Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

Ooh, Kevin, talk about falling into a trap....

As an admittedly amateur student of the Mongols, I am familiar with the
maneuver, also used by their Turkic cousins and others. Warrior represents
the maneuver quite satisfactorily, in my mind.
It can be done with an evade.
It can be done with a retirement.
It can be done with a counter.

What can't be done is a waver-free unprompted continuous maneuver making the
body totally unreachable and able to be exexcuted completely without risk.

On top of that, the OR maneuver has only been allowed in tournaments (some I
have played in) that for some reason completely ignore the sentence "Must be
prompted unless in retreat." despite the fact that that is as clear a rule as
WRG 7th has in it.
Which is to say that an OR completely violates the current rules (as it
should) just as it will Warrior's.

Mangudai have the morale and training to pull this maneuver off consistently,
but not forever perfectly.

Jon

After thrashing through the threads throughout this theme <whew, that
gave me a headache>, I remembered that the favorite battlefield
manuever of the Mongolians was to send the Mangudai straight up the
middle of the field with the specific purpose of enticing the enemy
to follow by feigning flight or retreat. Once pulled into the trap,
the wings of the Mongolian force would pinch off the group and kill
it. This manuever is well documented in quite a few places;
especially throughout Russian history since the Moscovites were
notorious for falling for this ruse. Book 3(WRG), albeit with very
little specificity, also mentions it.

This sounds very much like an "Offensive Retirement" to me.
Moreover, this evolved mainstay of many a convention has specific and
credible historical basis. So, why change the tradition? Unike many
of the wierd and sublime manuevers that have been tortured out of
these rules, what we now call the "Offensive Retirement" can be pin
pointed in many places throughout history.

Kevin

--- In WarriorRules@egroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:

> As an admittedly amateur student of the Mongols, I am familiar
> with the maneuver, also used by their Turkic cousins and others.
> Warrior represents the maneuver quite satisfactorily, in my mind.
>
> It can be done with an evade.
> It can be done with a retirement.
> It can be done with a counter.
>
> What can't be done is a waver-free unprompted continuous maneuver
> making the body totally unreachable and able to be exexcuted
> completely without risk.

Hello

I'm mostly a list lurker here and not too familiar with the Warrior
rules. IIRC the manoeuvre could be done in 7th edition but there was
an important element missing. It was entirely up to the other player
whether to follow up that retreat or not. I real life, the 'fleeing'
Mongols would entice the unit opposing them to follow. IMHO there
should be a rules mechanisms to simulate troops going after the
Mongols on their own initiative, forcing the player to do prompts (or
whatever) if he wants them to keep in line.

Greetings
Karl Heinz

Karl, Greetings to you and other lurkers. What I remember about the Mongol
and other faint withdraws was that they always shot at their enemies first
and the result of the shooting in part made their enemies charge them or
broke up their formations. As I recall if enough CPF's are inflected on a
unit from prep-shooting that unit most take a waver test to stand or charge.
Again welcome to Warrior. David Beeson, SA. TX.

[joncleaves]

There is such a mechanism, Karl. If you shoot at a knight unit with your mongol
cav, he has to chase you (or take a morale test).