Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Frank Gilson]

There's been some commentary recently about the later roman lists. I
think LIR is the better one (apart from MIR and Patrician.)

Why? Well, it has better light troops. You want to decisively defeat
enemy LI and LC with your LI and LC if you are choosing to use one
of these lists.

Backing that up are the auxilia and legionaries, and a little bit of
heavier cavalry.

You'll want 2E and 4E units of regular LI, D morale if their only
purpose is to give and receive shooting, C morale if they are
intended to charge, fight, and pass wavers..perhaps one 2E Reg B
units of LI.

LC should be 2E or 4E, perhaps one 6E unit (the Reg D LC B.) 2E
should be Reg B JLS,Sh. 4E would likely be Reg C...and either JLS or
B with shields.

Operate the LI units right next to LC units to attack enemy LI or LC
units.

Sling LI can also oppose enemy regular loose order shooters and
delay them without suffering significant CPF from prep shooting.

Figure out what frontage you can cover with your LI/LC skirmishing
force, and how much you'll cover with legions plus auxilia, based on
your army point total. Make sure you have points left over for a
cavalry reserve, and note when to send a legion or auxilia unit in
amongst your line of lights to stiffen it up.

Frank

[Ed Forbes]

As one who likes to play roman armies, I have found that the point size of the
army matters for competitiveness. They are bad in Fast Warrior, poor at 1200
points, and competitive at 1600 points. And also 25mm instead of 15mm. The
difference in table sizes matters for an expensive close order foot army.
At 1200pts and smaller, protecting the flanks are a real problem. At 1600 pts
it becomes more of straight face off, which is where Late Romans shine.
Not to say that at 1600 pts they are a "killer army", but they are a long ways
from hopeless.

Ed




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

[joncleaves]

Look for a change in the Fast Warrior situation with the revised rulebook....

-----Original Message-----
From: eforbes100@... <eforbes100@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sat, 5 Nov 2005 00:31:49 GMT
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Late Imperial Roman


As one who likes to play roman armies, I have found that the point size of the
army matters for competitiveness. They are bad in Fast Warrior, poor at 1200
points, and competitive at 1600 points. And also 25mm instead of 15mm. The
difference in table sizes matters for an expensive close order foot army.
At 1200pts and smaller, protecting the flanks are a real problem. At 1600 pts
it becomes more of straight face off, which is where Late Romans shine.
Not to say that at 1600 pts they are a "killer army", but they are a long ways
from hopeless.

Ed




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





Yahoo! Groups Links






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

I would definitely agree with this assessment of the Romans.I sometimes play
Republican Romans and have found that more points I have to work from, the
more competitive it becomes.

Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com]On
Behalf Of eforbes100@...
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2005 7:32 PM
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Late Imperial Roman

As one who likes to play roman armies, I have found that the point size of
the army matters for competitiveness. They are bad in Fast Warrior, poor at
1200 points, and competitive at 1600 points. And also 25mm instead of 15mm.
The difference in table sizes matters for an expensive close order foot
army.
At 1200pts and smaller, protecting the flanks are a real problem. At 1600
pts it becomes more of straight face off, which is where Late Romans shine.
Not to say that at 1600 pts they are a "killer army", but they are a long
ways from hopeless.

Ed




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



_____

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

* Visit your group " WarriorRules
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules> " on the web.

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .

_____



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

[Ewan McNay]

And once again, I get to disagree . Allowing more of expensive troops -
SHC, K in particular - is *not* in favour of an LIR. I think that LIR is
a superlative low-point (e.g. 1200) choice, medium-good at 160, and poor
at 2000. [It's also a very good 'Dogs of War' army]


On Sat, 5 Nov 2005, eforbes100@... wrote:

> As one who likes to play roman armies, I have found that the point size of the
army matters for competitiveness. They are bad in Fast Warrior, poor at 1200
points, and competitive at 1600 points. And also 25mm instead of 15mm. The
difference in table sizes matters for an expensive close order foot army.
> At 1200pts and smaller, protecting the flanks are a real problem. At 1600 pts
it becomes more of straight face off, which is where Late Romans shine.
> Not to say that at 1600 pts they are a "killer army", but they are a long ways
from hopeless.
>
> Ed
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Derek Downs]

In a message dated 11/4/2005 7:33:04 PM Eastern Standard Time,
eforbes100@... writes:
Not to say that at 1600 pts they are a "killer army", but they are a long
ways from hopeless.

Ed
they are a foot army in 25mm and a poor mounted army in 15mm
Ed What is a "killer army " to you

Derek


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

[Derek Downs]

In a message dated 11/4/2005 11:08:54 PM Eastern Standard Time,
ewan.mcnay@... writes:
And once again, I get to disagree . Allowing more of expensive troops -
SHC, K in particular - is *not* in favour of an LIR. I think that LIR is
a superlative low-point (e.g. 1200) choice, medium-good at 160, and poor
at 2000. [It's also a very good 'Dogs of War' army]
This is why we see so many armies. People have different styles, I agree with
Ed. In 25mm at 1200 points it is too small. The more points you get. The more
solid the army becomes.

I hate they armies mounted except it's LC. The rest is junk. So more points.
More good foot troops.

Derekcus


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

[Ed Forbes]

A LIR army does not control the tempo of the battlefield. It reacts, which is
dangerous.
I consider a "killer army" as one that can control the tempo and force the
decision in tourney play against most armies in a short peroid of time.
s to which armies I consider they are, they change with my moods.

The armies I do best with tend to be totally loose and open order to be able to
move across the field quickly and concentrate at a point of my choosing before
the opponent can react or change his line. This also requires shock troops that
can break the opponent no later than the 2nd rd of combat. Currenlty, I am
playing armies with Swiss pike mecrs supported by HC, knights, and swarms of
lights.
Ed
-- darnd022263@... wrote:

eforbes100@... writes:
Not to say that at 1600 pts they are a "killer army", but they are a long
ways from hopeless.

Ed
they are a foot army in 25mm and a poor mounted army in 15mm
Ed What is a "killer army " to you

Derek


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





Yahoo! Groups Links







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

[Derek Downs]

In a message dated 11/5/2005 9:35:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
eforbes100@... writes:
I consider a "killer army" as one that can control the tempo and force the
decision in tourney play against most armies in a short peroid of time.
s to which armies I consider they are, they change with my moods.
So basically a killer army is in the eye of the beholder. :)

Derekcus


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

[Ed Forbes]

yes

-- darnd022263@... wrote:
In a message dated 11/5/2005 9:35:37 PM Eastern Standard Time,
eforbes100@... writes:
I consider a "killer army" as one that can control the tempo and force the
decision in tourney play against most armies in a short peroid of time.
s to which armies I consider they are, they change with my moods.
So basically a killer army is in the eye of the beholder. :)

Derekcus


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





Yahoo! Groups Links






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