Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Ewan McNay]

Mark Stone wrote:
> Here's the fix: require that the loop that forms an open space be a polygon.

?? I must be missing something here that would make a C-shape a
non-polygon .

>>Japanese Warplanners want to know. (After they have contemplated Ewan's
>>analysis of the 1st Crusader list and realize their warplan only calls for 11
>>units)
>
> Yeah, much as I'm intrigued by the LEHI troop type (Alex and I are acquainted
> with it through the Lizard Man army in Fantasy Warrior), I'm not sure I would
> use it were I to play Japanese. You're already talking about an army that has
> trouble holding very much frontage. Up the cost of units by upgrading to LEHI
> and you're going to hold even less frontage.

On the other hand, at least with the Japanese you get to put out some
firepower from those units. Which at least somewhat mitigates the 'army
held up by 2E of LI' problem.

[Mark Stone]

--- On January 3 I wrote:---

>> Here's the fix: require that the loop that forms an open space be a polygon.

--- To which Ewan replied: ---

> ?? I must be missing something here that would make a C-shape a non-polygon
.

*Sigh* Note to self (again): drink coffee first, then send email.

A convex polygon.


-Mark

[Ewan McNay]

I knew what Mark meant, of course. However, I don't think that this is a
simple or desirable (nor likely! - getting pretty outre) change, given how
many fairly common shapes would be forbidden by a rule which forbade any
concave elements to a polygon.

And yes, I should have just posted this in the initial reply.

Mark Stone wrote:

> --- On January 3 I wrote:---
>
>
>>>Here's the fix: require that the loop that forms an open space be a polygon.
>
>
> --- To which Ewan replied: ---
>
>
>>?? I must be missing something here that would make a C-shape a non-polygon
>
> .
>
> *Sigh* Note to self (again): drink coffee first, then send email.
>
> A convex polygon.
>
>
> -Mark
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

Mark,
As you are the maestro of tactical terrain, I wonder if your "C"
strategy requires a theoretical "string theory" consideration about open
space.

Does the "string" have any actual width? (Mark, you already know
where I'm going with this, I'll bet.) That is to say, unless the string
has a defined width, the whole of an open space can be reduced to a
single point in space--so if the hole in your C is 2 Es wide (and I
assume it must be to allow placement of the feature) than my open space
could be declared as a single point in space--even in the NICT.

(Note--Tongue mostly in cheek)

Christian

[Doug]

Was the below quoted message from Ewan sent to Jon privately? I've
not gotten such a message by Ewan on the list, and I'd like to read
the whole thing.

>In a message dated 1/3/2006 07:31:04 Central Standard Time,
>ewan.mcnay@... writes:
>
>And to be clear, this choice would have had to be made *In advance* as all
>terrain features must be chosen before the first is rolled for. This
>would be on the list of things which would make me suspicious enough to
>ask to see an unknown opponent's ist .>>
>[
>True enough. I would say, however, that the only way the 120p feature thing
>would make any sense at all would be against an opponent who was *known* to
>routinely try the 'C' gambit. But since the 120p fetaure player is giving up
>so much of the rest of the table just to try and deny one or 2 'C's, the TF
>player simply places them somewhere else.
>
>Making this an entirely theoretical exercise since, in a real game, trying
>to place 120p features inside the other guy's 'C's does exactly nothing.
>
>Mark's 'C' was designed for the purpose of preventing the blockage of TFs by
>an opponent placing 4 large area features. If he tried to use four small
>120p features to get inside the C's, the TF player would actually have more
>freedom to place his TFs than if the opponent did not try and get
>inside the Cs.
>
>J

[Doug]

I've not gotten a list message by Tim with such contents as are
quoted below. Can someone quote the whole thing for me?

That's two messages that apparently didn't propagate correctly,
wonder how many others there are?

>--- On January 3 Tim Grimmet said: ---
>
>> To add to this theoretical discussion, which becomes relevant to certain
>> armies I'm looking into.
>>
>> Wouldn't it be possible to place another open space inside the "C" on such a
>> manner to prevent a TF?
>
>Yes, that is definitely a mathematical possibility. And in a
>friendly game, I'd
>allow my opponent to do that without a second thought. In the NICT, I'd be
>tempted to make him show me how he's going to fit is entire loop of string
>inside the "C" and an element away from the edges of the "C".
>
>More to the point, though, are Jon's earlier remarks: the more
>terrain picks my
>opponent uses countering my terrain picks, the more wide open space
>there is on
>the rest of the battlefield.
>>
>> Or can the TF be placed in the required one element gap between open spaces?
>>
>
>No. The TF must abide by the one element gap restriction, just like any other
>terrain pick. So it too must be one element away from everything.
>
>Now I will say this: there is a very easy clarification in the rules if Jon
>feels that the "C" tactic with open space is beyond the pale. And given that
>Jon's personal view is that TFs shouldn't be part of tournament
>battles at all,
>he may well want to tighten the use of open space a bit.
>
>Here's the fix: require that the loop that forms an open space be a polygon.
>A convex polygon.
>
>> Japanese Warplanners want to know. (After they have contemplated Ewan's
>> analysis of the 1st Crusader list and realize their warplan only
>>calls for 11
>> units)
>
>Yeah, much as I'm intrigued by the LEHI troop type (Alex and I are acquainted
>with it through the Lizard Man army in Fantasy Warrior), I'm not sure I would
>use it were I to play Japanese. You're already talking about an army that has
>trouble holding very much frontage. Up the cost of units by upgrading to LEHI
>and you're going to hold even less frontage.
>
>
>-Mark Stone
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


--
--

Doug
The price of freedom is infernal vigilantes

"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then,
that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress
shall have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every
other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an
American ... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of
either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it
will ever remain, in the hands of the People."- Tench Coxe, 1788.
http://www.constitution.org/mil/cs_milit.htm

This communication is for use by the intended recipient and contains
information that may be privileged, confidential or copyrighted under
applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby
formally notified that any use, copying or distribution of this e-mail,
in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender
by return e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system. Unless
explicitly and conspicuously designated as "E-Contract Intended",
this e-mail does not constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment,
or an acceptance of a contract offer. This e-mail does not constitute
a consent to the use of sender's contact information for direct marketing
purposes or for transfers of data to third parties.

[Ewan McNay]

Nope. It'll be in the archives.

On Tue, 3 Jan 2006, Doug wrote:

> Was the below quoted message from Ewan sent to Jon privately? I've
> not gotten such a message by Ewan on the list, and I'd like to read
> the whole thing.
>
> >In a message dated 1/3/2006 07:31:04 Central Standard Time,
> >ewan.mcnay@... writes:
> >
> >And to be clear, this choice would have had to be made *In advance* as all
> >terrain features must be chosen before the first is rolled for. This
> >would be on the list of things which would make me suspicious enough to
> >ask to see an unknown opponent's ist .>>
> >[
> >True enough. I would say, however, that the only way the 120p feature thing
> >would make any sense at all would be against an opponent who was *known* to
> >routinely try the 'C' gambit. But since the 120p fetaure player is giving
up
> >so much of the rest of the table just to try and deny one or 2 'C's, the TF
> >player simply places them somewhere else.
> >
> >Making this an entirely theoretical exercise since, in a real game, trying
> >to place 120p features inside the other guy's 'C's does exactly nothing.
> >
> >Mark's 'C' was designed for the purpose of preventing the blockage of TFs by
> >an opponent placing 4 large area features. If he tried to use four small
> >120p features to get inside the C's, the TF player would actually have more
> >freedom to place his TFs than if the opponent did not try and get
> >inside the Cs.
> >
> >J
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Doug]

No access to archives.

Mostly I'm wondering why not all messages seem to be propagating to me

>Nope. It'll be in the archives.
>
>On Tue, 3 Jan 2006, Doug wrote:
>
>> Was the below quoted message from Ewan sent to Jon privately? I've
>> not gotten such a message by Ewan on the list, and I'd like to read
>> the whole thing.
>>
>> >In a message dated 1/3/2006 07:31:04 Central Standard Time,
>> >ewan.mcnay@... writes:
>> >
>> >And to be clear, this choice would have had to be made *In advance* as all
>> >terrain features must be chosen before the first is rolled for. This
>> >would be on the list of things which would make me suspicious enough to
> > >ask to see an unknown opponent's ist .>>

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Actually, I have. And just for fun, I placed a tiny Li, B unit on it just to
screw things up in the center of the table for my opponents marching. I'm sure
the Li appreciated the terrain!

k

Mark Stone <mark@...> wrote:
--- On January 2 Doug said: ---

> A low ridge is "up to 120 paces wide" so it can be the exact same
> size & shape as a TF. So it will fit into the C shape.
>
> TFs are not on the list of items than can be superimposed, so the TF
> can't go on top of the low ridge

All true, Doug. Every terrain strategy is a calculated risk. Now, everyone raise
your hand if you've ever taken a low ridge as a terrain pick in a tournament
game.... Yeah. Thought so.


-Mark



SPONSORED LINKS
Miniature wargaming Wargaming Four horsemen Warrior

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.

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

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


---------------------------------






---------------------------------
Yahoo! Photos
Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events, holidays,
whatever.

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

[Greg Regets]

David Beeson, who participates on this board, uses them all the time,
and does the exact same thing that Kelly does. It can be effective.


--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, kelly wilkinson
<jwilkinson62@y...> wrote:
>
> Actually, I have. And just for fun, I placed a tiny Li, B unit on
it just to screw things up in the center of the table for my
opponents marching. I'm sure the Li appreciated the terrain!
>
> k
>
> Mark Stone <mark@d...> wrote:
> --- On January 2 Doug said: ---
>
> > A low ridge is "up to 120 paces wide" so it can be the exact same
> > size & shape as a TF. So it will fit into the C shape.
> >
> > TFs are not on the list of items than can be superimposed, so the
TF
> > can't go on top of the low ridge
>
> All true, Doug. Every terrain strategy is a calculated risk. Now,
everyone raise
> your hand if you've ever taken a low ridge as a terrain pick in a
tournament
> game.... Yeah. Thought so.
>
>
> -Mark
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Miniature wargaming Wargaming Four horsemen Warrior
>
> ---------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
> Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Photos
> Ring in the New Year with Photo Calendars. Add photos, events,
holidays, whatever.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[Mark Mallard]

In a message dated 03/01/2006 14:44:22 GMT Standard Time,
mark@... writes:

All true, Doug. Every terrain strategy is a calculated risk. Now, everyone
raise
your hand if you've ever taken a low ridge as a terrain pick in a tournament
game.... Yeah. Thought so.


-Mark



I used to take one sometimes and place my seleucid d class archers on it on
a flank. lol

mark mallard


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