Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Greg,

As you know, I like the Burmese army. And I play it b/c I dig the
elephants. In my opinion, w/o the elephants, the Burmese are just another bunch
of low morale JLS armed barbarians. At 1250 points I can have all my elephants
and minimums but none of the glitz that FHE (note to Jon: no name dropping
intended here) added to the list. that's why I dislike 1200 point tournaments.
Now if I played an army with almost no minimums (Han Chinese, Burgundians, etc.
. . ) then this would not be a problem to me. This leads me to a brainstorm. For
tournament play, shouldn't all armies have the same amount of point costed
minimums? Obviously we're not worried about historiocity in our open tournaments
with New Kingdom Egyptians going up against Feudal Japanese, right? It seems
there could be a ***** added for tournament play and otherwise the list would be
as normal when fighting in theme tournaments where armies are going against
period opponents. What do you think? For that matter, what do
any of the readership think?

kw

Greg Regets <greg.regets@...> wrote:

1250 points was the standard in Texas for as long as I can remember.
We changed to 1500, then 1600 points, when our group joined NASAMW.

1250 points is a much better game in my opinion. 1600 points in 25mm,
reminds me of that game we all used to play as kids, where we would
line plastic soldiers up and roll marbles at them.

g

P.S. Jon ... love the new book cover! :-)




--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "downs_derek" <darnd022263@a...>
wrote:
>
> I have to agree with you. There is no room for a cav army in 25mm.
> Except maybe the SHK knight armies which tend to run over things.
> That is way I loved it way back when when we were at 1250 points.
> there were still flank battles and such. And Khmer is over I an on
to
> bigger and better things now.
>
> Derek
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, kelly wilkinson
> <jwilkinson62@y...> wrote:
> > Mark,
> >
> > The Khmer keep getting better everyday. Check out the
changes
> made in the Burmese allies. No more spearmen! that means more
points
> for more effective alternatives when taking these guys as an ally.
By
> the way, do you need any Burmese Elephants? I may have some for
sell
> as I'm a Khmer player now. Death to the infidels (any who oppose
> me!) and moogboys.
> >
> > k
> >
> > Mark Stone <mark@d...> wrote:
> > --- On March 3 Derek Downs "decloaked" and said: ---
> >
> > > Mark if you want more finesse in ancient tournaments push for
> smaller
> > > point tournaments. When I started ancients 1000 years ago we
> played
> > > something like 1250 points on 8 foot tables. Talking about
flanks
> > > being important. Now with 1600 points it is wall to wall figs
> there
> > > are no flanks. The Aztec nearly cover the whole table. The
finesse
> > > however is there. It is by probing the opponents weak spots and
> > > breaking up his line.
> >
> > Derek, I don't think we disagree here. A "slugfest" and some
> skill/finesse are
> > not incompatible. George Foreman probably threw the hardest punch
> of anyone
> > who's ever boxed professionally, but if he had not had
considerable
> skill it
> > wouldn't have helped him much. Napoleon may not have cared much
for
> the outcome
> > at Borodino, but he didn't lose, and he did adapt.
> >
> > So no one is going to have your level of success in Warrior
without
> a lot of
> > skill and finesse. Having said that, I do think there are certain
> armies that
> > have become untenable, at least in 25mm, because they require
more
> flank space
> > and more depth in which to operate. I don't expect to be playing
my
> Grenadines
> > any time soon, nor my Post Mongol Russians. I find myself drawn
to
> the Parthian
> > list, but again I just don't see it as tenable as things are now.
> >
> > It will be interesting to see how the Mongols fare -- and I mean
> Gengis Khan
> > Mongols, not Timurid or Yuan, or any of those other "diluted"
> flavors.
> >
> > And it would be very interesting if you and I met in the NICT
this
> year. I don't
> > expect to win, but you're one of the top players I've yet to
cross
> swords with.
> > Fun as it might be, I won't be running Northern Barbarians. But
> then you
> > probably won't be running Khmer either, will you?
> >
> >
> > -Mark Stone
> >
> > 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.
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------
> > Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
> > Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




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.



---------------------------------
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web

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

[joncleaves]

<< that's why I dislike 1200 point tournaments.>>

Hmmm. Good to know...lol

<< Now if I played an army with almost no minimums (Han Chinese,
Burgundians, etc. . . ) >>

Of course they have minima. The issue, as I think Ewan correctly
pointed out, is how you make your minima work for you.

<< This leads me to a brainstorm. For tournament play, shouldn't all
armies have the same amount of point costed minimums?>>

Well, as we have noted before, a tourney director can do anything he
or she wants. But I can tell you that there is no way we'll ever
write a list this way. And for what it is worth, I'll never run an
event this way and I know someone else who wouldn't either... ;)

How about this alternative instead - since this is where all this is
leading anyway..

The Great 17.0 Pro-Choice Tournament.

Choose the listed point value directly from 17.0 - NOT from an army
list. Want to have no minima? No worries. Want Irr A Scythed HCh
with 6 crew with B and 2HCT? Go for it. Reg A SHK with L and B?
You got it. Irr B Elephant with 12 crew with HG and P? As much as
you want. Every unit a subgeneral, cart-mounted bombards, LI with
incendiary JLS, 60E of stone walls.... you get the idea.

Problem is, once that cat is out of the bag, I am not sure a couple
of people here would ever go back to 'normal' Warrior...lol

Enjoy
Jon

[Ewan McNay]

Jon wrote:

>
> << that's why I dislike 1200 point tournaments.>>
>
> Hmmm. Good to know...lol
>
> << Now if I played an army with almost no minimums (Han Chinese,
> Burgundians, etc. . . ) >>
>
> Of course they have minima. The issue, as I think Ewan correctly
> pointed out, is how you make your minima work for you.

Not sure it was me; but seems silly, honestly (not another moment of
agreement with Jon?!?) to try for similar minima. I mean, the minimum for
both LI and camels in a Midianite army is likely to be pretty high...
this actually seems to me one of the cases where history may validly
intrude on the game .

> The Great 17.0 Pro-Choice Tournament.
>
> Choose the listed point value directly from 17.0 - NOT from an army
> list. Want to have no minima? No worries. Want Irr A Scythed HCh
> with 6 crew with B and 2HCT? Go for it. Reg A SHK with L and B?
> You got it. Irr B Elephant with 12 crew with HG and P? As much as
> you want. Every unit a subgeneral, cart-mounted bombards, LI with
> incendiary JLS, 60E of stone walls.... you get the idea.

We did this twice (in the UK) for 7th. You *do* get some pretty tricked
out troops (although no-one thought of putting extra crew on an IrrA
scythed chariot that I recall), and it's fun.... once or twice.

And trying to have arguments about whether your elephants can *really* be
cart-mounted, or whatever...

[the stone walls and incendiaries would presumably fall foul of general
rules, as no list rules would be in evidence for this stuff, though.]

e

((my personal favourite troop? Over-crewed elephants that used incendiary
pigs!))

>
> Choose the listed point value directly from 17.0 - NOT from an army
> list. Want to have no minima? No worries. Want Irr A Scythed HCh
> with 6 crew with B and 2HCT? Go for it. Reg A SHK with L and B?
> You got it. Irr B Elephant with 12 crew with HG and P? As much as
> you want. Every unit a subgeneral, cart-mounted bombards, LI with
> incendiary JLS, 60E of stone walls.... you get the idea.
>
> Problem is, once that cat is out of the bag, I am not sure a couple
> of people here would ever go back to 'normal' Warrior...lol
>
Hey Jon,
I thought you guys already played Fantasy Warrior!
David

[Greg Regets]

Kelly ...

My response to this issue was to let each player completely ignore
one minimum for troops (not ally-generals), at 1250 points.

Clearly not an official Warrior stance, but one that Jon has
continually made it clear that players are free to do, and one that
helps the armies with "bad" minimums, more than the armies
with "good" ones.

I remember as old TOG tournament where you could buy anything that
existed on any of the lists, but couldn't make up new things. The
armies on the table looked like crap. If I live to be one-hundred, I
hope I never see another of these things. ;-)

g


--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "beeson17" <beeson17@y...> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Choose the listed point value directly from 17.0 - NOT from an
army
> > list. Want to have no minima? No worries. Want Irr A Scythed
HCh
> > with 6 crew with B and 2HCT? Go for it. Reg A SHK with L and
B?
> > You got it. Irr B Elephant with 12 crew with HG and P? As much
as
> > you want. Every unit a subgeneral, cart-mounted bombards, LI
with
> > incendiary JLS, 60E of stone walls.... you get the idea.
> >
> > Problem is, once that cat is out of the bag, I am not sure a
couple
> > of people here would ever go back to 'normal' Warrior...lol
> >
> Hey Jon,
> I thought you guys already played Fantasy Warrior!
> David

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Jon <JonCleaves@...> wrote:

<< that's why I dislike 1200 point tournaments.>>

Hmmm. Good to know...lol

***This is why I've become a Khmer player. The list just gets better and better.





<< Now if I played an army with almost no minimums (Han Chinese,
Burgundians, etc. . . ) >>

Of course they have minima. The issue, as I think Ewan correctly
pointed out, is how you make your minima work for you.

<< This leads me to a brainstorm. For tournament play, shouldn't all
armies have the same amount of point costed minimums?>>

Well, as we have noted before, a tourney director can do anything he
or she wants. But I can tell you that there is no way we'll ever
write a list this way. And for what it is worth, I'll never run an
event this way and I know someone else who wouldn't either... ;)

***Sadly, this will lead to some lists never being played in tournaments.



How about this alternative instead - since this is where all this is
leading anyway..

The Great 17.0 Pro-Choice Tournament.

Choose the listed point value directly from 17.0 - NOT from an army
list. Want to have no minima? No worries. Want Irr A Scythed HCh
with 6 crew with B and 2HCT? Go for it. Reg A SHK with L and B?
You got it. Irr B Elephant with 12 crew with HG and P? As much as
you want. Every unit a subgeneral, cart-mounted bombards, LI with
incendiary JLS, 60E of stone walls.... you get the idea.

Problem is, once that cat is out of the bag, I am not sure a couple
of people here would ever go back to 'normal' Warrior...lol

Enjoy
Jon

***This is okay as long as I can have Burning Ravaged White Women to hide under
my loin cloth. It would certainly make me eager.





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.




---------------------------------
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web

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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 3/4/2005 20:12:27 Central Standard Time,
cncbump@... writes:

***This is why I've become a Khmer player. The list just gets better and
better.>>


The list, maybe....









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

[Chris Bump]

Just out of curiosity Kelly, how would you define the meaning of the word
ravaged?
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: kelly wilkinson [mailto:jwilkinson62@...]
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 4:53 PM
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Open Tournament vs Theme Tournaments




Jon <JonCleaves@...> wrote:

<< that's why I dislike 1200 point tournaments.>>

Hmmm. Good to know...lol

***This is why I've become a Khmer player. The list just gets better and
better.





<< Now if I played an army with almost no minimums (Han Chinese,
Burgundians, etc. . . ) >>

Of course they have minima. The issue, as I think Ewan correctly
pointed out, is how you make your minima work for you.

<< This leads me to a brainstorm. For tournament play, shouldn't all
armies have the same amount of point costed minimums?>>

Well, as we have noted before, a tourney director can do anything he
or she wants. But I can tell you that there is no way we'll ever
write a list this way. And for what it is worth, I'll never run an
event this way and I know someone else who wouldn't either... ;)

***Sadly, this will lead to some lists never being played in tournaments.



How about this alternative instead - since this is where all this is
leading anyway..

The Great 17.0 Pro-Choice Tournament.

Choose the listed point value directly from 17.0 - NOT from an army
list. Want to have no minima? No worries. Want Irr A Scythed HCh
with 6 crew with B and 2HCT? Go for it. Reg A SHK with L and B?
You got it. Irr B Elephant with 12 crew with HG and P? As much as
you want. Every unit a subgeneral, cart-mounted bombards, LI with
incendiary JLS, 60E of stone walls.... you get the idea.

Problem is, once that cat is out of the bag, I am not sure a couple
of people here would ever go back to 'normal' Warrior...lol

Enjoy
Jon

***This is okay as long as I can have Burning Ravaged White Women to hide
under my loin cloth. It would certainly make me eager.





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.




---------------------------------
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web

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


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT





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

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

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

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



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

[Kelly Wilkinson]

lol! Chris, that is the author's intent. You need to ask Todd, Duane, and Greg
that!

kw

Chris Bump <cncbump@...> wrote:
Just out of curiosity Kelly, how would you define the meaning of the word
ravaged?
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: kelly wilkinson [mailto:jwilkinson62@...]
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 4:53 PM
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Open Tournament vs Theme Tournaments




Jon <JonCleaves@...> wrote:

<< that's why I dislike 1200 point tournaments.>>

Hmmm. Good to know...lol

***This is why I've become a Khmer player. The list just gets better and
better.





<< Now if I played an army with almost no minimums (Han Chinese,
Burgundians, etc. . . ) >>

Of course they have minima. The issue, as I think Ewan correctly
pointed out, is how you make your minima work for you.

<< This leads me to a brainstorm. For tournament play, shouldn't all
armies have the same amount of point costed minimums?>>

Well, as we have noted before, a tourney director can do anything he
or she wants. But I can tell you that there is no way we'll ever
write a list this way. And for what it is worth, I'll never run an
event this way and I know someone else who wouldn't either... ;)

***Sadly, this will lead to some lists never being played in tournaments.



How about this alternative instead - since this is where all this is
leading anyway..

The Great 17.0 Pro-Choice Tournament.

Choose the listed point value directly from 17.0 - NOT from an army
list. Want to have no minima? No worries. Want Irr A Scythed HCh
with 6 crew with B and 2HCT? Go for it. Reg A SHK with L and B?
You got it. Irr B Elephant with 12 crew with HG and P? As much as
you want. Every unit a subgeneral, cart-mounted bombards, LI with
incendiary JLS, 60E of stone walls.... you get the idea.

Problem is, once that cat is out of the bag, I am not sure a couple
of people here would ever go back to 'normal' Warrior...lol

Enjoy
Jon

***This is okay as long as I can have Burning Ravaged White Women to hide
under my loin cloth. It would certainly make me eager.





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.




---------------------------------
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web

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


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT





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

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

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

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



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


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.



---------------------------------
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web

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

[Kelly Wilkinson]

The list definitely got better after the latest errata came out. Thanks! I
have to say it's all the regulars and elephant detachments that make the list so
viable not to mention the great allies. Bring on the Mongols, "The Mighty Khmer
will be waiting!"



JonCleaves@... wrote:

In a message dated 3/4/2005 20:12:27 Central Standard Time,
cncbump@... writes:

***This is why I've become a Khmer player. The list just gets better and
better.>>


The list, maybe....









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


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.



---------------------------------
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web

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