Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Don Coon]

Well, that is a bunch of points for a back-rank SHK you do not
> _need_, and being the regs of the knight corps now if you drop em off
> horses they can not fight well in two ranks. Only advantage I see is
> staying SHK if you get disordered. I guess I am grown accustomed to
> the point-efficient HYWE.>>

Are the HYWE really that effecient? 3/4 of the knights can not be HK. If
you take 2 generals, you can out 2 of the 6 required men at arms with them,
leaving you with 2 more bodies of 2E Men at arms. Since 3/4 must be the
uparmored type and you have taken 6E only 1E can be the cheap HK. So to
meet the mins you wind up with 2 generals 2E SHK, 1 2E SHK, and 1 1E SHK+1E
HK? Am I reading this wrong?

Don

[John Murphy]

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, <jjendon@c...> wrote:
> 3/4 of the knights can not be HK. If
> you take 2 generals, you can out 2 of the 6 required men at arms
with them,
> leaving you with 2 more bodies of 2E Men at arms. Since 3/4 must
be the
> uparmored type and you have taken 6E only 1E can be the cheap HK.

Wrong. At least you better be or I have been using illegal lists for
a year now.

It is "up to 3/4" for the uparmored "rest" for the shieldless HK. So
you could have them _all_ shieldless HK if you wanted, and can
uparmor only those you wish. In fact, you can not uparmor more than
3/4.

So to
> meet the mins you wind up with 2 generals 2E SHK, 1 2E SHK, and 1
1E SHK+1E
> HK?

If you take 2 HK back-rankers for gens, then your other two units can
be SHK/HK half-half. That gives you 2 SHK and 4 HK elements which
falls within the upto 3/4 SHK and rest HK. You wind up with 2 gens
SHK/HK and 2 other units SHK/HK. Four SHK units, two generals, all
for the very cheap 103 pts/unit aside from cost of generals.

The only cheaper SHK units out there have HC back-rankers so you lose
the 2E dismount ability, which the shieldless HK are perfectly suited
for becoming EHI JLS (no shield) backing SHI 2HCW (also no shield
being left with the horses) - but 2HCW counts shielded first contact
and who cares if you are shieldless to shooting when you are SHI!

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 5/15/2004 11:58:19 Central Daylight Time,
jjmurphy@... writes:
backing SHI 2HCW (also no shield
being left with the horses) - but 2HCW counts shielded first contact
and who cares if you are shieldless to shooting when you are SHI!>>

SHI being shieldless when dismounting is under review. The language in that
section is a holdover and looks to be there for more barker-esque historical
color than meant as a rule. It is possible that we will find that SHI gets off
its horse with whatever shield it does or does not have.
And it does matter to be shieldless SHI - if you take 2 CPF in prep. The
whole issue of how much of a shield a man in full plate needed, etc. is being
looked at because we may be living with something very inaccurate. Don't know
yet.
J


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

[Don Coon]

> leaving you with 2 more bodies of 2E Men at arms. Since 3/4 must
> be the
> > uparmored type and you have taken 6E only 1E can be the cheap HK.
>
> Wrong. At least you better be or I have been using illegal lists for
> a year now.

> It is "up to 3/4" for the uparmored "rest" for the shieldless HK. So
> you could have them _all_ shieldless HK if you wanted, and can
> uparmor only those you wish. In fact, you can not uparmor more than
> 3/4.

WOW! Talk about a reading FU. Right you are. I had my list completely
backwards! Now I have a whole bunch of points to spend. Thanks for the
enlightenment dude.

Don