Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Ewan McNay]

This is better than I came up with (admittedly, I only spent about two
minutes on it prior to the event at Bill's).

I would not have the two units of close foot, as I would minimise this and
focus more on getting extra light units to support the (good) strike force
you have / delay elsewhere. I'd take all the LC as regular. And I
probably would take all 3 subs as SHC even at this point level, although
having one as EHC is a decent choice with different plusses. Othwreise,
OK, I stand corrected, this is certainly playable. I think I tried to
keep too much of the LC in my mind.

I might also consider having the CinC alone and a 3-El unit, but probably
not. That one-crew CinC El is vulnerable, though...

riderofrohan2001 wrote:

>
>
> Ewan,
>
> As I stated earler, I agree the Sassanid minimums are high. I have
> played the list in the 1200 point league we have here with some
> success. The list I have used the most follows. I'd appreciate your
> comments.
>
> CINC 2e EL + EL 2 crew(42) 157
> SG 2e SHC L,B,Sh + EHC L,B 134*
> SG 2e SHC L,B,Sh + EHC L,B 134*
> SG 2e EHC L,B,Sh + EHC L,B 109*
> HC 4e HC L, B 121
> El 2e El 4 crew + 2 crew 121
> MI 8e MI Reg D (1 C) LTS,JLS,Sh 134
> A 6e MI Reg D B 1/2 Sh or Pa 70
> LC 4e LC Irr C B 1/2 JLS, Sh 69
> LC 4e LC Reg D B 70
> LI 4e LI Reg D S, Sh 34
> LI 10e LC Irr D (1 Irr C) B 47
>
> Total 1200 points
>
>
>>[And on an entirely different aspect, the Sassanid minima are
>
> indeed quite
>
>>high. I can't get a 1200 point list out of it that I like,
>
> really. Which
>
>>is not even a vestige of a complaint, merely a correction. I'm
>
> interested
>
>>to see what people would do with the Timurids at 1600 (or, indeed,
>
> with
>
>>the Sassanids at 1200).]
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Charles Yaw]

Ewan, If you limited the the MI and LTS and B units to minimums what
would you take and how would you play the list. I tend to use the HC
unit to support the flank I am trying to screen off. Is there a
better role for it? And how would you take the LI and then play it?

Thanks, Charles

> This is better than I came up with (admittedly, I only spent about
two
> minutes on it prior to the event at Bill's).
>
> I would not have the two units of close foot, as I would minimise
this and
> focus more on getting extra light units to support the (good)
strike force
> you have / delay elsewhere. I'd take all the LC as regular. And I
> probably would take all 3 subs as SHC even at this point level,
although
> having one as EHC is a decent choice with different plusses.
Othwreise,
> OK, I stand corrected, this is certainly playable. I think I tried
to
> keep too much of the LC in my mind.
>
> I might also consider having the CinC alone and a 3-El unit, but
probably
> not. That one-crew CinC El is vulnerable, though...
>
> riderofrohan2001 wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > Ewan,
> >
> > As I stated earler, I agree the Sassanid minimums are high. I
have
> > played the list in the 1200 point league we have here with some
> > success. The list I have used the most follows. I'd appreciate
your
> > comments.
> >
> > CINC 2e EL + EL 2 crew(42) 157
> > SG 2e SHC L,B,Sh + EHC L,B 134*
> > SG 2e SHC L,B,Sh + EHC L,B 134*
> > SG 2e EHC L,B,Sh + EHC L,B 109*
> > HC 4e HC L, B 121
> > El 2e El 4 crew + 2 crew 121
> > MI 8e MI Reg D (1 C) LTS,JLS,Sh 134
> > A 6e MI Reg D B 1/2 Sh or Pa 70
> > LC 4e LC Irr C B 1/2 JLS, Sh 69
> > LC 4e LC Reg D B 70
> > LI 4e LI Reg D S, Sh 34
> > LI 10e LC Irr D (1 Irr C) B 47
> >
> > Total 1200 points
> >
> >
> >>[And on an entirely different aspect, the Sassanid minima are
> >
> > indeed quite
> >
> >>high. I can't get a 1200 point list out of it that I like,
> >
> > really. Which
> >
> >>is not even a vestige of a complaint, merely a correction. I'm
> >
> > interested
> >
> >>to see what people would do with the Timurids at 1600 (or,
indeed,
> >
> > with
> >
> >>the Sassanids at 1200).]
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

[Ewan McNay]

Well..

..the minimal close foot is one 8E unit, and that's how I'd take it. That
costs 110, so saves me 94 points. Assuming that I left the rest of the
list alone (and I note that your 4E reg LC unit is costed for 6E), I'd do
something like expand the S, Sh LI unit to 6E (8 points), expand the big
Irr LI (not LC, right??) B unit to 12E and give them half shields (16
points) and take 2E and 4E units of Reg D LI JLS, Sh (at 22 and 34 points)
- that has used up 80 points. OK, so make your 4E Irr LC unit into Reg D
B (saves 19) leaving 33, which will buy a 2E Reg D LC unit with JLS all
around (34, but that extra point is OK ). I gain 3 units, and expand
the existing LI, for the cost of minimising the close foot, and I think
it's worthwhile.

The HC at 1600 I never got into action, they just marched around at the
back looking for a need. A support role on either flank is fine.

This is an idiosyncratic approach to the list, I suspect, but there you
are off the top of my head.


riderofrohan2001 wrote:
> Ewan, If you limited the the MI and LTS and B units to minimums what
> would you take and how would you play the list. I tend to use the HC
> unit to support the flank I am trying to screen off. Is there a
> better role for it? And how would you take the LI and then play it?
>
> Thanks, Charles
>>>comments.
>>>
>>>CINC 2e EL + EL 2 crew(42) 157
>>>SG 2e SHC L,B,Sh + EHC L,B 134*
>>>SG 2e SHC L,B,Sh + EHC L,B 134*
>>>SG 2e EHC L,B,Sh + EHC L,B 109*
>>>HC 4e HC L, B 121
>>>El 2e El 4 crew + 2 crew 121
>>>MI 8e MI Reg D (1 C) LTS,JLS,Sh 134
>>>A 6e MI Reg D B 1/2 Sh or Pa 70
>>>LC 4e LC Irr C B 1/2 JLS, Sh 69
>>>LC 4e LC Reg D B 70
>>>LI 4e LI Reg D S, Sh 34
>>>LI 10e LC Irr D (1 Irr C) B 47
>>>
>>>Total 1200 points
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>[And on an entirely different aspect, the Sassanid minima are
>>>
>>>indeed quite
>>>
>>>
>>>>high. I can't get a 1200 point list out of it that I like,
>>>
>>>really. Which
>>>
>>>
>>>>is not even a vestige of a complaint, merely a correction. I'm
>>>
>>>interested
>>>
>>>
>>>>to see what people would do with the Timurids at 1600 (or,
>
> indeed,
>
>>>with
>>>
>>>
>>>>the Sassanids at 1200).]
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Charles Yaw]

Thanks. Interesting, I'll have to play a few games like that. The
Reg D LC unit was indeed 6e, I typoed it.

(and I note that your 4E reg LC unit is costed for 6E

[Bill Chriss]

>
>
> Kelly, you can twist your civil wars, who influenced who,etc however
> you want. Last time I looked Constantinople is now named Istanbul
>
> > the Byzantine empire somehow managed to weather the storm and
> outlasted the Arabs.
>
>

Youch! That hurts.



Greek

[Bill Chriss]

>
> Greetings
>
> I think it is fair to say that the fall of Constantinople was not
> down to the Arabs but to the Turks who (to generalise massively)
> initially moved in to fill the power vacuum left by the collapse of
> the Abbasid Caliphate into dynastic successor states. Byzantium
> came very close to disaster against the Arabs but it did survive.
>
> While Manzikert was a seminal event in the decline of the Byzantine
> power base, the Normans etc did not exactly help and a true
> Byzantine Empire more or less disappears with the Fourth Crusade.
>
> Edward


Of course you are right, but let me be more blunt, Edward, from the Greek
perspective. My Byzantine History professor taught that the Turks would
never have been able to conquer the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantine is
considered a perjorative term invented by French historians in the 19th
century) from without, if it had not first been subborned from within by
the greedy Venetians and their intolerant and rapacious western allies of
the 4th crusade. Indeed, it was in this context that Grand Duke Lukas
Notaras later said: Better to see the turban of the Turks reigning in the
middle of the city than the Latin tiara...


Greek

" Better to see the turban of the Turks reigning in the
middle of the city than the Latin tiara..."

...maybe it was the Latin Blood, awakening from time to time, that
kept Byzantium in being for as long as it did !?

The Latin :)

[Chris Bump]

Turks are not Arabs. Call a Turk an Arab sometime and see how similar they
are. Your ipso facto logic I hope is an effort at humor.
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: riderofrohan2001 [mailto:yaw@...]
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 11:25 AM
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Army Ratings




Kelly, you can twist your civil wars, who influenced who,etc however
you want. Last time I looked Constantinople is now named Istanbul :)

> the Byzantine empire somehow managed to weather the storm and
outlasted the Arabs.




Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT





----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Charles Yaw]

I am well aware of the fact it was the Turks who conquered
Constantople. I was poking at Kelly.

> Turks are not Arabs. Call a Turk an Arab sometime and see how
similar they
> are. Your ipso facto logic I hope is an effort at humor.
> Chris
> -----Original Message-----
> From: riderofrohan2001 [mailto:yaw@m...]
> Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 11:25 AM
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Army Ratings
>
>
>
>
> Kelly, you can twist your civil wars, who influenced who,etc
however
> you want. Last time I looked Constantinople is now named
Istanbul
>
> > the Byzantine empire somehow managed to weather the storm and
> outlasted the Arabs.
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
> --
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Greek

With regard to the Fourth Crusade and the Venetians you have a
point. Not the West's finest hour.

'Byzantine' is obviously not how its contemporaries described it but
it is a convenient if (relatively) modern label. One version of the
the derivation of the term can be found
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_Empire#The_term_.22Byzantine_E
mpire.22 .

I have no idea at what point in time the Rhomaioi would have
considered themselves Greek - my limited study of the Empire at
university was 9th-10th century (and it is a long time ago) and I
don't think we addressed that issue.

Edward

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, hrisikos@D... wrote:
> >
> > Greetings
> >
> > I think it is fair to say that the fall of Constantinople was
not
> > down to the Arabs but to the Turks who (to generalise massively)
> > initially moved in to fill the power vacuum left by the
collapse of
> > the Abbasid Caliphate into dynastic successor states. Byzantium
> > came very close to disaster against the Arabs but it did
survive.
> >
> > While Manzikert was a seminal event in the decline of the
Byzantine
> > power base, the Normans etc did not exactly help and a true
> > Byzantine Empire more or less disappears with the Fourth
Crusade.
> >
> > Edward
>
>
> Of course you are right, but let me be more blunt, Edward, from
the Greek
> perspective. My Byzantine History professor taught that the Turks
would
> never have been able to conquer the Eastern Roman Empire
(Byzantine is
> considered a perjorative term invented by French historians in the
19th
> century) from without, if it had not first been subborned from
within by
> the greedy Venetians and their intolerant and rapacious western
allies of
> the 4th crusade. Indeed, it was in this context that Grand Duke
Lukas
> Notaras later said: Better to see the turban of the Turks reigning
in the
> middle of the city than the Latin tiara...
>
>
> Greek

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Chris,

Charles does that. He's really a history teacher and is very aware of
history. I still like to poke at him for playing Sassanids, the Velveeta of
Imperial Warrior! Ofcourse I'm still the King of Cheese.

kelly
"It ain't easy being Cheesey!"

riderofrohan2001 <yaw@...> wrote:

I am well aware of the fact it was the Turks who conquered
Constantople. I was poking at Kelly.

> Turks are not Arabs. Call a Turk an Arab sometime and see how
similar they
> are. Your ipso facto logic I hope is an effort at humor.
> Chris
> -----Original Message-----
> From: riderofrohan2001 [mailto:yaw@m...]
> Sent: Friday, February 25, 2005 11:25 AM
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Army Ratings
>
>
>
>
> Kelly, you can twist your civil wars, who influenced who,etc
however
> you want. Last time I looked Constantinople is now named
Istanbul
>
> > the Byzantine empire somehow managed to weather the storm and
> outlasted the Arabs.
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
> --
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/
>
> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. Learn more.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]