Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Greg Regets]

I thought this was a good discussion point, based on Adrian's very
good post concerning the Japanese. Now, I don't know that much about
Japanese, but do know a bit about Medieval armor. To be honest with
you, I think this is absolutely one of FHE's very best list rules,
and wish they would incorporate this into more armies.

The bottom line is that most of what we classify as heavy infantry,
is chain mail, at least in the Dark Age & Medieval periods. Warriors
outfitted like this, were able to be HI or LHI (in game terms) based
upon spreading out a little and having the maneuverablity/flexibility
to still fight effectively.

When we talk about EHI (in game terms) we are primarily talking about
articulated plates of armor added to or replacing chain mail, and SHI
(in game terms) all-metal articulated armor. I have seen some amazing
demonstrations of all of these type of armor, and have worn a heavy
chain mail shirt. Trust me, the one that offers the least freedom of
movement is the chain shirt (the one we allow to be loose order), and
the one that offers the most is the fully articulated metal armor
(which we don't allow as loose order). I actually saw a guy do a
cartwheel in a full set of authentic field plate. The weight of the
armor was so well distributed, so as to hardly hinder movement at all.

Anyone that knows backpacking can speak to this. Go buy a WWII
surplus backpack at the Army/Navy store and load it with 80 pounds,
then go backpacking ... then go buy a $300 North Face backpack and
load it with 80 pounds, and do the same trail. The difference is
astounding. The GI backpack transfers so much weight to your
shoulders, it just saps your energy. A very high quality backpack
spreads the weight so well, that you really don't get tired. If the
distance is fifteen miles, you are better off jogging it with the
better backpack than walking it with the GI one.

I think when SeigeWarrior comes out, it would be very cool to allow
regular, SHI & EHI to operate as loose order, for those purposes.
Now, don't think we want a bunch of dismounted knights running
around in the open at tournaments as loose order, but for seiges, I
think it would work really well.

Thanks ... g

I just want to back Greg on this. I like the LEHI rule--heck, I like
everything on the Japanese list, since it makes one of the cool armies
of history available as a tourny option just as the Perry bros released
a great new set of Samurai--but I digress, as per usual.

I have worn armour, both modern and medieval, and I can run through
woods, jump onto a horse's back, or just go for a morning run (2.5
miles) while wearing white Milanese plate. In fact, I can do anything
except swim, and even then (okay, I never tried.)
Although it is like wearing a full body nautilaus machine, it is
NOT heavy. The weight is very well distributed. The loss of senses in
the helmet is another thing, but that's a fact of ancient warfare in all
periods. My full plate armor weighs in at about 54 pounds with padding
and under-armor. If it was tempered spring steel, like Robert
Macpherson currently makes, it would be even lighter, as 15th C. armours
generally were.
I look forward to LSHI... and I hope Europeans get it. I still
feel their armor was technologically WAY superior to Japanese, but I
recognize that there's about 6000 layers of myth on both sides of the
arguement and no resolution in sight.

Chris Cameron

WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com wrote:

>
>There are 25 messages in this issue.
>
>Topics in this digest:
>
> 1. Re: 25mm tents
> From: "cncbump" <cncbump@...>
> 2. Re: Rule Question: Swiss recoil
> From: "Adrian Williams" <fredthebaddy@...>
> 3. Re: Rule Question: Swiss recoil
> From: "Greg Regets" <greg.regets@...>
> 4. Re: Re: Rule Question: Swiss recoil
> From: JonCleaves@...
> 5. Re: Rule Question: Swiss recoil
> From: "scsabrecoach" <scsabrecoach@...>
> 6. Re: Rule Question: Swiss recoil
> From: "John" <jjmurphy@...>
> 7. Japanese LEHI
> From: "Adrian Williams" <fredthebaddy@...>
> 8. Japanese VS Swiss
> From: Tim Grimmett <grimmetttim@...>
> 9. PTR Cavalry
> From: "flaviuaetius" <flaviuaetius@...>
> 10. Re: PTR Cavalry
> From: "Adrian Williams" <fredthebaddy@...>
> 11. Re: Re: Rule Question: Swiss recoil
> From: Todd Schneider <thresh1642@...>
> 12. fulcum rules - what are they?
> From: "Christopher Webber" <sitalkes@...>
> 13. Fresno Tournament Results?
> From: Jeff Zorn <jrz3@...>
> 14. Thracian list
> From: "Christopher Webber" <sitalkes@...>
> 15. Italian Condotta
> From: "murray evans" <murray.evans@...>
> 16. rules question crossbows + 2HCT
> From: "Jonathan" <ccoutoftown@...>
> 17. Re: rules question crossbows + 2HCT
> From: JonCleaves@...
> 18. Hcon Tournaments Update
> From: Jeff Zorn <jrz3@...>
> 19. Re: Italian Condotta
> From: Steven Hollowell <sholl202000@...>
> 20. Re: Rule Question: Swiss recoil
> From: "John" <jjmurphy@...>
> 21. LEHI
> From: "Greg Regets" <greg.regets@...>
> 22. Re: Fresno Tournament Results?
> From: "eforbes100@..." <eforbes100@...>
> 23. Jon: Swiss recoil-2nd
> From: "eforbes100@..." <eforbes100@...>
> 24. Re: Fresno Tournament Results?
> From: Jeff Zorn <jrz3@...>
> 25. Re: Jon: Swiss recoil-2nd
> From: JonCleaves@...
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 19:54:53 -0000
> From: "cncbump" <cncbump@...>
>Subject: Re: 25mm tents
>
>Wonderful. Thanks.
>Chris
>
>--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Nicholas Cioran" <ncioran@m...>
>wrote:
>
>
>>I've made round medieval style pavilions out of printer paper and
>>simply painted them. They're self supporting, and with a little
>>fiddling you can model them open or closed. They're based on the
>>
>>
>very
>
>
>>accurate reproductions of medieval tents made by the people at
>>
>>
>Past
>
>
>>Tents (they have provided the pavilions for the interpreters at the
>>Leeds Armoury musueum and others...)
>>
>>You can see what their tents at this link:
>>
>>http://www.past-tents.demon.co.uk/
>>
>>If this is what you're looking for I'll see about getting my
>>
>>
>scanner
>
>
>>working and post the pattern as well as a couple of pics of mine...
>>
>>The pattern is flexible, and is scaled you can make a centre pole
>>
>>
>and
>
>
>>wagon wheel if you want to do an interior.
>>
>>Have fun!
>>Cole
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 21:58:13 -0000
> From: "Adrian Williams" <fredthebaddy@...>
>Subject: Re: Rule Question: Swiss recoil
>
>I do not like the whole invention of LEHI - I think it is
>unnecessary and undesirable.
>
>The list rules as such I don't have any problem with.
>
>ANW
>
>--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "scsabrecoach"
><scsabrecoach@y...> wrote:
>
>
>>Greetings Adrian,
>>I will bite, what is the scam regarding the japanese list?
>>
>>--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Adrian Williams"
>>
>>
><fredthebaddy@h...> wrote:
>
>
>>>Unusually with Geoff's post he is complaining that the Swiss
>>>
>>>
>list
>
>
>>>rules are too good - and he is a mad player of the Swiss - he is
>>>trying to down his own army not someone elses.
>>>
>>>It is the Japanese I reckon are the biggest list scam in the game
>>>
>>>ANW
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 22:06:27 -0000
> From: "Greg Regets" <greg.regets@...>
>Subject: Re: Rule Question: Swiss recoil
>
>I'm curious as to why you feel this way.
>
>g
>
>
>
>--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Adrian Williams"
><fredthebaddy@h...> wrote:
>
>
>>I do not like the whole invention of LEHI - I think it is
>>unnecessary and undesirable.
>>
>>The list rules as such I don't have any problem with.
>>
>>ANW
>>
>>--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "scsabrecoach"
>><scsabrecoach@y...> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Greetings Adrian,
>>>I will bite, what is the scam regarding the japanese list?
>>>
>>>--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Adrian Williams"
>>>
>>>
>><fredthebaddy@h...> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>Unusually with Geoff's post he is complaining that the Swiss
>>>>
>>>>
>>list
>>
>>
>>>>rules are too good - and he is a mad player of the Swiss - he
>>>>
>>>>
>is
>
>
>>>>trying to down his own army not someone elses.
>>>>
>>>>It is the Japanese I reckon are the biggest list scam in the
>>>>
>>>>
>game
>
>
>>>>ANW
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 4
> Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 18:26:47 EST
> From: JonCleaves@...
>Subject: Re: Re: Rule Question: Swiss recoil
>
>In a message dated 12/8/2005 16:13:23 Central Standard Time,
>greg.regets@... writes:
>
>I'm curious as to why you feel this way.
>
>g
>
>
>
>--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Adrian Williams"
><fredthebaddy@h...> wrote:
>
>
>>I do not like the whole invention of LEHI - I think it is
>>unnecessary and undesirable.
>>
>>The list rules as such I don't have any problem with.
>>
>> ANW>>
>>
>>
>
>Me too. It has been one of our most successful moves.
>
>Jon
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 23:27:09 -0000
> From: "scsabrecoach" <scsabrecoach@...>
>Subject: Re: Rule Question: Swiss recoil
>
>Greetings Adrian,
>LEHI still have all the flaws of loose order. They do move a bit better than
EHI but that was accurate for Samurai.
>TD
>
>--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Adrian Williams" <fredthebaddy@h...>
wrote:
>
>
>>I do not like the whole invention of LEHI - I think it is
>>unnecessary and undesirable.
>>
>>The list rules as such I don't have any problem with.
>>
>>ANW
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 6
> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 00:27:25 -0000
> From: "John" <jjmurphy@...>
>Subject: Re: Rule Question: Swiss recoil
>
>not.
>
>in fact, the greatest victory over the swiss came at the hands of
>those wonderful chivalric Free Companies for which Mark Stone has such
>a historical appreciation and most especially their English, Gascon
>and Burgundian longbowmen.
>
>i'm happy with the way warrior models this, at least, and in general
>would say geez the ink is only just barely dry on the game how about
>we give it some time in its current form before we start lobbying for
>the warrior 2.0
>
>
>
>>Todd Schneider <thresh1642@y...> wrote: Sigh...must read before
>>
>>
>hitting send..
>
>
>>Anways, the Swiss were some of the premier heavy
>>Infantry of the day, and did have a reputation for
>>withstanding bowfire, right?
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 7
> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 00:39:23 -0000
> From: "Adrian Williams" <fredthebaddy@...>
>Subject: Japanese LEHI
>
>I do not claim to be an expert on the Samurai by any stretch, but my
>view can be summarised as follows:
>
>1. I do not believe that any armour that heavy in that period was
>good enough to offer that degree of protection and allow that much
>freedom of movement. It may be a case of excessive romanticisation
>of Japanese "technology" and/ or "craftsmanship";
>
>2. I am of the view that with the high morale (no quibble about that)
>of the Japanese, treating them as LHI (my preferred classification)
>is the way to go - if they get shot up they are still likely to pass
>the test and go on to kill with their great weapons. Making them
>LEHI stops them from ever being shot up. I don't think that is
>right.
>
>3. Keep in mind that this is an army that never fought a series of
>battles against anyone other than itself, and never fought even one
>battle anything like a fair and open against anyone ever.
>
>I should disclose that I have in the last six months purchased the
>lead for a 15mm Feudal Japanese Army - and if I ever take it to a
>comp I will go for every advantage I can, including the LEHI. More
>likely I will use it for Friday night and club friendlies and see
>how they fare as LHI.
>
>Adrian Williams
>
>
>
>--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "scsabrecoach"
><scsabrecoach@y...> wrote:
>
>
>>Greetings Adrian,
>>LEHI still have all the flaws of loose order. They do move a bit
>>
>>
>better than EHI but that was accurate for Samurai.
>
>
>>TD
>>
>>--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Adrian Williams"
>>
>>
><fredthebaddy@h...> wrote:
>
>
>>>I do not like the whole invention of LEHI - I think it is
>>>unnecessary and undesirable.
>>>
>>>The list rules as such I don't have any problem with.
>>>
>>>ANW
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 16:55:10 -0800 (PST)
> From: Tim Grimmett <grimmetttim@...>
>Subject: Japanese VS Swiss
>
>I'll let you guys argue this out, but FWIW, I ran Feudal Japanese at Fall In
and had a blast (until I failed nearly every waver against Tim Brown).
Interestingly, my favorite game was agaisnt a Swiss army. Between the two
armies we lost a total of 5 units (one a scuzzy LI unit) and we managed a 3-3
tie. The dynamics of both lists' special rules made the whole experience lots
of fun.
>
>Adrian Williams <fredthebaddy@...> wrote: I do not claim to be an
expert on the Samurai by any stretch, but my
>view can be summarised as follows:
>
>1. I do not believe that any armour that heavy in that period was
>good enough to offer that degree of protection and allow that much
>freedom of movement. It may be a case of excessive romanticisation
>of Japanese "technology" and/ or "craftsmanship";
>
>2. I am of the view that with the high morale (no quibble about that)
>of the Japanese, treating them as LHI (my preferred classification)
>is the way to go - if they get shot up they are still likely to pass
>the test and go on to kill with their great weapons. Making them
>LEHI stops them from ever being shot up. I don't think that is
>right.
>
>3. Keep in mind that this is an army that never fought a series of
>battles against anyone other than itself, and never fought even one
>battle anything like a fair and open against anyone ever.
>
>I should disclose that I have in the last six months purchased the
>lead for a 15mm Feudal Japanese Army - and if I ever take it to a
>comp I will go for every advantage I can, including the LEHI. More
>likely I will use it for Friday night and club friendlies and see
>how they fare as LHI.
>
>Adrian Williams
>
>
>
>--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "scsabrecoach"
><scsabrecoach@y...> wrote:
>
>
>>Greetings Adrian,
>>LEHI still have all the flaws of loose order. They do move a bit
>>
>>
>better than EHI but that was accurate for Samurai.
>
>
>>TD
>>
>>--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Adrian Williams"
>>
>>
><fredthebaddy@h...> wrote:
>
>
>>>I do not like the whole invention of LEHI - I think it is
>>>unnecessary and undesirable.
>>>
>>>The list rules as such I don't have any problem with.
>>>
>>>ANW
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Miniature wargaming Wargaming Four horsemen Warrior
>
>---------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
> Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
>---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Yahoo! Shopping
> Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 9
> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 01:51:19 -0000
> From: "flaviuaetius" <flaviuaetius@...>
>Subject: PTR Cavalry
>
>I beleve PTR cavalry should be half upgraded to B class
>1) Cav was the best arm at this time.
>2) The infantry can be upgraded to half b class.
>3) The large influx of Huns at this time which is half responsible for
>the lance/ bow option is also responsible for increased quality at
>this in this arm at this time.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 10
> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 03:05:25 -0000
> From: "Adrian Williams" <fredthebaddy@...>
>Subject: Re: PTR Cavalry
>
>What is PTR?
>
>
>
>--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "flaviuaetius"
><flaviuaetius@y...> wrote:
>
>
>>I beleve PTR cavalry should be half upgraded to B class
>>1) Cav was the best arm at this time.
>>2) The infantry can be upgraded to half b class.
>>3) The large influx of Huns at this time which is half responsible
>>
>>
>for
>
>
>>the lance/ bow option is also responsible for increased quality at
>>this in this arm at this time.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 11
> Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2005 21:49:42 -0800 (PST)
> From: Todd Schneider <thresh1642@...>
>Subject: Re: Re: Rule Question: Swiss recoil
>
>Medieval Warrior has been out for some time.
>
>Now, if I were complaining the say after it was
>availabl commercially, you'd have a point.
>
>Todd
>
>--- John <jjmurphy@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>>not.
>>
>>in fact, the greatest victory over the swiss came at
>>the hands of
>>those wonderful chivalric Free Companies for which
>>Mark Stone has such
>>a historical appreciation and most especially their
>>English, Gascon
>>and Burgundian longbowmen.
>>
>>i'm happy with the way warrior models this, at
>>least, and in general
>>would say geez the ink is only just barely dry on
>>the game how about
>>we give it some time in its current form before we
>>start lobbying for
>>the warrior 2.0
>>
>>
>>
>>>Todd Schneider <thresh1642@y...> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>Sigh...must read before
>>hitting send..
>>
>>
>>>Anways, the Swiss were some of the premier heavy
>>>Infantry of the day, and did have a reputation for
>>>withstanding bowfire, right?
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 12
> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 10:48:18 -0000
> From: "Christopher Webber" <sitalkes@...>
>Subject: fulcum rules - what are they?
>
>Hi, on the Warrior web site it says
>
> "ROMAN INFANTRY RULES: The "fulcum" rules as outlined in Imperial
>Warrior apply to the following troops:
>
>List 6, Thracian Late Period, Roman Legionaries (NOT Imitation
>Legionaries)"
>
>What are the fulcum rules?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 13
> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 05:52:33 -0500
> From: Jeff Zorn <jrz3@...>
>Subject: Fresno Tournament Results?
>
>Howdy,
>
>Did anyone post the results of the Fresno Warrior tournament on Dec. 3?
>
>Jeff Zorn
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 14
> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 11:12:18 -0000
> From: "Christopher Webber" <sitalkes@...>
>Subject: Thracian list
>
>Hi, I've just joined this list after reading the new Thracian list.
>Hooray! It took 20 years, but finally I see a more historical,
>fearsome Thracian army list that would be fun to play (despite the
>lack of Kn, P, or HTW!) . This is really exciting. My only (minor)
>complaint is the lack of any "Irreg B" javelinmen, either as
>Agrianians or cavalry detachment. Has anybody tried the new Thracian
>list? Under the old rules, 2HCW+JLS used to be one of the best all-
>round weapon combinations (HTW+JLS better against infantry but worse
>against mounted); does this still hold true?
>
>Christopher Webber
>(see? I avoided shameless plug for book!)
>www.thrace.0catch.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 15
> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 11:27:59 -0000
> From: "murray evans" <murray.evans@...>
>Subject: Italian Condotta
>
>Hi all
>
>I am trying to figure out what you can and can't run with these guys
>and am quite confused with the different States, Ally General
>combinations.
>
>Am I supposed to choose a particular State (say Neapolitan) which
>then means I can choose from all troops who have no city state and
>those marked [N].
>
>Q1 - can I add troops from another city State (say VI) so long as it
>does not include an Allied General contingent?
>
>ie Swiss AG and Swiss troops in Late list can only be used if base
>City State is VI. and Albanians can only be used if army is N.
>
>Q2 - If correct, this would mean you could choose a late army based
>on VI in order to be able to use the Swiss, and then choose troops
>from say Mi, N, or VG.
>
>Q3 - If you choose troops from another city State do you then have
>to use an Ally General to command them? (upgrading a SG).
>
>Q4 - What does it mean that the AG must represent a city State
>except VG or GC? Can you use VG or GC troops without using an AG?
>
>thanks guys - there must be a good army in here somewhere but want
>to get the concepts right.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 16
> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 15:10:18 -0000
> From: "Jonathan" <ccoutoftown@...>
>Subject: rules question crossbows + 2HCT
>
>Sorry - another question:
>
>I put together a Qin Chinese army. I have two big blocks of LHI, the front
ranks of which
>have both crossbows and 2HCT.
>
>My question is:
>
>Do they get to first shoot in the prep phase, then again at enemy charging them
>(assuming my guys stand and wait for the charge) then fight with their 2HCT in
HTH?
>
>This is of course ideal so I hope the answer is yes.
>
>J
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 17
> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 10:20:14 -0500
> From: JonCleaves@...
>Subject: Re: rules question crossbows + 2HCT
>
>I have two big blocks of LHI, the front ranks of which have both crossbows and
2HCT.
>
>My question is:
>
>Do they get to first shoot in the prep phase, then again at enemy charging them
>(assuming my guys stand and wait for the charge) then fight with their 2HCT in
>HTH?>>
>
>Yes.
>Note that they won't be 1.5 rank 2HCT in the fight unless they are steady.
>
>J
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 18
> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 10:35:39 -0500
> From: Jeff Zorn <jrz3@...>
>Subject: Hcon Tournaments Update
>
>Howdy,
>
>Shortly after Fall In! I received this email from Fred Haub, on the
>HMGS-E BoD regarding the Hcon tournament crisis. In a follow up email
>he said I should share this info with "our" people. The same follow
>up assured me that this clarification/stance will appear in the
>HMGS-E Newsletter. This will also be appearing in Spearpoint, but
>since not every ancients player at Hcon is a NASAMW member it seemed
>good to spread the word here as well.
>
>As far as I'm concerned the issue won't really be closed until it
>appears in the HMGS-E Newsletter, so, if you're a member keep your
>eyes peeled for it. If we don't get a public assurance in that medium
>by CW we may have to apply a bit more public pressure. For the time
>being we'll have to hope and see if the BoD is as good as its
>semi-formal written word.
>
>Jeff Zorn
>
>
>
>
>>Jeff,
>>
>>Sorry I didn't get your e-mail in time. It was nice meeting you and I hope
>>that our meeting answered your questions. Eric was at the BoD meeting
>>Sunday morning and did a good job driving home the tournament groups needs
>>and what they bring to the convention. The tournaments will remain in the
>>Lampeter and have the same space as this past HCON. The BoD is unanimous on
>>this point and Bob G. agrees. I have it on my to-do list to declare this in
>>the Newsletter so that Bob G. will have to keep to his agreement.
>>
>>Fred Haub
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 19
> Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 07:40:34 -0800 (PST)
> From: Steven Hollowell <sholl202000@...>
>Subject: Re: Italian Condotta
>
>Inserted my comments after your questions.
>
>murray evans <murray.evans@...> wrote: Hi all
>
>I am trying to figure out what you can and can't run with these guys
>and am quite confused with the different States, Ally General
>combinations.
>
>Am I supposed to choose a particular State (say Neapolitan) which
>then means I can choose from all troops who have no city state and
>those marked [N].
>
> sh- yes
>
>
>Q1 - can I add troops from another city State (say VI) so long as it
>does not include an Allied General contingent?
>
> sh - If you choose a particular city-state, say Neapolitan, you can use all
the general troops and any marked (N)
>
>ie Swiss AG and Swiss troops in Late list can only be used if base
>City State is VI. and Albanians can only be used if army is N.
>
> sh - correct
>
>Q2 - If correct, this would mean you could choose a late army based
>on VI in order to be able to use the Swiss, and then choose troops
>from say Mi, N, or VG.
>
> sh - no, if you take VI (or choose any particular city) you can't pick MI, N,
or VG or any other unless you take an allied general in which case the minimum
requirements would be halved for that ally
>
>Q3 - If you choose troops from another city State do you then have
>to use an Ally General to command them? (upgrading a SG).
>
> sh - yes
>
>
>Q4 - What does it mean that the AG must represent a city State
>except VG or GC? Can you use VG or GC troops without using an AG?
>
> sh - no, you can't.
>
>thanks guys - there must be a good army in here somewhere but want
>to get the concepts right.
>
> sh - Hope that helped. IC contains some pretty good armies. Good luck and
have fun.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
> Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
>---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Yahoo! Shopping
> Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 20
> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 16:19:35 -0000
> From: "John" <jjmurphy@...>
>Subject: Re: Rule Question: Swiss recoil
>
>feudWar was out maybe 2-3 years ago, that is not actually a whole
>lot of time and when weighed against other lists that have been much
>more recently published i'd hope it was given some time before
>wholesale changes were made.
>
>i foolishly bought all the following...
>dbm 1.3 march 1996
>dbm 2.0 october 1997
>dbm 3.0 july 2000
>the rules had been 'stable' after that until now, a whopping 5 yrs
>but most of the time they were being re-issued every 1-3 yrs
>dbm army lists june 1993 - june 1994
>dbm army lists v2 november 1998 - july 2000
>so the army lists change every 5-6 yrs
>
>the above is _not_ an enviable corporate record for fhe to follow,
>and given the work that went into the warrior army lists scott and
>co would probably drop from exhaustion to keep it up, in a way it
>was bad enough that NWW was re-done almost immediately but at least
>most of the errata in the 'paying' lists is of a typo or consistency
>across-lists nature
>
>a much better model of consistency is that, for the most part, the
>current rules have changed only a bit since wrg 7.6 and in many ways
>only a little since wrg 7.0, and that until now the army lists from
>6th ed (1981-1982) were still being used 24 years later
>
>okay, 24 years (and one major revolutionary ruleset change) made
>them kind of moldy oldies but the point is that the time since
>feudWar was published is _nothing_ relative to that kind of
>consistent play
>
>i don't think we have even really gone all the way thru an entire
>rock-paper-scissors (or Burmese-LIR-Teuts) 'cycle' on the national
>level since darkAgeWar came out, let alone feudWar
>
>--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Todd Schneider
><thresh1642@y...> wrote:
>
>
>>Medieval Warrior has been out for some time.
>>
>>Now, if I were complaining the say after it was
>>availabl commercially, you'd have a point.
>>
>>Todd
>>
>>--- John <jjmurphy@s...> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>not.
>>>
>>>in fact, the greatest victory over the swiss came at
>>>the hands of
>>>those wonderful chivalric Free Companies for which
>>>Mark Stone has such
>>>a historical appreciation and most especially their
>>>English, Gascon
>>>and Burgundian longbowmen.
>>>
>>>i'm happy with the way warrior models this, at
>>>least, and in general
>>>would say geez the ink is only just barely dry on
>>>the game how about
>>>we give it some time in its current form before we
>>>start lobbying for
>>>the warrior 2.0
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Todd Schneider <thresh1642@y...> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Sigh...must read before
>>>hitting send..
>>>
>>>
>>>>Anways, the Swiss were some of the premier heavy
>>>>Infantry of the day, and did have a reputation for
>>>>withstanding bowfire, right?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>__________________________________________________
>>Do You Yahoo!?
>>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>>http://mail.yahoo.com
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 21
> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 17:09:48 -0000
> From: "Greg Regets" <greg.regets@...>
>Subject: LEHI
>
>I thought this was a good discussion point, based on Adrian's very
>good post concerning the Japanese. Now, I don't know that much about
>Japanese, but do know a bit about Medieval armor. To be honest with
>you, I think this is absolutely one of FHE's very best list rules,
>and wish they would incorporate this into more armies.
>
>The bottom line is that most of what we classify as heavy infantry,
>is chain mail, at least in the Dark Age & Medieval periods. Warriors
>outfitted like this, were able to be HI or LHI (in game terms) based
>upon spreading out a little and having the maneuverablity/flexibility
>to still fight effectively.
>
>When we talk about EHI (in game terms) we are primarily talking about
>articulated plates of armor added to or replacing chain mail, and SHI
>(in game terms) all-metal articulated armor. I have seen some amazing
>demonstrations of all of these type of armor, and have worn a heavy
>chain mail shirt. Trust me, the one that offers the least freedom of
>movement is the chain shirt (the one we allow to be loose order), and
>the one that offers the most is the fully articulated metal armor
>(which we don't allow as loose order). I actually saw a guy do a
>cartwheel in a full set of authentic field plate. The weight of the
>armor was so well distributed, so as to hardly hinder movement at all.
>
>Anyone that knows backpacking can speak to this. Go buy a WWII
>surplus backpack at the Army/Navy store and load it with 80 pounds,
>then go backpacking ... then go buy a $300 North Face backpack and
>load it with 80 pounds, and do the same trail. The difference is
>astounding. The GI backpack transfers so much weight to your
>shoulders, it just saps your energy. A very high quality backpack
>spreads the weight so well, that you really don't get tired. If the
>distance is fifteen miles, you are better off jogging it with the
>better backpack than walking it with the GI one.
>
>I think when SeigeWarrior comes out, it would be very cool to allow
>regular, SHI & EHI to operate as loose order, for those purposes.
>Now, don't think we want a bunch of dismounted knights running
>around in the open at tournaments as loose order, but for seiges, I
>think it would work really well.
>
>Thanks ... g
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 22
> Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 16:18:09 GMT
> From: "eforbes100@..." <eforbes100@...>
>Subject: Re: Fresno Tournament Results?
>
>It was canceled. we had 6 scheduled and 2 droped out due to flu and 2 due to
work requirements.
>
>Ed
>
>-- Jeff Zorn <jrz3@...> wrote:
>
>Howdy,
>
>Did anyone post the results of the Fresno Warrior tournament on Dec. 3?
>
>Jeff Zorn
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 23
> Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2005 17:20:17 GMT
> From: "eforbes100@..." <eforbes100@...>
>Subject: Jon: Swiss recoil-2nd
>
>
>Jon,
>
>I am going to restate my question on Swiss recoil as my email account has gone
haywire. I am getting re: to a re: before I get the original email. I am not
sure now what has been answered and what has not.
>
>Under Feudal Warrior corrections, the list rule for Swiss inf was changed such
that Swiss P that lose now recoil.
>
>
>I am unsure why it was thought that a P block of Swiss that lost to a P block
of Germans would be at such a disadvantage? Before this list rule change when
two such P blocks met the attack would stall, no matter who won.
>
>Now, If the German P block loses, the attack stalls as they stay inplace.
Moving the Swiss 2HCT forward gives the Swiss an advantage, but not enough to do
anything but recoil the German. In later rounds it will be 8 to 8 in all cases.
The Swiss will continue to recoil the German on odds, but it will not end
quickly if just between themselves.
>
>If the German wins (and they have the advantage in the first round due to being
4 P vs 3P/1-2HCT of Swiss ), They roll the Swiss up with 12 vs 8 due to the fact
that the Swiss recoil after the first bound.
>
>I would ask that this addition be removed and that Swiss P recoil as per other
P under 11.212 as it does not reflect the true balance between two contempory
German and Swiss P blocks.
>
>Ed
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 24
> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 12:53:50 -0500
> From: Jeff Zorn <jrz3@...>
>Subject: Re: Fresno Tournament Results?
>
>Makes for an easy round robin Better luck next time around.
>
>At 11:18 AM 12/9/2005, you wrote:
>
>
>>It was canceled. we had 6 scheduled and 2 droped out due to flu and
>>2 due to work requirements.
>>
>>Ed
>>
>>-- Jeff Zorn <jrz3@...> wrote:
>>
>>Howdy,
>>
>>Did anyone post the results of the Fresno Warrior tournament on Dec. 3?
>>
>>Jeff Zorn
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>Message: 25
> Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 14:17:02 -0500
> From: JonCleaves@...
>Subject: Re: Jon: Swiss recoil-2nd
>
>
><<Under Feudal Warrior corrections, the list rule for Swiss inf was changed
such
>that Swiss P that lose now recoil.>>
>
>This is incorrect. I'm sorry, Ed, but I didn't see your original question
because once I read this part I just ignored the rest. No such thing happened
and we have decided to ignore such posts as the only reason we can see why
someone would make one is to poke us in the eye.
>
>Loose order foot has always recoiled from victorious foot. Some people were
apparently skipping that line of 11.212 and arguing that since they had pike,
the rule that you go down the list in 11.212 until you find who you are and then
execute the instruction was somehow no longer valid - this despite the fact that
feudal warrior has never said any such thing. I suppose that if you were one of
these people this seems like a 'change' to you. But in our view 11.212 has been
in effect the whole time and nothing in the list rule supercedes it. Yet, to
help the customer (or probably more accurately, the opponents of such a
customer...), we put that clarification on the web. The list rule has never
changed in how recoils are handled by Swiss loose order foot.
>
>Swiss foot beat German pike. Your example ignores a number of factors, such as
disordered close germans v steady Swiss, the -1 for 2HCT, the expansion by Swiss
when they win and the typical lack of German pike shields.
>
>No change is planned.
>
>Jon
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>________________________________________________________________________
>________________________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>


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

Greetings Chris,
I think the FHE is the best representation of Samurai armour. Its protrctive
value is the same level as full chain mail, though it allows for more rapid
movement. The depection of samurai is such that it leads me to believe that
they were loose order. I don't think that it was as good as plate against pole
arms and 2 handed swords, but it likely provided similar protection against
missle fire. The faster movement allowed is a reflection of the order, or
atleast that is my view of it. LHI move faster than similarly armoured HI, its
the close order that slows HI down not the weight of the armour.
TD

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Christian and Sarah <cgc.sjw@s...> wrote:
>
> I just want to back Greg on this. I like the LEHI rule--heck, I like
> everything on the Japanese list, since it makes one of the cool armies
> of history available as a tourny option just as the Perry bros released
> a great new set of Samurai--but I digress, as per usual.
>
> I have worn armour, both modern and medieval, and I can run through
> woods, jump onto a horse's back, or just go for a morning run (2.5
> miles) while wearing white Milanese plate. In fact, I can do anything
> except swim, and even then (okay, I never tried.)
> Although it is like wearing a full body nautilaus machine, it is
> NOT heavy. The weight is very well distributed. The loss of senses in
> the helmet is another thing, but that's a fact of ancient warfare in all
> periods. My full plate armor weighs in at about 54 pounds with padding
> and under-armor. If it was tempered spring steel, like Robert
> Macpherson currently makes, it would be even lighter, as 15th C. armours
> generally were.
> I look forward to LSHI... and I hope Europeans get it. I still
> feel their armor was technologically WAY superior to Japanese, but I
> recognize that there's about 6000 layers of myth on both sides of the
> arguement and no resolution in sight.
>
> Chris Cameron
>
bvff

[Mark Stone]

As long as we are re-visiting the equine cemetary, let me whip a few carcasses a
bit further:

Would Samurai armor have stood up to late Medieval European weaponry in a manner
that befits the description "extra heavy"? Probably not. I guess my question
would be: so what? By which I mean
(1) Japanese vs. Medievals isn't a historical matchup, so its hypothetical
outcome should have no bearing on the rules;
(2) Within period, Japanese fought almost exclusively other Japanese (with the
odd venture here and there involving Mongols or Koreans), so getting the feel
of Japanese vs. Japanese combat right is paramount (here, by the way, my naive
view is that FHE has done quite well);
(3) Stetching the interpretation of Japanese armor a bit is certainly justified
if that's what it takes to get what should be one of our showcase armies onto
the tournament gaming table.

Now, if you're still inclined to bitch about the capabilities given to the
Japanese, please take a number, and get in line behind all of us waiting to
complain about Meso American pieces of obsidian being strapped to sticks with
leather thongs and counting as any weapon other than side arm or IPW.

And lest anyone think I'm too peeved about New World Warrior, I think a
variation of point (3) above applies to the Aztecs, so I'm willing to tolerate
a "generous" interpretation of the capabilities of Aztec weaponry.


-Mark Stone

[Todd Schneider]

As a player who runs Araucanians more than anything
else, and whose knowledge of Meso Americans is limited
at best, I take every weapon category in the list I
play with a grain of salt.

But then, I am in no hurry to get the weapons changed
either! :)

Todd

--- Mark Stone <mark@...> wrote:

> As long as we are re-visiting the equine cemetary,
> let me whip a few carcasses a
> bit further:
>
> Would Samurai armor have stood up to late Medieval
> European weaponry in a manner
> that befits the description "extra heavy"? Probably
> not. I guess my question
> would be: so what? By which I mean
> (1) Japanese vs. Medievals isn't a historical
> matchup, so its hypothetical
> outcome should have no bearing on the rules;
> (2) Within period, Japanese fought almost
> exclusively other Japanese (with the
> odd venture here and there involving Mongols or
> Koreans), so getting the feel
> of Japanese vs. Japanese combat right is paramount
> (here, by the way, my naive
> view is that FHE has done quite well);
> (3) Stetching the interpretation of Japanese armor a
> bit is certainly justified
> if that's what it takes to get what should be one of
> our showcase armies onto
> the tournament gaming table.
>
> Now, if you're still inclined to bitch about the
> capabilities given to the
> Japanese, please take a number, and get in line
> behind all of us waiting to
> complain about Meso American pieces of obsidian
> being strapped to sticks with
> leather thongs and counting as any weapon other than
> side arm or IPW.
>
> And lest anyone think I'm too peeved about New World
> Warrior, I think a
> variation of point (3) above applies to the Aztecs,
> so I'm willing to tolerate
> a "generous" interpretation of the capabilities of
> Aztec weaponry.
>
>
> -Mark Stone
>
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Mark,

Do you recall Darrell Smith's article in Spearpoint a lot of years back
that called for Aztecs not being able to follow up as they were gathering
prisoners to be sacrificed? I guess you gotta get your victims where you can
get'em.

kelly

Mark Stone <mark@...> wrote:
As long as we are re-visiting the equine cemetary, let me whip a few carcasses
a
bit further:

Would Samurai armor have stood up to late Medieval European weaponry in a manner
that befits the description "extra heavy"? Probably not. I guess my question
would be: so what? By which I mean
(1) Japanese vs. Medievals isn't a historical matchup, so its hypothetical
outcome should have no bearing on the rules;
(2) Within period, Japanese fought almost exclusively other Japanese (with the
odd venture here and there involving Mongols or Koreans), so getting the feel
of Japanese vs. Japanese combat right is paramount (here, by the way, my naive
view is that FHE has done quite well);
(3) Stetching the interpretation of Japanese armor a bit is certainly justified
if that's what it takes to get what should be one of our showcase armies onto
the tournament gaming table.

Now, if you're still inclined to bitch about the capabilities given to the
Japanese, please take a number, and get in line behind all of us waiting to
complain about Meso American pieces of obsidian being strapped to sticks with
leather thongs and counting as any weapon other than side arm or IPW.

And lest anyone think I'm too peeved about New World Warrior, I think a
variation of point (3) above applies to the Aztecs, so I'm willing to tolerate
a "generous" interpretation of the capabilities of Aztec weaponry.


-Mark Stone




SPONSORED LINKS
Miniature wargaming Wargaming Four horsemen Warrior

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


---------------------------------






---------------------------------
Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

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