Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

<< But having the LI move out of the rough terrain just to cancel the
chariot charge seems too, too "gamey". Same with Cavalry charges
canceled by Infantry charges that would never hit the Cavalry before
the Cavalry hit its Cavalry target through prorating of distance. I
think that the waver tests sometime fails to account for battlelust
or tunnel vision by troops or leaders. >>

Could you give me a more specific example so I could explain the reasoning?

<<The other point is raised by the LTS and JLS posting. I've noticed a
definite "plus the kitchen sink" syndrome. Just because troops may
be armed with LTS and carry some JLS plus armor and shield, it
doesn't mean they always had all with them or could use them
simultaneously. Could someone please explain how soldiers that are
charging or preparing to receive that charge can throw JLS and then
use the LTS?>>

Please remember that an element is several ranks of real soldiers deep.
Javelins may be thrown over the heads of actual front rankers. Also, pila
and javelins were indeed thrown by men carrying other weapons even in the
front rank. Reenactors have thrown such weapons further than 40 paces and
have thrown them with the enemy closer than 40 paces and still had time to
'switch'. Nothing 'gamey' here.

Please be careful not to confuse ranks of elements and which figures count as
fighting/shooting and real ranks of men on the ground. The first is a game
mechanic. A 2x2 legionaire unit is not 16 men in two ranks of men, it is 16
figures in two ranks of figures. In real life (which we simulate FOR EFFECT
with the figures fighting and rank of elements mechanic), it is
approximately 800 men in 8 ranks of men.

I'm new to the list and still working my way through the 15 Jul
ruleset. I have played two games so far (1-1), but I have already
formed two impressions.

The first is that this game lends itself to "gamey situations" that
appear not to be based on historical tactics or events. I have no
problem with LI in rough terrain prepared to shoot at chariots
roaring by or pouncing on any stragglers that come back that way.
But having the LI move out of the rough terrain just to cancel the
chariot charge seems too, too "gamey". Same with Cavalry charges
canceled by Infantry charges that would never hit the Cavalry before
the Cavalry hit its Cavalry target through prorating of distance. I
think that the waver tests sometime fails to account for battlelust
or tunnel vision by troops or leaders.

The other point is raised by the LTS and JLS posting. I've noticed a
definite "plus the kitchen sink" syndrome. Just because troops may
be armed with LTS and carry some JLS plus armor and shield, it
doesn't mean they always had all with them or could use them
simultaneously. Could someone please explain how soldiers that are
charging or preparing to receive that charge can throw JLS and then
use the LTS? Given the short distance that the JLS can be thrown
(check out The Roman Army website), there is just not enough time to
switch. Anyone out there ever tried to throw a JLS while carrying a
shield and a 10ft LTS in formation? I would think that the front two
ranks would be busy making sure that their formation is tight and
aligned for maximum effectiveness. Therefore I would think that the
reasonable ruling would be that the LTS attack at 1.5 and the third
rank throws JLS at .5. If there is no charging, then all three ranks
could throw.

These comments are not meant as criticism, but the first impressions
of a former infantryman and longtime wargamer

[Greg Regets]

Lets just face the issue head on.

It is indeed a bit of a "gamey" system. Only Steve Spurrier could come up with a more complicated offensive equasion. If you play your x's and o's right, you can overcome almost any odds.
Having said that, it is also by far the best system from a players point of view or a historical point of view, in my opinion.
I wouldn't trade it for all the DBM's, Tactica's and 6th Editions, combined!!

Greg

P.S. On the scythed chariot issue, as has been pointed out that on several occasions, special care was taken to give these things a clear path in which to fight. I'm sure the writers will weigh that against any other information they have. On a personal note, I'm still amazed that scythed chariots and naptha throwers are getting more special attention than things like Varangian Guardsmen, a truly worthless troop type with a fearsom historical reputation. But then, I have already beat that horse once already, .

[scott holder]

I wouldn't trade it for all the DBM's, Tactica's and 6th Editions,
combined!!

>I can't comment on Tactica, I an comment on 6th edition and DBM. Play DBM
long enough and if you played 6th edition, you'll be struck by the similar
"gameyness" of the two systems. Sure the mechanics are worlds apart but all
the little nitnoid "gamey" things I routinely see done in DBM are much much
more akin to 6th edition than 7th. I'm not saying anything is "better", I'm
simply saying that I've yet to find a system that's not gamey. My little
dabling in Armati hints at fewer "gamey" features there. I've not played
Terry Gore's Ancient Warfare or Medieval Warfare to know about those either.

Scott
List Ho

[Patrick Byrne]

The points I would make is that in Warrior....1. A 'Bound' is not a 1 minute
instantaneous item. Each bound is designed to cover the span of 15 minutes
(plus or minus a few). So the question is "What weapons could you wield or
switch out in the span of 15 minutes". I have seen men equivalent to LMI
throw 3 hatchets at close range and charge into combat over broken terrain in
the time span of 15 minutes. In addition, I have seen the archer who gets
off 10 to 15 shots then has time to switch to his side arm and defend
himself. So I would have to say that in the span of 15 minutes, the
effective use of multiple weapons can be acheived.

2. Whether or not the above situation is historical, I could not say; but
Warrior's whole point system is set up to cover the 'effectiveness' of the
troop type and quality. With that, the conclusion is that the troops armed
with JLS fought more effectively (verse those troops which it receives the
JLS+) than the troops who were not equiped (or trained) with JLS.

Just my spin.
-PB



> Anyone out there ever tried to throw a JLS while carrying a
> shield and a 10ft LTS in formation? I would think that the front two
> ranks would be busy making sure that their formation is tight and
> aligned for maximum effectiveness. Therefore I would think that the
> reasonable ruling would be that the LTS attack at 1.5 and the third
> rank throws JLS at .5. If there is no charging, then all three ranks
> could throw.
>
> These comments are not meant as criticism, but the first impressions
> of a former infantryman and longtime wargamer
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/