Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 6/3/2004 22:44:58 Central Daylight Time,
mwbard@... writes:

1. Victory Conditions

I read the post about the 'victory conditions' with a little bit of horror
(and yes, I was Al's opponent in that game). Since part of the goal (as I
understand it anyway) is to get new players into the hobby with the big
glossy book, I think it should have a 'Winning the Game' section. It
doesn't have to be hard and fast rules, just thoughts, recommendations, and
a summary of the rules as they stand.>>
[
[
Do you mean other than 14.5?



2. Diagrams

Long ago a friend and I tried to teach ourselves WRG 6th (it might have been
5th). Neither of us had ever done any miniature wargaming before. As a
result, we failed miserably, especially over minor things. Things such as
'what is a wheel?' Therefore, I believe it is a good idea for the book to
contain some diagrams of basic things - wheels, formation changes,
left/right/about face, etc. Yes, everybody on the list knows, but people
who have never played miniatures before have no clue.>>
[
[
I am adding more diagrams than are there now - and i am choosing based on
the most asked rules questions of the last two years. But I will certainly
consider requests.



3. Sequence of Play

As a long time SFB player, I know that the 3 page Sequence of Play is the
most valuable tool in the entire SFB rulebook. I strongly believe that a
master Sequence of Play for Warrior would be just as valuable. Most of it
is scattered throughout the rulebook, but it is never in one place and thus
it shouldn't be hard to generate. I, at least, would definitely find it
useful. This list should be able to put this together to save you some time
and effort.>>
[
[
You mean other than 3.2??



4. Summary Tables

There are two things I'm always looking up in the book (in addition to basic
combat factors and casualties): Waver checks and Fatigue sources. Having an
appendix of tables that includes a short list of all causes of waver checks
(with rules cross references), and all causes of fatigue (with rules cross
references) I would find very handy. Doubtless there are others.>>
[
[
You mean other than 5.5 and 5.31??
J


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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 6/3/2004 23:41:12 Central Daylight Time,
redcoat24@... writes:

14.5 describes how to score a battle when it is
over, but right now, there is no way a player knows when is a fair point to
stop playing. I like the way you do it, I think this is just a completeness
issue.

For the rest, I think Mike is just asking for more quick reference charts.>>
ok to both!
Jon





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

[Mike Bard]

1. Victory Conditions

I read the post about the 'victory conditions' with a little bit of horror
(and yes, I was Al's opponent in that game). Since part of the goal (as I
understand it anyway) is to get new players into the hobby with the big
glossy book, I think it should have a 'Winning the Game' section. It
doesn't have to be hard and fast rules, just thoughts, recommendations, and
a summary of the rules as they stand.

2. Diagrams

Long ago a friend and I tried to teach ourselves WRG 6th (it might have been
5th). Neither of us had ever done any miniature wargaming before. As a
result, we failed miserably, especially over minor things. Things such as
'what is a wheel?' Therefore, I believe it is a good idea for the book to
contain some diagrams of basic things - wheels, formation changes,
left/right/about face, etc. Yes, everybody on the list knows, but people
who have never played miniatures before have no clue.

3. Sequence of Play

As a long time SFB player, I know that the 3 page Sequence of Play is the
most valuable tool in the entire SFB rulebook. I strongly believe that a
master Sequence of Play for Warrior would be just as valuable. Most of it
is scattered throughout the rulebook, but it is never in one place and thus
it shouldn't be hard to generate. I, at least, would definitely find it
useful. This list should be able to put this together to save you some time
and effort.

4. Summary Tables

There are two things I'm always looking up in the book (in addition to basic
combat factors and casualties): Waver checks and Fatigue sources. Having an
appendix of tables that includes a short list of all causes of waver checks
(with rules cross references), and all causes of fatigue (with rules cross
references) I would find very handy. Doubtless there are others.

Comments? Other suggestions?

Michael Bard
That Greek Hoplite Guy

Answering quickly, yes to all your responses.

As for victory conditions, you might include a section exactly like your
response to my post the other day. Just some guidance on when the battle
might be considered over. You've left that for the players to decide for
themselves, nothing wrong with that, but at some point in the book you
should come out and say it. 14.5 describes how to score a battle when it is
over, but right now, there is no way a player knows when is a fair point to
stop playing. I like the way you do it, I think this is just a completeness
issue.

For the rest, I think Mike is just asking for more quick reference charts.
Thanks
Allan

----- Original Message -----
From: <JonCleaves@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 11:47 PM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] New Rulebook Thoughts


> In a message dated 6/3/2004 22:44:58 Central Daylight Time,
> mwbard@... writes:
>
> 1. Victory Conditions
>
> I read the post about the 'victory conditions' with a little bit of
horror
> (and yes, I was Al's opponent in that game). Since part of the goal (as
I
> understand it anyway) is to get new players into the hobby with the big
> glossy book, I think it should have a 'Winning the Game' section. It
> doesn't have to be hard and fast rules, just thoughts, recommendations,
and
> a summary of the rules as they stand.>>
> [
> [
> Do you mean other than 14.5?
>
>
>
> 2. Diagrams
>
> Long ago a friend and I tried to teach ourselves WRG 6th (it might have
been
> 5th). Neither of us had ever done any miniature wargaming before. As a
> result, we failed miserably, especially over minor things. Things such
as
> 'what is a wheel?' Therefore, I believe it is a good idea for the book
to
> contain some diagrams of basic things - wheels, formation changes,
> left/right/about face, etc. Yes, everybody on the list knows, but people
> who have never played miniatures before have no clue.>>
> [
> [
> I am adding more diagrams than are there now - and i am choosing based on
> the most asked rules questions of the last two years. But I will
certainly
> consider requests.
>
>
>
> 3. Sequence of Play
>
> As a long time SFB player, I know that the 3 page Sequence of Play is the
> most valuable tool in the entire SFB rulebook. I strongly believe that a
> master Sequence of Play for Warrior would be just as valuable. Most of
it
> is scattered throughout the rulebook, but it is never in one place and
thus
> it shouldn't be hard to generate. I, at least, would definitely find it
> useful. This list should be able to put this together to save you some
time
> and effort.>>
> [
> [
> You mean other than 3.2??
>
>
>
> 4. Summary Tables
>
> There are two things I'm always looking up in the book (in addition to
basic
> combat factors and casualties): Waver checks and Fatigue sources. Having
an
> appendix of tables that includes a short list of all causes of waver
checks
> (with rules cross references), and all causes of fatigue (with rules
cross
> references) I would find very handy. Doubtless there are others.>>
> [
> [
> You mean other than 5.5 and 5.31??
> J
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

[joncleaves]

New Rulebook Thoughts

First, let me say that it is extremely unlikely we will be selling the rulebook
at Hcon. This isn’t a crisis as even if we were selling it there, it would
not be in effect. In about a week, I will post the clarifications and 12/14
material that will be in effect. If I have to move the deadline, I will be
aiming to have the rulebook on sale in August or early Sept. so that it will be
in effect at Fall-In and all 2006 events. The bottom line is that I won’t let
this thing go to print unless I am happy with it and there is just a huge amount
of work left to do to do it right. We are getting a lot of great help from our
proofreaders, but when it comes to putting it together, Beth and I are an Army
of Two and this is not a day job for either of us.

Ok, some points to respond to the comments on the group about the new rulebook
from the last few days and to give you our reasons for doing things and to clear
up some misunderstandings.

1. Warrior is not an intro-level game. It is designed to be a simulation and
it is designed to be challenging. It is, without question, the most challenging
miniatures game on the market. Its target audience is the 19+ year old college
student/graduate. It is not written at the 9th grade level, it is written at
the college freshman level. It requires effort to learn and more to master
Warrior. That is one of its strengths and one of the main reasons the guys here
at FHE are in this business in the first place.

2. The Games Workshop model does not apply to Warrior. Games Workshop mainline
games are targeted at the 15-17 year old male. GW games are designed to sell
miniatures because GW is a profit-oriented company and their profits come from
the sale of miniatures. GW specialist games that target a slightly older crowd
do indeed make use of case numbering and a slightly higher reading level.

3. FHE is a business. It is and will remain in the black. But because we are
not full time, profit motive is not and really can’t be the top priority.
These two things together mean that while we must make practical decisions about
costs, pages, color, shipping, etc., first and foremost we are here to give the
gamer what the gamer wants. This means that we are not here, especially with
Warrior, to gain as many customers as possible no matter what that means for the
rules or the order in which products are completed. From a pure customer
increase/profit standpoint continuing to do *anything* with Warrior is senseless
– the market base is too small. A consultant would surely advise us to drop
Warrior and get the intro game out asap. However, at FHE, Warrior comes first
– for a lot of reasons.

4. FHE is not our primary workday effort. All four of us have one or more day
jobs. If I could afford to do Warrior full time, what is the revised rulebook
would have been the one published in 2002 and you’d see me at 20 cons a year
and GAMA doing demo games of Warrior Battles and SwordClash and running combined
Warrior/Campaign/Fleet/Siege games. I work on Warrior three nights a week
(Tues-Thurs) from about 2200/2300 to 0100. Maybe I start earlier if I don’t
go out that night, maybe not at all if I get home late. Sunday is the big
Warrior day, usually, and maybe I can put 6-8 hours in – usually 3-4. In the
big scheme of things, that is an impossibly small amount of time. It is cut
into by also running WarriorRules, although my ability to multitask allows me to
do some of that during the workday if I am in the office writing or researching.
Just the 47 diagrams in section 6 of the new rulebook took 12 hours to get into
a form Beth could put into layout. That comes out to about two weeks. This
says nothing of looking at, considering and incorporating the hundreds of
comments we have from the proofreaders. The idea of stopping this effort and
doing a ground-up revision is even more terrifying than the time I saw Event
Horizon. It would be a year, at least. I don’t want to be working on the
rulebook a year from now, I want to do other things. Our customers don’t want
to be playing from the ‘white rulebook’ a year from now.

5. The rulebook is, essentially, formatted in sequence of play order. But
observers are correct that it is not a 1:1 correlation. Charges are in tactical
moves because they are a form of tactical move. Could they be after marches in
the rulebook? Sure. The amount of work that entails is not worth the payoff.
Just the resequencing of the case numbers alone would not be worth it (which
would also make for an amount of list errata where 6-series rules were
referenced). Terrain has all been consolidated in 12.0 so that all battlefield
effects are in the same place, but the 6 and 9 sections on terrain will stay in
place so that there are summaries closer to where the player can get at them.
There will also be a terrain effects chart so that players don’t have to go to
the rules at all to see the effects of terrain. 13.0 is a rules summary.
Everything after 13.0 isn’t core rules, so the sequence of them isn’t really
overly important.

6. Designer’s Notes. I would like to do designer’s notes. I know that
players want them. I plan to do them - later. I plan to put them online for
free. Why? Not everyone wants them. I want the book done first –
designer’s notes are not rules and I want the rules to be the priority. I
want the rule work done and to be off on my next project before the inevitable
kibitzing starts over decisions explained in the designer’s notes. Once we
start saying why we did something, the volume of mail I have to answer increases
dramatically. I want the rules to be a fait accompli before this happens.
Also, I don’t have an unlimited number of pages to work with in the actual
rules book.

7. I would love for FHE to be a ‘real company’ with me doing this full time
and a paid staff of employees. Unfortunately, I make too much money. Even a VP
at GW makes half what I do. Warrior does not yet make enough money to pay one
person half of that. At some point, I will find a way to be doing this full
time, but until then, it is primarily a labor of love. And a labor of love that
is done for the game’s primary customer – the ancients gamer who wants to
play the most accurate and challenging game we can make. If you want something
with less rules pages or takes less time or less figures there are other games
out there. Or you can be part of the Warrior Battles process. Until then, we
are doing what we are doing and staying on schedule to have 2005 be the last
year with the white rulebook.

Thanks for listening
Jon



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

[Bill Chriss]

Jon:

Everything you say makes perfect sense to me, and I, for one, already
assumed 95% of what you have said. I want you Scott, Bill, and Jake to
know how much this one historical gamer appreciates FHE's efforts and
philosophy. I really shudder to think where dabblers like me would be
without guys like you to do the heavy lifting and literally keep the
hobby in existence for those of us who want something more than a
parchesi-like dice rolling game, or 2/2 tramplers with first strike and
flying who fight the chimeras of some Goth guy's imagination. (I know,
I know, fantasy gamers have rights, too, and you guys play fantasy
games, also, but humor my venting this once).

Truly, the whole idea of a realistic miniatures simulation of ancient
and medeival battles was in SERIOUS jeopardy of extinction just a few
years ago, as anyone who goes back to TOG 6th and then watched things
slide for the last several years can attest.

Finally, I know this is heresy, but I never thought even Barker's
English was hard to understand, much less the current set of Warrior
(TM). I started playing games with much more difficult rule sets when I
was 13. Sure you get stuff wrong without someone to show you how the
words are incarnated in action, but that's true of chess or backgammon,
too. Warrior and the lists that go with it are BY FAR the best
miniature wargaming system out there. What we should all be doing, in
my view, is using THIS system to put historical wargaming back on the
gaming/hobby map we got marginalized from by the dual challenge of the
appeal of fantasy gaming on the one hand, and the convenience of
opponent-less computer gaming on the other. In the early 80's I had
hopes that ancient/medieval miniature gaming would grow to the point
that we'd have hundreds or even thousands of REGULAR tournament players
in one rules system. Imagine if one day the NICT finals were on ESPN2.
Why shouldn't they be? Poker, billards, chess...why not us? We've got
to have a bigger vision, we can't just be a bunch of oddball hermits
doing something no one else even understands, much less cares about.
That way lies extinction. FHE is the only company to come along with a
vision, not only for their company, but for growing THE GAME, the
hobby. I don't pretend to suggest it's the same as mine, but for the
first time in years I'm actually pretty optimistic that when dinosaurs
like me die, the hobby in it's true incarnation won't die with us. SO
KEEP ON TRUCKING, FHE.

The problem is not our use of English. The problem is not in our
stars, but in ourselves that we are underlings. Or as Pogo used to
say: We have met the enemy and it is us. Or as my old tennis coach
used to say: It ain't the racket...and it ain't the shoes......


-Greek

Hi all,

I have to agree with Jon - besides it's his book and therefore he is to
decide how it's written and he stands with his name for it.
Generally I don't find the rules layout bad - sure it's hard for a
beginner to get into the game with just the rulebook on it's own.
But believe me this isn't really something a the layout could correct.
The gameengine and it's richness of possibilities wouldn't get simpler.
The layout is great to have a quick lookup to clarify a situation once
you already have mastered the rules. This is imo a good point of design
as the rules aren't meant to be an introductory game anyways.
If you look a typical itroductory level games like the GW shebang or
Flames of War to mention an historical example, it's not only the
layout that differs, the engine itselve is much simpler and easier/
faster to learn (that doesn't necessarily mean that there is no
tactical depth in such games - just the level of simulation isn't that
detailed. Chess has a very simple gameengine but most people agree that
it's tactical possibilities are VERY rich ...)
To come to a conclusion - I think it would be a mistake to reformat the
rules according to the layout of the games mentioned above. For the
expierienced player the look and feel of the rules would change without
gaining a profit from it while it wouldn't really help a newbie into
the game.
I can understand 'though how difficult it is to recruit new gamers -
actually I can understand it very goood - when you live in a country
like Austria you are very on your own when you want to start playing
warrior. When I started this kind of game with the WRG6th rules I was a
lone warrior (excuse me - I couldn't resist ;o) ) untill I found two
other guys that where interested. Now I was "reactivated" by a young
guy myselve and we managed to find two other players up to now. And
even with my old (and admittedly half forgotten) experience of 6thed.
and TOG it wasn't an easy way back
My suggestion for a solution for this problem is motivate some
experienced players to write a tutorial how to get into the rules with
pics/ diagrams, and the according references to the paragraphs in the
rulebook. This tutorial could be "published" on the FHE website where
we all could benefit from it - we the players from getting more gamers
into warrior and FHE in selling more copies of the rules
I would be willing to contribute pictures and the layout for this
project as I'm a photographer and graphic designer. So if some
experienced "dinosaurs" of the game would be willing to share and write
down their knowledge of the game, we'd might produce a result together.

Just my two (Euro)cents,

cheers, Michael

ps: please apologize any faults/ germanisms in the post - I had to to
it in a real hurry and don't have the time to proofread it at the
moment, but if I wait till evening I might forget halve of what I
wanted to say ;o) - I hope it's understandable any ways...

best, Michael

--
greymouse@...
http://www.fallout.de/greymouse

Rome did not build a great Empire by holding meetings...
Am 20.05.2005 um 21:11 Uhr schrieb JonCleaves@...:

[Todd Schneider]

Greymouse,

Check out the following file, and let me know if it
meets your needs:

http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/files/Roman-GermanDemoBattleSte\np-by-Step.pdf


Todd

--- Greymouse <greymouse@...> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have to agree with Jon - besides it's his book and
> therefore he is to
> decide how it's written and he stands with his name
> for it.
> Generally I don't find the rules layout bad - sure
> it's hard for a
> beginner to get into the game with just the rulebook
> on it's own.
> But believe me this isn't really something a the
> layout could correct.
> The gameengine and it's richness of possibilities
> wouldn't get simpler.
> The layout is great to have a quick lookup to
> clarify a situation once
> you already have mastered the rules. This is imo a
> good point of design
> as the rules aren't meant to be an introductory game
> anyways.
> If you look a typical itroductory level games like
> the GW shebang or
> Flames of War to mention an historical example, it's
> not only the
> layout that differs, the engine itselve is much
> simpler and easier/
> faster to learn (that doesn't necessarily mean that
> there is no
> tactical depth in such games - just the level of
> simulation isn't that
> detailed. Chess has a very simple gameengine but
> most people agree that
> it's tactical possibilities are VERY rich ...)
> To come to a conclusion - I think it would be a
> mistake to reformat the
> rules according to the layout of the games mentioned
> above. For the
> expierienced player the look and feel of the rules
> would change without
> gaining a profit from it while it wouldn't really
> help a newbie into
> the game.
> I can understand 'though how difficult it is to
> recruit new gamers -
> actually I can understand it very goood - when you
> live in a country
> like Austria you are very on your own when you want
> to start playing
> warrior. When I started this kind of game with the
> WRG6th rules I was a
> lone warrior (excuse me - I couldn't resist ;o) )
> untill I found two
> other guys that where interested. Now I was
> "reactivated" by a young
> guy myselve and we managed to find two other players
> up to now. And
> even with my old (and admittedly half forgotten)
> experience of 6thed.
> and TOG it wasn't an easy way back
> My suggestion for a solution for this problem is
> motivate some
> experienced players to write a tutorial how to get
> into the rules with
> pics/ diagrams, and the according references to the
> paragraphs in the
> rulebook. This tutorial could be "published" on the
> FHE website where
> we all could benefit from it - we the players from
> getting more gamers
> into warrior and FHE in selling more copies of the
> rules
> I would be willing to contribute pictures and the
> layout for this
> project as I'm a photographer and graphic designer.
> So if some
> experienced "dinosaurs" of the game would be willing
> to share and write
> down their knowledge of the game, we'd might produce
> a result together.
>
> Just my two (Euro)cents,
>
> cheers, Michael
>
> ps: please apologize any faults/ germanisms in the
> post - I had to to
> it in a real hurry and don't have the time to
> proofread it at the
> moment, but if I wait till evening I might forget
> halve of what I
> wanted to say ;o) - I hope it's understandable any
> ways...
>
> best, Michael
>
> --
> greymouse@...
> http://www.fallout.de/greymouse
>
> Rome did not build a great Empire by holding
> meetings...
> Am 20.05.2005 um 21:11 Uhr schrieb
> JonCleaves@...:
>
>

Hi Todd,

this is really great work. it can certainly be a baase for a tutorial I
have in mind. It just should be broken down in smaller more
"digestable" bits as 80+ pages would be a little bit hard for a total
newbie to work through at once. I'd break it down into several bits
where each oof them shows one or two aspects of the rules and the whole
file as all tutorials in one.
This would take a bit of rewriting but not too much. So if you'd
contribute this file as a workingbase it would be great.
Sorry I'm a bit short of time at the moment and can't go into details.
If you want I'll post a structure in a few days. (I think around the
end of the week I'll have some time.

Cheers,

Michael

ps: I have no problems if you call me Michael instead of greymouse
--
greymouse@...
http://www.fallout.de/greymouse

Rome did not build a great Empire by holding meetings...
Am 21.05.2005 um 18:48 Uhr schrieb Todd Schneider:

> Greymouse,
>
> Check out the following file, and let me know if it
> meets your needs:
>
> http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/files/Roman-
> GermanDemoBattleStep-by-Step.pdf
>
>
> Todd
>
> --- Greymouse <greymouse@...> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have to agree with Jon - besides it's his book and
>> therefore he is to
>> decide how it's written and he stands with his name
>> for it.
>> Generally I don't find the rules layout bad - sure
>> it's hard for a
>> beginner to get into the game with just the rulebook
>> on it's own.
>> But believe me this isn't really something a the
>> layout could correct.
>> The gameengine and it's richness of possibilities
>> wouldn't get simpler.
>> The layout is great to have a quick lookup to
>> clarify a situation once
>> you already have mastered the rules. This is imo a
>> good point of design
>> as the rules aren't meant to be an introductory game
>> anyways.
>> If you look a typical itroductory level games like
>> the GW shebang or
>> Flames of War to mention an historical example, it's
>> not only the
>> layout that differs, the engine itselve is much
>> simpler and easier/
>> faster to learn (that doesn't necessarily mean that
>> there is no
>> tactical depth in such games - just the level of
>> simulation isn't that
>> detailed. Chess has a very simple gameengine but
>> most people agree that
>> it's tactical possibilities are VERY rich ...)
>> To come to a conclusion - I think it would be a
>> mistake to reformat the
>> rules according to the layout of the games mentioned
>> above. For the
>> expierienced player the look and feel of the rules
>> would change without
>> gaining a profit from it while it wouldn't really
>> help a newbie into
>> the game.
>> I can understand 'though how difficult it is to
>> recruit new gamers -
>> actually I can understand it very goood - when you
>> live in a country
>> like Austria you are very on your own when you want
>> to start playing
>> warrior. When I started this kind of game with the
>> WRG6th rules I was a
>> lone warrior (excuse me - I couldn't resist ;o) )
>> untill I found two
>> other guys that where interested. Now I was
>> "reactivated" by a young
>> guy myselve and we managed to find two other players
>> up to now. And
>> even with my old (and admittedly half forgotten)
>> experience of 6thed.
>> and TOG it wasn't an easy way back
>> My suggestion for a solution for this problem is
>> motivate some
>> experienced players to write a tutorial how to get
>> into the rules with
>> pics/ diagrams, and the according references to the
>> paragraphs in the
>> rulebook. This tutorial could be "published" on the
>> FHE website where
>> we all could benefit from it - we the players from
>> getting more gamers
>> into warrior and FHE in selling more copies of the
>> rules
>> I would be willing to contribute pictures and the
>> layout for this
>> project as I'm a photographer and graphic designer.
>> So if some
>> experienced "dinosaurs" of the game would be willing
>> to share and write
>> down their knowledge of the game, we'd might produce
>> a result together.
>>
>> Just my two (Euro)cents,
>>
>> cheers, Michael
>>
>> ps: please apologize any faults/ germanisms in the
>> post - I had to to
>> it in a real hurry and don't have the time to
>> proofread it at the
>> moment, but if I wait till evening I might forget
>> halve of what I
>> wanted to say ;o) - I hope it's understandable any
>> ways...
>>
>> best, Michael
>>
>> --
>> greymouse@...
>> http://www.fallout.de/greymouse
>>
>> Rome did not build a great Empire by holding
>> meetings...
>> Am 20.05.2005 um 21:11 Uhr schrieb
>> JonCleaves@...:
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

Hi Todd,

sorry the delay but job is a bit - well it doesn't leave much time for
private things at the moment which possibly won't change for the next two
weeks :-(

anyways my basic thoughts about a tutorial:
first a couple of standard situations.

Tutorial 1: A round of shooting followed by a round of close combat
initiated by a charge, showing the difference in combat effectiveness of
different troops
Tutorial 2: Command and control: deploying some troops, describing the
overall battleplan according to the terrain for them (Occupy that hill and
hold it...) and showing how this plan can be realised by giving orders to
the troops (with an explanation why each order is given and what it's
consequences are and maybe showing what happens if they get some wrong
orders)
Tutorial 3: Movement and Terrain: using Terrain to your advantage by
moving different trooptypes showing wich kind of troops are especially
effective in which tpre of terrain.
Tutorial 4: How to use skirmishers effectively: showing how skirmishers
can lay out the road for the decisive charge of your heavies
Tutorial 5: How to design an army: showing how different troop types work
together to their advantage so you can build an army that's interesting to
play for you AND your opponent. (and avoiding to build a killerarmy for
powergaming)
Tutorial 6: the big tutorial: a report of an entire battle - well actually
your file ;o)

it should be possible to create much of the tutorials 1-4 out of your file
without too much work I'd guess
(btw - the numbers for tutorials 1-4 are just chosen randomly - they
shouldn't indicate any order in which to read them..)
Open for further suggestions/ critics/ comments/ etc. pp. ;-)

Cheers,

Michael
--
nice surf, Grey~O°>
http://adean.deviantart.com

Rome did not build an Empire by holding meetings...

[Todd Schneider]

--- Greymouse <greymouse@...> wrote:
> Hi Todd,
>
> sorry the delay but job is a bit - well it doesn't
> leave much time for
> private things at the moment which possibly won't
> change for the next two
> weeks
>

I feel your pain.


> anyways my basic thoughts about a tutorial:
> first a couple of standard situations.
>
> Tutorial 1: A round of shooting followed by a round
> of close combat
> initiated by a charge, showing the difference in
> combat effectiveness of
> different troops

OK. It's kind of subjective, but the honest truth is
every good player out there can look at a matchup and
know with a certain degree of assurance what the
outcome will be. While newer players like me are
still looking atthe chart to make sure that SHK L
charging seady MI armed with whatever is going to
be....The more expierence player knows he's doing 2CPF
and recoiling the enemy on even dice. I think the
above suggesstion is good, but I also know with so
many different troops types/weapon combinations, it
would take forever to finsih. I think its one of
those things that you learn through expierence and
repetition myself, but am open to suggestions on how
to go about doing something like this.

> Tutorial 2: Command and control: deploying some
> troops, describing the
> overall battleplan according to the terrain for them
> (Occupy that hill and
> hold it...) and showing how this plan can be
> realised by giving orders to
> the troops (with an explanation why each order is
> given and what it's
> consequences are and maybe showing what happens if
> they get some wrong
> orders)

Again, subjective, but doable. Also, see the "Drawing
a map tutorial" and tell me what you think of that.


> Tutorial 3: Movement and Terrain: using Terrain to
> your advantage by
> moving different trooptypes showing wich kind of
> troops are especially
> effective in which tpre of terrain.

I have yet to figure out the nuances of this on the
tabletop, so I am not sure what a tutorial I do will
solve :-)

> Tutorial 4: How to use skirmishers effectively:
> showing how skirmishers
> can lay out the road for the decisive charge of your
> heavies

Mark Stone has already sone this, sans diagrams. Its
a very good treatise.

> Tutorial 5: How to design an army: showing how
> different troop types work
> together to their advantage so you can build an army
> that's interesting to
> play for you AND your opponent. (and avoiding to
> build a killerarmy for
> powergaming)

Good subject. Far to braod and two subjective.
Writing Army lists is almost a hobby among many of us,
I've designed more armies than I'll vever play, and
the simple fact is no two players are going to design
the same army with a given list (unless it's one of
the few "generic" lists IMO.
That being said, Ewan McNay wrotes omething awhile
back, where he constructs a list with comments. Very
good reading, and I'd also recomend his After Action
NICT list reviews as well. They make for good reading
from one of the better players out there. They should
still be in the files section, if not Iknow I have
them saved, I would think Ewan does as well.


> Tutorial 6: the big tutorial: a report of an entire
> battle - well actually
> your file ;o)
>

The issue I ran into here was one of Size actually.
Using powerpoint limits me to what I can portray
effectively, and what looks good visually, and at some
point the units become meaningless blobs of color. I
had ppans for a 1200 point battle, but some other
Warrior related issues came up and it's been on the
backburner for awhile. Maybe this fall....

Of course, I don;t have to be the only one doing these
things, do I :-)


Todd

> it should be possible to create much of the
> tutorials 1-4 out of your file
> without too much work I'd guess
> (btw - the numbers for tutorials 1-4 are just chosen
> randomly - they
> shouldn't indicate any order in which to read
> them..)
> Open for further suggestions/ critics/ comments/
> etc. pp.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Michael
> --
> nice surf, Grey~O°>
> http://adean.deviantart.com
>
> Rome did not build an Empire by holding meetings...
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>
>

Hi Todd,

thanks for your comments. I know it looks like the approach is too big on
many points. But I didn't mean to cover any possibility with every
possible Troop type or any combinationa of command. I always thought of
giving an example with one or two trooptypes in a certain situation. I
think the function of a tutorial shouldn't be to give a total reference of
how to play Warrior, but to give a few examples to give a starting point
how to use the rules - from there on the reader has to work on himselve (I
meaning it's a part of the fun discovering how it works and getting better
along)
I just imagine (and I know it from experience) how a total newbie sits
there with the rulebook having just finished to read it and thinks - wow
really a big game - but what now, how should I start?
I think of the tutorials like kind of driving lessons - you won't learn
really how to drive there but you are shown the basics of driving so that
yopu can get a car and start driving around - and then you learn how to
drive - by doing it.
No tutorial should try to substitute experience. Gaining experience is
part of the fun imo (and it wouldn't work anyway )
BUt when I can read how HC is doing in a certain situation and get
explained why it does so, I can figure out and try myselve how it would
do in a different one or how EHC would do in the same situation.
So the tutorials I spoke of should be rather short - maybe 2 Examples each
half a page or so. They should just show how and why something works in an
Example. Also your powerpoint is really extensive enough for a battle - no
need to rework.
And of course many things will be subjective - I think with many
situations there are as many approaches as there are players. Never mind
the tutorials should just ease the process of getting into the game for a
newbie and then he/she shall develop his/her own subjective opinions ;o)

Last point - of course you could incorporate all points in one tutorial, I
just believe if you just have worked through a set like Warrior. the Idea
of reading a tutorial of 80+ pages isn't very appealing. 4 or 5 small
tutorials are much more attractive and when you have done that and had a
few games then you will get naturally attracted to the 80page thing for
more detailes.
So if you still want to work together - don't do too much ;o)

Cheers,

Michael

--
nice surf, Grey~O°>
http://adean.deviantart.com

Rome did not build an Empire by holding meetings...