Warrior Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules
A Four Horsemen Enterprises Rules Set
 
  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups AlbumAlbum   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Includes one RULE QUESTION, Polybians Romans this weekend

 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> Egroup Archives
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2778
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Mon Feb 20, 2006 4:20 pm    Post subject: Includes one RULE QUESTION, Re: Re: Polybians Romans this we


I'll post more a little later on the fun that was BillCon - I'm sorry,
Ludes Praesidentorum. I sadly didn't get to face the Polybians myself,
but from observation their line was very short - not unexpected, but still
a worry, and one that will only get worse with Peter's (correct)
observation about the need for reserves. Of course, not allowing an
entire line of Frankish foot to get off their impetuous charges would also
help Smile.

I have some mental notes on a couple of rules questions/issues. One which
is to mind now, though: I faced Jacob's hussites in my second game, and we
looked at the ways they move/deploy. As far as we can tell, provided that
one element (which can be the end element of a 9-wide wagon laager) stays
still, the other elements can, in one tactical move phase, deploy from any
block to any other block; for instance, a 9-wide laager on the otherside
of that end element, for a net frontage expansion/contraction of 16
elements in one move. That seemed, ah, odd Smile. Did the language covering
this (in the online rules addenda) intend for this to be the case?


On Mon, 20 Feb 2006, Peter Celella wrote:

> Well:
>
> After playing this weekend, I must state, you guys were right - there
> is too much Spanish foot in this list. I played a Late Hungarian list
> and a Merovigian Frank list, and in both games, the Spanish were
> essentially nothing but targets.
>
> The legions were fun to play with the new rules, but even with these,
> in straight up matchups with the barbarian warbands, did not win. I
> think that you need a second legion to back up the first and charge in
> after the first round of combat - so maybe what is needed is a
> combination of 2E and 4E legion units. And most definitely more velites.
>
> I'm going to still work on this. I think this army can be definitely
> made a competitive one, if not a 'killer' one.
>
> Peter
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Celella" <pcelella@...> wrote:
> >
> > Sure Jon, I don't mind sharing. Here it goes:
> >
> > Polybian Roman
> >
> > CINC 2E RA HC JLS,Sh 160
> > Principes/Hastati 3x4E RC HI HTW,Sh 3x106
> > Velites 2x2E RC LI JLS,Sh 2x26
> > Triari 4E RB HI LTS,Sh 122
> > Peltasts 4E RC LMI LTS,JLS,Sh 90
> > Italian Infantry 4E RB LHI/LMI JLS,Sh 106
> > Slingers 4E RC LI S,Sh 42
> > Tarantine Cavalry 4E RC LC JLS,Sh 74
> >
> > Spanish Ally 2E IB HC JLS,Sh 120
> > Light Cavalry 4E IB/IC LC JLS,Sh 77
> > Caetrati 6E IC LI JLS,Sh 61
> > Scutarii 2x6E 1E IA,5E IC LMI HTW,JLS,Sh 2x103
> > Celtiberians 2x4E IB LMI HTW,JLS,Sh 2x85
> >
> > 35 Scouting Points, 1598 Total Points
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> Egroup Archives All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group