Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 7/6/2001 23:00:48 Central Daylight Time,
RobHofrich@... writes:

<< Page 15, 3.2.3: This never actually says "Conduct approach moves." I
know-I'm being a bit nit-picky here.>.

Good one! Fixed.

<< Page 27, 6.0: According to the set of bullets at the end of this section
(at least as far as I can tell), if within 40 paces of an enemy, you cannot
charge an enemy as the only permitted moves are formation change, counter,
retire, or staff moves. Is this intended?>.

Good one! Fixed. yes, you can charge.

<<Page 65, 13.32: Says, "Fighting transport moves...at speed of wagons or
foot type, whichever is slower." Once again, being nit-picky, do you also
mean, "moves...as wagons or foot type, whichever is more restricted
(limited?)" as wheeled cannot move in certain terrain?>>

Whole fighting transport section being redone. I will add this to the pile.

<<Page 70, 14.45: Says flank marches are permitted by "...one command or
unit." I am assuming that this means (and was intended to mean) that if you
want more than one unit flank marching, you have to use an entire command.
Is this correct?>>

Yes, and I will clarify.

<<Page 72, 14.5: Since I didn't notice anything about any special loss rules
(except for the looting rule) concerning Baggage/Camp, I assume that losing
your baggage is the equivalent of one body broken or destroyed (both for
command morale purposes and victory points), but since it was "free" its
value would be 0 (for victory point purposes). Is this correct and was it
intended? Personally, I like baggage having a decent victory point value.>>

150 points. Fixed.


<< Thanks for your patience (and all the hard work).

Robert Hofrichter
Glen Allen, VA >>


No, Robert, thank YOU. :)

Wow. That was easy.

On the other hand, only one new thing came up as a result of the game we
played on Saturday. Of course, as Charles and Roger are old (and
up-to-date) WRG/Warrior fanatics, they handled all the other questions as
they came up--I just tried to verify what they said by making sure that the
current rules said the same thing.

The one item that came up--Counters and Retirements (sections 6.14 and 6.15
respectively). Both rules have a line that says, in effect, "The player who
did not have initiative during approaches attempts (performs) all his
counters (retirements) first." Now, in section 3.2, part 4 of a bound is
the Counter/Retirement Phase. Unfortunately, I couldn't find anything that
said counters must occur first (or vice versa) or whether they occurred
simultaneously. We played that they occurred at the same time, so that the
non-initiative player had to do all his counters AND retirements before the
initiative player. Is this correct? Is there anything that I have missed
that specifies?

I think that was the only thing that came up that we couldn't really
determine from a close reading of the rules (Charles--if I've missed
something, please let me know).

A picture of the battle is available at
http://www.engdy.net/picts/friends/20010707/index.html

It was a fight between an early Byzantine army (split between a cav command
and the C-in-C leading a foot command) and an Avar/Slav army (of two
balanced commands).

This was taken when the Byzantine flank march (the cavalry command) finally
arrived on the table. The Imperial infantry has started to advance from
their defended area, in order to support the somewhat boxed-in cav.

We had to call the battle two (or was it three?) bounds later as I had to
pack up and head home. Essentially a draw. While it may not seem
particularly strange to some of you, this was the first time I'd seen a WRG
battlefield get turned on its side because of the way we (I was the Imperial
CinC and Charles was the Master of Horse) set up. On the plus side, we
essentially negated most of the enemy's foot, but the minus was that our own
deployment of the flank march left them too bunched up (rolled a 6 on
something like the 5th bound, forcing them to enter in the enemy rear area
with two fatigue). A very dangerous situation that was only retrieved by
some fancy maneuvering and some lucky rolls. The fact that much of my
command was hidden (in the BUA and woods) for much of the battle kept the
Avars very cautious.

Anyway, that's about it--have a great time at Historicon (all those
fortunate enough to go)!

Rob

----- Original Message -----
From: <JonCleaves@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 9:47 AM
Subject: [WarriorRules] New member comments/questions ANSWERED


> In a message dated 7/6/2001 23:00:48 Central Daylight Time,
> RobHofrich@... writes:
>
> << Page 15, 3.2.3: This never actually says "Conduct approach moves." I
> know-I'm being a bit nit-picky here.>.
>
> Good one! Fixed.
>
> << Page 27, 6.0: According to the set of bullets at the end of this
section
> (at least as far as I can tell), if within 40 paces of an enemy, you
cannot
> charge an enemy as the only permitted moves are formation change,
counter,
> retire, or staff moves. Is this intended?>.
>
> Good one! Fixed. yes, you can charge.
>
> <<Page 65, 13.32: Says, "Fighting transport moves...at speed of wagons
or
> foot type, whichever is slower." Once again, being nit-picky, do you
also
> mean, "moves...as wagons or foot type, whichever is more restricted
> (limited?)" as wheeled cannot move in certain terrain?>>
>
> Whole fighting transport section being redone. I will add this to the
pile.
>
> <<Page 70, 14.45: Says flank marches are permitted by "...one command or
> unit." I am assuming that this means (and was intended to mean) that if
you
> want more than one unit flank marching, you have to use an entire
command.
> Is this correct?>>
>
> Yes, and I will clarify.
>
> <<Page 72, 14.5: Since I didn't notice anything about any special loss
rules
> (except for the looting rule) concerning Baggage/Camp, I assume that
losing
> your baggage is the equivalent of one body broken or destroyed (both for
> command morale purposes and victory points), but since it was "free" its
> value would be 0 (for victory point purposes). Is this correct and was
it
> intended? Personally, I like baggage having a decent victory point
value.>>
>
> 150 points. Fixed.
>
>
> << Thanks for your patience (and all the hard work).
>
> Robert Hofrichter
> Glen Allen, VA >>
>
>
> No, Robert, thank YOU.
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Robert,

Where do you live?

Kelly Wilkinson
--- "Robert W. Hofrichter" <RobHofrich@...>
wrote:
> Wow. That was easy.
>
> On the other hand, only one new thing came up as a
> result of the game we
> played on Saturday. Of course, as Charles and Roger
> are old (and
> up-to-date) WRG/Warrior fanatics, they handled all
> the other questions as
> they came up--I just tried to verify what they said
> by making sure that the
> current rules said the same thing.
>
> The one item that came up--Counters and Retirements
> (sections 6.14 and 6.15
> respectively). Both rules have a line that says, in
> effect, "The player who
> did not have initiative during approaches attempts
> (performs) all his
> counters (retirements) first." Now, in section 3.2,
> part 4 of a bound is
> the Counter/Retirement Phase. Unfortunately, I
> couldn't find anything that
> said counters must occur first (or vice versa) or
> whether they occurred
> simultaneously. We played that they occurred at the
> same time, so that the
> non-initiative player had to do all his counters AND
> retirements before the
> initiative player. Is this correct? Is there
> anything that I have missed
> that specifies?
>
> I think that was the only thing that came up that we
> couldn't really
> determine from a close reading of the rules
> (Charles--if I've missed
> something, please let me know).
>
> A picture of the battle is available at
>
http://www.engdy.net/picts/friends/20010707/index.html
>
> It was a fight between an early Byzantine army
> (split between a cav command
> and the C-in-C leading a foot command) and an
> Avar/Slav army (of two
> balanced commands).
>
> This was taken when the Byzantine flank march (the
> cavalry command) finally
> arrived on the table. The Imperial infantry has
> started to advance from
> their defended area, in order to support the
> somewhat boxed-in cav.
>
> We had to call the battle two (or was it three?)
> bounds later as I had to
> pack up and head home. Essentially a draw. While
> it may not seem
> particularly strange to some of you, this was the
> first time I'd seen a WRG
> battlefield get turned on its side because of the
> way we (I was the Imperial
> CinC and Charles was the Master of Horse) set up.
> On the plus side, we
> essentially negated most of the enemy's foot, but
> the minus was that our own
> deployment of the flank march left them too bunched
> up (rolled a 6 on
> something like the 5th bound, forcing them to enter
> in the enemy rear area
> with two fatigue). A very dangerous situation that
> was only retrieved by
> some fancy maneuvering and some lucky rolls. The
> fact that much of my
> command was hidden (in the BUA and woods) for much
> of the battle kept the
> Avars very cautious.
>
> Anyway, that's about it--have a great time at
> Historicon (all those
> fortunate enough to go)!
>
> Rob
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <JonCleaves@...>
> To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 9:47 AM
> Subject: [WarriorRules] New member
> comments/questions ANSWERED
>
>
> > In a message dated 7/6/2001 23:00:48 Central
> Daylight Time,
> > RobHofrich@... writes:
> >
> > << Page 15, 3.2.3: This never actually says
> "Conduct approach moves." I
> > know-I'm being a bit nit-picky here.>.
> >
> > Good one! Fixed.
> >
> > << Page 27, 6.0: According to the set of bullets
> at the end of this
> section
> > (at least as far as I can tell), if within 40
> paces of an enemy, you
> cannot
> > charge an enemy as the only permitted moves are
> formation change,
> counter,
> > retire, or staff moves. Is this intended?>.
> >
> > Good one! Fixed. yes, you can charge.
> >
> > <<Page 65, 13.32: Says, "Fighting transport
> moves...at speed of wagons
> or
> > foot type, whichever is slower." Once again,
> being nit-picky, do you
> also
> > mean, "moves...as wagons or foot type, whichever
> is more restricted
> > (limited?)" as wheeled cannot move in certain
> terrain?>>
> >
> > Whole fighting transport section being redone. I
> will add this to the
> pile.
> >
> > <<Page 70, 14.45: Says flank marches are
> permitted by "...one command or
> > unit." I am assuming that this means (and was
> intended to mean) that if
> you
> > want more than one unit flank marching, you have
> to use an entire
> command.
> > Is this correct?>>
> >
> > Yes, and I will clarify.
> >
> > <<Page 72, 14.5: Since I didn't notice anything
> about any special loss
> rules
> > (except for the looting rule) concerning
> Baggage/Camp, I assume that
> losing
> > your baggage is the equivalent of one body broken
> or destroyed (both for
> > command morale purposes and victory points), but
> since it was "free" its
> > value would be 0 (for victory point purposes).
> Is this correct and was
> it
> > intended? Personally, I like baggage having a
> decent victory point
> value.>>
> >
> > 150 points. Fixed.
> >
> >
> > << Thanks for your patience (and all the hard
> work).
> >
> > Robert Hofrichter
> > Glen Allen, VA >>
> >
> >
> > No, Robert, thank YOU.
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

Glen Allen--okay, so for those of you not from or living in the area--that's
a NW suburb of Richmond.

And if you mean more specifically, Dunncroft.

Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: "kelly wilkinson" <jwilkinson62@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 4:26 AM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] New member comments/questions ANSWERED


> Robert,
>
> Where do you live?
>
> Kelly Wilkinson
> --- "Robert W. Hofrichter" <RobHofrich@...>
> wrote:
> > Wow. That was easy.
> >
> > On the other hand, only one new thing came up as a
> > result of the game we
> > played on Saturday. Of course, as Charles and Roger
> > are old (and
> > up-to-date) WRG/Warrior fanatics, they handled all
> > the other questions as
> > they came up--I just tried to verify what they said
> > by making sure that the
> > current rules said the same thing.
> >
> > The one item that came up--Counters and Retirements
> > (sections 6.14 and 6.15
> > respectively). Both rules have a line that says, in
> > effect, "The player who
> > did not have initiative during approaches attempts
> > (performs) all his
> > counters (retirements) first." Now, in section 3.2,
> > part 4 of a bound is
> > the Counter/Retirement Phase. Unfortunately, I
> > couldn't find anything that
> > said counters must occur first (or vice versa) or
> > whether they occurred
> > simultaneously. We played that they occurred at the
> > same time, so that the
> > non-initiative player had to do all his counters AND
> > retirements before the
> > initiative player. Is this correct? Is there
> > anything that I have missed
> > that specifies?
> >
> > I think that was the only thing that came up that we
> > couldn't really
> > determine from a close reading of the rules
> > (Charles--if I've missed
> > something, please let me know).
> >
> > A picture of the battle is available at
> >
> http://www.engdy.net/picts/friends/20010707/index.html
> >
> > It was a fight between an early Byzantine army
> > (split between a cav command
> > and the C-in-C leading a foot command) and an
> > Avar/Slav army (of two
> > balanced commands).
> >
> > This was taken when the Byzantine flank march (the
> > cavalry command) finally
> > arrived on the table. The Imperial infantry has
> > started to advance from
> > their defended area, in order to support the
> > somewhat boxed-in cav.
> >
> > We had to call the battle two (or was it three?)
> > bounds later as I had to
> > pack up and head home. Essentially a draw. While
> > it may not seem
> > particularly strange to some of you, this was the
> > first time I'd seen a WRG
> > battlefield get turned on its side because of the
> > way we (I was the Imperial
> > CinC and Charles was the Master of Horse) set up.
> > On the plus side, we
> > essentially negated most of the enemy's foot, but
> > the minus was that our own
> > deployment of the flank march left them too bunched
> > up (rolled a 6 on
> > something like the 5th bound, forcing them to enter
> > in the enemy rear area
> > with two fatigue). A very dangerous situation that
> > was only retrieved by
> > some fancy maneuvering and some lucky rolls. The
> > fact that much of my
> > command was hidden (in the BUA and woods) for much
> > of the battle kept the
> > Avars very cautious.
> >
> > Anyway, that's about it--have a great time at
> > Historicon (all those
> > fortunate enough to go)!
> >
> > Rob
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <JonCleaves@...>
> > To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 9:47 AM
> > Subject: [WarriorRules] New member
> > comments/questions ANSWERED
> >
> >
> > > In a message dated 7/6/2001 23:00:48 Central
> > Daylight Time,
> > > RobHofrich@... writes:
> > >
> > > << Page 15, 3.2.3: This never actually says
> > "Conduct approach moves." I
> > > know-I'm being a bit nit-picky here.>.
> > >
> > > Good one! Fixed.
> > >
> > > << Page 27, 6.0: According to the set of bullets
> > at the end of this
> > section
> > > (at least as far as I can tell), if within 40
> > paces of an enemy, you
> > cannot
> > > charge an enemy as the only permitted moves are
> > formation change,
> > counter,
> > > retire, or staff moves. Is this intended?>.
> > >
> > > Good one! Fixed. yes, you can charge.
> > >
> > > <<Page 65, 13.32: Says, "Fighting transport
> > moves...at speed of wagons
> > or
> > > foot type, whichever is slower." Once again,
> > being nit-picky, do you
> > also
> > > mean, "moves...as wagons or foot type, whichever
> > is more restricted
> > > (limited?)" as wheeled cannot move in certain
> > terrain?>>
> > >
> > > Whole fighting transport section being redone. I
> > will add this to the
> > pile.
> > >
> > > <<Page 70, 14.45: Says flank marches are
> > permitted by "...one command or
> > > unit." I am assuming that this means (and was
> > intended to mean) that if
> > you
> > > want more than one unit flank marching, you have
> > to use an entire
> > command.
> > > Is this correct?>>
> > >
> > > Yes, and I will clarify.
> > >
> > > <<Page 72, 14.5: Since I didn't notice anything
> > about any special loss
> > rules
> > > (except for the looting rule) concerning
> > Baggage/Camp, I assume that
> > losing
> > > your baggage is the equivalent of one body broken
> > or destroyed (both for
> > > command morale purposes and victory points), but
> > since it was "free" its
> > > value would be 0 (for victory point purposes).
> > Is this correct and was
> > it
> > > intended? Personally, I like baggage having a
> > decent victory point
> > value.>>
> > >
> > > 150 points. Fixed.
> > >
> > >
> > > << Thanks for your patience (and all the hard
> > work).
> > >
> > > Robert Hofrichter
> > > Glen Allen, VA >>
> > >
> > >
> > > No, Robert, thank YOU.
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > > WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
> http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>

[Don Coon]

>
> << Page 15, 3.2.3: This never actually says "Conduct approach moves." I
> know-I'm being a bit nit-picky here.>.
>
> Good one! Fixed.
>
> << Page 27, 6.0: According to the set of bullets at the end of this
section
> (at least as far as I can tell), if within 40 paces of an enemy, you
cannot
> charge an enemy as the only permitted moves are formation change,
counter,
> retire, or staff moves. Is this intended?>.
>
> Good one! Fixed. yes, you can charge.

Along these same lines: as stated above one of the restrictions in 6.0 is
"formation change." This should be changed to "maneuver (one if irregular,
2 if steady regulars)". The way it is stated now, you can only form a
testudo, skirmish, or orb; or revert to a block. 6.12 defines formations as
those I have listed as does 6.4. Then in 6.13 last para you state "a body
starting the approach phase closer than 40p to an enemy body may only make a
maneuver (one or two if steady regulars)."

So right now 6.0 contadicts 6.13. We always have played by 6.13.

4.51 Retreat: We have one player who is not getting the proper feel of
retreat orders. He is reading the wording a little loosly IMHO, but while
we understand them just fine as is, I suggest the following clarifying
wording.

(bullet 1) Must try to leave the table by the quickest route to own table
edge using retirement moves or march moves. If both types of moves would be
otherwise legal, the body MUST make a retirement move and as many march
moves as possible in a given bound. Flank marching troops retreat to the
table edge of arrival.

This drives the point home.

(bullet 4) Only troops withing enemy charge reach can attempt to counter.

This stops all the "counter cheese" to prevent having to retire. It also
allows retreating troops who are within (not just approached to) charge
reach to counter out.

Along this same vein in 6.0 please add "[EX: retirement moves for bodies
under retreat orders, or any charge responses may be combined with march
moves]" after "marches and tactical moves may not be combined"

The first exception further stresses retreating bodies must get off table
ASAP, and the second covers the very infrequent (but we had it happen
yesterday) case of a body ending its march move within 40p of woods and
having an ambusher charge out at them.

Then finally 5.151 2nd to last sentance: please rewrite to "Note that
retreating bodies MUST both retire AND march in the same bound if able to do
so"

Again, while we have no problem with the rule as written, we have one guy
who says since the rule currently says "MAY", he can choose not to march in
any bound that he has made a retirement move. The change to "must if able"
keeps the rule intent and closes this argument maker.

Don

[joncleaves]

<< The one item that came up--Counters and Retirements (sections 6.14 and 6.15
respectively). Both rules have a line that says, in effect, "The player who
did not have initiative during approaches attempts (performs) all his
counters (retirements) first." Now, in section 3.2, part 4 of a bound is
the Counter/Retirement Phase. Unfortunately, I couldn't find anything that
said counters must occur first (or vice versa) or whether they occurred
simultaneously. We played that they occurred at the same time, so that the
non-initiative player had to do all his counters AND retirements before the
initiative player. Is this correct? Is there anything that I have missed
that specifies? >>

Counters first. Clarified in 3.2 of the 15 July draft which I will post
tonight.

[joncleaves]

<< Along these same lines: as stated above one of the restrictions in 6.0 is
"formation change." This should be changed to "maneuver (one if irregular,
2 if steady regulars)".>>

Fixed - July 15 Draft.

<< (bullet 1) Must try to leave the table by the quickest route to own table
edge using retirement moves or march moves. If both types of moves would be
otherwise legal, the body MUST make a retirement move and as many march
moves as possible in a given bound. Flank marching troops retreat to the
table edge of arrival.>>

Done.

<< Along this same vein in 6.0 please add "[EX: retirement moves for bodies
under retreat orders, or any charge responses may be combined with march
moves]" after "marches and tactical moves may not be combined">>

Done.

<< Then finally 5.151 2nd to last sentance: please rewrite to "Note that
retreating bodies MUST both retire AND march in the same bound if able to do
so">>

Done.

Not so hard, was it? :-)

Jon