Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Mark Stone <mark@d...> wrote:
> Yes, it is flawed reasoning, on two counts:
> (1) Suppose you take 2 CPF in prep while in skirmish (against any
halfway decent
> opponent you will). Now you are presumably going to recall, rather
than take a
> waver test with Ds. OK, so what do you do next bound? Next bound
you won't be in
> skirmish unless you counter. And your odds of making a counter...
hmm, you're
> still Ds.

This is true and why I'm wanting to run them in pairs. If I'm facing
enemy shooters I want to split the difference of their shot. They
are a liability, but they are also about as good as it gets for the
French Ordinance missile troops. As a 6E block in 3 ranks I can
skirmish and cover the same footprint, but I think I'll take more CPF
as the third rank only gives me 4 additional figures. So I would be
absorbing CPF as 20 figs instead of 16. I don't think there is a
good break there, but I'll look at it during lunch to see your math.
The shield would be handy during the recall/rally I admit.


> (2) I don't think you'll do a lot of skirmishing with the close
order LB. These
> are just guys waiting to die. They are the absolute Achilles Heal
of this list,
> which otherwise would have some real potential. I've emailed before
about how I
> think these guys should be classified, but I wouldn't expect a
change, or at
> least not any time soon. As it stands, these guys doom the list.

I agree and will in some way try to find them a home. I was
considering flank marching them since in Warrior I can't mount them
on boats anymore. The nice thing is that I could place them on a
hill far far away and hope they draw off enough of the enemy shock
troops to leave other areas vulnerable to my SHK ;)

>
> If you insist on playing this list, put the crossbowmen in 2 24-man
units
> instead of 3 16-man units (see my previous post about the value of
6-stand
> units), and buy shields for the front rank.

See above. What I want these guys to do I manuver and draw fire more
than win any encounter.

>
> If you want a list that is Late Medieval, works on 1200 points, has
much the
> same feel as French Ordinnance, and isn't handicapped with required
troops that
> will lose the battle for you, then try Free Company.
> -Mark Stone

Mark I look long and hard at this list but I can't make it large
enough to cover it's own flanks. Maybe I'm not looking at it
correctly. Will look again. Thanks for the commentary. Excellent
information to consider.
boyd

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Boyd,

I've looked at this list(French Ordinance) as well as the Medieval French
and have come to the conclusion that I like the Late Scots Common list better as
it's French (Allied)Kniggits can be 1/2 Irg "A" and the French you get are
somewhat useful. Besides, the Scot Yeomen foot kick the crap out of most any
similar foot for the time period and you get lots of them! Heck, the main reason
I even considered the Medieval French was due to the fact that they could get a
sizable Scottish ally because I dislike the foot support that they (the
froggies) get. I tend to like troops that can have shields and am not a believer
in close order 2hct/2hcw as these guys are walking around with signs that say,
"Wanted, SHK L, Sh, Please Kill Us and put us out of our misery so we can cause
the rest of the crappy morale of a French foot force to fail multiple waivers!"
Don't get me wrong! I love the hitting power of the French SHK, it's just that
in the late period of the French list, you can't take
them as Nutty Irg "A's" is all. But. . . In the Scots Common, You can! And you
don't have to settle for cruddy support troops. You can take Highlanders that
get great hitting power along with bows if you like and lots of Scary Lowlander
foot! "If I were Waaalace, I could shoot fire from my eyeballs and lightning
from my arse!" Makes me want to be a Wallace with REAL mounted forces (the
french)!

kelly



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes

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

I certainly have looked long and hard at the Common's list, but I'm
just not interested in having a couple of hundred non-morphing close
order foot on my tab That's the problem with 25mm IMO is that you
have to be able to use them over and over in many manifestations.
These Frenchies can be used for any German/Papal/whatever late era
list; might even be able to pretend they were Burgundians who forgot
which cross to wear.

I completely aggree with your assesment, but for the money I'm trying
to buy a large army with a small number of figs :)

Perhaps it is because I'm scottish--they don't hand out odd names
like "boyd" and "bruce" together unless you are born with a kilt--
that I see buying and painting armies this way...IOW, I'm a cheap
b**t**d. I'd love to run the middle period army of "the Bruce", but
without 24E of lowland it seems vulnerable to EL and K.

I am starting to look long at the Swiss list, but here again I would
have a pot-load of loose order pike that wouldn't work anywhere
else. I see the swiss rules as wickedly awsome; loose order pike
immune to mounted charges, and they get a free exchange of ranks and
stone walls that act as cover (well only in early list). What is
there not to like
Wanax

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, kelly wilkinson
<jwilkinson62@y...> wrote:
> Boyd,
>
> I've looked at this list(French Ordinance) as well as the
Medieval French and have come to the conclusion that I like the Late
Scots Common list better as it's French (Allied)Kniggits can be 1/2
Irg "A" and the French you get are somewhat useful. Besides, the Scot
Yeomen foot kick the crap out of most any similar foot for the time
period and you get lots of them! Heck, the main reason I even
considered the Medieval French was due to the fact that they could
get a sizable Scottish ally because I dislike the foot support that
they (the froggies) get. I tend to like troops that can have shields
and am not a believer in close order 2hct/2hcw as these guys are
walking around with signs that say, "Wanted, SHK L, Sh, Please Kill
Us and put us out of our misery so we can cause the rest of the
crappy morale of a French foot force to fail multiple waivers!" Don't
get me wrong! I love the hitting power of the French SHK, it's just
that in the late period of the French list, you can't take
> them as Nutty Irg "A's" is all. But. . . In the Scots Common, You
can! And you don't have to settle for cruddy support troops. You can
take Highlanders that get great hitting power along with bows if you
like and lots of Scary Lowlander foot! "If I were Waaalace, I could
shoot fire from my eyeballs and lightning from my arse!" Makes me
want to be a Wallace with REAL mounted forces (the french)!
>
>
kelly
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Greg Regets]

From reading your other posts on this board, it seems like you play
mostly 1200 points on a 5' x 8' table.

If this is correct, my opinion is that all of these armies will be
somewhat limited, due to the lack of quality light troops and terrain
troops that are more suited to attacking terrain, rather than holding
it.

To my way of thinking, this will limit your high-margin victories to
battles where the terrain rolls go just the way you want them.

Just my .02

Greg



--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "spocksleftball"
<spocksleftball@y...> wrote:
> I certainly have looked long and hard at the Common's list, but I'm
> just not interested in having a couple of hundred non-morphing
close
> order foot on my tab That's the problem with 25mm IMO is that
you
> have to be able to use them over and over in many manifestations.
> These Frenchies can be used for any German/Papal/whatever late era
> list; might even be able to pretend they were Burgundians who
forgot
> which cross to wear.
>
> I completely aggree with your assesment, but for the money I'm
trying
> to buy a large army with a small number of figs
>
> Perhaps it is because I'm scottish--they don't hand out odd names
> like "boyd" and "bruce" together unless you are born with a kilt--
> that I see buying and painting armies this way...IOW, I'm a cheap
> b**t**d. I'd love to run the middle period army of "the Bruce",
but
> without 24E of lowland it seems vulnerable to EL and K.
>
> I am starting to look long at the Swiss list, but here again I
would
> have a pot-load of loose order pike that wouldn't work anywhere
> else. I see the swiss rules as wickedly awsome; loose order pike
> immune to mounted charges, and they get a free exchange of ranks
and
> stone walls that act as cover (well only in early list). What is
> there not to like
> Wanax
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, kelly wilkinson
> <jwilkinson62@y...> wrote:
> > Boyd,
> >
> > I've looked at this list(French Ordinance) as well as the
> Medieval French and have come to the conclusion that I like the
Late
> Scots Common list better as it's French (Allied)Kniggits can be 1/2
> Irg "A" and the French you get are somewhat useful. Besides, the
Scot
> Yeomen foot kick the crap out of most any similar foot for the time
> period and you get lots of them! Heck, the main reason I even
> considered the Medieval French was due to the fact that they could
> get a sizable Scottish ally because I dislike the foot support that
> they (the froggies) get. I tend to like troops that can have
shields
> and am not a believer in close order 2hct/2hcw as these guys are
> walking around with signs that say, "Wanted, SHK L, Sh, Please Kill
> Us and put us out of our misery so we can cause the rest of the
> crappy morale of a French foot force to fail multiple waivers!"
Don't
> get me wrong! I love the hitting power of the French SHK, it's just
> that in the late period of the French list, you can't take
> > them as Nutty Irg "A's" is all. But. . . In the Scots Common,
You
> can! And you don't have to settle for cruddy support troops. You
can
> take Highlanders that get great hitting power along with bows if
you
> like and lots of Scary Lowlander foot! "If I were Waaalace, I could
> shoot fire from my eyeballs and lightning from my arse!" Makes me
> want to be a Wallace with REAL mounted forces (the french)!
> >
>
>
> kelly
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Actually Boyd,
I don't see where the Scots are vulnerable at all to elephants or Knights.
In fact, they win in all instances since they can fight both FULL ranks just
like Pikes but are not disordered when they lose to foot like Pikes. In fact
against SHK L, Sh they are dead even which is better than most foot. ie: Let's
just say the mounted are impetous charging the scotts. . . element for element
the K's are 5 @ +7 down 2 for facing LTS = 5 @ +5 = 20. The Scots Yeoman comback
with 8 (that's right! look at the list rule!!) @ +2 plus an additional +1for
standing LTS verses impetuous mounted = 8 @ +3 = 20. Considering that the scots
are equivilant in points or less so such as a 16 fig unit, the K's suck up 3cpf
for charging, 1 cpf for impetuousity and 3 for being punked by the Scotts for a
total of 7cpf tired and disordered and stuck on the pointy sticks. Unless you
can get them some help on the next bound, the Knights will be overwhelmed by the
Scotts. On the other hand the Scotts are still
laughing at the fact that someone purchased Knights with an army of shieldless
footmen vulnerable to them and take 2 whole cpf because they are irreg foot.
Next up, Elephants. Let's say the seleucids come to play (IMHO the best elepants
out there). Element for element the El fights 5 EL @ 2 + 1 for charging -2 for
facing LTS = 5 @ +1 = 7 fp. 1 @ El crew @ +1 (because the Scotts can be !/2 Hi)
= 1fp, 1 El crew + JLs is 1 @ +2 = 2fp (support shot from the bow armed crewman
does 2 @ -1 =1fp) total hand to hand against the loyal kinsmen =10 fatigue
points. the Scots coming back with 8 (see list rule!) LTS verses EL 8 @ +1 down
1 for facing EL pike =8 fatigue points. A two element unit of elephants takes 1
cpf while the pikes lose none in their smallest form of 4 elements. The
Elephants cost 115 points for 2 elements while the Scots Yeomen end up costing
only 89 points. Hardly vulnerable.
And Boyd, what about the 12 elements of lovely Highlanders who can be 1/2 Irreg
"A" 1/2 Irreg "C" LMI JLS, B, Sh? Shooting the crap out of the elepants and
charging them impetuous with JLS? The Scots Common has plenty of troops to deal
with enemies. And their foot can be generic looking enough in the late period to
be used in most late medieval armies. Heck the Scots figure quite prominently in
the War of the Roses Lancastrians as well as Medieval French. For some reason
their French counterparts can't get the Irreg "A" knights in their list but they
are much better in the Scot Common list and you don't have to take as much
vulnerable SHIELDLESS foot who die, die , DIE in Warrior to most opposing foot
with shields. I enjoy winning far more than losing and the Scots give you a
better chance since both Foot and mounted could win for you while the French
have to depend on their foot to hold out/delay long enough for their mounted
component to win for them. My choice goes to the Scots
Common list. Also, Greg Regets has shown me the light of what Impetuous LTS can
do to foot oponents as well! Not too shabby those Scotts who get stout foot both
loose and close and the BEST SHK (French) in the game!

kelly
spocksleftball <spocksleftball@...> wrote:
I certainly have looked long and hard at the Common's list, but I'm
just not interested in having a couple of hundred non-morphing close
order foot on my tab That's the problem with 25mm IMO is that you
have to be able to use them over and over in many manifestations.
These Frenchies can be used for any German/Papal/whatever late era
list; might even be able to pretend they were Burgundians who forgot
which cross to wear.

I completely aggree with your assesment, but for the money I'm trying
to buy a large army with a small number of figs :)

Perhaps it is because I'm scottish--they don't hand out odd names
like "boyd" and "bruce" together unless you are born with a kilt--
that I see buying and painting armies this way...IOW, I'm a cheap
b**t**d. I'd love to run the middle period army of "the Bruce", but
without 24E of lowland it seems vulnerable to EL and K.

I am starting to look long at the Swiss list, but here again I would
have a pot-load of loose order pike that wouldn't work anywhere
else. I see the swiss rules as wickedly awsome; loose order pike
immune to mounted charges, and they get a free exchange of ranks and
stone walls that act as cover (well only in early list). What is
there not to like
Wanax



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes

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

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Regets" <gar@t...> wrote:
> From reading your other posts on this board, it seems like you play
> mostly 1200 points on a 5' x 8' table.
> If this is correct, my opinion is that all of these armies will be
> somewhat limited, due to the lack of quality light troops and
terrain
> troops that are more suited to attacking terrain, rather than
holding
> it.

Interesting point. Yes I do mainly 1200pt here in Florida. I am
somewhat limited in opponants, so I don't see as many heavy elephant
armies. I do see many chariot based armies, many missile based
armies, some elephants as in 2 or 3, and many Romans and knight type
armies. While I've had success with Normans to some extent, I'm
looking to incorporate regular manuverability with shooting.

Almost all of my losses come from massed archery shooting my close
order to a halt/disorder and drawing my HC or K into a killing zone
of arrows. I see this somewhat weak looking French army as a counter
to those massive Derek lead blocks of RegD LMI B, RgD MC B, RgD M
Camel B. I really want to touch these units with SHK Problem is
he is usually shooting on the 24 and 36 scale, and nothing can make
contact surviving such withering fire. Of course, if I could get on
one of those large units, it is worth a boat load of points, and the
cascading wavers also begin.

In a more open gaming dynamic this army cannot hold. Armies like
Vikings, Gurid, Med. Spanish, Burmese, and even the Swiss would run
it down like the dog it is. But unless Chris Damour shows up, or a
massed Elephant army, I should be able to continue winning percentage
wise.

> To my way of thinking, this will limit your high-margin victories
to battles where the terrain rolls go just the way you want them.
> Just my .02
> Greg

Yes it is not a very flexible army, but at least it will march on 3,
so one force marched unit will give me some wiggle room :)

You've given me something to ponder, thanks

Wanax

Standing with 8? I'll look at that. didn't see the list rule. Also
you've convinced me. I'll draw up a list. I wanted regulars, but
I'll go back and see how much a 1200pt army of Scotts will cost me.
All good reasoning, thanks.
Wanax

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, kelly wilkinson
<jwilkinson62@y...> wrote:
> Actually Boyd,
> I don't see where the Scots are vulnerable at all to elephants
or Knights. In fact, they win in all instances since they can fight
both FULL ranks just like Pikes but are not disordered when they lose
to foot like Pikes. In fact against SHK L, Sh they are dead even
which is better than most foot. ie: Let's just say the mounted are
impetous charging the scotts. . . element for element the K's are 5 @
+7 down 2 for facing LTS = 5 @ +5 = 20. The Scots Yeoman comback with
8 (that's right! look at the list rule!!)

Wanax

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Glad to be of help. Boyd your a decent guy and deserve an army you can love even
if you sometimes lose to those Tyrants ( "The Anglish")! "It's moy Ailand! If I
get to kill Anglish then Ai'm in the right place!"

kelly

spocksleftball <spocksleftball@...> wrote:
Standing with 8? I'll look at that. didn't see the list rule. Also
you've convinced me. I'll draw up a list. I wanted regulars, but
I'll go back and see how much a 1200pt army of Scotts will cost me.
All good reasoning, thanks.
Wanax

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, kelly wilkinson
<jwilkinson62@y...> wrote:
> Actually Boyd,
> I don't see where the Scots are vulnerable at all to elephants
or Knights. In fact, they win in all instances since they can fight
both FULL ranks just like Pikes but are not disordered when they lose
to foot like Pikes. In fact against SHK L, Sh they are dead even
which is better than most foot. ie: Let's just say the mounted are
impetous charging the scotts. . . element for element the K's are 5 @
+7 down 2 for facing LTS = 5 @ +5 = 20. The Scots Yeoman comback with
8 (that's right! look at the list rule!!)

Wanax


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/

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.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes

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