Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Phil Gardocki]

While balanced lists are often the norm for tournaments, there always seems
to be a truly unbalanced list, that it overwhelms any tactics or troop types
designed to deal with it. Often the shock of these lists alone are enough to
get them into the quarter finals.

To wit,
One Origins, there was a Sassanid Persian list with a shock force of 10
elephants in one unit. Followed closely with the EHC, who didn't care if they
were
disordered.

An Alan list that was composed of mostly 36 man MC,L,B units.

Midianite Arabs, so simple, so overwhelming. It only has two troop types,
chain-guns and pillows.

Any list with more than 10 Knight units.

Any list with 20 elephants in it.

Early Germans, where half your points buys 5 48 man MI,JLS,SH units.

All these lists have one thing in common, if you get in their way, they roll
you over. And sometimes, getting out of the way doesn't help either.

Phil


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

[Greg Preston]

The Competition List Construction Questionnaire
What sort of list writer are you ? Find out by taking this quick quiz.

Choose the best response from each of the options supplied for the
multiple choice questions below. There are no right answers. You may
circle more than one response.

Q1- Preparation
The ideal preparation for writing a competition list is:

a. a good knowledge of likely opponents
b. Reading list book/s
c. surveying your available troops
d. beer/s

Q2- Level of dedication
When constructing lists do you:

a. throw troops in box- work out exact composition of forces in the
five minutes before comp starts.
b. Forget comp is on- pick something that kind of adds up to the points
the night before.
c. Spend months fine tuning your list down to the last point- then SAY
you have just thrown troops together the night before
d. What do you mean construct a list- I’ll take what I’ve always taken-
if it was good enough to win the 4th Edition comp in 1975 it will come
good again for me someday

Q3. Support
When picking lists for comps, my family and friends know to:

a. leave me alone
b. suggest I run Visigoths because they like the name.
c. point at random names in book of lists to -help daddy-
d. what do you mean family and friends ?- I’m a wargamer- I pick lists
!!


Q4. Level of ingenuity:
When reading a book of lists do you

a. Get excited about some possibility that you haven’t seen before in a
list that you have already looked at over a thousand times- you don’t
know how you missed it- it seems so obvious now- Formulate devious
plan to – win next comp/beat long time rival/rule the world.
b. Go through a likely list, picking out all the troops that you think
will serve your purpose , oh, and all those horrible compulsory troops.
Add up everything you want then start working backwards from 3500
points ( exception:4500points for Ghaznavids) towards your goal points
target -give up at 3000points.
c. I never read a book of lists.
d. What is a book of lists ?

Q5. Adaptability
When you find that your favourite army does not have that killer troop
type it use to have; do you

a. curse and pick something else from the list
b. curse and go with your family and/or friends suggestion of
“Visigoths” -it is a good name after all
c. decide that you are sure you remember a reference to an obscure
Latvian academic who wrote a thesis on the above topic. Write Scott an
abusive email about this- claiming that the list should be amended
immediately so that your plan will work in the comp,
d) same as (c) except that the demand is for a retrospective change- so
that you have, in fact, won the last two comps you entered.

Q6. Evaluation
After unsuccessfully using a new army in a competition, do you,

a. spend the whole trip home from the comp planning the new killer army
b. spend the whole trip home from the comp complaining about the
dice/troops/terrain/gods/draw/weather/paint job to anyone who will
listen
c. Put the army on E-bay the next day
d. only have a vague recollection that you have even been at a comp-
must have been the “few quiet drinks” you had on the first night- or
was that the second night....

Q7. Honesty
When adding up points values for comp lists,
a) I ensure that I check the addition a couple of dozen times to make
sure its right. I have nightmares about being 10points over for the
weeks leading up to the comp. I develop a minor nervous complaint and
a nasty skin rash- doctor suggests I do not travel.
b) I generate a spreadsheet which will calculate the value of each
individual troop type, cross referenced against relative fighting
effectiveness, to give a regression coefficient for my army- attempt to
write program which will do this automatically for armies I am likely
to face in the comp- forget to pick army or add up points
c) I never add up the points of my armies- I do it by feel- hey- its
not cheating if you don’t know.
d) whoa......armies have points values ?? You’ll be telling me there
are command structures next.

Q8. List notification
When asked what you are taking to a comp, you answer

a) I haven’t decided yet... you don’t want to give anything away
b) make vague comments about Bolt-shooters, jumbos, and Mongols... turn
up with Medieval French
c) Saxons.... no-one will ask you again- you are clearly insane.
d) Alans.... turn up with Hussites and two guys from next door... both
named Alan.

Q9. List/Personality traits
It is said that people tend to pick lists that reflect something about
themselves, therefore I tend to pick armies that have

a. lots of regular high morale foot- I like control
b. lots of Irregular A troops- I like trade stalls
c. lots of bowmen- I like to keep my distance
d. few morals and no sense of personal hygiene- others like to keep
their distance

Q10. Accuracy of on table depiction
My troops are

a. always exactly as depicted- I once put a unit of Early Imperial
Roman infantry on the table and the shield pattern may have been dated
to the reign of Valens- so to save confusion I declared this to my
opponent at the beginning of the game (and reminded him at the start of
each bound)
b. correctly depicted. I really can not play much though- I am still
waiting for an ancient army which has dancing bears, street vixen, and
elephants on bicycles
c. well... I have an army. Yes just the one... and if you are not
imaginative enough to recognise that these mounted medieval crossbowmen
are Alexandrian pike- then that is your problem.
d. Troop types are generally ok.....mostly....well the base sizes are
right.... well they have the correct number of figures per element...
mostly... damm it I should have picked c


So..... how did you score ?

Greg P.



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

[joncleaves]

These are all excellent, Greg.

But two bear special mention:

>Q5. Adaptability
>When you find that your favourite army does not have that killer troop
>type it use to have; do you
>
>a. curse and pick something else from the list
>b. curse and go with your family and/or friends suggestion of
>“Visigoths” -it is a good name after all
>c. decide that you are sure you remember a reference to an obscure
>Latvian academic who wrote a thesis on the above topic.  Write Scott an
>abusive email about this- claiming that the list should be amended
>immediately so that your plan will work in the comp,
>d) same as (c) except that the demand is for a retrospective change- so
>that you have, in fact, won the last two comps you entered.>>

This is a humorous mail I take it, with lots of fun never really happen type
answers. So why include c) and d) above? ;)

>
>Q8. List notification
>When asked what you are taking to a comp, you answer
>
>a) I haven’t decided  yet... you don’t want to give anything away
>b) make vague comments about Bolt-shooters, jumbos, and Mongols... turn
>up with Medieval French
>c) Saxons.... no-one will ask you again- you are clearly insane.
>d) Alans.... turn up with  Hussites and two guys from next door... both
>named Alan..>>

I MUST try d) !!! lol

Jon

Greg,

In regard to question 8 below, where does it leave you if you say
Saxons and really mean it????? I think I know the answer!

Cheers.........Geoff



--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Greg Preston <edgdp@a...> wrote:
> The Competition List Construction Questionnaire
> What sort of list writer are you ? Find out by taking this quick
quiz.
>
> Choose the best response from each of the options supplied for the
> multiple choice questions below. There are no right answers. You
may
> circle more than one response.
>
> Q1- Preparation
> The ideal preparation for writing a competition list is:
>
> a. a good knowledge of likely opponents
> b. Reading list book/s
> c. surveying your available troops
> d. beer/s
>
> Q2- Level of dedication
> When constructing lists do you:
>
> a. throw troops in box- work out exact composition of forces in
the
> five minutes before comp starts.
> b. Forget comp is on- pick something that kind of adds up to the
points
> the night before.
> c. Spend months fine tuning your list down to the last point- then
SAY
> you have just thrown troops together the night before
> d. What do you mean construct a list- I'll take what I've always
taken-
> if it was good enough to win the 4th Edition comp in 1975 it will
come
> good again for me someday
>
> Q3. Support
> When picking lists for comps, my family and friends know to:
>
> a. leave me alone
> b. suggest I run Visigoths because they like the name.
> c. point at random names in book of lists to -help daddy-
> d. what do you mean family and friends ?- I'm a wargamer- I pick
lists
> !!
>
>
> Q4. Level of ingenuity:
> When reading a book of lists do you
>
> a. Get excited about some possibility that you haven't seen before
in a
> list that you have already looked at over a thousand times- you
don't
> know how you missed it- it seems so obvious now- Formulate
devious
> plan to – win next comp/beat long time rival/rule the world.
> b. Go through a likely list, picking out all the troops that you
think
> will serve your purpose , oh, and all those horrible compulsory
troops.
> Add up everything you want then start working backwards from 3500
> points ( exception:4500points for Ghaznavids) towards your goal
points
> target -give up at 3000points.
> c. I never read a book of lists.
> d. What is a book of lists ?
>
> Q5. Adaptability
> When you find that your favourite army does not have that killer
troop
> type it use to have; do you
>
> a. curse and pick something else from the list
> b. curse and go with your family and/or friends suggestion of
> "Visigoths" -it is a good name after all
> c. decide that you are sure you remember a reference to an obscure
> Latvian academic who wrote a thesis on the above topic. Write
Scott an
> abusive email about this- claiming that the list should be amended
> immediately so that your plan will work in the comp,
> d) same as (c) except that the demand is for a retrospective
change- so
> that you have, in fact, won the last two comps you entered.
>
> Q6. Evaluation
> After unsuccessfully using a new army in a competition, do you,
>
> a. spend the whole trip home from the comp planning the new killer
army
> b. spend the whole trip home from the comp complaining about the
> dice/troops/terrain/gods/draw/weather/paint job to anyone who will
> listen
> c. Put the army on E-bay the next day
> d. only have a vague recollection that you have even been at a
comp-
> must have been the "few quiet drinks" you had on the first night-
or
> was that the second night....
>
> Q7. Honesty
> When adding up points values for comp lists,
> a) I ensure that I check the addition a couple of dozen times to
make
> sure its right. I have nightmares about being 10points over for
the
> weeks leading up to the comp. I develop a minor nervous complaint
and
> a nasty skin rash- doctor suggests I do not travel.
> b) I generate a spreadsheet which will calculate the value of each
> individual troop type, cross referenced against relative fighting
> effectiveness, to give a regression coefficient for my army-
attempt to
> write program which will do this automatically for armies I am
likely
> to face in the comp- forget to pick army or add up points
> c) I never add up the points of my armies- I do it by feel- hey-
its
> not cheating if you don't know.
> d) whoa......armies have points values ?? You'll be telling me
there
> are command structures next.
>
> Q8. List notification
> When asked what you are taking to a comp, you answer
>
> a) I haven't decided yet... you don't want to give anything away
> b) make vague comments about Bolt-shooters, jumbos, and Mongols...
turn
> up with Medieval French
> c) Saxons.... no-one will ask you again- you are clearly insane.
> d) Alans.... turn up with Hussites and two guys from next door...
both
> named Alan.
>
> Q9. List/Personality traits
> It is said that people tend to pick lists that reflect something
about
> themselves, therefore I tend to pick armies that have
>
> a. lots of regular high morale foot- I like control
> b. lots of Irregular A troops- I like trade stalls
> c. lots of bowmen- I like to keep my distance
> d. few morals and no sense of personal hygiene- others like to
keep
> their distance
>
> Q10. Accuracy of on table depiction
> My troops are
>
> a. always exactly as depicted- I once put a unit of Early Imperial
> Roman infantry on the table and the shield pattern may have been
dated
> to the reign of Valens- so to save confusion I declared this to my
> opponent at the beginning of the game (and reminded him at the
start of
> each bound)
> b. correctly depicted. I really can not play much though- I am
still
> waiting for an ancient army which has dancing bears, street vixen,
and
> elephants on bicycles
> c. well... I have an army. Yes just the one... and if you are not
> imaginative enough to recognise that these mounted medieval
crossbowmen
> are Alexandrian pike- then that is your problem.
> d. Troop types are generally ok.....mostly....well the base sizes
are
> right.... well they have the correct number of figures per
element...
> mostly... damm it I should have picked c
>
>
> So..... how did you score ?
>
> Greg P.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Todd Schneider]

While I agree that many of these lists look
unabalanced, I haven't seen any of them win a
tournament, at least from checking the NASAMW result
sites I haven't seen any of them win a tournament.
But then, I've only been checking the lists for about
two years now.

Todd


--- PHGamer@... wrote:

---------------------------------
While balanced lists are often the norm for
tournaments, there always seems
to be a truly unbalanced list, that it overwhelms any
tactics or troop types
designed to deal with it. Often the shock of these
lists alone are enough to
get them into the quarter finals.

To wit,
One Origins, there was a Sassanid Persian list with a
shock force of 10
elephants in one unit. Followed closely with the EHC,
who didn't care if they were
disordered.

An Alan list that was composed of mostly 36 man MC,L,B
units.

Midianite Arabs, so simple, so overwhelming. It only
has two troop types,
chain-guns and pillows.

Any list with more than 10 Knight units.

Any list with 20 elephants in it.

Early Germans, where half your points buys 5 48 man
MI,JLS,SH units.

All these lists have one thing in common, if you get
in their way, they roll
you over. And sometimes, getting out of the way
doesn't help either.

Phil


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


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/

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.

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 7/18/2004 00:30:19 Central Daylight Time,
thresh1642@... writes:

OK, Snarky question time:

As I understand it, the SIlla Korean List Derek used
has been out for awhile.>>

Yep. Crappy old H+C list we will only be living with for another few
months. HOWEVER - it is nothing more than an EHK/missile list where the
missiles
can be taken very efficiently. While the history of that list is very
questionable, I do not agree with Mark that Derek exploited a flaw in the
'system'.
He used a quite legal list that 'sounds' oriental but plays like early
burgundians. As long as his opponents played at it like a K/missile list, then
all they had to do was beat Derek instead of Derek *and* misconceptions about
the structure of the list.



So how come no one else used it first? >>
Derek is to be highly credited for seeing the potential of the list and
linking it to his style of play.



Does that mean there will be more than 1 Silla Korean
list at this years NICT?>>
That would be a dangerous long term investment given the shaky nature of
that list. I would 'guess' that the FHE version will not look the same.... :)

The bottom line - Derek won those games - not the little lead figures....

J


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

[Mark Stone]

--- On July 17 Todd Schneider said: ---

> While I agree that many of these lists look
> unabalanced, I haven't seen any of them win a
> tournament, at least from checking the NASAMW result
> sites I haven't seen any of them win a tournament.
> But then, I've only been checking the lists for about
> two years now.

Sure, other than Derek winning the national championship last year with his
monolithic 300+ Korean bowmen. Clearly just a gimmick though, and Derek must
have gotten lucky, yeah, that's it, no possibility that a clever player was
exploiting a flaw in the system... nah, that couldn't be it....


-Mark Stone

[Todd Schneider]

OK, Snarky question time:

As I understand it, the SIlla Korean List Derek used
has been out for awhile.

So how come no one else used it first?

Does that mean there will be more than 1 Silla Korean
list at this years NICT?

Todd

--- Mark Stone <mark@...> wrote:

---------------------------------
--- On July 17 Todd Schneider said: ---

> While I agree that many of these lists look
> unabalanced, I haven't seen any of them win a
> tournament, at least from checking the NASAMW result
> sites I haven't seen any of them win a tournament.
> But then, I've only been checking the lists for
about
> two years now.

Sure, other than Derek winning the national
championship last year with his
monolithic 300+ Korean bowmen. Clearly just a gimmick
though, and Derek must
have gotten lucky, yeah, that's it, no possibility
that a clever player was
exploiting a flaw in the system... nah, that couldn't
be it....


-Mark Stone

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/

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.

From a guy who has played Derek a few times, Derek rarely just gets
lucky. He plays best with large armies that occupy your forces, find
a weakness and exploits it with uncanny timing. I've seen him play
Silla, Byzantine, Medeval French, Indians with the same results.

The Silla are just his newest group of cheap foot backed by equally
cheap lancers.

Last year I played Feudal French against his Komnenan Byzantines at
Derekcon 30. He destroyed me in three bounds by using cheap spear
and bow units on my front and massing Reg D MC,L and LC B on a
flank. This forced me to dismount a EHK to hold the flank. That EHK
unit was later disordered and it didn't care if the Lancer was a SHK
or MC it routed just the same and let a hoard in behind my main force.

It's not a gimmick army, just well generalled. He exploited the fact
that many players don't know how to counter massed bow without using
a lot of their own force. So he can pick when and where to fight at
his advantage.

Wes

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 7/18/2004 00:30:19 Central Daylight Time,
> thresh1642@s... writes:
>
> OK, Snarky question time:
>
> As I understand it, the SIlla Korean List Derek used
> has been out for awhile.>>
>
> Yep. Crappy old H+C list we will only be living with for another
few
> months. HOWEVER - it is nothing more than an EHK/missile list
where the missiles
> can be taken very efficiently. While the history of that list is
very
> questionable, I do not agree with Mark that Derek exploited a flaw
in the 'system'.
> He used a quite legal list that 'sounds' oriental but plays like
early
> burgundians. As long as his opponents played at it like a
K/missile list, then
> all they had to do was beat Derek instead of Derek *and*
misconceptions about
> the structure of the list.
>
>
>
> So how come no one else used it first? >>
> Derek is to be highly credited for seeing the potential of the list
and
> linking it to his style of play.
>
>
>
> Does that mean there will be more than 1 Silla Korean
> list at this years NICT?>>
> That would be a dangerous long term investment given the shaky
nature of
> that list. I would 'guess' that the FHE version will not look the
same....
>
> The bottom line - Derek won those games - not the little lead
figures....
>
> J
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Phil Gardocki]

I know that unbalanced lists rarely take the cup, but, they are talked about,
and if we are not playing for war stories, then what are we playing for?

That being said, just recently, the Midianite Arabs took 5th place, out of
36, in the nationals, squeaking out a 5-0 against my Islamic Persians. The
same army also narrowly defeated my Selucid's, 5-1, to win the tournament at
Fall In.

Phil


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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 7/19/2004 06:40:23 Central Daylight Time, PHGamer@...
writes:

That being said, just recently, the Midianite Arabs took 5th place, out of
36, in the nationals, squeaking out a 5-0 against my Islamic Persians. The
same army also narrowly defeated my Selucid's, 5-1, to win the tournament
at
Fall In.



Lead does not win tourneys, a human does....

Jon


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

[Mark Stone]

--- On July 19 Jon Cleaves said: ---

>> In a message dated 7/19/2004 06:40:23 Central Daylight Time, PHGamer@a...
>> writes:
>>
>> That being said, just recently, the Midianite Arabs took 5th place, out of
>> 36, in the nationals, squeaking out a 5-0 against my Islamic Persians. The
>> same army also narrowly defeated my Selucid's, 5-1, to win the tournament
>> at Fall In.
>
> Lead does not win tourneys, a human does....
>
> Jon
>

Sure, Jon, whatever you say. But....

If Derek and I were to play 10 games in a row using whatever armies either of us
wanted, Derek would beat me 9 games out of 10. If, however, I get to play
Medieval French all 10 games and Derek has to play Anglo-Danish all 10 games,
then I will beat him 9 games out of 10.

In open competition where a-historical matchups are permitted, lists do matter,
because:

Unlike chess, players do not start off with the same pieces in the same
position. Furthermore, you have a point system that explicitly takes other
factors into consideration besides play balance (historical cost/rarity of
technology, training, etc.).

Consequently, for anyone whose _only_ consideration is optimizing a list for
open play, it's a mathematical certainty that there will be some troop types
that cost too much for their performance, and other troop types that
substantially outperform their cost. You have, by your own admission, built a
game system that guarantees this. I'm not saying it's a bad thing, but let's at
least be honest about what's going on.

So yes, Derek is a top calibre player. But a _big_ part of being that good is
knowing how to look at a list and see where the point system can be exploited
for open tournament play. Derek is an outstanding player at the table, but I
can still think of two or three others that are his equal or superior in that
regard. Where Derek is in a class by himself is picking and constructing a
list. And last year's Silla Koreans are a perfect example.


-Mark Stone

[joncleaves]

>
>Sure, Jon, whatever you say. But....>>

Mark, you should have just stopped there...lol

True, Derek and you are close enough that a bad matchup would swing it. Not at
all what I was trying to point out, nor to whom. My comments were for newer
players to get the game down with something in their style first and not be
caught up in the whole 'his *army* beat my *army* stuff'...

Jon

[Ewan McNay]

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Mark Stone <mark@d...> wrote:
> Consequently, for anyone whose _only_ consideration is optimizing a
list for
> open play, it's a mathematical certainty that there will be some
troop types
> that cost too much for their performance, and other troop types that
> substantially outperform their cost. You have, by your own
admission, built a
> game system that guarantees this. I'm not saying it's a bad thing,
but let's at
> least be honest about what's going on.

...

> So yes, Derek is a top calibre player. But a _big_ part of being
that good is
> knowing how to look at a list and see where the point system can be
exploited
> for open tournament play.

Both of these are self-evidently true, but not always appreciated or
acknowledged. Cataphract camels again for the first . For the
second, I would not think of it as exploiting the point system, but
that's a fair description - looking to see which armies have large
numbers of under-pointed troops, and in combinations that accentuate
their underpricing. List construction has, I think, a far larger
impact that Jon is claiming. And at decent-or-above levels of skill,
it becomes critical.

[joncleaves]

>> Consequently, for anyone whose _only_ consideration is optimizing a
>list for
>> open play, it's a mathematical certainty that there will be some
>troop types
>> that cost too much for their performance, and other troop types that
>> substantially outperform their cost. You have, by your own
>admission, built a
>> game system that guarantees this.>>

There is no point based gamne system for which this is not true. Warrior is no
different than any other such game in this regard.


<<  List construction has, I think, a far larger
>impact that Jon is claiming.>>

I claimed nothing about list *construction*. I have never been beaten, nor has
anyone I know, by a list alone. Midianties, or any other of Phil's examples, in
the hands of a newbie, won't permit him to beat a veteran.

<< And at decent-or-above levels of skill,
>it becomes critical.>>

Totally agree - at the top end of play, you need every edge. Last year's NICT
was an example of that...lol

Jon