Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Mark Stone]

Thanks to everyone for the early posts regarding Historicon activity. For those
of us who couldn't make it, it was nice to have some sense of what was going
on. And congrats to Derek, who continues to prove himself a worthy champion and
creative list constructor.

Speaking of which: I know Scott will post all the lists at some point, but could
somebody (Ewan perhaps?) who faced Derek post a rough description of what his
list was like? I know, with 19 elephants there isn't much else to the list, but
still.... What size were his elephant units? Did he have any that _didn't_ have
generals? Did he put LI on the base of his elephants? If so, were they regular
(I think the Khmer have that option, but I'm not sure)?


-Mark Stone

[Ewan McNay]

Mark Stone wrote:
> Thanks to everyone for the early posts regarding Historicon activity. For
those
> of us who couldn't make it, it was nice to have some sense of what was going
> on. And congrats to Derek, who continues to prove himself a worthy champion
and
> creative list constructor.

Yep.

> Speaking of which: I know Scott will post all the lists at some point, but
could
> somebody (Ewan perhaps?) who faced Derek post a rough description of what his
> list was like? I know, with 19 elephants there isn't much else to the list,
but
> still.... What size were his elephant units? Did he have any that _didn't_
have
> generals? Did he put LI on the base of his elephants? If so, were they regular
> (I think the Khmer have that option, but I'm not sure)?

Actually, there was a *lot* more to the list, alas. Derek had no
base-mounted LI, and only one 4-man detachment. I think that there
were 5 2-elephant units and 3 3-elephant; from memory, the 3-El units
had only one crewman, while the others were double-crewed. All that I
ever found out the morale of were IrrB. He had 3 Sub generals and an
Ally (which I confess I didn't think was legal, otherwise I'd have had
another general myself); the Subs were all in 2-El units, while the
Ally was in a 3 and commanded the other two 3s also.

In addition, he had 3 16-man units of Reg C LHI JLS, Sh; 3 16-man
units of Reg C LMI B; 5 LI units (3 4-man JLS, Sh and 2 larger with B)
and some compulsory HC at the back (with the CinC?).

More in my writeup, in progress.

E

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 7/26/2004 14:06:02 Central Daylight Time,
mark@... writes:

then the total of CinC, subs, and allies cannot be more than 4, regardless of
how many may be available of each individual type.



True. again, without a list rule.

My memory of the list was CINC, 2 x sub, 1x ally. I am not aware that
anything was wrong, but I will defer to Scott.

Jon


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

[Mark Stone]

--- On July 26 Ewan McNay said: ---

>
> He had 3 Sub generals and an Ally (which I confess I didn't think was legal,
> otherwise I'd have had another general myself)
>

Ewan, I think you are correct about that not being legal. Presumably Jon will
give us the definitive answer, but under "General Concepts" in the army list
books it says: "Unless otherwise specified in a specific list, no army can have
more than 4 generals regardless of how many are listed as available overall."

Admittedly, this could be better worded, but I've always assumed this to mean
that unless the list notes specifically allow more than 4 generals (and I'm
not aware of any lists with notes to this effect; Khmer certainly does not),
then the total of CinC, subs, and allies cannot be more than 4, regardless of
how many may be available of each individual type.

An honest mistake on Derek's part, I'm sure, and like I said the wording could
be clearer.

Jon, can you give us a definite answer on this one?


-Mark Stone

Were any X rules used at Historicon or was is straight Warrior ?.

Kingo

----- Original Message -----
From: <JonCleaves@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 2004 8:15 AM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Historicon results


>
> In a message dated 7/26/2004 14:06:02 Central Daylight Time,
> mark@... writes:
>
> then the total of CinC, subs, and allies cannot be more than 4,
regardless of
> how many may be available of each individual type.
>
>
>
> True. again, without a list rule.
>
> My memory of the list was CINC, 2 x sub, 1x ally. I am not aware that
> anything was wrong, but I will defer to Scott.
>
> Jon
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

[Don Coon]

> ever found out the morale of were IrrB. He had 3 Sub generals and an
> Ally (which I confess I didn't think was legal, otherwise I'd have had
> another general myself);

I too would think this illegal. The list books say a max of 4 generals
regardless of how many are listed as available. Do the Khmer have a list
rule or something?

Don

[scott holder]

Nothing was *wrong* per se. The 4 general allowance is designed for the FHE
lists. The older lists were not covered specifically with this. Probably not
as clear as I should have been. This is why I want list work done so we don't
have these issues.

-----Original Message-----
From: JonCleaves@... [mailto:JonCleaves@...]
Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 5:16 PM
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Historicon results



In a message dated 7/26/2004 14:06:02 Central Daylight Time,
mark@... writes:

then the total of CinC, subs, and allies cannot be more than 4, regardless of
how many may be available of each individual type.



True. again, without a list rule.

My memory of the list was CINC, 2 x sub, 1x ally. I am not aware that
anything was wrong, but I will defer to Scott.

Jon


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





Yahoo! Groups Links

Scott:



Thanks for allowing Dennis Shorthouse and I to "timeshare" a slot in the
15mm Open at Historicon. Since Dennis is the owner of On Military Matters,
and I'm one of the crew at this very large and popular booth at Historicon,
it is difficult to find the time to participate.



I was surprised we finished 4th or 5th if I remember your results post
accurately. If my Indian Ally General didn't roll a catastrophe on the last
turn of my second game, my 3-3 game would have been a 5-1. Even worse, the
catastrophe occurred against a unit that already was shaken and routed in
the same combat by my other elephants. I got greedy, didn't need to involve
him. A cascade of waiver checks followed, all which failed, causing a
command to achieve retreat orders. I learned a lesson in my first
Historicon tournament.



Also, I wanted to thank Jake and Bill for allowing me to pull off the most
successful HC L charge I ever launched in our "grudge match" on Friday
night. Jon looked fairly apoplectic upon arriving to the game and
witnessing the carnage. Seems that Saladin has been avenged, both sides
have now had "bad games". Thanks for being good sports to all of FHE.



Looking forward to next year's cage match!



Fred Stratton





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