Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Doug]

Ewan said
>>>
I also upgrade one element of each unit to C class. This is solely
because of the rule that all-D units take a waver test if prompted to
charge. It's entirely possible that I will wish to prompt a charge,
so I have no desire to take wavers for it.
>>>

While within the letter of the rules this strikes me as cheesy.
Shouldn't there be a complete rank of C class, and also be the front
rank?
--

Doug
The price of freedom is infernal vigilantes

I live in Maryland. We top the list for heroin addiction, syphilis,
violent crime, and political corruption. So if you visit, expect to
be drugged, raped, robbed, and then taxed for the experience.[Attrib
to Bulldozer]

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 10/23/2002 1:42:17 PM Eastern Standard Time,
rockd@... writes:

> I also upgrade one element of each unit to C class. This is solely
> because of the rule that all-D units take a waver test if prompted to
> charge. It's entirely possible that I will wish to prompt a charge,
> so I have no desire to take wavers for it.
> >>>
>
> While within the letter of the rules this strikes me as cheesy.
> Shouldn't there be a complete rank of C class, and also be
> the front
> rank?>>

The rule in question is from 5.52:

"(LOW MORALE CHARGES). If a body that is entirely D or at least partially E, and
prompted to charge. "

This is a waver test cause. So, a body with one C element and the rest D is not
required to take this test when prompted to charge.

The key to this is the old lists where there are upgrades from D to C where you
don't have to make at least half (or more) of the unit C's.

Now, the C/D combo is something we want to keep as it simulates very well units
that would charge on orders without failing morale, but which are still more
'brittle' than all C units (a C/D unit still tests on D numbers).

The one element issue is one I plan to look at very carefully when those lists
that are habitual users of this one element deal come to me for review. Some
have gotten by already, but mainly it is an issue in classic/imperial army's
support troops. My opinion is that it should be halvesies, unless one can show
that some local 'officers' (the C element) were charismatic enough to enforce
upper echelon command orders without big trouble.

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 10/23/2002 17:37:33 Central Daylight Time,
rockd@... writes:



> Do you think the "upgrade some to avoid waver" might be best applied
> only to troops that depend on "mass scrum pushing" like Pikes and
> maybe LTS ?

No. And I say no mostly because it isn't either an 'upgrade some to avoid
waver' nor is it intended only for such troops.

>
> Or since it is to fix a particular situation, why not just add a
> points surcharge to the unit? All D, but with better officers.
>

There isn't really anything in need of 'fixing'. All I signed up for was to
check the classic and imperial lists to make sure when we permitted less than
half a unit to be upgraded, it was for the right reasons. The rule is all goo
d. And I will not be a party to any 'points surcharge' discussion...lol





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

[Doug]

In units that tend to run 2 ranks, halvies is the result of taking a
full rank of better class troops, but for Pikes (which is Ewan's
example) you really only need a quarter to get the front rank filled.

Do you think the "upgrade some to avoid waver" might be best applied
only to troops that depend on "mass scrum pushing" like Pikes and
maybe LTS ?

Or since it is to fix a particular situation, why not just add a
points surcharge to the unit? All D, but with better officers.

>In a message dated 10/23/2002 1:42:17 PM Eastern Standard Time,
>rockd@... writes:
>
>> I also upgrade one element of each unit to C class. This is solely
>> because of the rule that all-D units take a waver test if prompted to
>> charge. It's entirely possible that I will wish to prompt a charge,
>> so I have no desire to take wavers for it.
>> >>>
>>
>> While within the letter of the rules this strikes me as cheesy.
>> Shouldn't there be a complete rank of C class, and also be
>> the front
> > rank?>>


Scott Replied:
>The rule in question is from 5.52:
>
>"(LOW MORALE CHARGES). If a body that is entirely D or at least
>partially E, and prompted to charge. "
>
>This is a waver test cause. So, a body with one C element and the
>rest D is not required to take this test when prompted to charge.
>
>The key to this is the old lists where there are upgrades from D to
>C where you don't have to make at least half (or more) of the unit
>C's.
>
>Now, the C/D combo is something we want to keep as it simulates very
>well units that would charge on orders without failing morale, but
>which are still more 'brittle' than all C units (a C/D unit still
>tests on D numbers).
>
>The one element issue is one I plan to look at very carefully when
>those lists that are habitual users of this one element deal come to
>me for review. Some have gotten by already, but mainly it is an
>issue in classic/imperial army's support troops. My opinion is that
>it should be halvesies, unless one can show that some local
>'officers' (the C element) were charismatic enough to enforce upper
>echelon command orders without big trouble.
--

Doug
The price of freedom is infernal vigilantes

I live in Maryland. We top the list for heroin addiction, syphilis,
violent crime, and political corruption. So if you visit, expect to
be drugged, raped, robbed, and then taxed for the experience.[Attrib
to Bulldozer]