Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Chris Bump]

Jon,

The rules currently state that lance armed cav may fire bows from the second
rank and still fight in HtH. What of cav who could normally wedge but are
not armed with lance such as the Hun LC and Japanese HC, both of which have
bows in addition to weapons and could wedge? Are they allowed to shoot from
second rank and still fight?

Chris

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 5/13/2001 23:03:41 Central Daylight Time, cncbump@...
writes:

<< The rules currently state that lance armed cav may fire bows from the
second
rank and still fight in HtH. What of cav who could normally wedge but are
not armed with lance such as the Hun LC and Japanese HC, both of which have
bows in addition to weapons and could wedge? Are they allowed to shoot from
second rank and still fight?
>>

Yes.

[Chris Bump]

Jon,

A new thought came to me after our last game. If a unit armed with HTW in
the front rank and Jls in the second rank attacks a unit with LTS or P. Does
the second rank of attacking foot take the -2 penalty or is it enough that
the front rank has HTW and nullifys the advantage of LTS and or P?

Also does a unit armed with LTS take the -2 for facing another unit with LTS?
That seems a silly question, but the rules state a unit not armed with HTW
or P facing LTS or P. Presumably a unit armed with LTS will take a -2 when
facing P because of the reach difference, but this might be confusing if the
three are thrown into the same sentence.

Chris

[joncleaves]

Thanks, Scott.

An additional note: none of what Scott said is different in any way from WRG
7th.

[scott holder]

A new thought came to me after our last game. If a unit armed with HTW in
the front rank and Jls in the second rank attacks a unit with LTS or P. Does
the second rank of attacking foot take the -2 penalty

>Yes. Everyone please remember that unless specified specifically in the
rules, handle all these types of instances on an element by element basis.

or is it enough that
the front rank has HTW and nullifys the advantage of LTS and or P?

>See above. The front rankers don't suffer the -2, the second rankers do.

Also does a unit armed with LTS take the -2 for facing another unit with LTS?

>Yes. That's why when you do the numbers, hoplite vs hoplite battles (which
rarely, if ever, are seen in this or any other game) become a rugby scrum.
Even with goofy up rolling by regulars, it becomes very hard to break the
opponent except thru successive bounds and progressive "problems" ie, first
you outroll him enough to disorder the unit; next bound you do twice as many
cuz he's disordered close and doesn't roll up and you don't roll down, he then
blows the waver test, now he's shaken; on the third bound you do the same
thing as in the second bound, he blows the waver test again and breaks. In
"real life" that represents a 45 minute rugby scrum. Note that unless one
side or the other "gets lucky", this battle can go on forever, unless of
course other units are brought into the fray.


That seems a silly question, but the rules state a unit not armed with HTW
or P facing LTS or P.

>Um, where does it state this? In the February draft of Warrior, it does not.
Here's the exact quote:

Deduct 2:
If at first contact and facing non-impetuous P or LTS armed steady foot
(unless steady foot using HTW, P, or non-impetuous LTS).

>I don't see the word "unit" in here anywhere and as such, see comments above.

Presumably a unit armed with LTS will take a -2 when
facing P because of the reach difference, but this might be confusing if the
three are thrown into the same sentence.

>The LTS do take the -2 which is why people play pike armies and not
hoplites:) Aside from the all the other "balance" issues between the two
types of armies, pikes whomp hoplites assuming no odd swing of the dice.

Scott
List Ho

[scott holder]

An additional note: none of what Scott said is different in any way from WRG
7th.

>That's probably why I knew what I was talking about:) Now if it's a
Warrior question.....

Scott
List Ho

[Ewan McNay]

Scott quoth:

>>Yes. That's why when you do the numbers, hoplite vs hoplite battles
(which
>rarely, if ever, are seen in this or any other game) become a rugby
scrum.

There were a lot of these at Dog Wars (sorry, dogs *of* War..), as when
your troops have to be D class, close foot is an obvious choice. And,
indeed, they do go on forever; if one side is irregular, that's often
enough to make the (eventual) difference, as the CPF mount up - but so
is almost any other smallish difference, such as a front rank of HI.
It's one case where overlaps can be bad, because they're just a
temptation to be hit by a mounted support unit - and now when pushed
back *by mounted*, there's a cause of disorder every turn.

>>The LTS do take the -2 which is why people play pike armies and not
>hoplites:) Aside from the all the other "balance" issues between
the two
>types of armies, pikes whomp hoplites assuming no odd swing of the
dice.

Yep. Even with the change to give the LTS guys two full ranks, assuming
equal width units it's still an auto-rout. Of course, that means that
there are twice as many pike guys as there are hoplites, but it's still
a good deal for the pikemen .

[per element frontage, 16 pikemen do 12@4=36; hoplites do 8@2=16]

Ewan