Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Doug]

>>>
My first army was Theodoran Byzantine, the WRG
predecessor to FHE's Later Paleologan Byzantine
>>>

Just realizing that the FHE list books take up a lot more shelf space
than the WRG list books even accounting for the different paper &
binding.

So now I'm wondering if the new lists are a 1:1 replacement; and if
not which WRG lists have been split into more than one list, and if
any completely new lists have been created (other than the American
lists).

[Mark Stone]

--- On Dec 1 Doug said: ---

> So now I'm wondering if the new lists are a 1:1 replacement; and if
> not which WRG lists have been split into more than one list, and if
> any completely new lists have been created (other than the American
> lists).

Well, I expect the FHE response to this to be "WRG lists? What are those?" Which
is as they should respond.

From my point of view, no, there is no 1:1 correspondence, and there doesn't
appear to ever have been any intent for there to be. The FHE army lists reflect
what they think the army breakdown should be; no more, no less.


-Mark Stone

[Doug]

I'm not talking about the line-item contents of the lists.

What I want to know is "book X list number Y" the same "army" for
both versions?

>--- On Dec 1 Doug said: ---
>
>> So now I'm wondering if the new lists are a 1:1 replacement; and if
>> not which WRG lists have been split into more than one list, and if
>> any completely new lists have been created (other than the American
>> lists).
>
>Well, I expect the FHE response to this to be "WRG lists? What are
>those?" Which
>is as they should respond.
>
>From my point of view, no, there is no 1:1 correspondence, and there doesn't
>appear to ever have been any intent for there to be. The FHE army
>lists reflect
>what they think the army breakdown should be; no more, no less.
>
>-Mark Stone

[Mark Stone]

--- On Dec 1 Doug said: ---

> I'm not talking about the line-item contents of the lists.
>
> What I want to know is "book X list number Y" the same "army" for
> both versions?

Sorry if I was unclear. But I meant what I said earlier to be taken as:

In my opinion no thought has been given by FHE to whether or not something was
an army in a WRG army list book. There is no correspondence, as far as I can
see, beyond historical common sense, between what army has an army list
according to WRG and what army has an army list according to FHE.

Certainly there are plenty of examples of armies that are in the FHE books but
are not in the WRG books, or armies that have a different name, or armies that
span a somewhat different time period. So no, I don't think there's any
correspondence between one and the other.


-Mark

[Doug]

>Certainly there are plenty of examples of armies that are in the FHE books but
>are not in the WRG books, or armies that have a different name, or armies that
>span a somewhat different time period. So no, I don't think there's any
>correspondence between one and the other.
>-Mark

That's what I'm getting at. FHE has 268 + the New World lists. WRG
had something under 200?

It would be interesting to see the WRG list titles in one column and
the FHE in another, showing which lists were split and what
completely new lists were created.