Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Frank Gilson]

Thanks for the couple of responses...I have responses to the responses.

hrisikos8 states:
"First, let me say that I have no comment on the native portion of
the list, only the Spanish. Second, heretical as it seems, I have
actually helped my son build this army, one of his favorites. Third,
my only suggestion is probably wrong. We like the 4E Spanish foot
with HG in front rank, CB back rank. You sacrifice range for
firepower, and since they're loose, you can move into range fairly
quickly. I'd like to hear why you opted against this, since I'm long
on history and very short on playing the game well."

Well, I hate handguns... They have great factors, but don't "reach out" to
240p. Thus, you lose some extension of force you would otherwise have. Also,
I tend to put high morale regular loose order foot with a hth weapon in 8
man units, poor morale into 24 man units. 16 man units are a 'bridge'
between these two concepts that just doesn't seem to work out well.

Now, given that you can run the Spanish foot in a few 8 man units...you can
certainly use HG if your tactical intent is to use them as a reserve. I
personally still prefer crossbow on these troops so that I can "reach out"
and put 4 figures on somebody at 240p, or approach 120p up to close range
for XB and put out 8.

Jon Cleaves then brings up the reasonable point:
"I like it and the reasoning is sound. One question - and why I have not
tried
it out yet - what to do about Late Romans and their ilk. There doesn't
appear
to be enough shock to kill their flank stuff and you'll have to skirmish
away
from the foot. You won't lose, but you won't go 5-1 either, so what is your
vision of a solid win v LIR?"

Well, I just won't face LIR in a tournament ...Something like Sean Patrick
Scott's reasoning on running a knight heavy list. I've designed my list to
compete reasonably with many foot and all mounted opponents.

My plan for fighting Late Romans? Mess up the table with terrain in which I
can still use LTS (brush, unfortified built over area, marsh, steep hills),
but in which legionaries cannot operate...and try to overwhelm a flank of
the roman army with massed shooting while dodging around on the rest of my
frontage.

Frank Gilson

_________________________________________________________________
Free up your inbox with MSN Hotmail Extra Storage. Multiple plans available.
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-us&page=hotmail/es2&ST=1/go/onm00200362ave/dire\nct/01/

[scott holder]

Responses to Frank's responses:

Like the others who noted this before, LIR (or some of the earlier Byzantine
lists) would bother me, particularly the latter because they have better cav and
if operating in conjunction with something else, take away many of the options
I'd otherwise have. That's another reason why I'd probably go toward the HG/CB
option for the Spanish because now, I'll actually want those kinds of matchups.
In fact, I end up using the Spanish to anchor some point on my side of the table
since they are afraid of pretty much nothing.

The LTS, B option for the natives is intriguing. Frank, what happens when you
don't get terrain and are facing the knight army on a billiard table? All those
D class foot bother me unless they're safe in/behind some kind of cover,
otherwise, they are blown waver checks waiting to happen. And if they skirmish
and assuming I have some kind of combined armes late medieval trash list (Med
Spanish for example) that can move up with Moogs and knights in little 2-3 unit
"pods", my reactions with the natives is somewhat constrained by the fact that
if I skirmish, I'll most likely take a charge and even if I'm not hit, it's that
waver test that bothers me. And this also assumes that there is some infantry
units closer to absorb any shooting that would otherwise potentially neutralize
the impending knight threat. If I stand, I risk getting pounded to death by the
infantry in the first 1-2 bounds of H-T-H and then the knights come in. Same
type of thing could apply if I were facing Byzantines (Kavalaroi and Scuts) or
Seleucids (pikes/peltasts and elephants or even any HC lancers, I'd toss them
against a D class native unit in skirmish assuming just to get the waver).
Depending on what the natives are doing, that will drive which of my "pod" units
charges in first. If standing, I'd toss in the infantry first just to tie em
up. Next bound, in goes the mounted unit. If skirmishing, the mounted goes in
first to cause the waver check. If I contact (unlikely considering that the
mounted unit will be far enough back so that it can hit but that the fellow "pod
unit", in this case infantry, is closer so will take the shot), great, infantry
mops up next bound. If the unit shakes, all kinds of options open up. If not,
I move the infantry up again next bound and hope you don't counter away, then
start the process all over again.

Okay, let's assume that I, as the Span/Tlax player will endeavor to counter out
of these ticklish spots. Again, those D class natives make that problematic.

So, I'm then assuming that the D class folks are either the reserve or tucked
away in some anchoring terrain feature......unless there ain't none of the
latter. Then it will come down to Frank's adroitness in leading with the higher
morale natives. And here's where I as an opponent, given my playing style,
still might take him up on the offer and start pounding as much as I can against
these guys in the hopes that once(if) they crack, all the low morale guys
smoking cigarettes in the back will take the resultant waver tests and it's game
over dude. If I don't succeed, tough, I've given it my best shot assuming that
I don't spend 3.99 hours trying to pick on one of Frank's D class units that
he's keeping out of harm's way.

If the only two strike units are the Spanish HK, then I'm kinda hurting because
since I view this army as strictly a counter punching list, I tend to need more
than 2 counterpunching units, for me, 4 are a minimum if for nothing else than
to cover up my mistakes from earlier bounds. This is where, as Ewan mentioned,
a couple of 2E Irr A whacko units come in handy. I'm still fiddling with the
best weapon combo. The 2HCT/1HCW combo sure makes for a killer on impact but
obviously these units have no staying power.

This is a fiendish list. On the surface, you just go ga-ga over the individual
troop types. But then getting them all to work (well) together raises all kinds
of questions and concerns that'll drive you nuts. If you are an agressive
counterpunching player, you'll like this list (that's how I describe my playing
style) but it's tough to master the nuances. Too bad my short attention span
and diminishing brain capacity get in the way of playing anything for any length
of time:):)

In the endless cycle of which army types are in vogue, I'm not too sure where
this one fits in. It's a missile heavy army which puts it into the currently
fashionable (in North America) armies of that ilk. And Frank has apparently
tried to optimize it against the last fashionable armies, the late medieval
knight monsters. But then it appears on the surface that the "classical" lists
(not actually those in Classical Warrior but more like LIR, Byzantines,
Seleucids, etc) are well designed to cope with the New World stuff---but less so
with the late medieval knights, etc. Love the cycle!

scott

[Chris Damour]

Scott Holder says: "Frank, what happens when you don't get terrain and
are facing the knight army on a billiard table? All those D class foot
bother me unless they're safe in/behind some kind of cover, otherwise,
they are blown waver checks waiting to happen."
BAH! NAH I say! When your waver dice only roll "1", "5" & "6" why
pay for morale?

--
Christopher Damour

[John Murphy]

So, Chris...

Have we been using the same waver dice all this time? You know, the
one with a '5' a '6' and, it seems like, 4 '1''s? <g>

And it is invariably the 134-point King's Guard A-class longbowmen
that get the '1' and shake as some impetuous Irr C MC shieldless JLS
is bearing down on them!

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, damourc <damourc@k...> wrote:
> When your waver dice only roll "1", "5" & "6" why pay for morale?

[Frank Gilson]

Scott makes valid points. I also don't have to buy 6 elements of Reg
D LMI, I can get away with buying 2 elements...however, it's a cheap
way to get 24 LMI LTS,B,Sh.

Not get any terrain? Blasphemy! But say the army is organized with
other weapons...not LTS, and still doesn't get terrain. Isn't that
worse? Now knights won't even need a failed waver test to kill them.

So, a primary question is what morale grade to go with? The
Tlaxcallans don't get too many Bs, and pretty much no As...so I made
the decision to buy it out with block of Cs and a D, supporting with
a few high morale units.

I still paid for a substantial amount of LI and a flexible artillery
unit, and my list version still has a significant high morale
component...no terrain? so be it...I'll channel the spirit of Damour.

Also, if you are good enough to combine arms between mounted and foot
to approach my troops, and can get the lights out of the way, and
launch a careful timed attack...then you deserve your victory for
that is some of the most difficult play to pull off our game requires.

Frank

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Holder, Scott"
<Scott.Holder@f...> wrote:
> Responses to Frank's responses:
>
> Like the others who noted this before, LIR (or some of the earlier
Byzantine lists) would bother me, particularly the latter because
they have better cav and if operating in conjunction with something
else, take away many of the options I'd otherwise have. That's
another reason why I'd probably go toward the HG/CB option for the
Spanish because now, I'll actually want those kinds of matchups. In
fact, I end up using the Spanish to anchor some point on my side of
the table since they are afraid of pretty much nothing.
>
> The LTS, B option for the natives is intriguing. Frank, what
happens when you don't get terrain and are facing the knight army on
a billiard table? All those D class foot bother me unless they're
safe in/behind some kind of cover, otherwise, they are blown waver
checks waiting to happen. And if they skirmish and assuming I have
some kind of combined armes late medieval trash list (Med Spanish for
example) that can move up with Moogs and knights in little 2-3
unit "pods", my reactions with the natives is somewhat constrained by
the fact that if I skirmish, I'll most likely take a charge and even
if I'm not hit, it's that waver test that bothers me. And this also
assumes that there is some infantry units closer to absorb any
shooting that would otherwise potentially neutralize the impending
knight threat. If I stand, I risk getting pounded to death by the
infantry in the first 1-2 bounds of H-T-H and then the knights come
in. Same type of thing could apply if I were facing Byzantines
(Kavalaroi and Scuts) or Seleucids (pikes/peltasts and elephants or
even any HC lancers, I'd toss them against a D class native unit in
skirmish assuming just to get the waver). Depending on what the
natives are doing, that will drive which of my "pod" units charges in
first. If standing, I'd toss in the infantry first just to tie em
up. Next bound, in goes the mounted unit. If skirmishing, the
mounted goes in first to cause the waver check. If I contact
(unlikely considering that the mounted unit will be far enough back
so that it can hit but that the fellow "pod unit", in this case
infantry, is closer so will take the shot), great, infantry mops up
next bound. If the unit shakes, all kinds of options open up. If
not, I move the infantry up again next bound and hope you don't
counter away, then start the process all over again.
>
> Okay, let's assume that I, as the Span/Tlax player will endeavor to
counter out of these ticklish spots. Again, those D class natives
make that problematic.
>
> So, I'm then assuming that the D class folks are either the reserve
or tucked away in some anchoring terrain feature......unless there
ain't none of the latter. Then it will come down to Frank's
adroitness in leading with the higher morale natives. And here's
where I as an opponent, given my playing style, still might take him
up on the offer and start pounding as much as I can against these
guys in the hopes that once(if) they crack, all the low morale guys
smoking cigarettes in the back will take the resultant waver tests
and it's game over dude. If I don't succeed, tough, I've given it my
best shot assuming that I don't spend 3.99 hours trying to pick on
one of Frank's D class units that he's keeping out of harm's way.
>
> If the only two strike units are the Spanish HK, then I'm kinda
hurting because since I view this army as strictly a counter punching
list, I tend to need more than 2 counterpunching units, for me, 4 are
a minimum if for nothing else than to cover up my mistakes from
earlier bounds. This is where, as Ewan mentioned, a couple of 2E Irr
A whacko units come in handy. I'm still fiddling with the best
weapon combo. The 2HCT/1HCW combo sure makes for a killer on impact
but obviously these units have no staying power.
>
> This is a fiendish list. On the surface, you just go ga-ga over
the individual troop types. But then getting them all to work (well)
together raises all kinds of questions and concerns that'll drive you
nuts. If you are an agressive counterpunching player, you'll like
this list (that's how I describe my playing style) but it's tough to
master the nuances. Too bad my short attention span and diminishing
brain capacity get in the way of playing anything for any length of
time:)
>
> In the endless cycle of which army types are in vogue, I'm not too
sure where this one fits in. It's a missile heavy army which puts it
into the currently fashionable (in North America) armies of that
ilk. And Frank has apparently tried to optimize it against the last
fashionable armies, the late medieval knight monsters. But then it
appears on the surface that the "classical" lists (not actually those
in Classical Warrior but more like LIR, Byzantines, Seleucids, etc)
are well designed to cope with the New World stuff---but less so with
the late medieval knights, etc. Love the cycle!
>
> scott