Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 8/25/2004 17:24:42 Central Daylight Time,
rockd@... writes:

So I ask- if you take two historical opponents, maybe even fighting a
historical battle, what if any differences would you see between the
scale/table sizes under discussion?????>>



For my part, this is *entirely* a tourney-based discussion. When I play an
historical game, the table size is 100% driven by ground scale and the
historical terrain. I would never advocate a standard table size for scenario
games.

J


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

[Todd Schneider]

Jon,

Would it be worth it to sit down and try and figure
out the exact dimensions of a 15mm table scaled for
25mm play for inclusion in 14.0?

Todd

[Ewan McNay]

Asuming that you've read my previous post on this, it'll be clear that
I think this all misses the point: that there are different games
being played not because this is forced by the scale in isolation, but
because they have evolved (largely by chance, I expect) through the
combination of scale and table size, and because once players have
*seen* how different the games are, unsurprisingly both have their
devotees.

I note Jon's comment about seeing no differences in the way one plays
regardless of scale or table size; I can only express both surprise
and certainty that discovering the differences will come as a help .

Todd Schneider wrote:

> Jon,
>
> Would it be worth it to sit down and try and figure
> out the exact dimensions of a 15mm table scaled for
> 25mm play for inclusion in 14.0?
>
> Todd
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

[joncleaves]

Jon,

Would it be worth it to sit down and try and figure
out the exact dimensions of a 15mm table scaled for
25mm play for inclusion in 14.0?

Todd>>

Already done that, Todd. Charles, Jon B, Steve and I all did that as a prep
exercise while they were gatherig 25mm for HCon. I didn't notice any
appreciable difference in play between 1600 at 6'x4' and 1600 at 5'x3'1.5". At
all.

In writing 14.0, we are going to have a clear basic standard for competition -
which right now is 6'x4' for 1600 in 15mm and 8'x5' at 1600 in 25mm. The
reasons for this are the same reasons we have been supporting it for NASAMW for
years - standard available physical table sizes combined with wanting a
*slightly* different feel.

If I actually thought these table sizes made for substantively different games,
I would not be signing up for that.

Jon

[Todd Schneider]

Ewan,

Can you provide some specific examples as to why the
games are different?

How different do your Selucids play in 15's as opposed
to 25's?

I am leaning towards agreeing with Mark on this one,
any differences that players see between the two
scales are psychological in nature.

I am not sure how many games Jon Played with his
Medieval Spanish this past year before the NICT, but I
was his opponent in 4 different versions of it many
times, and the few occasions where we switched armies
for the game, it didn't "run" any differently.

We played Fast Warrior, 1200 and 1600 in 15's, we also
played 1600 in 15's on a table scaled to 25's. I
played his 25's once against Charles Yaw on an 8x4,
and I didn't notice anything different in terms of how
the Army handled.

Todd



--- Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@...> wrote:
---------------------------------
Asuming that you've read my previous post on this,
it'll be clear that
I think this all misses the point: that there are
different games
being played not because this is forced by the scale
in isolation, but
because they have evolved (largely by chance, I
expect) through the
combination of scale and table size, and because once
players have
*seen* how different the games are, unsurprisingly
both have their
devotees.

I note Jon's comment about seeing no differences in
the way one plays
regardless of scale or table size; I can only express
both surprise
and certainty that discovering the differences will
come as a help .

Todd Schneider wrote:

> Jon,
>
> Would it be worth it to sit down and try and figure
> out the exact dimensions of a 15mm table scaled for
> 25mm play for inclusion in 14.0?
>
> Todd
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
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.

[joncleaves]

I note Jon's comment about seeing no differences in the way one plays
regardless of scale or table size; I can only express both surprise
and certainty that discovering the differences will come as a help .>>

Again, I am not arguing minor adjustments - the 25mm table is narrower and
shallower, no question. But an entirely different method of winning? I remain
unconvinced and haven't seen any discussion of *that* in any case. What we keep
coming back to is noting the geometric differences - but since those differences
do not change the way things happen in *time* (even though they may change
slightly where they happen in space) and do not all all change the *nature* of
*what* has to happen to win, I don't think there is anything to be discovered
here, beyond the odd positional adjustment.

Where's the proof? lol

J

[Ewan McNay]

I tried to give some examples previously. I agree with Mark that some
of it is culture - different armies are often brought - but think that
culture has a basis in optimisation.

To give a reductio ad absurdum: imagine 15mm on 8 x 5 vs 25mm on 4 x
2. Clearly different (!). Much more so than 25mm on 8x5 vs 15mm on
4x2. Scale matters. once that is agreed - and it seems to be by all
- then the degree to which it impacts is oly perception of the
individual, nothing more. However, I can state quite categorically
that taking the same army list to 15mm and 25mm tourneys will not
optimise for at least one.

Todd Schneider wrote:

> Ewan,
>
> Can you provide some specific examples as to why the
> games are different?
>
> How different do your Selucids play in 15's as opposed
> to 25's?
>
> I am leaning towards agreeing with Mark on this one,
> any differences that players see between the two
> scales are psychological in nature.
>
> I am not sure how many games Jon Played with his
> Medieval Spanish this past year before the NICT, but I
> was his opponent in 4 different versions of it many
> times, and the few occasions where we switched armies
> for the game, it didn't "run" any differently.
>
> We played Fast Warrior, 1200 and 1600 in 15's, we also
> played 1600 in 15's on a table scaled to 25's. I
> played his 25's once against Charles Yaw on an 8x4,
> and I didn't notice anything different in terms of how
> the Army handled.
>
> Todd
>
>
>
> --- Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@...> wrote:
> ---------------------------------
> Asuming that you've read my previous post on this,
> it'll be clear that
> I think this all misses the point: that there are
> different games
> being played not because this is forced by the scale
> in isolation, but
> because they have evolved (largely by chance, I
> expect) through the
> combination of scale and table size, and because once
> players have
> *seen* how different the games are, unsurprisingly
> both have their
> devotees.
>
> I note Jon's comment about seeing no differences in
> the way one plays
> regardless of scale or table size; I can only express
> both surprise
> and certainty that discovering the differences will
> come as a help .
>
> Todd Schneider wrote:
>
>
>>Jon,
>>
>>Would it be worth it to sit down and try and figure
>>out the exact dimensions of a 15mm table scaled for
>>25mm play for inclusion in 14.0?
>>
>>Todd
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> 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.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

[joncleaves]

To give a reductio ad absurdum: imagine 15mm on 8 x 5 vs 25mm on 4 x 2. Clearly
different (!).>>

Concur - wholeheartedly. I find myself doing things differently in Fast
Warrior, for example because you do need to do things slightly differently to
win and things definitely happen in *time* differently than they do in full
games.

However, other table size combos are not at issue. I am discussing precisely
15/6x4 vs 25/8x5 - something Scott and I have given a huge amount of thought and
playtesting to. We wanted something slightly different and think we achieved
that. We didn't want two different games and think we have avoided that. On
this latter point, some disagree - and that's cool - I was only looking for the
specific tatical and temporal reasons why.

<< However, I can state quite categorically
that taking the same army list to 15mm and 25mm tourneys will not
optimise for at least one.>>

So state if you like...lol

J

[Doug]

> I am discussing precisely 15/6x4 vs 25/8x5 - something Scott and I
>have given a huge amount of thought and playtesting to. We wanted
>something slightly different and think we achieved that. We didn't
>want two different games and think we have avoided that.-Jon


Getting confused now. Previously one of the horsemen (Scott or John)
said there is no difference other than the odd positional adjustment.
Now you say there IS a difference, but just a "slight" one.

What is the significance of this "slight" difference? Indeed, what
exactly is the slight difference you see?

And one of the top competetive players asserts there is a very
important difference.

Seems to me this discussion has been driven by tourney types.

So I ask- if you take two historical opponents, maybe even fighting a
historical battle, what if any differences would you see between the
scale/table sizes under discussion?????

[Jake Kovel]

In a message dated 8/25/2004 4:08:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Ewan McNay
<ewan.mcnay@...> writes:

>However, I can state quite categorically
>that taking the same army list to 15mm and 25mm tourneys will not
>optimise for at least one.
>

I am someone who prefers to play one list and who has multiple examples of the
same army in both scales. I deliberately build my armies to match so that I am
completely familiar with how they work. I play the same list in both scales and
have been equally successful in both scales. Among the armies I have done this
with are T'ang Chinese, Alexandrian Macedonian, Early Hungarian, Later Polish
and Hussite. I think that covers the spectrum of army types as well. Now I
also have some armies that I play only in 25mm, but that is a lead issue not a
style one.
Jacob Kovel