Half-hexes...

An idea expressed in Arthur Harman's comment in Bob Cordery's blog has inspired me to look into a possible refinement of warfare in a hex grid.  It is - formally or informally - to divide hexes in half. This may depend upon the orientation of the hex field:

The above is the way my 'blank' map is presented in my files, but the action is as likely to go 'north-south' as 'east-west'. The 'N-S' orientation is where the half-hex idea seems to suggest itself, permitting a line abreast formation of units.

This alternate notion (the array rotated through 90 degrees) seems hardly distinguishable from a square grid, but there might be something worth examining here. We'll look at it later.

In the above diagram, the infantry move 1 hex, the cavalry 3. Beginning in the rear of a hex, an infantry unit may choose to end its move in either half of the next hex. If it stops in the 'rear' half, it can shoot at but not assault any unit in the next hex along. It it continues into the front half of the destination hex, then it may assault any enemy in a next hex. 

The cavalry above has been presented with a whole range of options, starting in the rear half of the corner hex: 
(a) advance on a straight line to the rear half of the third hex whence it can shoot at either of the two infantry units facing;
(b) advance to the front half of the third hex, whence it may (in the same turn) assault the nearer infantry, or shoot at the one occupying the rear half of of its hex;
(c) swing left in its 3-hex move to the near half of the hex flanking an enemy unit, whence it may assault it at once;
(d) swing left into the farther half of the hex flanking an enemy unit, whence it may shoot into it.
There are, of course a whole bunch of other options, but these illustrate what might be possible with this kind of grid system. Suggested for smaller hex-fields, this might serve to 'enlarge' the battlefield, without actually modifying the foundation rule set.

These four by no means exhaust the options available.

The above really is no different from a field of squares, except maybe as an aide memoire for determining whether a close assault or shooting is permissible (or possibly) mandatory. It does have the virtue, however, of permitting units to form a proper line. In some Portable Wargames rule sets, opposing units in adjacent grid areas are automatically in close assault. I like this system because the fighting being automatic (and contested) permits the use of holding attacks whilst reserves are mobilised. 

Having said that, there are other PW rule sets in which not only are close assaults between adjacent adversaries not mandatory, but are simply impractical.  The Sengoku set is one such, and, if memory serves, neither is the Pike and Shot rule set. The thing would not be workable at all for the type of 'Map Game' that has been subject now and then to my experimentation (e.g. this one).

The latter system might equally be practical in the 3x3 square grid game system - possibly also within larger square-grid arrays. I say 'might' as I have only the diagram examples in mind, and haven't formulated the ideas in words. However there is one consideration that has to be borne in mind: the 'half-hex' and 'half-square' grid system assumes the whole battlefield has a specific orientation. This probably works for battles that have a linear orientation,  but I can't see it 'working' for more fluid battlefields (but see my parenthetical comment that closes this posting). 

It also depends upon the size of the grid areas compared with the elements or units fighting thereon. I've used my Memoir '44 board for Sengoku games, and have since constructed a larger board. The elements fill the hexes pretty much, which means this idea is simply not practical. But it might be were I to use them on a larger board. E.g. such a system might have worked for my Bulgar-Byzantine battle (fought in April) that I'm half-way through writing up.

The 'half-hex' idea won't 'work' with these armies
on this board.

I have yet to give these notions a practical test, but another Bul-Byz battle suggests itself.

The 'half-hex' idea might well be practical with these units on
this board.

(I was about to close this posting off, but a further idea presents itself - a much more fluid application of the 'half-hex' idea.  This one I'll keep under wraps - hoping I don't forget about it - pending the impending border war between the National Association of Ideological Zealots (NAIZ) of Teutonia and the Confederated Community of Collaborative Peoples (CCCP)*.

*The attentive readers of this blog might recall that the CCCP has featured, in rather shadowy fashion, in some of my earlier postings. They might also note that I have not been consistent with the words represented buy the letter 'C'. Fact is, I can never quite remember how it goes, and until now not found a sequence that was quite the thing. The above might be the one that 'sticks'.)