stand around form up ranks and loose off a couple of tidy volleys of arrows.

Or something along those lines.

[foxgom]

"Cuneus" sometimes seems to be used to mean globus or drounggos - a cavalry
unit charging at speed with no attempt to keep order.

[/quote]

Hi

Thanks for that gem !
Sounds like a case of sloppy English to me....       

A globus could mean spherical, which has no implicit direction or
it might be a translation of a Greek word for a disordered group of cavalry, which may or may not all be facing in one direction.

I suggest:

1. for the moment, the globus should have a direction.
2. that the powers that be (committee) should make a ruling ASAP.

neil

[MikeCampbell]

I don't know where yuo get the idea that a single element of cavalry in ambush doesn't have to have a direction - the requirements for an ambush are clearly stated on page 17 -

Its [ie the ambushes] location and direction faced is written down at the end of stage 2 of deployment,..."

there's no exception for cavalry single elements (or any other single elements for that matter) that I can see.

A single element ambush can be placed - there's no restriction on that that I can see either -

An ambush is a single element or group of up to 8 elements....

Again there's no restricion on the troop types except that psiloi get a few extra places to hide.

As far as I can see the ONLY think about a single element of cavalry in ambush that is different from any other ambush is that the cavalry is impetuous whereas it normally would not be.  Apart from that all the other rules apply as normal.

Also "the committee" is specificially NOT "the powers that be" to make "rulings".

[foxgom]

Hello

The sentence (Page 30) says
"A single element of regular cavalry placed alone in ambush (as a globus) that has not yet moved."

All the English dictionaries I have checked say that a globus is something round and do not mention anything about translations of Greek military terms.

Why should someone state that something which is a rectangle with an obvious direction (an element with figures facing forward) counts as being round?

What is the point of the three words "as a globus"?
If you leave them out the meaning is crystal clear, it?s just a normal ambush with only one element and has a obvious direction.

They must be there for a reason, either:

 . showing off (see first reply to the original question)
or
 . implying that "being a globus" or "being round" makes a difference, the obvious difference being the lack of direction a spherical object has.

I do not have a problem with either interpretation, but am, not for the first time, puzzled by DB* phrasing.
I see no need for a new rule, but I do see a need for an clarification.

It?s probably down to the fact that I?m a physicist and not a Greek translator.

neil   

[MikeCampbell]

It's just commentary as far as I can see - it's not a rule, its parenthisised (so can be ignored), and it's using the ancient definition of "globus" and not the modern English one.

I've hada look in the DBMM yahoogroup list archives & can't see anything much about it apart from when Phil asks if allowing regular cavalry to declare themselves as impetuous "as globi" would be a proper simulation, and hten shortly after teh current rule appears in the May 2004 test version of the rules & everyone seems to think it's a good idea.