Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

Shoot 'while interpenetrating' but not that bound? I am sorry, I do not
understand the question.

J

-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Walker <rwalker@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:56:55 -0500
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Rules question



so a body of LI B can shoot as normal while interpenetrating an elephant unit as
long as it did not interpenetrate that bound and the front edge of the LI is
clear of the elephant body?


----- Original Message -----
From: <JonCleaves@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Rules question


>
> None
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roger Walker <rwalker@...>
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:07:08 -0500
> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Rules question
>
>
>
>> If you were interpenetrated (or exchanged ranks) you can't shoot that
>> bound..
>
> What effect does interpenetration have on the next bound, assuming the
> bodies do not move?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

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




Yahoo! Groups Links






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

[joncleaves]

The only way you can be left 'partially interpenetrated' from a previous bound
is to be in hand to hand contact - so there would not be any prep shooting
anyway...

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: John <jjmurphy@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 21:27:45 -0000
Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question




This is a real good quentsion... when left mixed from
interpenetrating in a previous bound (eg insufficient move to clear
but other reason occurs to resolve), do the units still count
as "interpenatring" in the current bound? (if I understand the
question, it might apply to other things as well and the answer
could probably use being considered a "clarifiaction")

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Walker" <rwalker@g...>
wrote:
> so a body of LI B can shoot as normal while interpenetrating an
elephant unit as long as it did not interpenetrate that bound and
the front edge of the LI is clear of the elephant body?
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <JonCleaves@a...>
> To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 12:17 PM
> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Rules question
>
>
> >
> > None
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Roger Walker <rwalker@g...>
> > To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:07:08 -0500
> > Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Rules question
> >
> >
> >
> >> If you were interpenetrated (or exchanged ranks) you can't
shoot that
> >> bound..
> >
> > What effect does interpenetration have on the next bound,
assuming the
> > bodies do not move?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






Yahoo! Groups Links






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

It takes a couple of bounds to develop, but suppose:

Diagram uploaded: interpenetrated.JPG
Interpenetrated and bow fire

At some point, a LI B unit interpenetrates or is interpenetrated by another
unit, the two are intermingled with the LI base edge closest to the enemy
and clear of the other body. There they sit...counter failed, move
forgotten, just being perverse.

Enemy unit moves into range.

May all elements of the LI B fire? Only those not intermingled with the
Elephants? Only the front rank of those intermingled?

We had essentially this situation last Sunday and played it that the 'clear'
elements could fire but intermingled back rank could not (either overhead of
the Elephants or similar to shooting in woods)


----- Original Message -----
From: <JonCleaves@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question


>
> The only way you can be left 'partially interpenetrated' from a previous
> bound is to be in hand to hand contact - so there would not be any prep
> shooting anyway...
>
> Jon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John <jjmurphy@...>
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 21:27:45 -0000
> Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question
>
>
>
>
> This is a real good quentsion... when left mixed from
> interpenetrating in a previous bound (eg insufficient move to clear
> but other reason occurs to resolve), do the units still count
> as "interpenatring" in the current bound? (if I understand the
> question, it might apply to other things as well and the answer
> could probably use being considered a "clarifiaction")
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Walker" <rwalker@g...>
> wrote:
>> so a body of LI B can shoot as normal while interpenetrating an
> elephant unit as long as it did not interpenetrate that bound and
> the front edge of the LI is clear of the elephant body?
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <JonCleaves@a...>
>> To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 12:17 PM
>> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Rules question
>>
>>
>> >
>> > None
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Roger Walker <rwalker@g...>
>> > To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
>> > Sent: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:07:08 -0500
>> > Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Rules question
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> If you were interpenetrated (or exchanged ranks) you can't
> shoot that
>> >> bound..
>> >
>> > What effect does interpenetration have on the next bound,
> assuming the
>> > bodies do not move?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[joncleaves]

Again, Roger, that situation isn't possible. The only way to be partially
interpenetrated is to be in hand to hand combat.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Walker <rwalker@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 11:03:51 -0500
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question



It takes a couple of bounds to develop, but suppose:

Diagram uploaded: interpenetrated.JPG
Interpenetrated and bow fire

At some point, a LI B unit interpenetrates or is interpenetrated by another
unit, the two are intermingled with the LI base edge closest to the enemy
and clear of the other body. There they sit...counter failed, move
forgotten, just being perverse.

Enemy unit moves into range.

May all elements of the LI B fire? Only those not intermingled with the
Elephants? Only the front rank of those intermingled?

We had essentially this situation last Sunday and played it that the 'clear'
elements could fire but intermingled back rank could not (either overhead of
the Elephants or similar to shooting in woods)


----- Original Message -----
From: <JonCleaves@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question


>
> The only way you can be left 'partially interpenetrated' from a previous
> bound is to be in hand to hand contact - so there would not be any prep
> shooting anyway...
>
> Jon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John <jjmurphy@...>
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 21:27:45 -0000
> Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question
>
>
>
>
> This is a real good quentsion... when left mixed from
> interpenetrating in a previous bound (eg insufficient move to clear
> but other reason occurs to resolve), do the units still count
> as "interpenatring" in the current bound? (if I understand the
> question, it might apply to other things as well and the answer
> could probably use being considered a "clarifiaction")
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Walker" <rwalker@g...>
> wrote:
>> so a body of LI B can shoot as normal while interpenetrating an
> elephant unit as long as it did not interpenetrate that bound and
> the front edge of the LI is clear of the elephant body?
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <JonCleaves@a...>
>> To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 12:17 PM
>> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Rules question
>>
>>
>> >
>> > None
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Roger Walker <rwalker@g...>
>> > To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
>> > Sent: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:07:08 -0500
>> > Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Rules question
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> If you were interpenetrated (or exchanged ranks) you can't
> shoot that
>> >> bound..
>> >
>> > What effect does interpenetration have on the next bound,
> assuming the
>> > bodies do not move?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>





Yahoo! Groups Links






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

[Mark Mallard]

In a message dated 19/04/2005 17:30:57 GMT Standard Time, JonCleaves@...
writes:

** i am with roger on this - occasionally evaders for example get left
partially through a unit - they do not always get completely through during the
next bound - as it takes a counter to do so - or there are other issues such as
space.

mark mallard

Again, Roger, that situation isn't possible. The only way to be partially
interpenetrated is to be in hand to hand combat.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Walker <rwalker@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 11:03:51 -0500
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question



It takes a couple of bounds to develop, but suppose:

Diagram uploaded: interpenetrated.JPG
Interpenetrated and bow fire

At some point, a LI B unit interpenetrates or is interpenetrated by another
unit, the two are intermingled with the LI base edge closest to the enemy
and clear of the other body. There they sit...counter failed, move
forgotten, just being perverse.

Enemy unit moves into range.

May all elements of the LI B fire? Only those not intermingled with the
Elephants? Only the front rank of those intermingled?

We had essentially this situation last Sunday and played it that the 'clear'
elements could fire but intermingled back rank could not (either overhead of
the Elephants or similar to shooting in woods)


----- Original Message -----
From: <JonCleaves@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question


>
> The only way you can be left 'partially interpenetrated' from a previous
> bound is to be in hand to hand contact - so there would not be any prep
> shooting anyway...
>
> Jon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John <jjmurphy@...>
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 21:27:45 -0000
> Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question
>
>
>
>
> This is a real good quentsion... when left mixed from
> interpenetrating in a previous bound (eg insufficient move to clear
> but other reason occurs to resolve), do the units still count
> as "interpenatring" in the current bound? (if I understand the
> question, it might apply to other things as well and the answer
> could probably use being considered a "clarifiaction")
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Walker" <rwalker@g...>
> wrote:
>> so a body of LI B can shoot as normal while interpenetrating an
> elephant unit as long as it did not interpenetrate that bound and
> the front edge of the LI is clear of the elephant body?
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <JonCleaves@a...>
>> To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 12:17 PM
>> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Rules question
>>
>>
>> >
>> > None
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Roger Walker <rwalker@g...>
>> > To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
>> > Sent: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:07:08 -0500
>> > Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Rules question
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> If you were interpenetrated (or exchanged ranks) you can't
> shoot that
>> >> bound..
>> >
>> > What effect does interpenetration have on the next bound,
> assuming the
>> > bodies do not move?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >





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

[joncleaves]

This is incorrect. If an evader gets into a body, it goes all the way through.
The only time a body is left partially interpenetrated is while it is in hand to
hand contact.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: markmallard7@...
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 10:36:21 EDT
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question



In a message dated 19/04/2005 17:30:57 GMT Standard Time, JonCleaves@...
writes:

** i am with roger on this - occasionally evaders for example get left
partially through a unit - they do not always get completely through during the

next bound - as it takes a counter to do so - or there are other issues such as

space.

mark mallard

Again, Roger, that situation isn't possible. The only way to be partially
interpenetrated is to be in hand to hand combat.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Walker <rwalker@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 11:03:51 -0500
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question



It takes a couple of bounds to develop, but suppose:

Diagram uploaded: interpenetrated.JPG
Interpenetrated and bow fire

At some point, a LI B unit interpenetrates or is interpenetrated by another
unit, the two are intermingled with the LI base edge closest to the enemy
and clear of the other body. There they sit...counter failed, move
forgotten, just being perverse.

Enemy unit moves into range.

May all elements of the LI B fire? Only those not intermingled with the
Elephants? Only the front rank of those intermingled?

We had essentially this situation last Sunday and played it that the 'clear'
elements could fire but intermingled back rank could not (either overhead of
the Elephants or similar to shooting in woods)


----- Original Message -----
From: <JonCleaves@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 10:24 AM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question


>
> The only way you can be left 'partially interpenetrated' from a previous
> bound is to be in hand to hand contact - so there would not be any prep
> shooting anyway...
>
> Jon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John <jjmurphy@...>
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 21:27:45 -0000
> Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question
>
>
>
>
> This is a real good quentsion... when left mixed from
> interpenetrating in a previous bound (eg insufficient move to clear
> but other reason occurs to resolve), do the units still count
> as "interpenatring" in the current bound? (if I understand the
> question, it might apply to other things as well and the answer
> could probably use being considered a "clarifiaction")
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Walker" <rwalker@g...>
> wrote:
>> so a body of LI B can shoot as normal while interpenetrating an
> elephant unit as long as it did not interpenetrate that bound and
> the front edge of the LI is clear of the elephant body?
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: <JonCleaves@a...>
>> To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 12:17 PM
>> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Rules question
>>
>>
>> >
>> > None
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Roger Walker <rwalker@g...>
>> > To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
>> > Sent: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:07:08 -0500
>> > Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Rules question
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >> If you were interpenetrated (or exchanged ranks) you can't
> shoot that
>> >> bound..
>> >
>> > What effect does interpenetration have on the next bound,
> assuming the
>> > bodies do not move?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >





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




Yahoo! Groups Links






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

We had read the evade rule that if the final rank did not have the movement
to clear their back edge past the standing bodies front edge, the evader did
not go all the way through but was interpenetrated.


> This is incorrect. If an evader gets into a body, it goes all the way
> through. The only time a body is left partially interpenetrated is while
> it is in hand to hand contact.
>
> Jon

[joncleaves]

Roger, I am putting this out on the group because I have others responding to
your question.

If a hand to hand leaves a body interpenetrating, but not in contact with the
enemy, the interpenetrating body is inserted beyond as part of combat
resolution.

J
-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Walker <rwalker@...>
To: JonCleaves@...
Sent: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 12:01:24 -0500
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question


Flogging the moribund equine, offline

I had it happen this weekend, so just a bit more of your time to figure out
where I went wrong.

I think it was two LI units, mine charged by his.

He wins and recoils my LI B into my elephants, LIs still in HtH contact.

Next turn I get a mounted charge on his exposed LI unit (larger than mine so an
open end). His LI recoils or routs...in any event, its no longer in HtH with my
LI B. I am still in the elephants.

A couple of bounds later, neither my LI B nor my ELs have moved, so are still
'interpenetrated'.

That mess is approached by the LMI.

That is where the shooting question arose.

Was I required to move either the LI B or the ELs so they were no longer
interpenetrated? Probably would have been a good idea regardless, but I didn't.



----- Original Message ----- From: <JonCleaves@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 11:20 AM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question

>
> Again, Roger, that situation isn't possible. The only way to be partially >
interpenetrated is to be in hand to hand combat.
>
> Jon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roger Walker <rwalker@...>
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 11:03:51 -0500
> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question
>
>
>
> It takes a couple of bounds to develop, but suppose:
>
> Diagram uploaded: interpenetrated.JPG
> Interpenetrated and bow fire
>
> At some point, a LI B unit interpenetrates or is interpenetrated by > another
> unit, the two are intermingled with the LI base edge closest to the enemy
> and clear of the other body. There they sit...counter failed, move
> forgotten, just being perverse.
>
> Enemy unit moves into range.
>
> May all elements of the LI B fire? Only those not intermingled with the
> Elephants? Only the front rank of those intermingled?
>
> We had essentially this situation last Sunday and played it that the > 'clear'
> elements could fire but intermingled back rank could not (either overhead > of
> the Elephants or similar to shooting in woods)
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- > From: <JonCleaves@...>
> To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 10:24 AM
> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question
>
>
>>
>> The only way you can be left 'partially interpenetrated' from a previous
>> bound is to be in hand to hand contact - so there would not be any prep
>> shooting anyway...
>>
>> Jon
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: John <jjmurphy@...>
>> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
>> Sent: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 21:27:45 -0000
>> Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> This is a real good quentsion... when left mixed from
>> interpenetrating in a previous bound (eg insufficient move to clear
>> but other reason occurs to resolve), do the units still count
>> as "interpenatring" in the current bound? (if I understand the
>> question, it might apply to other things as well and the answer
>> could probably use being considered a "clarifiaction")
>>
>> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Roger Walker" <rwalker@g...>
>> wrote:
>>> so a body of LI B can shoot as normal while interpenetrating an
>> elephant unit as long as it did not interpenetrate that bound and
>> the front edge of the LI is clear of the elephant body?
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: <JonCleaves@a...>
>>> To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
>>> Sent: Monday, April 18, 2005 12:17 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Rules question
>>>
>>>
>>> >
>>> > None
>>> >
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> > From: Roger Walker <rwalker@g...>
>>> > To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
>>> > Sent: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:07:08 -0500
>>> > Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Rules question
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> If you were interpenetrated (or exchanged ranks) you can't
>> shoot that
>>> >> bound..
>>> >
>>> > What effect does interpenetration have on the next bound,
>> assuming the
>>> > bodies do not move?
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


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

[joncleaves]

That is in conflict with 6.52.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Walker <rwalker@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 13:44:00 -0500
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules question



We had read the evade rule that if the final rank did not have the movement
to clear their back edge past the standing bodies front edge, the evader did
not go all the way through but was interpenetrated.


> This is incorrect. If an evader gets into a body, it goes all the way
> through. The only time a body is left partially interpenetrated is while
> it is in hand to hand contact.
>
> Jon





Yahoo! Groups Links






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

I have what I am sure is a silly question but I want to make sure.

Say I turn a ten element unit of LC 90 degrees. It was 2 deep so now
becomes a column with frontage of 1. Now it is ten units long.

In what direction does that expansion occur, forwards or backwards? Is
it at the player's discretion? If not, what if there is no room in
the required direction? Can the column wait to string out to its full
ten until it begins to move?

Further, next turn say i want to turn 90 again back to my original
facing.

My column is ten elements long so is much more than four deep so my
frontage after turning 90 should contract down to three elements. Is
the location of all that contraction at the players discretion? from
the head of the column? the tail?


hope this is not too stupid a question,
Jonathan

[Bill Chriss]

I understand that with the exception of general's bodyguards, and absent
other special provision in the list, troop types from different lines in a
list may not be combined in a single unit, but this doesn't apply to
upgrades or downgrades, right?

Thus, if a list allows 6 two man light bolt shooters, and allows two of
the bolt shooters to be upgraded to heavy by addition of another crewman,
one can have a unit composed of 4 light bolt shooters and 2 heavies,
right?
Or am I analyzing this wrong?

More problematic is the case where lists (e.g., Later Greek Hoplite) allow
boltshooters to be upgraded to stonethrowers. I seem to recall that the
intent is stone throwers may not be brigaded together with boltshooters,
but I can't remember why. Is this a different case because the weapon used
is different, or what? Thanks.

Greek

[Bill Chriss]

I understand that with the exception of general's bodyguards, and absent
other special provision in the list, troop types from different lines in a
list may not be combined in a single unit, but this doesn't apply to
upgrades or downgrades, right?

Thus, if a list allows 6 two man light bolt shooters, and allows two of
the bolt shooters to be upgraded to heavy by addition of another crewman,
one can have a unit composed of 4 light bolt shooters and 2 heavies,
right?
Or am I analyzing this wrong?

More problematic is the case where lists (e.g., Later Greek Hoplite) allow
boltshooters to be upgraded to stonethrowers. I seem to recall that the
intent is stone throwers may not be brigaded together with boltshooters,
but I can't remember why. Is this a different case because the weapon used
is different, or what? Thanks.

Greek

[joncleaves]

I understand that with the exception of general's bodyguards, and absent
other special provision in the list, troop types from different lines in a
list may not be combined in a single unit, but this doesn't apply to
upgrades or downgrades, right?>>

Correct.

<<Thus, if a list allows 6 two man light bolt shooters, and allows two of
the bolt shooters to be upgraded to heavy by addition of another crewman,
one can have a unit composed of 4 light bolt shooters and 2 heavies,
right?
Or am I analyzing this wrong?>>

No, that is correct.

In fact, I am taking a serious look at just allowing any artillery in a list to
be placed in a unit together. It would simplify questions like this and there
is a lot of evidence of different artillery types being used from the same spot
on the battelfield.

Thoughts anyone?

Jon


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

[joncleaves]

Ok, let's make sure we are talking the same thing.

If you have light bolt shooters on a line and they allow you to upgrade to
heavy, then they *can* be in the same unit.

If you have LBS on one line and HBS on another, they currently cannot.

I am considering changing that - in the case of ART *only* to allow any Art to
be in the same unit regardless of line.

This does not in any way change any list organization rule regarding HC or any
other troop type.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: hrisikos@...
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 10:36:30 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Rules Question



> In fact, I am taking a serious look at just allowing any artillery in a
> list to be placed in a unit together. It would simplify questions like
> this and there is a lot of evidence of different artillery types being
> used from the same spot on the battelfield.
>
> Thoughts anyone?
>
> Jon
>
>


You know, Jon, frankly, I (and everyone else I know) has always played
that way anyway. (Of course, maybe that's the water down here!) And I'm
talking about all the way back to 6th ED. The old Mac Early Successor and
Alexandrian lists allowed two bolt-shooters and two stone-throwers and I
always just combined them into one unit, and no one ever asked a question.
I've seen Chinese players and other Mac players do the same.

The assumption we all made was that 'troop type' for unit brigading
purposes was 'ART' and that all that differed was the weapon used- just
like brigading different HC together: front rank lance, back rank bow into
one unit.

It makes little sense to me to allow the one case and not the other. BUt
hey, I can live with it either way.


Greek




Yahoo! Groups Links






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

[Bill Chriss]

> In fact, I am taking a serious look at just allowing any artillery in a
> list to be placed in a unit together. It would simplify questions like
> this and there is a lot of evidence of different artillery types being
> used from the same spot on the battelfield.
>
> Thoughts anyone?
>
> Jon
>
>


You know, Jon, frankly, I (and everyone else I know) has always played
that way anyway. (Of course, maybe that's the water down here!) And I'm
talking about all the way back to 6th ED. The old Mac Early Successor and
Alexandrian lists allowed two bolt-shooters and two stone-throwers and I
always just combined them into one unit, and no one ever asked a question.
I've seen Chinese players and other Mac players do the same.

The assumption we all made was that 'troop type' for unit brigading
purposes was 'ART' and that all that differed was the weapon used- just
like brigading different HC together: front rank lance, back rank bow into
one unit.

It makes little sense to me to allow the one case and not the other. BUt
hey, I can live with it either way.


Greek