Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Ewan McNay]

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> Ewan, et al:
>
> Here is the rule that should have been (and now is) in the NWW
'general concepts' section and will be in all future list books (and
applies to all existing and future list books):
>
> "A weapon combination (e.g. 2HCT, JLS) that is expressly permitted
by a list is AUTOMATICALLY a "list rule" allowing combinations not
otherwise permitted by WARRIOR (2.32)."

OK. Hardly a 'clarification,' mind, but a new rule; fortunately in
this case easily modified online.

This does make the Aztecs (even more) foot killer infantry that can
actually stand up to mounted. Very dangerous. Also makes it really
hard to choose between JLS and D in some cases, which I am sure was
the intent . I still think that the Axtecs are a superior list to
the Tlaxcallans, for the available Subs and the saving of points on
Spanish. They'll suffer from being frequently outscouted, although
not a huge problem for such a homogenous force, but putting 2HCT guys
in the open will allow them to stand up even to K, I expect, at least
not rout on contact. Pretty deadly. Watch out in the NICT,
especially if Todd's still running them.

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 7/15/2003 10:35:52 AM Eastern Standard Time,
ewan.mcnay@... writes:

> OK. Hardly a 'clarification,' mind, but a new rule; >>

Add that to the list of things we disagree on.....lol You're welcome, by the
way.

<< I still think that the Axtecs are a superior list to
> the Tlaxcallans, for the available Subs and the saving of points on
> Spanish.>>

We need to get together when my Spanish led Tlax's are done so we can test that
theory the only way it *can* be tested...until then it is all speculation and I
know I'd sure prefer comments like these were couched as such.

J

[scott holder]

We need to get together when my Spanish led Tlax's are done so we can test
that theory the only way it *can* be tested...until then it is all speculation
and I know I'd sure prefer comments like these were couched as such.

>I actually have some playing experience with both new lists so much of this
isn't terribly speculative although my data points remain few. Yes, I find the
aztec (and to a lesser extent Tlaxcallan) infantry good infantry. But, they
suffer, at least after the first couple of games, when faced with any late
Medieval army with lotsa LB and SHK/EHK. Why? Regular LBmen routinely skirmish
or counter back to 120p and pepper the warriors at close range and not get shot
at in return. This is mitigated somewhat if you're running Tlax with bow,
however. And don't forget that the 2HCT upgrade is only for up to 1/4 of the
appropriate troops. Right now, I'm running 2E Irr A units with 2HCT in front,
1HCW in back. Great for plowing into pikes but they still suffer against
anything on horseback in armor because the second rank is effectively a non
player. True, the cost effectiveness of a knight unit vs 2E Irr A whackos is
something to consider but, when they die, we're back to the whole philisophical
discussion regarding waver testing, assuming you've got at least one unit within
120p of the now exploded Irr A unit. That becomes very problematic with the
lower moraled Tlax. And chariot armies can do much of the same thing, namely
stay out of D range and yet remain in range to charge, force waver tests, etc.
Okay, the Irr A nuts as I run em don't have that problem since they can charge
the chariots (assuming they're heavy) but in the 4-5 games I've played with em,
they are in effect human expendables designed to cause problems and dieing in
the process. If they don't perform up to standard, I have bigger problems. And
that's your army's punch and with it gone, you're back to the standard
shortcomings of Aztecs as has been talked about before. And they just can't
dance at 120p anymore.

>The Tlax list is fascinating because of the choices it forces onto the players.
I mean do you go with the Dart/Bow option for your better morale guys or all
bow? How do you organize the lower morale guys? And the Spanish? They are
wonderful troops and can hold just about anything. So they are great when you
tank your terrain roles, at least they can stick in the open with some semblance
of being able to hold the open. And in my 3 games with em, they pretty much did
that all the time. But then your opponent then tries to beat up on the rest of
your army and keep the Spanish at bay for a while. And yes, Cortez shook in one
game and one of the 4E Conquistador units shook later in the game. And I lost
that game pretty badly.

>I think both lists offer interesting possibilities but don't kid yourself, thus
far, they're playing just like they were designed, tough on infantry opponents,
exceptionally problematic against armored mounted opponents. Plus, I have at
least one former multi-NICT champion email me saying "why did you make the
aztecs SUCK?". 30 players=45 opinions.

Scott
New World Ho

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 7/15/2003 11:47:41 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Scott.Holder@... writes:

> 30 players=45 opinions.>>

So very well said.