Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Todd Kaeser]

Jon,

While the rules have greatly clarified things for me
(despite these recent questions) I'm still a little
muddled on baggage camps.

My question has to do w/ the looting/destruction of a
camp.

Let's say a LC unit charges a baggage camp (happened
twice during our CLAN WAR Tournament at my house) and
wins the combat.

Let's check to see if we did this correctly.

8 (2 wide)LC charging w/ Jls vs. baggage camp.

4 LC vs. transport = 4 - charging +1, Jls +1, -2
fighting across obstacle rolls +1 = 4 @5 = 16
casualties.

Transport fights as 6 Irreg D LMI w/ IPW

6 other foot vs. LC = 2 (no modifiers) 6@2= 12
casualties.

Since the LC won the combat it destroys or breaks the
camp. Right so far?

The 2nd time it happened (same combat result) there
was an enemy unit w/in 240 paces of the camp. - HC
unit. The HC unit preceeded to charge the LC unit and
eventually shove it off table. I ruled that in the
2nd turn of combat the LC continued to fight the LMI
now shieldless and disordered w/ the HC hacking at the
flank of the LC. I also assumed that since the LC was
shoved off the baggage camp that it was not looted and
therefore no points were awarded and it remained on
table.

I guess I screwed up since at first contact the LMI
counted shieldless since I've now read that section
7.1 shields.

A suggestion: when you print more copies of the rules
have an example of attacking the baggage camp so
everyone knows what applies in the combat. Or put in
on the warrior files section.

Thanks again...

Todd K

Oh, by the way that silly little overlap question came
up again in our tournament.

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

[joncleaves]

14.0 Baggage Camps have NO ARMED FIGURES. They do not fight back - they are UA.

[Todd Kaeser]

Sorry for the confusion. I must be thinking of the
unofficial warrior baggage camps which contained
baggage troops.

Just checking - A unit just has to charge the camp and
it is destroyed? It wasn't played this way at
Historicon.

Todd

--- JonCleaves@... wrote:
> 14.0 Baggage Camps have NO ARMED FIGURES. They do
> not fight back - they are UA.
>


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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated Tue, 20 Aug 2002 11:52:15 AM Eastern Standard Time,
hailkaeser@... writes:

> Just checking - A unit just has to charge the camp and
> it is destroyed? >>

No. It is a transport unit.

[Todd Kaeser]

Jon,

After reading the sections 13.313, 13.331, 13.342, and
14.44 (I'm trying myself, but I need clarification) it
seems that a unit attacking a baggage camp must
inflict at least 20 casualties (1 CPF) against a
transport element (4 included in a typical 1600 pt.
game) in order to "follow-up/pursue/break-through
across them". The camps do not fight back. After
checking 11.223 (breaking through) it seems that a
unit attacking a camp need only inflict a single
casualty (3x) to a camp in order to break through it,
thereby destroying it.

Is this correct?

How's that overlap question coming by the way?

Todd

I won't be having battles for a while, so my questions
are done for a while. Sorry for the annoyance, but w/
the lack of sleep I'm getting I need to be told like
I'm 4.

--- JonCleaves@... wrote:
> In a message dated Tue, 20 Aug 2002 11:52:15 AM
> Eastern Standard Time, hailkaeser@... writes:
>
> > Just checking - A unit just has to charge the camp
> and
> > it is destroyed? >>
>
> No. It is a transport unit.
>
>
>
>
>


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

[joncleaves]

<<> After reading the sections 13.313, 13.331, 13.342, and
> 14.44 (I'm trying myself, but I need clarification) it
> seems that a unit attacking a baggage camp must
> inflict at least 20 casualties (1 CPF) against a
> transport element (4 included in a typical 1600 pt.
> game) in order to "follow-up/pursue/break-through
> across them". >>

Hmmm, they need one CPF to follow up but need 3x casualties to break through.
The part of your sentence in quotes is from a section of the rules about
transport used as an obstacle, which baggage camps are not, so looks like you
are mixing apples and oranges.

<< The camps do not fight back. After
> checking 11.223 (breaking through) it seems that a
> unit attacking a camp need only inflict a single
> casualty (3x) to a camp in order to break through it,
> thereby destroying it.>>

Yes, but that doesn't destroy a baggage camp all by itself. Again, I think you
are confusing camps with separate transport used as an obstacle.

<<How's that overlap question coming by the way?>>

The speed with which I will complete the next clarification update is inversely
proportional to the sum of rules questions and times asked about the 'overlap
question'..... :)

J

[joncleaves]

I didn't use the word annoying...lol

I want to do a whole clarification update, not just answer that one question
separately. And I want to take the time to do it right.


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

[Todd Kaeser]

Thanks for the clarification and the notice about
annoying you :-)

Todd


--- JonCleaves@... wrote:
> <<> After reading the sections 13.313, 13.331,
> 13.342, and
> > 14.44 (I'm trying myself, but I need
> clarification) it
> > seems that a unit attacking a baggage camp must
> > inflict at least 20 casualties (1 CPF) against a
> > transport element (4 included in a typical 1600
> pt.
> > game) in order to "follow-up/pursue/break-through
> > across them". >>
>
> Hmmm, they need one CPF to follow up but need 3x
> casualties to break through. The part of your
> sentence in quotes is from a section of the rules
> about transport used as an obstacle, which baggage
> camps are not, so looks like you are mixing apples
> and oranges.
>
> << The camps do not fight back. After
> > checking 11.223 (breaking through) it seems that a
> > unit attacking a camp need only inflict a single
> > casualty (3x) to a camp in order to break through
> it,
> > thereby destroying it.>>
>
> Yes, but that doesn't destroy a baggage camp all by
> itself. Again, I think you are confusing camps with
> separate transport used as an obstacle.
>
> <<How's that overlap question coming by the way?>>
>
> The speed with which I will complete the next
> clarification update is inversely proportional to
> the sum of rules questions and times asked about the
> 'overlap question'.....
>
> J
>
>
>


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