Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

That's not a bad idea Al.
I like it.

"Whatever you do boys... don't go into the woods"!
A general trying his best to avoid something in particular. A veto.
Perhaps if you predefined it when you chose terrain?
For example: "avoid woods" would remove/void one placed enemy woods,
"avoid minor water feature" could remove the offending river on a
certain roll. If they never chose/placed the item you wasted your pick.

I think it might be a better solution than forcing your opponent (or
yourself) to attack. No offence to anyone, but that sounds like a
"fudge" to me. I say if you don't want to attack, don't. Reaction has
it's own penalties, as opposed to action.

Sometimes armies are stuck in unfavourable circumstances, and the
poor charioteers have to fight across the river, but it really
shouldn't be every battle.
I used to play a certain Syracusan player quite often,
who always chose the same pre-fab cliffside-hill (rocky and steep
facing only me) to place his multitude of bolt shooters apon. I'd
think to myself, "I wish that one day I'd pick a place to fight that
didn't have a deadly cliff on which my enemy will certainly place his
bolt shooters". I learned how to deal with it, but it seems a bit
silly (and boring) sometimes. The river problem is much worse, and
harder to counter if your opponent is dedicated to that river.

I think your suggested rule could help this (albeit minor) problem.

I fear most people aren't going to want to permanently change the
standard tournament terrain rules, so anything other than an X rule
may meet with too much resistance.

It's kinda like the Elgin Marbles.
Deep down, we all know what the right thing to do is, but jeez, they
look so good on the mantle.

Noel.


--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Allan Lougheed" <redcoat24@...>
wrote:
>
> What about a "Remove one Terrain Item" option as a standard pick. For
> example, my choices could be Open, Brush, Hill, Remove One Item.
Make it
> available to anyone, but it only works on a 4 or 5+ roll.
>
> Eliminates the need for exhaustive revisit of the list rules, helps a
> general concerned with poor matchups, doesn't always work so it is
not a
> panacea.
>
> I don't agree that ancient combat methods are universal, some things
are
> just plain superior. Chariot based armies having to cross a river is
a prime
> example. The strength of the terrain generation system is that it
allows a
> player to be an actual general, and attempt to choose a battle field on
> favourable terms. As the commander of a Chariot based army, avoiding
a fight
> across a river is probably part of my overall strategy. So part of my
> Pre-Battle maneuvering is aimed at drawing my opponent away from major
> rivers. The dice decide how successfull I am.
>
> Just trying to look at this from a different point of view, hope it
helps.
> Some might say the Open Feature already accomplishes this.
>
> Allan

[Tim Grimmett]

Noel--

Did you every choose a brush and place it on top of his pre-surveyed location
for an artillery park?

Works like a charm.

Tim

Noel White <agrianian@...> wrote:
I used to play a certain Syracusan player quite often,
who always chose the same pre-fab cliffside-hill (rocky and steep
facing only me) to place his multitude of bolt shooters apon. I'd
think to myself, "I wish that one day I'd pick a place to fight that
didn't have a deadly cliff on which my enemy will certainly place his
bolt shooters". I learned how to deal with it,

---------------------------------
Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!

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

[Greg Regets]

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Noel White" <agrianian@...> wrote:

> I used to play a certain Syracusan player quite often,
> who always chose the same pre-fab cliffside-hill (rocky and steep
> facing only me) to place his multitude of bolt shooters apon. I'd
> think to myself, "I wish that one day I'd pick a place to fight that
> didn't have a deadly cliff on which my enemy will certainly place his
> bolt shooters".

Hell, I would roll the hill FOR him, and keep it clear. He would spend
the game shooting at light infantry, or move stuff in front of his
shooters to get rid of it.

Either way works. ;-)

[Mike Bard]

As the Syracusan individual who did place the hill, I would point out that
there are many solutions -- Woods or Brush, or simply not attacking there
with your cavalry.

In those days your pike killed my hoplites dead, so all you had to do was
put some LI opposite the hill to delay me, and run over my hoplites with
your pike. I don't consider this "fighting a defensive game". In fact, I
believe I generally sent a LC/HC/Celt combo "pod" to wipe out your cavalry
supported by the artillery...

As a whole counter-point to this thread, what do people consider happens
when the opponent force marches ditches opposite your HI line so that you
can't really attack him. Is playing defensively because of opponent placed
terrain count as delaying the game?

Michael Bard
That Greek Hoplite Guy

P.S. You will also note that I eventually stopped doing that.

>
> I used to play a certain Syracusan player quite often,
> who always chose the same pre-fab cliffside-hill (rocky and steep
> facing only me) to place his multitude of bolt shooters apon. I'd
> think to myself, "I wish that one day I'd pick a place to fight that
> didn't have a deadly cliff on which my enemy will certainly place his
> bolt shooters".

[Greg Regets]

I have no problem with the use of ditches, walls, water features,
other terrain, masses of skirmishers, whatever. While I do think two
lists give a "better" chance of dealing with this stuff ... I think
it's all part of the game.

Many times, it seems like the guys that cry the loudest about things
that delay, are guys that play super armies that are trying to bring
their super stuff into play. Guys with lesser armies, have to use
terrain, etc ... It's part of what you have to put up with, when you
play a super army.



--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Bard" <mwbard@...>
wrote:
>
> As the Syracusan individual who did place the hill, I would point
out that
> there are many solutions -- Woods or Brush, or simply not attacking
there
> with your cavalry.
>
> In those days your pike killed my hoplites dead, so all you had to
do was
> put some LI opposite the hill to delay me, and run over my hoplites
with
> your pike. I don't consider this "fighting a defensive game". In
fact, I
> believe I generally sent a LC/HC/Celt combo "pod" to wipe out your
cavalry
> supported by the artillery...
>
> As a whole counter-point to this thread, what do people consider
happens
> when the opponent force marches ditches opposite your HI line so
that you
> can't really attack him. Is playing defensively because of
opponent placed
> terrain count as delaying the game?
>
> Michael Bard
> That Greek Hoplite Guy
>
> P.S. You will also note that I eventually stopped doing that.
>
> >
> > I used to play a certain Syracusan player quite often,
> > who always chose the same pre-fab cliffside-hill (rocky and steep
> > facing only me) to place his multitude of bolt shooters apon. I'd
> > think to myself, "I wish that one day I'd pick a place to fight
that
> > didn't have a deadly cliff on which my enemy will certainly place
his
> > bolt shooters".
>

Chill out Mike.

I'm not accusing you of anything...
I think we both know how to counter the cliff-hill. I don't see to
many of those anymore.

What I want to say is that maybe a "specific terrain veto" isn't a bad
idea. Another (very minor) twist to a possibly repetitive
game/opponent scenario -- kinda like the major XXX features we are
using in the campaign.

The inclusion of a "specific terrain veto" would upset the balance of
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, and possibly prevent you from playing exactly the
same game you did last night.

Perhaps that is more clear.

Noel.