Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

Boyd, I agree with you on the thread being one of the best.

I think Frank should post a defeinition for each of his ratings and then we can
use this framework to discuss armies from a comp standpoint.

Now to disgaree a little.

> The strength of this army is the battleline. "C" grade HI with
> JLS/sh backed by MI B/JLS are tougher than average. While not keen
> to face large numbers of pike armed foot, they can ward off all but
> SHK with shooting. Elephants are less of a problem and chariots are
> easy pickings for large units with bow armed second rank. They are
> slow and vulnerable to second bound charges, and once
> disordered they
> are going to loose. Some can have LTS. Rating Good.>>

If understand the troop type (HI JLS Sh front, MI B, JLS back rank) then I must
disagree with your comments about it. A back rank only of shooting isn't enough
to really hurt anyone and should be looked at for its ability to split the other
guy's shooting, not as something that will scare off shock troops or a better
battleline. Elephants may have a problem with this, but any K and any real
shock foot will waste this guy. I don't think you should be rated as good at
being batteline if pikes beat the crap out of you, let alone HTW/2HCT/2HCW
troops. This is vulnerable to EHK as much as SHK (you shoot them better but
still weakly, but get no JLS bonus) and I'd even be pleased to hit it with HK or
even HC given that if you make it big enough to resist one CPF from a lancer
attack, it is big enough to hit with mutliple mounted units.
Sure, if a 2E HC hits the center of a 3x2 block of this, it will lose - but
that's rookie stuff...lol You don't attack 1200 missile and light spear armed
foot with 300 HC and expect to win...

Not trying to mess with anyone - just another opinion.

Jon

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> Boyd, I agree with you on the thread being one of the best.
>
> I think Frank should post a defeinition for each of his ratings and
then we can use this framework to discuss armies from a comp
standpoint.

I would love to see something like a guide, but of course it would be
just an opinion guide. As Ewan pointed out behind Mark, Style of
play is key to the effectiveness of troops.

And another point, which I think is key to understanding our
difference of opinion below is the point level at which you play.
Playing at low point totals means few skirmishers and tough choices.
A 12E unit like below or even a 6E unit of the same is much tougher
to deal with at 1200 points than 1600 or 2000; this is mainly because
you have to commit so many resources to accomplish the task that it
is better to try and avoid it. At larger points, this unit certainly
would occupy a hill for the duriation.

Close order alway will rely upon touch rather than power, and as a
long time advocate of close order I think touch is often overlooked
by the high level players.

>
> Now to disgaree a little.

This is how we learn from each other, so Good! The differences in
playing style are so possible in Warrior that disagreement is a
standard rather than a worry. I'm sure you will agree.

>
> > The strength of this army is the battleline. "C" grade HI with
> > JLS/sh backed by MI B/JLS are tougher than average. While not
keen
> > to face large numbers of pike armed foot, they can ward off all
but
> > SHK with shooting. Elephants are less of a problem and chariots
are
> > easy pickings for large units with bow armed second rank. They
are
> > slow and vulnerable to second bound charges, and once
> > disordered they
> > are going to loose. Some can have LTS. Rating Good.>>
>
> If understand the troop type (HI JLS Sh front, MI B, JLS back rank)
then I must disagree with your comments about it. A back rank only
of shooting isn't enough to really hurt anyone and should be looked
at for its ability to split the other guy's shooting, not as
something that will scare off shock troops or a better battleline.

I am using a Lickert scale in my essesment and assumed Frank & Mark
were also. The scale is poor, marginal, average, good, excellent. I
would rate Pike armed, dual armed like Russ and Roman, and Han as
Excellent, not good. These guys can and will beat irregular LTS
which constitutes a good number of close order. If they survive the
first bound without rolling down, then 2hand weapons are going to be
sheildless and loose slowly. Simply they will give the player time
to counterpunch moreso than the majority of close order, thus good.

>Elephants may have a problem with this, but any K and any real shock
foot will waste this guy. I don't think you should be rated as good
at being batteline if pikes beat the crap out of you, let alone
HTW/2HCT/2HCW troops.

Again, they rate good against excellent battleline as noted above,
but do very well against hoplite and Fyrd types which I rate as
average. The shooting of any mounted will cause enough casualties
between prep and support that anything less than SHK or SHC will
likely be tired and disordered on impact. I've shot so many
elephants down that it isn't funny, so yes elephants should avoid
this formation unless 2 or more units working in tandum (something
expensive to do at lower points totals).

>This is vulnerable to EHK as much as SHK (you shoot them better but
still weakly, but get no JLS bonus) and I'd even be pleased to hit it
with HK or even HC given that if you make it big enough to resist one
CPF from a lancer attack, it is big enough to hit with mutliple
mounted units.

Certainly when impacted repeatedly, any close order will soon become
disordered and thus fail. Pike have a distinct advantage as we all
know, and thus rate as "excellent" IMO. The point being that from
experience anything mounted will take shooting at a 4 to start off.
Another point is that, as so often is pointed out here, this is in a
vaccume where the enemy can afford to send waves of lancers into a
large 168 point unit that occupies a 4 to 6 element frontage.
Certainly if someone where to allowcate 4x2E HC L/sh, then this unit
has done it's job well; the lack of enemy shock mounted elsewhere
means weakness to your own shock troops.

> Sure, if a 2E HC hits the center of a 3x2 block of this, it will
lose - but that's rookie stuff...lol You don't attack 1200 missile
and light spear armed foot with 300 HC and expect to win...

Let us look at 2 units of HC L/sh charging impetously from 160paces
away since for points value this is all the HC one might reasonably
be expected to afford for such a task. Without the chart, here, so...

prep shot is 4@4 to each, or 2 CPF. HC must charge or waver. They
charge

support shot is 8@2 or at least 3 CPF, so they hit shot down 3 and
probably disordered. Tired next bound.

per frontage:
HC fight 5@7-3-1 or 5@3
HI fight 6@2+1 or 6@3

HC break off tired, disordered and must rally within bowshot

HC roll up 4 the HI take 1 and recoil disordered
HI roll up 1 (or so) and the HC rout.

For HK, the same above but add one fatigue for charging, so they are
tired on impact.

I'll take that fight. The point is the bow change the equation. I
appologize if my figures are off here and there, but I don't have my
chart and can't be exact. I'm sure I'm not off by much, so Kentucky
windage disclaimer on numbers :)

And as you point out yourself, these guys are not there to fight
anyway but to keep enemy missiles off your own shock mounted which
they do very well...

Thus average army with good close order troops. :)

Wanax






>
> Not trying to mess with anyone - just another opinion.
>
> Jon

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 3/29/2004 12:30:22 PM Eastern Standard Time,
spocksleftball@... writes:

> I would love to see something like a guide, but of course it would be
> just an opinion guide. As Ewan pointed out behind Mark, Style of
> play is key to the effectiveness of troops. >.

It may be possible to agree on the rating scheme - who knows?
>
> And another point, which I think is key to understanding our
> difference of opinion below is the point level at which you play.
> Playing at low point totals means few skirmishers and tough choices.
> A 12E unit like below or even a 6E unit of the same is much tougher
> to deal with at 1200 points than 1600 or 2000;>>

I have been playing a great deal of 1200 to prep for the Call to Arms tourney
next month and do not feel this unit rates above avereage at any point value.
And if how good a unit is to outside factors, why just choose point value? Why
not table size, open v. theme or terrain? I was assuming we were talking
ratings in absolute terms, but hold that since the points investment in this
beast at 1200 requires you to use it as battle line and not keep it away from
trouble, my comments are *more* relevant in 1200 than 1600...lol

<< At larger points, this unit certainly
> would occupy a hill for the duriation. >>

Amen, bro.

> I am using a Lickert scale in my essesment and assumed Frank & Mark
> were also. The scale is poor, marginal, average, good, excellent.>>

Me too. This guy is average at best, IMO.

<<I
> would rate Pike armed, dual armed like Russ and Roman, and Han as
> Excellent, not good. >>

I would agree there. I am messing more with close order LTS, JLS these days...

The shooting of any mounted will cause enough casualties
> between prep and support that anything less than SHK or SHC will
> likely be tired and disordered on impact.>>

?? How is that? lol First, whoever sticks a mounted guy in front of this
without something that shoots drawing away the prep shot desrves to die. If the
rating shceme is based on the enemy making poor choices, every battleline could
be excellent..lol
As for support, 8 @ 0 v EHK makes them 5 @ 6, which still wins. If I have HK or
HC, I have to use more than 2E, but still win.

<< this is in a
> vaccume where the enemy can afford to send waves of lancers into a
> large 168 point unit that occupies a 4 to 6 element frontage.
> Certainly if someone where to allowcate 4x2E HC L/sh, then this unit
> has done it's job well; the lack of enemy shock mounted elsewhere
> means weakness to your own shock troops.>>

I could do it with 2x2E and a missile troop to draw off prep. And as I said
before, killing this thing in the battle line would be where I would want to
spend up to 4x2E HC - waver test city...

>
> Let us look at 2 units of HC L/sh charging impetously from 160paces
> away since for points value this is all the HC one might reasonably
> be expected to afford for such a task. Without the chart, here, so...
>
> prep shot is 4@4 to each, or 2 CPF. HC must charge or waver.>>

No one is going to charge into this with HC without something else drawing prep
fire unless you are teaching your newbies poorly...lol

Borax

Fine, you know best. You rate anything anyway you want.

Afterall, having a different opinion wrong anyway.

I will say that if you want to help/encourage newbies, you Jon need
to stop trying to do yourself a disservice as a means of getting at
me. you don't like me or my opinion then just remain silent or boot
me off the list.

Anyone would be a fool to send HC into any close order BTW. Check
your own charts. And if you don't think the person handling the
close order make the difference, then you are fooling yourself. I
have had considerable success fighting SHK bow and pike with this
army, so I don't see why you make it such a point to try and undercut
me.

I'm sure every new person wants you to tell them to run whatever does
well in an open tournament. You know, I don't know why I keep trying
to help and encourage people to play a game when the "editor" is so
actively trying to disregard other people's opinions on what makes
the game fun. Perhaps some self diagnostics are in order for you.

I thought we were here to rate armies, not pick at differences of
opinions, so this is why I was hessitant to enjoy it. I knew someone
would start talking big talk to quash discussion. Of course, Jon,
your opinion is better, and yes the great powers who win concur.
Let's all be like Jon.

What is your agenda, jon? Optimize player touranment performance so
that you only get 4 different armies at touranments, or help people
enjoy the game at their own level and method?

enjoy yourself, for I'm about done with this constant beating for no
reason.

Wanax

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 3/29/2004 1:09:19 PM Eastern Standard Time,
spocksleftball@... writes:

> Fine, you know best. You rate anything anyway you want.>.
>
> Afterall, having a different opinion wrong anyway.>>

Whoa, hey - I said it was a different opinion - not trying to portray it at all
as the only right answer. Just trying to give a different perspective on it.

> I will say that if you want to help/encourage newbies, you Jon need
> to stop trying to do yourself a disservice as a means of getting at
> me. you don't like me or my opinion then just remain silent or boot
> me off the list.>>

I was not at all trying to 'get at' anyone. I just disagreed with your rating
of HI JLS Sh/ MI JLS, B. Nothing more than that.

> Anyone would be a fool to send HC into any close order BTW.>>

I am not a fool and I did not attack you personally, Boyd.

<< Check
> your own charts. >>

I know them fairly well. Lance on HI is a 4, impetuous 6, charging 7. 5 at 7
is 30, which recoils the close and disorders them if they are 6 elements strong.
In order to change that you have to: shoot them down below 6, have an LTS/P or
do more back than they do to you. You *can* shoot HC down below 6 if they come
in alone with just a 2E unit. But if two units come in and one is on the end,
you get 4 @ 2 shooting which is only one, he hits 5 @ 6 and does more, the other
guy just sucks it up and adds a little to this. So, two HC can take this guy
down as long as they have someone to take away the prep shot.

<<. And if you don't think the person handling the
> close order make the difference, then you are fooling yourself. >>

I absoloutely DO think it makes a big difference. Could not AGREE more.

<< I
> have had considerable success fighting SHK bow and pike with this
> army, so I don't see why you make it such a point to try and undercut
> me.>>

It wasn't personal.

> I'm sure every new person wants you to tell them to run whatever does
> well in an open tournament. You know, I don't know why I keep trying
> to help and encourage people to play a game when the "editor" is so
> actively trying to disregard other people's opinions on what makes
> the game fun. >>

I didn't disgaree with the rest of your rating of your army or the last few
posts by Mark, Ewan and Frank. I simply disagree with your statements about
this one troop type and was offering a counter opinion. If I disregarded your
opinion, I would not have said anything at all.

<< Perhaps some self diagnostics are in order for you.>>

Hey, physician heal thyself. I didn't attack you, I merely disagreed with your
opinion of the characteristics of one troop type. In fact, I like those guys
and think they have a use, just not the one you ascribe.

<< What is your agenda, jon? Optimize player touranment performance so
> that you only get 4 different armies at touranments, or help people
> enjoy the game at their own level and method?>>

The latter. In this case, I feel that the First Crusade is a solid army - one
that is greater than the sum of its parts. I simply do not think that troop
should be used as a part of it in the way you described it. I think it should
be taken in two blocks and used to split HIS fire to help your HK/HC strike home
without dying in prep. But saying it always beats any mounted but SHK is giving
it abilities it does not have.

It does kill the heck out of elephants, though...lol

Jonax

My last commentary here.

1st Crusade is built upon the 18E of required close order foot.

This is the essentail detail of the army that it has a better than
average based of close order upon which to anchor your
counterattacks. With the bow/JLS armed second rank, they are more
than your average meatsickle like the Normans are stuck with.

At times Jon, when you continue to pick pick pick at one person's
opinion it will begin to resist. I personally disagree with much
said here, but I don't continue to point it out at every
opportunity. New players need to know IMO that there are good armies
that are fun to play and have competent advocates, but these armies
are not one of the dozen or so chosen tournament winners. I find 1st
Crusade to be an extremely enjoyable army, and for an irregular army
very flexible. My point is that if someone were hellbent on running
Sea People, then I would make it a point to help them optimize it
rather than disueding them.

Wanax

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 3/29/2004 3:08:30 PM Eastern Standard Time,
spocksleftball@... writes:

> My point is that if someone were hellbent on running
> Sea People, then I would make it a point to help them
> optimize it
> rather than disueding them.>.

Fair enough. I am not trying to continue to pick, but as First Cru is our
current example, how should I recommend to you to use your HI/MI JLS B units to
split enemy fire and not try to be the main stay of the battleline? or should I
try once and then just stop?

J