Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Mark Stone]

--- On August 5 Greg Regets said: ---

> Jon hit the main points and hit them well ... that being how point
> effective these guys are, defense in depth and large units. Although
> I'm not on Mark's veteran player list, I have managed to win a few
> games over the years, and do have a few things to add.


The veterans I mentioned by name are among those I've seen play. While I've
never seen Greg play, his comments on this list have always been astute, and
the comments he makes here are no exception. This is all excellent advice.

One further point I'll make; this came up last week in a somewhat different
context: If you have a mix of morale types, such as a limited number of
upgrades to Irr B or Irr A, then you want the higher morale troops in the
smaller reserve units. These "second" wave units are the ones most likely to be
taking the waver tests, and it's more important that they be higher morale. I
can pretty much assure getting one large Irr C unit off impetuously at the
right time with careful use of standards. It's when that unit rolls down 3 and
comes routing back that I need good morale to keep the rest of the units in
that area moving forward and eager.


-Mark Stone

>
> 10E units will suffice because at 2 wide and 5 deep they are worth
21 cpf; a knight at 5 at more is putting out no more than 60;
therefore a single 6-man knight cannot break one of these units in
the first round of combat.
>

Of course, all this great advice is for using LMI JLS,SH. What if you
wanted to play, say the Early Visigoth army? Here the main troop type
is Irr C MI JLS,Sh. 1/4 to 1/3 of each of these units can be upgraded
to Irr A. Are using MI JLS a hopeless case? Or would this make sense
to have a 12E unit, with the 4 front elements upgraded to Irr A? In
this case would the unit be deployed 2E x 6E deep? I was hoping some
day to put together a 5th century German army, even if it isn't a top
competitor, but is there no chance of any success?

Peter

[John Murphy]

Just purely by this same criteria, I would take a wild uneducated
guess that an 8E unit would suffice (2E wide in 4 ranks of figures =
24 figs for CPF, so can not be broken by lancers on 5 @ +more).

Of course, now you are talking CO foot, so they can not skirmish,
can hardly maneuver being Irregs, can not fight in terrain, and have
to worry about many other things that are going to target them
besides SHK!

So I would take a look at what damage, say, Moogs would do on their
front. That would be as much as 9 @ +more (Moogs actually start 2
factors higher than lancers anyhow, just they are not going to catch
LMI _if_ LMI can get into skirmish). To avoid breaking on 108
casualties you would need to count as at least 37 figures for CPF on
a 2E front. To do that would require being 2E wide by 8 ranks deep,
oops that is a 16E unit. So against Moogs you are going to be 1E x 8
ranks.

All this of course ignores problems with expanding follow-up troops
and waver tests for first and subsequent (disordered) bounds. But we
are just talking about making them sure to survive first contact -
then there has to be something waiting to help, in the face of the
likehood that the enemy is also going to have some supports.

So I would guess you'd be better to follow Mark Stone's advice and
concentrate the Irr A in the smaller counter-punch units.

And, actually, given the likelihood of getting into skirmish with
Irreg JLS to evade Moogs, I would say that LMI is also a bit
problematic.

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Celella" <pcelella@c...>
wrote:
> What if you
> wanted to play, say the Early Visigoth army? Here the main troop
type
> is Irr C MI JLS,Sh. 1/4 to 1/3 of each of these units can be
upgraded
> to Irr A. Are using MI JLS a hopeless case? Or would this make
sense
> to have a 12E unit, with the 4 front elements upgraded to Irr A?
In
> this case would the unit be deployed 2E x 6E deep?

[Greg Regets]

Actually, close order has it's advantages also.

There are some terrain choices that still give you the advantages you
are looking for, even if close order.

Gentle hills with steep slopes are nice. As long as you don't cross
the slope, you're fine. Even the dreaded "Moog" will have trouble
kicking you off, as you will count halted on higher. On a two element
frontage;

"Moog" will get 9@7=54
CO JLS will get 12@4=36

So, all the points about "influencing" on either side of the terrain
still apply.

Gully's work well, and limit the types of things that can get at you.
Just set up on the far side. UBA's a fine while defending the
perimeter. These last two choices, of course, do not give the
advantage of halted higher. These two terrain choices are more
defensive, which is probably not a good thing with this kind of army.
UBA's have issues if you move at all.

The tactic of deploying wide, and contracting away from threats,
actually works better with close order foot, primarily because
whatever you are starting behind (usually lights of some kind) are
just a little bit closer to start off with, because the CO foots
basing is more shallow. Some people dismiss this tactic, without ever
really giving it a chance. It takes a bit of practice, and a
committment to put the right guys with these troops, to form a goal
directed tag-team.

No wavers for being charged by mounted, gives the CO a clear
advantage. This rather makes most elephants a non-factor.

*****

For Mark Stone, I was just funnin' ya with the list of veterans
comment. I always get a kick out of the "major tournament winner"
comments on this board. I know a couple of guys that have never
played in any tournament, anywhere, that I would bet a months pay
could play dead even with anyone. No offense was intended at all.
Your the best poster on this board, hands down.

*****

For John Garlic ... if you like Saxons, perhaps consider Picts
instead. You still get Saxons, and some useful other stuff.

*****

Thanks ... and lets have more of these sorts of discussions!

Greg





--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "John" <jjmurphy@s...> wrote:
> Just purely by this same criteria, I would take a wild uneducated
> guess that an 8E unit would suffice (2E wide in 4 ranks of figures
=
> 24 figs for CPF, so can not be broken by lancers on 5 @ +more).
>
> Of course, now you are talking CO foot, so they can not skirmish,
> can hardly maneuver being Irregs, can not fight in terrain, and
have
> to worry about many other things that are going to target them
> besides SHK!
>
> So I would take a look at what damage, say, Moogs would do on their
> front. That would be as much as 9 @ +more (Moogs actually start 2
> factors higher than lancers anyhow, just they are not going to
catch
> LMI _if_ LMI can get into skirmish). To avoid breaking on 108
> casualties you would need to count as at least 37 figures for CPF
on
> a 2E front. To do that would require being 2E wide by 8 ranks deep,
> oops that is a 16E unit. So against Moogs you are going to be 1E x
8
> ranks.
>
> All this of course ignores problems with expanding follow-up troops
> and waver tests for first and subsequent (disordered) bounds. But
we
> are just talking about making them sure to survive first contact -
> then there has to be something waiting to help, in the face of the
> likehood that the enemy is also going to have some supports.
>
> So I would guess you'd be better to follow Mark Stone's advice and
> concentrate the Irr A in the smaller counter-punch units.
>
> And, actually, given the likelihood of getting into skirmish with
> Irreg JLS to evade Moogs, I would say that LMI is also a bit
> problematic.
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Celella"
<pcelella@c...>
> wrote:
> > What if you
> > wanted to play, say the Early Visigoth army? Here the main troop
> type
> > is Irr C MI JLS,Sh. 1/4 to 1/3 of each of these units can be
> upgraded
> > to Irr A. Are using MI JLS a hopeless case? Or would this make
> sense
> > to have a 12E unit, with the 4 front elements upgraded to Irr A?
> In
> > this case would the unit be deployed 2E x 6E deep?

[John Garlic]

Painting Picts would seem to be scarier than Saxons! Besides, there's
something about being a Saxon 'dog!'

> For John Garlic ... if you like Saxons, perhaps consider Picts
> instead. You still get Saxons, and some useful other stuff.



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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 8/6/2004 19:03:06 Central Daylight Time, jmgarlic@...
writes:

Painting Picts would seem to be scarier than Saxons! Besides, there's
something about being a Saxon 'dog!'



I definitely plan to do a pictish army someday...


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

[Greg Regets]

I'm probably going to do one more sooner than later.

I actually have myself convinced that I can win with this army. This
may of course be a completely silly conviction. ;-)

Are you planning on 15mm or 25mm Jon? My understanding is that you
play both scales.



--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 8/6/2004 19:03:06 Central Daylight Time,
jmgarlic@a...
> writes:
>
> Painting Picts would seem to be scarier than Saxons! Besides,
there's
> something about being a Saxon 'dog!'
>
>
>
> I definitely plan to do a pictish army someday...
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 8/6/2004 20:28:45 Central Daylight Time,
greg.regets@... writes:

Are you planning on 15mm or 25mm Jon? My understanding is that you
play both scales.



When i do Picts, it will be in 25's. I am an equal scale employer - 30, 25,
15. And someday probably 10 as well...


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

I was looking over the Early Visigoth List in Imperial Warrior some
more in light of the JLS Tactics discussion, and realised that in
addition to the mass of Irr C MI JLS, Sh it contains, it also has an
option for Dacian Warriors Irr C LMI JLS, Sh, half of which can be
upgraded to 2HCW. This would seem to be an interesting combination.
Could one still deploy 12E units of MI JLS, with the LMI in support,
maybe with the lanced armed HC also? Any recommendations on how to
set this type of organization up, and how to go about combat and
maneuvering tactics with it on the tabletop?

Peter