Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Derek Downs]

Does anyone on this list play DBR?

I recently acquired a number of figs and know nothing about the game.

Derek


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

[Kelly Wilkinson]

I suggest you wait for the Warrior version of Renaissance. Nothing else is truly
worthy. But, if your really wanting to play Renaissance now, Armati is not bad.

kw

darnd022263@... wrote:
Does anyone on this list play DBR?

I recently acquired a number of figs and know nothing about the game.

Derek


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



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! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

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

[Jeff Zorn]

Howdy,

Well, you could join the yahoo DBM group for awhile and ask around
there. It has been discussed on occasion. A search through the
archive under DBR will turn up the past discussions.

Jeff Zorn

At 07:02 AM 10/28/2005, you wrote:
>Does anyone on this list play DBR?
>
>I recently acquired a number of figs and know nothing about the game.
>
>Derek


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

[Ed Forbes]

Not many play it these days, but I have always prefered WRG's 2nd Ed Renaissance
rules myself.
Ed Forbes

-- kelly wilkinson <jwilkinson62@...> wrote:
I suggest you wait for the Warrior version of Renaissance. Nothing else is truly
worthy. But, if your really wanting to play Renaissance now, Armati is not bad.

kw

darnd022263@... wrote:
Does anyone on this list play DBR?

I recently acquired a number of figs and know nothing about the game.

Derek


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



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! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

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





Yahoo! Groups Links







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

Greetings Ed,
There is a reason not many play it, its not that good. It reminds me
of WRG 6th. I would think using a few small modifications you could
use Warrior and the 2nd ed WRG lists.

-- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "eforbes100@j..."
<eforbes100@j...> wrote:
>
> Not many play it these days, but I have always prefered WRG's 2nd Ed
Renaissance rules myself.
> Ed Forbes
>

[Ewan McNay]

I think this is probably true, although gunpowder alters things.

I played a *lot* of Gush (the author's name, and our colloquiallism for
the rules) when I first started wargaming, and the biggest problem was the
domination of cav, especially A class cav; foot were *almost* useless
against competent opposition. Wallachian A class LC would charge formed
square and win...


...sure was fun though; my winged hussars charging with lance, dropping
that for their pistols in round 2, then throwing them away in favour of an
axe on round 3 .

scsabrecoach wrote:

> Greetings Ed,
> There is a reason not many play it, its not that good. It reminds me
> of WRG 6th. I would think using a few small modifications you could
> use Warrior and the 2nd ed WRG lists.
>
> -- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "eforbes100@j..."
> <eforbes100@j...> wrote:
>
>>Not many play it these days, but I have always prefered WRG's 2nd Ed
>
> Renaissance rules myself.
>
>>Ed Forbes
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Jeff Zorn]

Howdy,

OTOH if you go to any of the PA cons you'll find lots of people
playing it through the Renaissance Wargame Society (formerly US Pike
and Shot
Federation) http://www.renaissancewargamesociety.com/index.shtm
Oddly enough they are often set up right next to the Warrior tables :-)

Jeff Zorn

At 12:40 PM 10/28/2005, you wrote:
>Greetings Ed,
>There is a reason not many play it, its not that good. It reminds me
>of WRG 6th. I would think using a few small modifications you could
>use Warrior and the 2nd ed WRG lists.
>
>-- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "eforbes100@j..."
><eforbes100@j...> wrote:
> >
> > Not many play it these days, but I have always prefered WRG's 2nd Ed
>Renaissance rules myself.
> > Ed Forbes
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


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

[Ed Forbes]

I beg to differ on foot being almost worthless in 2nd ed. My late Austrian Army
( almost all foot ) brought cav armies to a solid halt. Combined arms with
salvo muskets and counter charging cav subunits would win against the heaviest A
class cav every time. It was pike armies that gave me problems, not cav armies.

Gush does play like WRG 6th ed. And this is a bad thing how?
Ed

-- Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@...> wrote:

I think this is probably true, although gunpowder alters things.

I played a *lot* of Gush (the author's name, and our colloquiallism for
the rules) when I first started wargaming, and the biggest problem was the
domination of cav, especially A class cav; foot were *almost* useless
against competent opposition. Wallachian A class LC would charge formed
square and win...


...sure was fun though; my winged hussars charging with lance, dropping
that for their pistols in round 2, then throwing them away in favour of an
axe on round 3 .

scsabrecoach wrote:

> Greetings Ed,
> There is a reason not many play it, its not that good. It reminds me
> of WRG 6th. I would think using a few small modifications you could
> use Warrior and the 2nd ed WRG lists.
>
> -- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "eforbes100@j..."
> <eforbes100@j...> wrote:
>
>>Not many play it these days, but I have always prefered WRG's 2nd Ed
>
> Renaissance rules myself.
>
>>Ed Forbes
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>





Yahoo! Groups Links







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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 10/28/2005 22:34:07 Central Standard Time,
sirkev_2001@... writes:

If the Horsemen come out with a Warrior version I am all over it!!!!


Renaissance Warrior is definitely on the list of things to do. Just not on
this year's list....lol

J


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

Yes pike is very difficult to defeat, you have to gang up on them. I started
playing DBR but will never again, too many strange rules and just not a
realistic game IMHO. The Gush rules are fun, and Principles of War Renn. Rules
are enjoyable as well, though they have some odd basing ideas. You can use the
basic DBX basing and they still play well. If the Horsemen come out with a
Warrior version I am all over it!!!! I would love to field the Landsknechts
again!
Kevin

"eforbes100@..." <eforbes100@...> wrote:
I beg to differ on foot being almost worthless in 2nd ed. My late Austrian Army
( almost all foot ) brought cav armies to a solid halt. Combined arms with
salvo muskets and counter charging cav subunits would win against the heaviest A
class cav every time. It was pike armies that gave me problems, not cav armies.

Gush does play like WRG 6th ed. And this is a bad thing how?
Ed

-- Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@...> wrote:

I think this is probably true, although gunpowder alters things.

I played a *lot* of Gush (the author's name, and our colloquiallism for
the rules) when I first started wargaming, and the biggest problem was the
domination of cav, especially A class cav; foot were *almost* useless
against competent opposition. Wallachian A class LC would charge formed
square and win...


...sure was fun though; my winged hussars charging with lance, dropping
that for their pistols in round 2, then throwing them away in favour of an
axe on round 3 .

scsabrecoach wrote:

> Greetings Ed,
> There is a reason not many play it, its not that good. It reminds me
> of WRG 6th. I would think using a few small modifications you could
> use Warrior and the 2nd ed WRG lists.
>
> -- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "eforbes100@j..."
> <eforbes100@j...> wrote:
>
>>Not many play it these days, but I have always prefered WRG's 2nd Ed
>
> Renaissance rules myself.
>
>>Ed Forbes
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>





Yahoo! Groups Links







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



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! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

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

[Todd Schneider]

I know Jon has talked baout it as a future product,
but it's at least two other "Rules sets" away.

Todd

--- Kevin Rounsaville <sirkev_2001@...> wrote:

> Yes pike is very difficult to defeat, you have to
> gang up on them. I started playing DBR but will
> never again, too many strange rules and just not a
> realistic game IMHO. The Gush rules are fun, and
> Principles of War Renn. Rules are enjoyable as well,
> though they have some odd basing ideas. You can use
> the basic DBX basing and they still play well. If
> the Horsemen come out with a Warrior version I am
> all over it!!!! I would love to field the
> Landsknechts again!
> Kevin
>
> "eforbes100@..." <eforbes100@...> wrote:
> I beg to differ on foot being almost worthless in
> 2nd ed. My late Austrian Army ( almost all foot )
> brought cav armies to a solid halt. Combined arms
> with salvo muskets and counter charging cav subunits
> would win against the heaviest A class cav every
> time. It was pike armies that gave me problems, not
> cav armies.
>
> Gush does play like WRG 6th ed. And this is a bad
> thing how?
> Ed
>
> -- Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@...> wrote:
>
> I think this is probably true, although gunpowder
> alters things.
>
> I played a *lot* of Gush (the author's name, and our
> colloquiallism for
> the rules) when I first started wargaming, and the
> biggest problem was the
> domination of cav, especially A class cav; foot were
> *almost* useless
> against competent opposition. Wallachian A class LC
> would charge formed
> square and win...
>
>
> ...sure was fun though; my winged hussars charging
> with lance, dropping
> that for their pistols in round 2, then throwing
> them away in favour of an
> axe on round 3 .
>
> scsabrecoach wrote:
>
> > Greetings Ed,
> > There is a reason not many play it, its not that
> good. It reminds me
> > of WRG 6th. I would think using a few small
> modifications you could
> > use Warrior and the 2nd ed WRG lists.
> >
> > -- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com,
> "eforbes100@j..."
> > <eforbes100@j...> wrote:
> >
> >>Not many play it these days, but I have always
> prefered WRG's 2nd Ed
> >
> > Renaissance rules myself.
> >
> >>Ed Forbes
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>
>
> 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! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in
> one click.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 10/29/2005 09:59:46 Central Standard Time,
John_the_OFM@... writes:

Why not have a poll on the site, on what list members would like to see next?
What IS on the menu next, by the way? I would be more inclined to buy
Renaissance Warrior, and I suppose the lists, than I would Siege or Naval.
I am now being seduced to the Dark Side, via The Sword and the Flame
Fantasy, so if FW is next on the list, bring it out quick!
Of course, I am a rules junkie anyway, so if both sets are compatible basing
wise, I see no problem.



We did a poll and Warrior Battles is next, followed by Campaign Warrior.
I'd be happy to do a new poll soon and see if the long term desires have
changed, but WB is absolutely next.

Fantasy Warrior is out in draft in the files section of the FantasyWarrior
yahoo group - it is a playable game and has been for some time. We have
already run several tourneys in it and two campaigns with a third planned. As
we
have said, if a list you want to play isn't there, we'll do it for you.

Jon




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

Why not have a poll on the site, on what list members would like to see next?
What IS on the menu next, by the way? I would be more inclined to buy
Renaissance Warrior, and I suppose the lists, than I would Siege or Naval.
I am now being seduced to the Dark Side, via The Sword and the Flame Fantasy, so
if FW is next on the list, bring it out quick!
Of course, I am a rules junkie anyway, so if both sets are compatible basing
wise, I see no problem.

John the OFM Carroll


----- Original Message -----
From: JonCleaves@...<mailto:JonCleaves@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com<mailto:WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 11:43 PM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: DBR



In a message dated 10/28/2005 22:34:07 Central Standard Time,
sirkev_2001@...<mailto:sirkev_2001@...> writes:

If the Horsemen come out with a Warrior version I am all over it!!!!


Renaissance Warrior is definitely on the list of things to do. Just not on
this year's list....lol

J


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





Yahoo! Groups Links








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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 10/29/2005 15:47:37 Central Standard Time,
jjmurphy@... writes:

When you polled before was RW on the list? I had not thought it was
at the time but I guess I am mistaken.



It was not. I am pretty sure that Warrior folks want more Warrior support
products out instead of me leaving Warrior for a year or two to do RW. We'll
see... I will say that what I am looking to do once the book is out is get
one or two more people involved in writing Warrior stuff and if that happens,
then maybe I can do RW at the same time I am supervising them.
But I need the Warrior rulebook done first.


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

[John Murphy]

Jon - I am all over this drooling too.

When you polled before was RW on the list? I had not thought it was
at the time but I guess I am mistaken.

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 10/29/2005 09:59:46 Central Standard Time,
> John_the_OFM@m... writes:
>
> Why not have a poll on the site, on what list members would like
to see next?
> What IS on the menu next, by the way? I would be more inclined
to buy
> Renaissance Warrior, and I suppose the lists, than I would Siege
or Naval.
> I am now being seduced to the Dark Side, via The Sword and the
Flame
> Fantasy, so if FW is next on the list, bring it out quick!
> Of course, I am a rules junkie anyway, so if both sets are
compatible basing
> wise, I see no problem.
>
>
>
> We did a poll and Warrior Battles is next, followed by Campaign
Warrior.
> I'd be happy to do a new poll soon and see if the long term
desires have
> changed, but WB is absolutely next.
>
> Fantasy Warrior is out in draft in the files section of the
FantasyWarrior
> yahoo group - it is a playable game and has been for some time.
We have
> already run several tourneys in it and two campaigns with a third
planned. As we
> have said, if a list you want to play isn't there, we'll do it
for you.
>
> Jon
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>