Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

Taking your question more seriously... Checking the list, I see you
can upgrade to LHI. While you want to be careful spending points on a
unit that is very vulnerable to missle fire, I should think that the
upgrade of the front rank to LHI would help a lot! In the Middle
period, you don't have to up armour half of them or more as in the
Late period. You do lose the Ikko Ikki option if you don't do the
late period, however.

The list allows mantlet arming of foot with bow as well. I don't have
the rules in front of me but I thought this only applied to close
order foot?! Jon, corrections here?

As far as optimum size, it depends on what you want to do. Your idea
of putting them in column is interesting. You have the option of
giving 1/2 in whole units LTS (but you can still combine with bow in
a third and forth rank).

Yes, the units are vulnerable but taking them with LTS or taking the
bow only, accounts for only 2 points a figure! You will definitely
want some terrain rolls. And while they won't hold there own against
Jls armed troops, they can still delay the enemy while in there.

Once again, I don't have my rules in front of me regarding
skirmishing but can a unit that is half missle-only skirmish? If so,
then this would help them in the woods.

The real issue is that this troop type is vulnerable to almost every
other troop! LI with missle weapons will tear them up. Almost any
mounted will give them trouble as well. Most shielded foot will beat
them (if not in the first, then definitely in the second round of
combat).

Okay, back to the original question. I would uparm the front rank to
LHI. I would take them in 24 man units minimum. Front rank 2HCT or
LTS (your choice), second rank LTS is you took these or bow if you
didn't, third rank bow, fourth rank bow if you took LTS (or 2HCT [if
you took these])

In the case of of the bow, 2HCT combo, you get 2HCT in the front rank
as LHI, 2 ranks of bow and last rank of 2HCT (this helps you get to
your minimum numbers quickly) By taking the unit as only 2 elements
wide, you diminish the missle fire they will take.

You get 6 figures fighting with 2HCT and 9 figures shooting. They
take casualties as an 18 man LHI unit unless disordered or being shot
at from the rear or flank. Total unit cost of 96 points.

Taking a unit with the downarm LTS option, the points for the unit
are 84 and in my opinion, this option is more "bang for the buck".
Only pike, LTS or HTW foot won't take the negative against the LTS.
Unfortunately, you can only do this to half of your 2HCT Ashigaru.

I have run this army in the past. Running the Ashigaru with your
cavalry in teams is a good way to handle these guys should you not
find suitable terrain. They make good reserve troops to go after
opportunities that may develop. Not a good frontline troop. This army
is definitely for the attacking type of player; sucks for the
defensive player. You run this army because you like it, not because
it is competitive under the rules. If you play Might Of Arms, this
army is a KILLER army! (Late Period)

If you use them to exploit gaps or to team charge another unit,
consider taking them in column and taking them in 9 or 12 figure
units. 9 figure units are a little more wieldy. Run these like
warrior priests seem to be run in the Aztec army. They won't have the
punch of Irr A's but they will help a charge by your mounted Samurai
in some cases. Running them as maniple formations will work against
some foot types that aren't missle armed. Charge with one in the
first bound in column. Push back the enemy, halt and let second unit
come in in subsequent bound (only works if you DON'T charge impet.)

Yes, they are vulnerable but they do have their uses. In my opinion,
the lamelar armour should be EHI but not require the fatigues
associated with this armour (list rule, List Ho?) Armour of this
period or at least the late period was very, very good. The tempering
and lacquering of the armour made it much superior to most armour out
there. Chainmail was known by the Japanese but not used much as all.
There are reasons for this. Anyway, this is a new discussion. Suffice
it to say that there are issues with the list as it exists, in my
opinion.

Hope some of this helps!

Chris Tebo

--- In WarriorRules@y..., "spocksleftball" <spocksleftball@y...>
wrote:
> While these answers have all been clever, I doubt I'll be using any
> BUA with my army. Here is the question respecified:
>
> What size block of Ashigaru best provide a balance between missile
> absorbtion, manuverability, and HTH endurance?
>
> I'm leaning towards massive units, but as we all know that keeps
them
> from actually attacking. If I keep them in a 2x? column, then they
> can manuver but loose much of their ability to absorb damage.
>
> My fear is mounted archers and of course any charging mounted.
Yet,
> I want to use them. Any thoughts welcome.
>
> boyd

Wow, and thank you for a well thought out and complete analysis of my current
situation. I will have to consider your options in depth. I like the small
reserve teams in combination with mounted if I'm understanding you correctly.
You say hit with mounted, then followup with Ashigaru, and/or use LTS armed
ashigaru to ward off unwanted mounted attacks and absorb bowfire as bleed off.
My fear is to use them as a giant block of missle magnet on one end of the line,
then have to fight a two front battle after they amscray in bound 5.
I mentioned to the list Ho some time back that making Samurai and late Ashigaru
count sheilded vs missle would help and give the same effect as EHI without a
special no fatigue calculation. So you subvert one rule for another Anyway,
I don't think the ashigaru can skirmish with only half having missles. Also,
and list ho might consider this if not a special rule, allow ashigaru to be in
separate units (some bow, some yari or naginata). that would also help the army
historically, as in the later period task oriented functions were segregated to
some extent.
ancientsgamer wrote:Taking your question more seriously... Checking the list, I
see you
can upgrade to LHI. While you want to be careful spending points on a
unit that is very vulnerable to missle fire, I should think that the
upgrade of the front rank to LHI would help a lot! In the Middle
period, you don't have to up armour half of them or more as in the
Late period. You do lose the Ikko Ikki option if you don't do the
late period, however.

The list allows mantlet arming of foot with bow as well. I don't have
the rules in front of me but I thought this only applied to close
order foot?! Jon, corrections here?

As far as optimum size, it depends on what you want to do. Your idea
of putting them in column is interesting. You have the option of
giving 1/2 in whole units LTS (but you can still combine with bow in
a third and forth rank).

Yes, the units are vulnerable but taking them with LTS or taking the
bow only, accounts for only 2 points a figure! You will definitely
want some terrain rolls. And while they won't hold there own against
Jls armed troops, they can still delay the enemy while in there.

Once again, I don't have my rules in front of me regarding
skirmishing but can a unit that is half missle-only skirmish? If so,
then this would help them in the woods.

The real issue is that this troop type is vulnerable to almost every
other troop! LI with missle weapons will tear them up. Almost any
mounted will give them trouble as well. Most shielded foot will beat
them (if not in the first, then definitely in the second round of
combat).

Okay, back to the original question. I would uparm the front rank to
LHI. I would take them in 24 man units minimum. Front rank 2HCT or
LTS (your choice), second rank LTS is you took these or bow if you
didn't, third rank bow, fourth rank bow if you took LTS (or 2HCT [if
you took these])

In the case of of the bow, 2HCT combo, you get 2HCT in the front rank
as LHI, 2 ranks of bow and last rank of 2HCT (this helps you get to
your minimum numbers quickly) By taking the unit as only 2 elements
wide, you diminish the missle fire they will take.

You get 6 figures fighting with 2HCT and 9 figures shooting. They
take casualties as an 18 man LHI unit unless disordered or being shot
at from the rear or flank. Total unit cost of 96 points.

Taking a unit with the downarm LTS option, the points for the unit
are 84 and in my opinion, this option is more "bang for the buck".
Only pike, LTS or HTW foot won't take the negative against the LTS.
Unfortunately, you can only do this to half of your 2HCT Ashigaru.

I have run this army in the past. Running the Ashigaru with your
cavalry in teams is a good way to handle these guys should you not
find suitable terrain. They make good reserve troops to go after
opportunities that may develop. Not a good frontline troop. This army
is definitely for the attacking type of player; sucks for the
defensive player. You run this army because you like it, not because
it is competitive under the rules. If you play Might Of Arms, this
army is a KILLER army! (Late Period)

If you use them to exploit gaps or to team charge another unit,
consider taking them in column and taking them in 9 or 12 figure
units. 9 figure units are a little more wieldy. Run these like
warrior priests seem to be run in the Aztec army. They won't have the
punch of Irr A's but they will help a charge by your mounted Samurai
in some cases. Running them as maniple formations will work against
some foot types that aren't missle armed. Charge with one in the
first bound in column. Push back the enemy, halt and let second unit
come in in subsequent bound (only works if you DON'T charge impet.)

Yes, they are vulnerable but they do have their uses. In my opinion,
the lamelar armour should be EHI but not require the fatigues
associated with this armour (list rule, List Ho?) Armour of this
period or at least the late period was very, very good. The tempering
and lacquering of the armour made it much superior to most armour out
there. Chainmail was known by the Japanese but not used much as all.
There are reasons for this. Anyway, this is a new discussion. Suffice
it to say that there are issues with the list as it exists, in my
opinion.

Hope some of this helps!

Chris Tebo

--- In WarriorRules@y..., "spocksleftball" <spocksleftball@y...>
wrote:
> While these answers have all been clever, I doubt I'll be using any
> BUA with my army. Here is the question respecified:
>
> What size block of Ashigaru best provide a balance between missile
> absorbtion, manuverability, and HTH endurance?
>
> I'm leaning towards massive units, but as we all know that keeps
them
> from actually attacking. If I keep them in a 2x? column, then they
> can manuver but loose much of their ability to absorb damage.
>
> My fear is mounted archers and of course any charging mounted.
Yet,
> I want to use them. Any thoughts welcome.
>
> boyd


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

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



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



---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs, a Yahoo! service - Search Thousands of New Jobs

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

[Todd Kaeser]

The Feudal Japanese list (Spearpoint) written by Mike
McGinnis (sp?)- who I believe was a thorough Japanese
researcher - has the Ashigaru as LMI 2HCW,B or LB w/
the upgrade to LHI. A buddy of mine runs this list
and almost everything is LHI 2HCW,B some of which is
Ir A. The Ashigaru are hidden due to the same
armament.

A saw firsthand that the 9 man Ashigaru LTS units work
well as counterpunch units. They don't always last
very long, but are more effective than the 1/2 2HCT
1/2 LB units.

Todd K

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs
http://www.hotjobs.com