Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

Elephants are higher, Ed, not entirely at the same level as other troops.

[joncleaves]

<<Archers could do the same, I presume?>>

No. Bolt shooters on carts have an exception to the overhead shooting rule that
allows them to shoot at elephants over other troops. Archers do not have this
exception.

[scott holder]

Scott implying that those who go by the published rules on
this issue were cheating and this

>No, I wasn't implying anything. I was simply stating that players who
participated in NASAMW tourneys run by myself and who were very clearly
informed that such overhead shooting was not allowed but who continued
to try to do so in subsequent games in the same event *were* cheating.
What anyone does locally or in their basement is their bidness. And for
that matter, if someone showed up who obviously didn't think the
visibility rules applied to light bolt shooters on carts but were
informed in their first round game that "you gotta see the target in
order to shoot at it", fine, we all dealt with little worlds playing the
game their own little way. Therefore, I wouldn't accuse someone of
cheating like that in a first round game and they were unaware of how
the published rules read. But, when someone participating in an event
such as I've described and is flat out told by the umpire "what you are
doing is incorrect, if you don't like it, don't play here" and continues
to attempt to do the same 3 hours later in another game in order to take
advantage of an opponent's relative ignorance on the matter, is, imnsho,
cheating.

As the effect is what Warrior is after, over head fire from carts would
give the increased fire power back to the late Roman leg. that was seen
historically and is not shown in the game currently. I would require
them to be attached to the rear of the unit as this comes closest to
simulating how the Romans used them in direct fire support but were not
in the way of combat. I realize that some have vehement opposition to
this, but I belive the facts support my position.

>Sources? Certainly LIR as a revised list is not written in stone but
until someone trots out specific source references for me to read, I
have no facts to interpret.

Scott
List Ho

[Ed Forbes]

On 06 May 2002 14:06:46 -0400 "Holder, Scott <FHWA>"
<Scott.Holder@...> writes:
>
> >Sources? Certainly LIR as a revised list is not written in stone
> but
> until someone trots out specific source references for me to read,
> I
> have no facts to interpret.
>
> Scott
> List Ho

Scott,

Not used to the list exceptions as opposed to a general rule change. I
actually like this approach of rule list exceptions better as it would
give a better feel for different armies who were capable of different
things.

I have found some stuff on Roman use of lt. art in the field. Will see
if I can find it again and send it to you to support the idea that LIR
units should be able to have attached lt art able to shoot overhead.

Actually, the readings talked about lt, portable, bolt shooters mixed
with the unit and withdrawn quickly back behind the lines before contact.
One way to represent would not be with models, but costing per stand
with the effect of 2 art figures. Anyway, I first have to find the stuff
again.

Ed

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

[joncleaves]

<<I have found some stuff on Roman use of lt. art in the field. Will see if I
can find it again and send it to you to support the idea that LIR units should
be able to have attached lt art able to shoot overhead. >>

Now we are getting somewhere! :)

[Patrick Byrne]

> From: "Holder, Scott <FHWA>" <Scott.Holder@...>
> Reply-To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Date: 06 May 2002 14:06:46 -0400
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com (IPM Return requested) (Receipt notification
> requested)
> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Stone / Bolt shooters
>
> Scott implying that those who go by the published rules on
> this issue were cheating and this
>
>> No, I wasn't implying anything. I was simply stating that players who
> participated in NASAMW tourneys run by myself and who were very clearly
> informed that such overhead shooting was not allowed but who continued
> to try to do so in subsequent games in the same event *were* cheating.
> What anyone does locally or in their basement is their bidness. And for
> that matter, if someone showed up who obviously didn't think the
> visibility rules applied to light bolt shooters on carts but were
> informed in their first round game that "you gotta see the target in
> order to shoot at it", fine, we all dealt with little worlds playing the
> game their own little way. Therefore, I wouldn't accuse someone of
> cheating like that in a first round game and they were unaware of how
> the published rules read. But, when someone participating in an event
> such as I've described and is flat out told by the umpire "what you are
> doing is incorrect, if you don't like it, don't play here" and continues
> to attempt to do the same 3 hours later in another game in order to take
> advantage of an opponent's relative ignorance on the matter, is, imnsho,
> cheating.
>
> As the effect is what Warrior is after, over head fire from carts would
> give the increased fire power back to the late Roman leg. that was seen
> historically and is not shown in the game currently. I would require
> them to be attached to the rear of the unit as this comes closest to
> simulating how the Romans used them in direct fire support but were not
> in the way of combat. I realize that some have vehement opposition to
> this, but I belive the facts support my position.
>
>> Sources? Certainly LIR as a revised list is not written in stone but
> until someone trots out specific source references for me to read, I
> have no facts to interpret.
>
> Scott
> List Ho
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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/
>
>

[Don Coon]

> As the effect is what Warrior is after, over head fire from carts would
> give the increased fire power back to the late Roman leg. that was seen
> historically and is not shown in the game currently. I would require
> them to be attached to the rear of the unit as this comes closest to
> simulating how the Romans used them in direct fire support but were not
> in the way of combat. I realize that some have vehement opposition to
> this, but I belive the facts support my position.
>
> Not an issue until the next revision of Warrior is contemplated, but it
> is an issue that will be raised then.

I am not going to weigh in on how it was done before, but I must say from
personal experience that bolt shooters on carts are nasty without giving
them overhead shooting too. 360 degree fire is VERY advantageous in and of
itself. This is addition to 120p move and 3 march segments. My EIR and MIR
LBS on carts in 25mm are feared throughout DFW. I think overhead shooting
would be an unbalancing advantage.

Don

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 5/6/2002 17:58:53 Central Daylight Time,
jjendon@... writes:


> I think overhead shooting
> would be an unbalancing advantage.
>

Have no fear of that.


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

[Ed Forbes]

On Mon, 6 May 2002 18:02:54 -0500 <jjendon@...> writes:
> I am not going to weigh in on how it was done before, but I must say
> from
> personal experience that bolt shooters on carts are nasty without
> giving
> them overhead shooting too. 360 degree fire is VERY advantageous in
> and of
> itself. This is addition to 120p move and 3 march segments. My EIR
> and MIR
> LBS on carts in 25mm are feared throughout DFW. I think overhead
> shooting
> would be an unbalancing advantage.
>
> Don
>
>

As it was very carefully explained to me before by Jon, unbalanced
advantages / disadvantages are not concidered for what goes into a list.
Only if it is historicaly justified for the effect with that army. Game
balance is not the prime issue.

The late Roman army had more organic art attached than do most modern
forces. Here is one ref on the subject.

Ed

U.S. ARMY WAR COLLEGE, (June 30, 1992) Major General William A. Stofft,
Commandant
Roman advances in the design, mobility, and firepower of artillery
produced the largest, longest-ranged, and most rapid-firing artillery
pieces of the ancient world. Roman catapults were much larger than the
old Greek models and were powered by torsion devices and springs made of
sinew kept supple when stored in special canisters of oil. As Josephus
recorded in his account of the siege of Jerusalem, the largest of these
artillery pieces, the onager, (called the "wild ass" because of its
kick), could hurl a 100 pound stone over 400 yards. Vegetius noted that
each legion had 10 onagri, one per cohort, organic to its organization.
Smaller versions of these machines, such as the scorpion and ballista,
were compact enough to be transported by horse or mule. These machines
could fire a 7-10 pound stone over 300 yards. Caesar required that each
legion carry 30 of these small machines, giving the legion a mobile,
organic artillery capability. Smaller machines fired iron-tipped bolts.
Designed much like the later crossbow but mounted on small platforms or
legs, these machines, which required a two man crew, could be used as
rapid-fire field guns against enemy formations. They fired a 26-inch bolt
over a range of almost 300 yards. Larger versions mounted on a wheeled
frame were called carroballistae and required a 10-man crew. These
machines could fire perhaps three to four bolts a minute and they were
used to lay down a barrage of fire against enemy troop concentrations.
They were the world's first rapid-fire field artillery guns.

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

Ed,

The source you cite includes examples from the 300 years or more before the
Late Imperial List as well as Vegetius. What's more, I don't see any examples
of the artillery deploying behind the cohorts and shooting over the top of
them. Isn't that what we are debating here?

Shooting at a distance at an enemy concentrations does not require over head
firing.

John Meunier


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

[Doug]

>U.S. ARMY WAR COLLEGE, (June 30, 1992) Major General William A. Stofft,
>Commandant
>powered by torsion devices and springs made of
>sinew kept supple when stored in special canisters of oil.

Never heard of that. Know his source?

>Vegetius noted that

OTOH, how reliable is Vegetius, really? Can we really discern what
was from his era vs what was really used prior?
--

Doug
The price of freedom is infernal vigilantes

"The tyranny of the legislatures is the most formidable dread at
present, and will be for long years. That of the executive will come
in it's turn, but it will be at a remote period." James Madison, 15
March 1798 (_Papers of J.M._ vol 12, p.14; LC call no. JK.111.M24)

[Ed Forbes]

I know, just a reminder on the amount and the diff size of art the Roman
army used. I am mostly just trying to get material together and pass it
along for comment. As I get comment, I will look for material to address
these comments.

Ed


On Tue, 7 May 2002 08:56:36 EDT scribblerjohn@... writes:
> Ed,
>
> The source you cite includes examples from the 300 years or more
> before the
> Late Imperial List as well as Vegetius. What's more, I don't see any
> examples
> of the artillery deploying behind the cohorts and shooting over the
> top of
> them. Isn't that what we are debating here?
>
> Shooting at a distance at an enemy concentrations does not require
> over head
> firing.
>
> John Meunier

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.