Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

Actually, Don, this isn't really new. I have always played it that way. I
have met some 'strict constructionists' that did not realize that it was
really a good way of representing arcs without templates. A classic example
of a good idea poorly worded.

[Don Coon]

JonCleaves@... wrote:

> 2. Shooting arcs will permit an element to shoot at a target directly in
front of it or in front of an element next to it ('prolonging the front') EVEN
IF THERE IS NO ELEMENT THERE. All that rule was ever meant to do was avoid
having to have some 'arc template' like Napoleonic games have for shooting.
(You know the ones that allow a guy to sneak in against a long unit as the angle
is placed at the center of the unit's front.) What happens here is arguments
that a unit can only use the 'prolonging the front' of the arc rule if there is
actually an element there. What about the end guy? How come his arc is smaller
just because he has no one next to him? We are fixing this with a picture.

I LIKE this (man think artillery!). We played it yesterday and it made
the Swiss bombards much more effective as they cover more real estate.
I had not reead your post before the game and was afraid that with an
element now shooting 3 elements wide you were still allowing an element
to shoot with his neigbors arc to (thus allowing the right end element
of a 2 element wide body 2 elements to his left - the one element his
neighbor is standing in and his neighbors 1 left element of new arc. I
see however from the way you stated it above this is (thankfully) not
the case. Each elements shooting arc is one element to either side of
it (plus itself). This is good.

I think this rule make bows more effective. I have been frustrated many
times by regular cav shuffling to the right to escape my front. Now the
will have to turn and go, or face the fire. One element wide bodies
especially benefit from this rule, and they effectively triple their
frontage.

Cool new rule (time and playtesting to bear out its effect).

Don

PS Patricks question never really got answered. Suppose a body three
elements wide wants to shoot. The right 2 elements have clear LOS to
the target but the left most element has an intervening friendly body
partially in front of it (for arguments sake say 20p away). Can this
element still shoot at the enemy due to the fact that its shooting arc
extends one element to its right, and this portion of its arc has LOS?

What the question comes down to is basically does the entire shooting
arc of an element have to have LOS to the target, or only 1 element of
its LOS?

Don again.

[joncleaves]

I'm sorry, I thought I had. There will be an additional statement under
shooting arcs and/or visibility that you must still be able to draw a line
from some part of the element to the target.

[Don Coon]

JonCleaves@... wrote:
>
> Actually, Don, this isn't really new. I have always played it that way. I
> have met some 'strict constructionists' that did not realize that it was
> really a good way of representing arcs without templates. A classic example
> of a good idea poorly worded.

Jon,

Are you ever going to answere Patricks original question (which I
rephrased in my last post) about elements who are screened (or partially
screened) when their neighbors are not being able (or prohibited from)
shooting? If an elementhas an enemy in arc (like the element space
directly to its left) but has a screening friend (or building or woods
etc) directly to its front, can it still shoot since their is enemy in
arc?

Don

[Patrick Byrne]

Your response basically does answer my question. A hardcopy of the picture I
had drawn is in the mail.

But your answer yeilds a new question....
Is it true that bodies can shoot over intervening troops (of the same
elevation) if some part of the shooting element can see the enemy body to be
shot?

Does this also apply to intervening woods? If part of the shooting body is
able to draw a line to the target and the other part of the shooting body is
not.

We have been playing that the whole shooting body had to have Line of sight to
the target AND that those Sight lines were perpendicular to the shooting
bodies frontage.

Diagrams will definately be helpful in the final rules set on this matter.
-PB


JonCleaves@... wrote:

> I'm sorry, I thought I had. There will be an additional statement under
> shooting arcs and/or visibility that you must still be able to draw a line
> from some part of the element to the target.
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com

[Patrick Byrne]

OOPS
please replace the word 'body' in my previous questions with 'element'
(see below for revised questions)
-PB
Patrick Byrnes wrote:
Your response basically does answer my question. 
A hardcopy of the picture I
had drawn is in the mail.
But your answer yeilds a new question....
Is it true that elements can shoot over intervening troops (of
the same
elevation) if some part of the shooting element can see the enemy body
to be
shot?
Does this also apply to intervening woods?  If part of the shooting
element is
able to draw a line to the target and the other part of the shooting
element is
not.
We have been playing that the whole shooting element had to have
Line of sight to
the target AND that those Sight lines were perpendicular to the shooting
elements frontage.
Diagrams will definately be helpful in the final rules set on this matter.
-PB
JonCleaves@aol.com wrote:
> I'm sorry, I thought I had.  There will be an additional statement
under
> shooting arcs and/or visibility that you must still be able to draw
a line
> from some part of the element to the target.
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/0/_/_/_/976664452/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com