Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 7/12/2002 22:32:05 Central Daylight Time, dave8365@...
writes:

<< but I like playing games
and there doesn't seem to be any other Warrior games being put on
(speaking of which - has anyone ever considered doing Warrior
scenarios, like they do with Might of Arms?) >>

Dave - This is very much something I would like to see and hope to find the
support to do it starting next year.

Jon

Hi all,

I am an utter novice at Warrior (and 7th Edition, for that matter,
having never actually played a game of either...)

The rules have, however, really, really, really intrigued me (now
that I can actually make sense of them) and since I am going to
Historicon anyway, I am considering playing in the Tournament. Not
that I like tournaments, because I don't...but I like playing games
and there doesn't seem to be any other Warrior games being put on
(speaking of which - has anyone ever considered doing Warrior
scenarios, like they do with Might of Arms?)

The following is a suggest Alexandrian Macedonian list which I have
prepared. I would appreciate comments on it, including unit size,
effectiveness under the rules, etc.

List 36 - Alexandrian Macedonian (1600 Points)

Morale Equipment Points Figures Command Total
Alexander Reg. A HC, L 10 5 100 150
Parmenio Reg. A HC, L 10 5 50 100
Companions Reg. A HC, L 10 6 10 70
Companions Reg. A HC, L 10 6 10 70
Thessalians Reg. B HC, JLS 8 6 10 58
Thessalians Reg. B HC, JLS 8 6 10 58
Hypaspists Reg. B MI, P, Sh 5 32 10 160
Phalangites Reg. C MI, P, Sh 4 48 10 202
Phalangites Reg. C MI, P, Sh 4 48 10 202
Greek Hoplites Reg. D MI, LTS, Sh 3 48 10 154
Thracians Irr. C LMI, LJS 3 6
½ 2HCW 4 6 25 67
Thracians Irr. C LMI, LJS 3 6
½ 2HCW 4 6 25 67
Agranians Reg. B LI, JLS, Sh 5 8 10 50
Agranians Reg. B LI, JLS, Sh 5 8 10 50
Cretans Reg. C LI, B 3 8 10 34
Cretans Reg. C LI, B 3 8 10 34
Bolt Shooter w/ 3 Reg. C Crew 30 2 10 70

Total: 1596

There seems to be a preference for running infantry in smaller units,
as opposed to larger units; but given the difficulty (hopefully) of
inflicting large CPF on 48 figures units, does the foregoing make
sense? What are the drawbacks?

PS - the above is based on what I actually have painted...so apart
from some Elephants, this is what I got for this army (which was
originally painted as a Pyrhhic, but I don't have enough Greeks for
that army...yet...)

Cheers, and thanks in advance for the KIND words...
Dave Lynch

[Ewan McNay]

On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, dave8365 wrote:
> I am an utter novice at Warrior (and 7th Edition, for that matter,
> having never actually played a game of either...)

Welcome :-)

> (speaking of which - has anyone ever considered doing Warrior
> scenarios, like they do with Might of Arms?)

I believe that this is actually underway at this moment, yes!

> The following is a suggest Alexandrian Macedonian list which I have
> prepared. I would appreciate comments on it, including unit size,
> effectiveness under the rules, etc.

OK. I don't expect to be nasty but bear in mind that I'm an evil
tournament type...

> List 36 - Alexandrian Macedonian (1600 Points)
>
> Morale Equipment Points Figures Command Total
> Alexander Reg. A HC, L 10 5 100 150
> Parmenio Reg. A HC, L 10 5 50 100

So far so good :)

> Companions Reg. A HC, L 10 6 10 70
> Companions Reg. A HC, L 10 6 10 70

I believe that you can get lesser-morale cav; I'd take it, as Reg A is
overpriced. note that for your cav to hit hard, they're going to need to
be impetuous, which - because they're regular - means that they'll need to
be charging at the same time as a general. Lance-armed is good, though;
cheap lance cav are a potent force in Warrior.

> Thessalians Reg. B HC, JLS 8 6 10 58
> Thessalians Reg. B HC, JLS 8 6 10 58

These, however, I would not take. First, JLS-armed HC do not fight well
at all, so their only role is to skirmish and shoot a little, then run
away. Given that, there is no point in giving them (i) armour - MC would
do just as well; (ii) morale - Reg D would be just as good; or (iii) loose
order - LC will do the job a lot *better*. Dump these and get some LC
instead (regular, in units of 4, will do nicely for holding up large
sections of an opposing army).

You could also take more L-armed HC instead, for a different approach. If
you're careful to define them, few if any folk wouild object to JLS
figures being deemed to be L-armed. However, I think you're much better
off with LC (if available - i saw your note below): as currently written,
you will be out-scouted most games, which will be bad for you.

note in passing that your lack of cav shields makes you *VERY VERY VERY*
vulnerable to missile fire. Do not take your cav into issile fire of any
kind, including e.g. LMI w/ JLS. They will rapidly become toast. This is
another reason to take LC, who get shot slightly less badly and have a
much better reaction (run away, not charge!) when they *do* get shot.

> Hypaspists Reg. B MI, P, Sh 5 32 10 160

I'd put these into 2x16

> Phalangites Reg. C MI, P, Sh 4 48 10 202
> Phalangites Reg. C MI, P, Sh 4 48 10 202

And these into 3x32

> Greek Hoplites Reg. D MI, LTS, Sh 3 48 10 154

And dump these entirely. In a list with so many pikemen, taking hoplites
is not effective at all. They're cheap, but they're essentially just bad
pikemen, and a target for the opposition to kill. Replace with Elephants,
or if wanted more pikemen, or peltasts, or anything! :)

> Thracians Irr. C LMI, LJS 3 6
> ½ 2HCW 4 6 25 67
> Thracians Irr. C LMI, LJS 3 6
> ½ 2HCW 4 6 25 67

These are powerful but fragile; I am not advising against thm, but be
careful to support (so that you can be impetuous; without an army
standard, this will not be possible when facing elephants or chariots, and
that would tilt me against them). If you decide to delete, good
replacements would be peltasts (so you can still contest terrain) and/or
Elephants.

> Agranians Reg. B LI, JLS, Sh 5 8 10 50
> Agranians Reg. B LI, JLS, Sh 5 8 10 50

My inclination would be to have these in 4-man units; as Reg B, they can
almost always counter out of any trouble. Excellent troops; can also
delay in any terrain especially if you delete the Thracians.

> Cretans Reg. C LI, B 3 8 10 34
> Cretans Reg. C LI, B 3 8 10 34

more good troops.

> Bolt Shooter w/ 3 Reg. C Crew 30 2 10 70

I can't use these effectively, but they may work for you. Place between
pike units.

> There seems to be a preference for running infantry in smaller units,
> as opposed to larger units; but given the difficulty (hopefully) of
> inflicting large CPF on 48 figures units, does the foregoing make
> sense? What are the drawbacks?

1. Lack of LC. With such a slow-moving, ponderous army, you need
something to pin the enemy and buy you room. LC are the tool of choice.
I'd buy 3 and maybe 4 4-man (regular) units.

2. TOO big and ponderous. Yes, big pike units are OK, but 48s you'll
find just *too* big and too easily pinned by opposing LC/LI..

3. Not enough strike force. Buy Elephants for this, and/or maybe a
couple more units of HC. Sure, you want to fight the pikes, but you also
need something small and hard-hitting to go in support of them.

4. No peltasts. Unless I mis-remember, you get good peltasts. These are
great troops - usually the best terrain troops on the table; can fight in
the open if needed; effective against opposing mounted; can skirmish and
shoot if desired. Buy lots (at least 2, probably 3x16).

5. As noted, delete the hoplites. Useless troops.

In general, your difficulty is going to be getting the opposition to fight
your foot. You may want to consider force-marching. If you don't buy LC,
this will be essential but probably still futile. if you *do* buy LC,
consider force-marching it and essentially using it as a time-sacrifice
top allow the pikes more time to march up and push the enemy off the
table.

> PS - the above is based on what I actually have painted...so apart
> from some Elephants, this is what I got for this army (which was
> originally painted as a Pyrhhic, but I don't have enough Greeks for
> that army...yet...)

OK. If you can, I'd rebase some HC JLS as LC, and use the elephants; with
deleting the Greeks and buying more command points, that should roughly
balance. I would bet on the Thracians losing you at least one game and
your first painting target should be some peltasts. But have fun!!

Ewan

[Greg Regets]

I second all of Ewan's thoughts, especially the idea to buy elephants and the
notion to rebase the HC JLS as LC.

I'm a person that does not see LTS as 'worthless' but then again the LTS I buy
are in a knight army and I don't get pikes. If you get pikes, take them over
LTS, but consider the differences. The decision to use LTS over pike (in my
opinion) is the role when fighting foot. Taking more and a CPF recoils LTS, but
disorders pikes. At times, this can come in handy for the LTS. Again, not
telling you to take them, but to consider the difference. Sometimes, when you
just want to hang around a while and not have to take tests, the LTS works out
better. Pikes are much (MUCH) better offensively, but if you do lose and
disorder, you are probably talking about testing every bound from then on,
making staying power problematic at best.

My only real difference to Ewan's thoughts is the moral of the HC L. I would
leave them A's. Making them C's only saves you 24 points, but costs the the
potential for unease, ease of counters, the +1 when you roll down (which I
consider worth the points all in itself) as well as waver test considerations.
Consider that you are not buying an army standard, so being eager will be
difficult. This could cost you an impetuous charge even when charging with a
general. I find high moral on small units to be the best buy in the game.

Anyway ... good luck, buy elephants, and have a ball!!!

Greg

----- Original Message -----
From: ewan.mcnay@...
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 11:15 PM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Possible List, and Request for Input


On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, dave8365 wrote:
> I am an utter novice at Warrior (and 7th Edition, for that matter,
> having never actually played a game of either...)

Welcome :-)

> (speaking of which - has anyone ever considered doing Warrior
> scenarios, like they do with Might of Arms?)

I believe that this is actually underway at this moment, yes!

> The following is a suggest Alexandrian Macedonian list which I have
> prepared. I would appreciate comments on it, including unit size,
> effectiveness under the rules, etc.

OK. I don't expect to be nasty but bear in mind that I'm an evil
tournament type...

> List 36 - Alexandrian Macedonian (1600 Points)
>
> Morale Equipment Points Figures Command Total
> Alexander Reg. A HC, L 10 5 100 150
> Parmenio Reg. A HC, L 10 5 50 100

So far so good :)

> Companions Reg. A HC, L 10 6 10 70
> Companions Reg. A HC, L 10 6 10 70

I believe that you can get lesser-morale cav; I'd take it, as Reg A is
overpriced. note that for your cav to hit hard, they're going to need to
be impetuous, which - because they're regular - means that they'll need to
be charging at the same time as a general. Lance-armed is good, though;
cheap lance cav are a potent force in Warrior.

> Thessalians Reg. B HC, JLS 8 6 10 58
> Thessalians Reg. B HC, JLS 8 6 10 58

These, however, I would not take. First, JLS-armed HC do not fight well
at all, so their only role is to skirmish and shoot a little, then run
away. Given that, there is no point in giving them (i) armour - MC would
do just as well; (ii) morale - Reg D would be just as good; or (iii) loose
order - LC will do the job a lot *better*. Dump these and get some LC
instead (regular, in units of 4, will do nicely for holding up large
sections of an opposing army).

You could also take more L-armed HC instead, for a different approach. If
you're careful to define them, few if any folk wouild object to JLS
figures being deemed to be L-armed. However, I think you're much better
off with LC (if available - i saw your note below): as currently written,
you will be out-scouted most games, which will be bad for you.

note in passing that your lack of cav shields makes you *VERY VERY VERY*
vulnerable to missile fire. Do not take your cav into issile fire of any
kind, including e.g. LMI w/ JLS. They will rapidly become toast. This is
another reason to take LC, who get shot slightly less badly and have a
much better reaction (run away, not charge!) when they *do* get shot.

> Hypaspists Reg. B MI, P, Sh 5 32 10 160

I'd put these into 2x16

> Phalangites Reg. C MI, P, Sh 4 48 10 202
> Phalangites Reg. C MI, P, Sh 4 48 10 202

And these into 3x32

> Greek Hoplites Reg. D MI, LTS, Sh 3 48 10 154

And dump these entirely. In a list with so many pikemen, taking hoplites
is not effective at all. They're cheap, but they're essentially just bad
pikemen, and a target for the opposition to kill. Replace with Elephants,
or if wanted more pikemen, or peltasts, or anything! :)

> Thracians Irr. C LMI, LJS 3 6
> ½ 2HCW 4 6 25 67
> Thracians Irr. C LMI, LJS 3 6
> ½ 2HCW 4 6 25 67

These are powerful but fragile; I am not advising against thm, but be
careful to support (so that you can be impetuous; without an army
standard, this will not be possible when facing elephants or chariots, and
that would tilt me against them). If you decide to delete, good
replacements would be peltasts (so you can still contest terrain) and/or
Elephants.

> Agranians Reg. B LI, JLS, Sh 5 8 10 50
> Agranians Reg. B LI, JLS, Sh 5 8 10 50

My inclination would be to have these in 4-man units; as Reg B, they can
almost always counter out of any trouble. Excellent troops; can also
delay in any terrain especially if you delete the Thracians.

> Cretans Reg. C LI, B 3 8 10 34
> Cretans Reg. C LI, B 3 8 10 34

more good troops.

> Bolt Shooter w/ 3 Reg. C Crew 30 2 10 70

I can't use these effectively, but they may work for you. Place between
pike units.

> There seems to be a preference for running infantry in smaller units,
> as opposed to larger units; but given the difficulty (hopefully) of
> inflicting large CPF on 48 figures units, does the foregoing make
> sense? What are the drawbacks?

1. Lack of LC. With such a slow-moving, ponderous army, you need
something to pin the enemy and buy you room. LC are the tool of choice.
I'd buy 3 and maybe 4 4-man (regular) units.

2. TOO big and ponderous. Yes, big pike units are OK, but 48s you'll
find just *too* big and too easily pinned by opposing LC/LI..

3. Not enough strike force. Buy Elephants for this, and/or maybe a
couple more units of HC. Sure, you want to fight the pikes, but you also
need something small and hard-hitting to go in support of them.

4. No peltasts. Unless I mis-remember, you get good peltasts. These are
great troops - usually the best terrain troops on the table; can fight in
the open if needed; effective against opposing mounted; can skirmish and
shoot if desired. Buy lots (at least 2, probably 3x16).

5. As noted, delete the hoplites. Useless troops.

In general, your difficulty is going to be getting the opposition to fight
your foot. You may want to consider force-marching. If you don't buy LC,
this will be essential but probably still futile. if you *do* buy LC,
consider force-marching it and essentially using it as a time-sacrifice
top allow the pikes more time to march up and push the enemy off the
table.

> PS - the above is based on what I actually have painted...so apart
> from some Elephants, this is what I got for this army (which was
> originally painted as a Pyrhhic, but I don't have enough Greeks for
> that army...yet...)

OK. If you can, I'd rebase some HC JLS as LC, and use the elephants; with
deleting the Greeks and buying more command points, that should roughly
balance. I would bet on the Thracians losing you at least one game and
your first painting target should be some peltasts. But have fun!!

Ewan



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/




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

[Ewan McNay]

On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, Greggory A. Regets wrote:
> My only real difference to Ewan's thoughts is the moral of the HC L. I would
leave them A's. Making them C's only saves you 24 points, but costs the the
potential for unease, ease of counters, the +1 when you roll down (which I
consider worth the points all in itself) as well as waver test considerations.
Consider that you are not buying an army standard, so being eager will be
difficult. This could cost you an impetuous charge even when charging with a
general. I find high moral on small units to be the best buy in the game.

Hmm. Greg may actually be right here. I am not used to not having an
army standard. On the other hand, 'only' 24 points is almost another LI
unit . On balance, though, I'll accede to Greg's position.

I think his predeliction for LTS guys is bunk, though .

E

Thanks, Ewan and Greg...

And if anyone else has comments, please keep them coming.

For instance, I guess, not having played, the issue of Force
Marching, March Moves, and Counters haven't really registered on my
radar yet. I understand the rule, but the implementation probably
has to be seen on the table top.

I note the suggestion of 4-man LC units...aren't these really
fragile, due to the ease of CPF?

Also, with regard to Irr cavalry; because of command costs, do folks
ever put these in 12 man units, or keep them in 6 man units?

Finally, concerning Elephants (which I have and dearly love):

1. What is the unit size suggestion? 2? 4 (if you get than many?)

2. My Macedonian elephants all have howdahs (I don't think Old Glory
makes an Indian elephant with a Greek pikeman astride) - is this a
problem, or simply an "identification" issue?

3. Do I understand the rules correctly, so that 1 El. w 1 Pike, 1
Bow, shoots as 2 bowmen, then fights as 2 El Crew (limited mods) and
5 El with +1 charging (plus any die modifier), and the opponent takes
the -1 unless HTW?

Cheers,
Dave Lynch

[Ewan McNay]

On Sat, 13 Jul 2002, dave8365 wrote:
> For instance, I guess, not having played, the issue of Force
> Marching, March Moves, and Counters haven't really registered on my
> radar yet. I understand the rule, but the implementation probably
> has to be seen on the table top.

Yes. Marches will be easy to grasp; the correct use of counters (which
allow you to move last when you would otherwise move first, but require
dicing to accomplish) takes a while.

> I note the suggestion of 4-man LC units...aren't these really
> fragile, due to the ease of CPF?

If you ever get shot or fight, yes. But in such a case, you did something
wrong (exception: clearing away opposing LI, another role for which such
units are excellently suited and one which you will sorely need again to
allow your pikes to contact, which should be your unswerving goal with
this army). Your LC should be seizing space, skirmishing on flanks, never
actually fighting!

> Also, with regard to Irr cavalry; because of command costs, do folks
> ever put these in 12 man units, or keep them in 6 man units?

Either is done. You would want 6-man b/c you already have lots of huge
units, so are in need of smaller units to flilt around them.

> Finally, concerning Elephants (which I have and dearly love):
>
> 1. What is the unit size suggestion? 2? 4 (if you get than many?)

I like 2 or 3; 2-model units can be fragile, especially to shooting,
however. Note that in an exception to the normal rules, pikes and
elephants *can* charge together, and often should (this will make opposing
foot receive you at the halt). If you get only 4 (how many do you get??)
then 2x2 is the best - this allows them to be in two places on the field
rather than just one.

> 3. Do I understand the rules correctly, so that 1 El. w 1 Pike, 1
> Bow, shoots as 2 bowmen, then fights as 2 El Crew (limited mods) and
> 5 El with +1 charging (plus any die modifier), and the opponent takes
> the -1 unless HTW?

Yes, that all looks right (I don't recall whether HTW still take the -1
for *Elephant* pike but believe you to be correct).

[Kelly Wilkinson]

> I note the suggestion of 4-man LC units...aren't these really
> fragile, due to the ease of CPF?

*** Normally I would agree with that but since these are Reg B
morale, they usually can get out of any trouble that arises through
countering! Roll anything but a one and you succeed.


> Also, with regard to Irr cavalry; because of command costs, do
folks
> ever put these in 12 man units, or keep them in 6 man units?

*** Considering that some cav gets to fight 1.5 ranks, it is better
to have 2 six figure units as opposed to a single 12 figure unit when
hitting an opposing unit(not of L or cav that fights 1.5). In
Warrior, one rounds up when counting the 2nd rank and therefore the
two units will count 10 figures when hitting most units to the 9
that the 12 figure unit hits. Also the 6 figure unit is more
maneuverable.



Kelly
"6 figure HO
>
> Finally, concerning Elephants (which I have and dearly love):
>
> 1. What is the unit size suggestion? 2? 4 (if you get than many?)
>
> 2. My Macedonian elephants all have howdahs (I don't think Old
Glory
> makes an Indian elephant with a Greek pikeman astride) - is this a
> problem, or simply an "identification" issue?
>
> 3. Do I understand the rules correctly, so that 1 El. w 1 Pike, 1
> Bow, shoots as 2 bowmen, then fights as 2 El Crew (limited mods)
and
> 5 El with +1 charging (plus any die modifier), and the opponent
takes
> the -1 unless HTW?
>
> Cheers,
> Dave Lynch

[Mark Mallard]

What do you mean about the ~###~# scythed chariots.

The seleucids did use them from time to time but after a pretty poor showing
(where they minced up their own troops) they became unpopular. I guess some
of the troops protested about the possibility of being killed by their own
weapons.

I have used them numerous times with not much effect apart from disrupting
the enemy line. The army facing them only has to be careful and after a
couple of bounds they are largely gone.

I was even unlucky enough to get one routing into my own cavalry just like
happened to the seleucids.

I think that they were mainly designed to distract the opposition, which is
what they do.

mark


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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 7/14/2002 10:54:38 AM Central Daylight Time, gar@...
writes:


> I protest a weapon with so little historical success, that requires a plan
> to defeat, at a cost of 24 points a throw.


Expendables are 45 points. So shall any be in the Warrior Seleucid list.

<< Perhaps I'm inane,>>

Perhaps.... :)

<< Every time I hear the mantra of historical accurate simulations, I think
of these
> things and die laughing.>>


Promises, promises. :)

> I'm a Seleucid player, but it is my sincere hope that when Scott makes the
> new lists for this period, he gives a player ONE scythed chariot, or at
> least no more than two, and requires them to be in one body.
>

No one, and I repeat NO ONE will be looking at Classical and Imperial Warrior
harder than I will. Those lists are where 90% of our 'problems' lie. You
can relax about the Seleucids (or anyone else) having too many scythed
chariots (or pigs or cattle or war dogs...) in Warrior....

Jon


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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 7/14/2002 11:25:29 AM Central Daylight Time, gar@...
writes:


> >>>GREG>>> I must be missing something. Still looks like 24 points on page
> 95 to me.
>
> Irr chariot with unarmed driver and two horses = 10
> Two extra horses = 4
> Scythes for horses = 8
> Upgrade to A = 2
>
>
>

yep, does look like a screw up. I'll have to take a hard look at this.


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

[Mark Mallard]

there were alot at magnesia if my recollection is correct.


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

[Mark Mallard]

they are not effective unless your opponent screws up.


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

[Greg Regets]

For instance, I guess, not having played, the issue of Force
Marching, March Moves, and Counters haven't really registered on my
radar yet. I understand the rule, but the implementation probably
has to be seen on the table top.

>>>>GREG>>>> Force marching in order to gain table control is basically
essential. Even if your plan is largely defensive, which is an aggressive
alternative in this game in spite of what many will tell you, (in my opinion),
you will still need enough table control to make maneuvers that will have a
potential to fool the enemy while he is on the way too you. Marching is an art,
especially if you ever play 15mm. It is almost the most important part of the
game in that scale, as crafty marching can make up for aweful deployment at
times. In addition to counters, don't forget retirements, and make sure you have
enough generals to prompt these.

I note the suggestion of 4-man LC units...aren't these really
fragile, due to the ease of CPF?

>>>>GREG>>>> Yes, they are. I usually buy quite a few though, as they have
many uses. 1. Force march for table control. If you can get a clean flank charge
on a force marched enemy LI unit, take it, but only in bound one, and only if
the opportunity to be broken back by something else next bound is remote. 2.
Leave gaps in your line to withdraw your LC through. Not a problem as these
units are small. While it is true that you don't want to get shot, don't worry
too much if you do. Even if you get shot very badly, you will rally back in the
gaps your main line leaves, they will cover you in approach, and the same time
that you use to rally can also be used to promp march to get into position for
task three. Note that sometimes you may even want to let yourself get shot, just
so you can rally back, and get the heck out of your own way. 'Ouch', but
sometimes you do what you have to do. Either way, don't get stuck out there as
part of the main battle line, or bad things can happen. 3. March to a position
to work the flanks or find small openings to charge against a disordered loose
order elements on the battle line.

Also, with regard to Irr cavalry; because of command costs, do folks
ever put these in 12 man units, or keep them in 6 man units?

>>>>GREG>>>> I have seen Irr LC used effectively this way, although I prefer
8's. As far as loose order cav, I have never done it, but have seen some other
good players use them. Not my cup of tea though, but I prefer many smaller units
mixed with a few large ones. Granted this is a prejudice on my part. Try
whatever you want Dave, there is no secret formula. In our area, the last

Finally, concerning Elephants (which I have and dearly love):

>>>>GREG>>>> I will let others give advice on these, as not many in our area
play such unmanly weapons. I did paint some for my wife to use though, ;-)

Take care and happy gaming ... Greg


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

[Greg Regets]

Hey Ewan ...

Talk Scott into giving me pikes on my lists and I will gladly go for them!!!!
... :-)

It's not that I love LTS so much, as much as I have always tried to figuring out
how to use what you have got. Sure, lots of stuff beats these guys, but it is
also true that lots of the things that beat them, are easy meat for SHK's, or
dismounted SHI. Not everyone plays Seleucids after all ... ... Legionaries,
Celtiberians, pike armies without elephants, Franks ... etc.

There are actually people out there that choose to play with men, rather than
food on the hoof and the most historically bull-@#$% weapon ever included in a
wargame, the scythed chariot, (Saying this as a guy that just finished painting
a Seleucid army in 25mm, lol.).

Anyway, if you are going to NICT, good luck!!!!!

Greg


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