Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

Mark writes a superb post here. Great analysis - everyone should read it in
its entirety.

The following specific notes show the kind of thought I think is often
missing from the 'troop type x sucks' posts. Much of what is good/not good
about a
troop type is situational and not simply revealed by looking at the combat
chart.


>
>
> 2. Firing in two ranks is a plus. Longbow doesn't do this. Note, however,
> that
> this advantage comes in a heck of a lot less than you'd think it would,
> since
> (a) at long range longbow and crossbow fire with the same number of figures,
> and
> (b) at close range you're often in skirmish formation anyway.

The above is a great example. 'On paper' that hafl rank looks entirely bad,
but the situations of use often make it a wash.

>
> 3. Being at close range at 120 paces is a definite plus. There are _many_
> examples of why this makes a huge difference, but here's one: against
> superior
> hand to hand loose order troops in the brush (say, your favorite flavor of
> Barbarian trash) I can be at close range, _not_ have to go into to skirmish,
> and
> thus fire in two full ranks, without the risk of getting charged, because
> loose
> order only move/charge 80 paces in the brush. If I deal out 2 CPF to
> irregular
> foot in prep shooting this way, it's an automatic waver test for them.

Nothing I like more than a 2 per waver because the target can't charge....

>
> ..... And in an open tournament, you aren't
> going to win without beating elephants somewhere along the way.

Repeat after Mark...lol

Jon


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

[Mark Stone]

Quoting "WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com" <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>:

> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 09:18:11 CDT
> From: gar@...
> Subject: Re: Kight Armies
>
> A nice example of this was Mark Stone's lack of 'love' given to regular loose
> order crossbows. I'm sure there is a good reason he does not prefer them,
> based on who and where he plays, but in our area, it seemes to have evolved
into a
>
> valued weapon. It's easy to see how this has happened, as a very high
> percentage of the players around here are running SHK, EHK and SHC based
> armies. No point of view is right or wrong - they are just different, based
> on
> whom people are playing and what armies they are running.
>

First off: absolutely there is no right or wrong, preferences do indeed depend
on who you play and in what contexts.

Having said that: I come at this as a tournament player. I enjoy, and even
prefer, historical matchups when they happen in tournament play, but I have no
interest in theme tournaments, have never played in a theme tournament, and
speak exclusively from the perspective of someone looking to maximize his
chances in the open tournament format.

Now, I've also given crossbowmen a fair chance, and gotten about as much
mileage/success out of them as you can. Bill Chamis and I played Knights of
Saint John at Cold Wars for years, typically running 72 loose order crossbowmen.
We always won more often than we lost, and in our best year made it to the
finals. So it is possible to have success with crossbowmen in an open
tournament, it's just damned hard work.

So here's a quick summary of the pros and cons of the much-maligned crossbowman.

Pro:
1. Being able to hit EHK, SHC, and EHC at a decent factor definitely helps.
Note, however, that longbowmen do this too, and also are a factor better than CB
against SHK.

2. Firing in two ranks is a plus. Longbow doesn't do this. Note, however, that
this advantage comes in a heck of a lot less than you'd think it would, since
(a) at long range longbow and crossbow fire with the same number of figures, and
(b) at close range you're often in skirmish formation anyway.

3. Being at close range at 120 paces is a definite plus. There are _many_
examples of why this makes a huge difference, but here's one: against superior
hand to hand loose order troops in the brush (say, your favorite flavor of
Barbarian trash) I can be at close range, _not_ have to go into to skirmish, and
thus fire in two full ranks, without the risk of getting charged, because loose
order only move/charge 80 paces in the brush. If I deal out 2 CPF to irregular
foot in prep shooting this way, it's an automatic waver test for them.

Con:
1. CB just plain sucks against elephants. And in an open tournament, you aren't
going to win without beating elephants somewhere along the way.

2. No support shooting from the second rank when charging. Longbow doesn't do
this either, but bow does and it's a huge advantage.

3. Worse factor than Bow against MI/LMI, worse factor than Longbow against
HI/LHI.

4. Worse factor than Bow Longbow against MC, LC, LI.

If you play in historical period, and face a lot of cav armies, the negatives
are minimized, and the advantages matter more. Under those circumstances, I
don't feel "penalized" for having crossbow, though I'm still not jumping for joy
to have it.

In an open format, CB is clearly inferior. Sad, but true.


-Mark Stone