Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Ed Forbes]

Peter,
I play Swiss or Swiss merc's by preference. Using shooting priorities
correctly, I almost never take a prep shot hit against my shock units at the
point of decision.
Lancer cav is even easier to get into a position to charge without taking a prep
shot if properly supported by missile troops.
Auxilia are great support troops. Winning without Auxilia is hard, but by
themselves can generaly only delay, and seldom win.
Fighting an army mostly of Auxilia, I would screen a portion of this army and
attack with a combination of Swiss loose order pike, lancers, and lights at a
point of decision. I would take little,if any, hits by prep shooting in
position to launch a charge. If you are in skirmish, I charge with the lancers,
forcing a waver test and no support shot. If not in skirmish, I charge with the
Swiss. Next bound the lancers charge without taking a support shot as you are
ranks eligible to fight. This charge can break you on contact.
I used to take all Knights with this force, but lately I have been taking more
HC lancers instead. If I can take on these Auxilia units with C/D morale HC
lancers, using EHC would be easier.

This same tacitc can be use with most any loose order, but reg Pike/LTS loose
order work best. And there are lots of armies with reg loose order LTS.
Ed

-- "Peter Celella" <pcelella@...> wrote:

Okay - I just ran some numbers on Auxilia versus EHC, and I don't see
why they would necessarily be toast. I figured this in a vacuum, and I
know that actual game combats don't always play out this way. Also,
don't hesitate to point out my obvious errors. So here goes:

Assume a two stand, 6 figure unit of EHC attacking the 6 stand, 24
figure unit of Auxilia, 4 JLS, D, Sh and 2 B, Sh. The Auxilia have
just moved up to 80 paces in approaches.

Assuming that the Auxilia prep shooting is split, then between the
darts and rear rank bows there's 8@2 which would be 16 or 2 CPF to the
EHC.

Now, assuming the Auxilia pass wavers when being charged, then the
support shooting would be 16@2 -2 (in contact) =0 for another 16 and
two more 2 CPF. The EHC would take 2 more fatique for a mounted charge
for a total of 6 - so they would hit tired, right?

For the combat, the EHC would now be 5@4 +1 (mounted charge) -2 from
support shooting -1 (tired) = 2 for 10 casualties and no CPF to the
Auxilia. The Auxilia would be 6@1 +1 (using JLS) = 2 for 12 casualties
and another 2 CPF to the EHC who would now have to either break off or
recoil.

Why would this be so horrendous for the Auxilia? Am I missing something?

Peter

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Mark Stone <mark@d...> wrote:
>
> In a message dated 11/2/2005 2:38:47 PM Eastern Standard Time, mark@
writes:
>
> >>
> >> but armies with substantial shock mounted -- even just EHC --
should roll you
> >> over.
> >>
>
> To which Derek replied:
>
> > Mark,
> >
> > What are you thinking? Auxilia will kill EHC.
>
> Derek,
>
> Glad you feel that way. Please bring all the auxilia you can to
future Lancaster
> tournaments.
>
>
> -Mark Stone
>









Yahoo! Groups Links







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

Yes - you guys are all correct. The auxilia would have difficulties
getting to 80 paces - granted. And I also didn't assume that the EHC
would be impetuous. But in my Patrician Roman battle line, I would
also have the HTW lugging barbarians and HC lancers to back up and
support the auxiliaries. So, I see the problems with the matchup, but
like I said, I was looking only at an isolated incident for the
numbers I threw out. Considering that, even though my opponent would
of course have other factors, units, etc. to counter my efforts with,
I also would have other tactical options in this dance, no? I might be
at a definite disadvantage, but my main point was that it didn't
necessarily seem like a slam dunk against me either.

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
>
> Some issues.
>
> 1. The EHC would be impetuous or it would not be able to reliably
push back a 6E auxilia.
>
> 2. I would use 2x 2E EHC on a 6E (or even 4E) auxilia. Too often I
see someone try and use 300 men to kill 1200 men and then wonder why
it doesn't go well...
>
> 3. B class auxilia in 6E units are pricey. Its probably a C. In
any case, I (and others) will often charge a couple such units just
because of the likelihood of a failed waver - and you don't need many
to start the ball rolling...
>
> 4. If the EHC player lets an aux get to 80p he deserves what he
gets. This example should have been at 120p - no dart in prep.
>
> J
>

[Mark Stone]

--- On November 3 Derek Downs said: ---

> Mark
>
> I will bring my Auxilia army as soon as you bring your EHC army to Lancaster.
>
> Derek :)

Derek,

Other than Shang Chinese at Cold Wars last year, every army I have brought to
Lancaster for the last several years has included EHC. Other than Shang at Cold
Wars 2005 and Han Chinese at NICT 1992, every army I've brought to Lancaster has
had EHC or heavier cav. I assure you, you can expect that trend to continue. So:
auxilia, yes, please bring some.


-Mark Stone

[Derek Downs]

In a message dated 11/3/2005 7:43:55 PM Eastern Standard Time,
ewan.mcnay@... writes:

Derek Downs: NICT wins - 4 (right?)
Ewan McNay: NICT wins - 0.




let's get it right that would be 5 but who's counting

The EHC Hater


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

Greetings Ed,
I think that LIR or patrician can give your swiss a lot of headaches. The
LI is good. Your foot doesn't match up well against his, espcially if he gets
a prep shot off. Your cav is better, but you have be able to use it.

TD

[Ewan McNay]

Who is this Derek guy anyway? Is he any good? Sounds like a newbie, right?

darnd022263@... wrote:

> This is crazy. I have played a few games of ancients in my time and can't
> believe what I am reading.
> My usual Late Roman list has 80 RB Auxilia.
> With their ability to counter and prep fire few things can fight them.
>
> EHC suck. Even if they somehow recoil the Auxilia they loose the second turn.
> The army standard keeps these RB Auxilia eager. So they counter and pass
> waivers on 2's.
>
> Even with the folks at "Warrior Inc." toning down the Late Roman list it is
> still very good.
>
> RB Auxilia and triple armed Roman foot are a great one two punch.
>
> Mark. By the way. The small handful of EHC you are running are most likely
> hiding behind some real foot units. While the Auxilia, men that they are,
> hide from no one.
>
> Let me say it again. EHC suck. Except in Derekcon's of course. Where they
> are allowed to skirmish.
>
> Derekcus "EHC hater"
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Greg Regets]

I played Patrician in TOG for many years and enjoyed the army quite a
bit. To me, the way to win with it, is to accept it for what it is,
and work within those limitations. To be more specific and to use a
football analogy;

If you have a great running back or great quarterback, you build your
offense around those guys. All else is subservient to those players.
If you have a great defensive line, you build your defense around
that. You figure out ways to emphasise that, and hide the weaknesses
of the rest of your defense.

If you don't have any of those things, you have to rely on cunning
and trickery to be an effective team. Those teams with all those
material assets can also have cunning and be tricky, but they are not
really encouraged of motivated to do so, having all sorts of other
ways to win.

To me, LIR and PTR are armies without any serious, "money in the
bank" shock troops. There are lots of good things, but nothing that
screams at you to build a whole army around ... so you are encouraged
to place greater emphasis on optimization of the assets you do
have ... high morale, light troops with somewhat unique weapons
combinations, artillery on carts, Huns, wide variety of close, loose
and open troops, high unit count ... and use them in such a way that
your opponent never quite gets a read on what you're going to do.

Again, most armies are able to do this ... but if necessity is the
mother of invention, you will find all the need you would ever want.
Armies without that need, will not find themselves as inventive.

My advice to any LIR or PTR player, is to commit yourself to playing
this army exclusively for two years.

[joncleaves]

Welcome back, Greg! Good stuff...

-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Regets <greg.regets@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, 03 Nov 2005 22:41:26 -0000
Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Comments on 25 mm late Roman lists


I played Patrician in TOG for many years and enjoyed the army quite a
bit. To me, the way to win with it, is to accept it for what it is,
and work within those limitations. To be more specific and to use a
football analogy;

If you have a great running back or great quarterback, you build your
offense around those guys. All else is subservient to those players.
If you have a great defensive line, you build your defense around
that. You figure out ways to emphasise that, and hide the weaknesses
of the rest of your defense.

If you don't have any of those things, you have to rely on cunning
and trickery to be an effective team. Those teams with all those
material assets can also have cunning and be tricky, but they are not
really encouraged of motivated to do so, having all sorts of other
ways to win.

To me, LIR and PTR are armies without any serious, "money in the
bank" shock troops. There are lots of good things, but nothing that
screams at you to build a whole army around ... so you are encouraged
to place greater emphasis on optimization of the assets you do
have ... high morale, light troops with somewhat unique weapons
combinations, artillery on carts, Huns, wide variety of close, loose
and open troops, high unit count ... and use them in such a way that
your opponent never quite gets a read on what you're going to do.

Again, most armies are able to do this ... but if necessity is the
mother of invention, you will find all the need you would ever want.
Armies without that need, will not find themselves as inventive.

My advice to any LIR or PTR player, is to commit yourself to playing
this army exclusively for two years.








Yahoo! Groups Links






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

[Tim Grimmett]

And he occasionally tries to buy more on Ebay....

I don't have your creditals, but I do have a Late Roman army I am dusting
off.
Auxilia or bust !!!

Derekcus


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



---------------------------------
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! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

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

[Ewan McNay]

On Thu, 3 Nov 2005 darnd022263@... wrote:
> Well Mr. Ewan,
>
> I don't have your creditals, but I do have a Late Roman army I am dusting off.

[In case anyone was in any doubt...

Derek Downs: NICT wins - 4 (right?)
Ewan McNay: NICT wins - 0.

Alas .

But if he's really going to take LIR in 2006, that'll be one more year to
start catching up...]

Oh great! I guess I know what army I'm facing on Saturday....

Steve

On Thu, 3 Nov 2005 17:44:11 EST, darnd022263 wrote
> In a message dated 11/3/2005 4:40:06 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> ewan.mcnay@... writes:
> Who is this Derek guy anyway?  Is he any good?  Sounds like a newbie, right?
> Well Mr. Ewan,
>
>     I don't have your creditals, but I do have a Late Roman army I am dusting
> off.
> Auxilia or bust !!!
>
> Derekcus
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>

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

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.

>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------




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

[Derek Downs]

In a message dated 11/3/2005 10:46:33 PM Eastern Standard Time,
steve@... writes:
Oh great! I guess I know what army I'm facing on Saturday....

Steve
Hey, at least I get to convince Steve that Auxilia are good troops. :)

Derekcus


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

[Greg Regets]

> What is your definition of shock troops. Mounted? Late Roman Legions
are probably the most all around feared unit in the game. They destroy
foot of all types, all but the very heaviest foot, and are one of the
few troop types that welcome fighting elephants.


This is just my opinion, but most of the time, when I have seen close
order foot consistantly effective as shock troops against quality
opponents, it was when they were accompanied by knights, elephants or
chariots (emphasis on consistantly).

As part of an "attack group" of mutually complementary parts, I would
consider triple-armed Legionaries, excellent shock troops.

960p of them, in large units, would neither thrill me as the one
playing them, or frighten me as an opponent. :-)

[Derek Downs]

In a message dated 11/4/2005 5:37:01 PM Eastern Standard Time,
greg.regets@... writes:
960p of them, in large units, would neither thrill me as the one
playing them, or frighten me as an opponent.
This attitude concerns me. Has Late Imperial Roman been out of the main
stream that long?
For you people to not fear triple armed legions and massed auxilia is
disturbing. I know now what I must do.

Derekcus


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

Wow, what a bunch of comments I started up. I'm with Derek, I'm going to
have dust off my LIR lead and go to more tounaments outside of Jacksonville.
Derek only fields 80 aux when he uses LIR, I like to go whole hog and field
96. I dusted off my Imperial warrior list, went back and restudied the
list, and here is a sample army list.

CinC element, 1 element RB HC JLS Sh 124+33
157 157
Sub element, 1 element RB HC JLS Sh 74 + 33
107 264
2E RC HC JLS Sh
70 334
2E RA LC JLS Sh
50 384
2E RA LC JLS Sh
50 434
2E RC LC JLS Sh
42 476
2E RC LC B Sh
42 518
6E RC MI 2/3 HTW JLS D, 1/3 B Sh
138 656
6 x 4E RB LMI JLS D Sh
636 1292
4E RC LMI B Sh
74 1366
4E RC LI S Sh
42 1408
2 x 2E RC LI JLS D Sh
60 1468
6E RC LI B Sh
58 1526
2E RD LCm JLS Sh
46 1572
2E RD LI JLS Sh
22 1594

43 scouting points, 21 units.


I thought Ewan's analysis earlier was interesting about 6 EHC fighting an
Auxilia unit. I don't like integral archers with my auxilia usually, but
he's making an interesting point. Anyway, to answer some earlier questions.
I usually use probe orders so I can get within 240 p and use counters to
dance around to avoid being outside of 80 but inside of 160.

How about this for an in a vaccuum analysis
6 EHC L, B Sh (90 to 100 points, depending on morale and such)
12 RB JLS D Sh (106 points)
Charge from outside 80, RB aux pass their steady waver
support shot of 12 at 0
EHC is 5 at 5 for 20,
Aux is 6 at 2 for 12 Aux recoil
Second bound, EHC expand, EHC are tired and disordered, Aux are disordered
EHC are 6 at 4 for 18
Aux are 12 at 1 for 18
Lock, EHC have a waiver for second disorder
Third bound
EHC are 6 at 3 for 15
Aux are 12 at 1 for 18












----- Original Message -----

>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>