Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Don Coon]

Ever see any 3 element Reg units? Probably not. Why? Uneven rear rank
rule.


> What are the other examples of Irreg maneuvering better than Regs?
>
> JM

[Patrick Byrne]

Wouldn't the proper tactic be to avoid that well overpriced, slow to move
formation? Is that the lesson you learned?
-PB


----- Original Message -----
From: "Wanax Andron" <vercengetorix@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 22, 2002 12:50 PM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] basing with DBEs; #figs & depth vs DBR,M


> There used to be a guy named Brett Stiffle (sp) who
> played 7th in 15mm. He was a perennial champion and
> very tough. He and I had one game where he was
> Carolingian Franks vs My Anglo-NOrmans. the lesson I
> learned is that even in deep 2 element wide column, a
> 48 man block can absorb many many casualties without
> worry. I distinctly remember ramming a 24 man block
> of impetuous Irrg B HI front rank 2HCW second rank JLS
> into the front of his Frankish MI JLS/sh. I pushed
> him back, and stuck. Next bound my boys when recoiled
> disordered from tired and shieldless, then next bound
> exhausted as they then were sheildless and rear rank
> MI. Learned the lesson then, remember it today.
> don't do stupid things to large masses of infantry in
> deep column!
>

--- jjendon@... wrote:
>
> Ever see any 3 element Reg units? Probably not.
> Why? Uneven rear rank
> rule.

Infact, I have used a 3 element Rg unit before. Can't
remember the army, but I remember it was LMI LB, and
the maximun allowed was 3. They just stayed in line
one element deep.
boyd

>
>
> > What are the other examples of Irreg maneuvering
> better than Regs?
> >
> > JM
>
>
>


=====
Wake up and smell the Assyrians

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more
http://games.yahoo.com/

I ran a 3 element Roman LC, Jls, Sh unit Sunday...the only unit that did its
job, tiring an IRR A Turk 6 element LC, L, B, Sh.
----- Original Message -----
From: Wanax Andron
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 9:07 AM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] basing with DBEs; #figs & depth vs DBR,M



--- jjendon@... wrote:
>
> Ever see any 3 element Reg units? Probably not.
> Why? Uneven rear rank
> rule.

Infact, I have used a 3 element Rg unit before. Can't
remember the army, but I remember it was LMI LB, and
the maximun allowed was 3. They just stayed in line
one element deep.
boyd

>
>
> > What are the other examples of Irreg maneuvering
> better than Regs?
> >
> > JM
>
>
>


=====
Wake up and smell the Assyrians

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more
http://games.yahoo.com/

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT




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.



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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 4/23/2002 17:26:24 Central Daylight Time,
eforbes100@... writes:


> Irr can maneuver better than reg with the option of having 1 less rank
> Forcing reg to be in, for example, 1X3 or 3X1 and giving irrg the option
> of 2x1 is a LARGE advantage. No rational reason under the rules, time per
> bound, and fig scale accounts for the difference in allowable formations.
>

That is not, in my opinion, an advantage - large or otherwise. Players do
not have some 'right' to regular 3-element units that we are impinging upon.
Units are almost entirely arbitrary in an ancient and medieval game, and so
one of the first candidates for help with playability since there is no
historical basis for why any given unit is the size it is in a competition
game.

Our reasons for the regulars in even ranks is primarily aesthetic, which I
have told you before. True, some competitive players are rankled by this as
aesthetics often get in the way of getting every drop of blood out of a list.
But that is certainly not ever going to be the reason for me to change my
mind about a rules mechanic.

So, yes, if your definition of 'dug in heels' is not letting competitive
min-maxing of a list change a rule we have in there to make the game 'look'
and 'feel' better from an ancient battlefield standpoint - I am guilty.

Jon


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

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Actually Don,...
If you march through terrain that is difficult
for the pikes you are forced to go to column and thus
can go into a 1x12 formation! Heeheee!

Kelly
--- jjendon@... wrote:
>
> > LOL! Holy Shite, I remember doing this a time or
> two
> > in 7th with Alex Imperial One 48 man block of
> HI
> > P/sh one rank deep covering an entire flank to
> keep LC
> > from running loose
> >
> > Ah the good old dayz
>
> The sad thing is, is that the only way to get into
> that 1X12 formation is to
> start that way. Once in a 1X12 there is no way to
> get out of it. At least
> not with Pikemen (reg).
>
> Don
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more
http://games.yahoo.com/

[Chris Bump]

Actually Don,...
If you march through terrain that is difficult
for the pikes you are forced to go to column and thus
can go into a 1x12 formation! Heeheee!

Kelly

True enough Kelly,
But even a facing movement will not get you a 12x1 (the desired formation) and
you still cannot ever get there.
Chris

[Ed Forbes]

What part is not true Jon?

Irr can maneuver better than reg with the option of having 1 less rank
Forcing reg to be in, for example, 1X3 or 3X1 and giving irrg the option
of 2x1 is a LARGE advantage. No rational reason under the rules, time per
bound, and fig scale accounts for the difference in allowable formations.

You yourself posted that this rule had not gone to discussion to the
group when I asked about the history of the Warrior rule last year. You
said it was looked at internally and brought straight along from 7th.

It is your game and if you wish to the rule to be in, it is in, and that
is the way I will play it.

I know that you would like the subject to go away as you have dug your
heels in with the "no more update" pledge. Personally, I never had a
problem with 7th and its updates every year or so.

Nothing in this world is perfect. The evolution of rules sets tend to be
a good thing, not bad, and one should allways at least strive for
perfection, knowing it is not possiable.

Ed Forbes

> >
>
> Ed, I can't stop you from doing stuff like this. But I would if I
> could. We
> all know you hate the regulars in even ranks rule. That does not at
> all make
> any part of what you said above true, and I wish you wouldn't say
> such things
> because it confuses new players.
> Jon
>
>

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Chris, This is a true statement. Remember this though,
Regular units are better in smaller element sizes. One
takes regulars for many benefits one of which is
maneuver. Close order foot seems to operate most
effectively as 4 or 8 element units. These sizes have
none of the problems that are being discussed and for
that matter it seems rather unusual that anyone would
run such a large unit of Regular foot realizing that
you play regulars for the benefit of the
maneuverablitiy aspect although this is not always the
case as some players aren't as logical as you and I
!!!!!!!
Later Bro,

Kelly
--- cncbump@... wrote:
>
> Actually Don,...
> If you march through terrain that is difficult
> for the pikes you are forced to go to column and
> thus
> can go into a 1x12 formation! Heeheee!
>
> Kelly
>
> True enough Kelly,
> But even a facing movement will not get you a 12x1
> (the desired formation) and you still cannot ever
> get there.
> Chris
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more
http://games.yahoo.com/