Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

Ewan, as always, has provided some great analysis in the post with the above
subject line.

A couple of observations:

1. He doesn't look at the roman lists with the new lists rules and i think
that is a shame. They do a lot more than most think, and I'd like to see a
player like Ewan put them on the table a couple times and get his thoughts. I
think they are especially viable in this theme, and while I like the
sassanids, I would take a couple of those imperial roman lists over the
sassanids
any time. Wait - I just did the other day....
The other thing about the roman list rules is that they make that Commagene
list a lot less attractive....

2. Spartacans are the list I am looking at most for next year's 'no
missile' contender. Great stuff there, although I am interested to see the way
Ewan
would take them. Have to look into the differences... However, they are
not in this theme as this is an Imperial theme and the Spartacans are a
Marian enemy...

3. I also like the Later Judeans. In addition to being a viable theme list
I think they are a good choice for Dogs of War.....

Jon


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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 7/2/2004 11:49:42 Central Daylight Time,
ewan.mcnay@... writes:

Jon may be right; my brain just rebels at Romans. I do think that
their list rules will lead to anyone taking Romans to be legion-heavy
- else, why go there? Now, the fulcum alleviates some of the problems
that would pose against say a Parthian otherwise - but that's still a
*lot* of points tied up into regular, decent-morale, HI. >>

Yes, and it seems quite counter to your style to invest in high morale HI
and I would not try and convince you they are a good troop *for you*.. But I
have seen some cool things from them in playtest and games since...

And LIR
don't get the new rules (thankfully!) - so one has to run likely MIR.
And even fulcum still loses to SHC unless there's another legion
coming in to replace, of course.>>
As Todd would say - that is what Roman generals are for.....lol But EIR
sadly cannot do that..




Jon, care to put up the Roman list you used? I'd be very interested,
and it might well spark others' interest.>>
I dumped it as I made changes shortly after. but it centered around
supporting the legions with 2 units of bolt shooters doing the things Mike and
I did
with them to win the teams two years ago, a couple of S/B armed auxilia for
the elephants and a mass of my new favorite troop type: Irr B MC L B. Talk
about a steal..lol and if shieldless MC doesn't teach you to split the other
guy's fire, nothing will. :)



As Scott said. Fair enough. I may have gone overboard on the massive
D class units, of course, but it came out to something like 430 foot
figures, and easily stretching across an 8' table, or even a 6' table
in 15mm - better in 25mm.>>
Good points. My jury is still out on how to take them and I'll be fudging
with it all fall before I commit to painting a ton of foot...lol



> 3. I also like the Later Judeans. In addition to being a viable theme
list
> I think they are a good choice for Dogs of War.....

Assuming that you count D-class command points toward your 480, and
that you don't go for oddness like imitation legions, that is going to
mean a *lot* of horse archers. There are 'only' 48E of IrrD LC at 6
points = 288, so you need to put them into 8, 6E units to get to 488.
I guess that's viable. Hope for no close terrain!>>
You are quite right. i misspoke - I was originally looking at them as a
candidate for the 'no-missile' army and not Dogs. The issue is that with
either
the Parthian or marian allies there is a B-armed minimum. I am trying to
find an army with NO B...lol

J


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

[Ewan McNay]

OK, so after having disparaged Todd's Berber list, I was
inspired/sufficiently bored to wander through Imperial Warrior in
search of interest. I found an unexpected amount - so here are
several lists in the vague hope that they might inspire someone else,
especially for the H'Con theme.

The permitted lists for the theme are:

ROME (Imperial Warrior)
18 (94)-EARLY IMPERIAL ROMAN
23 (99)-MIDDLE IMPERIAL ROMAN
32 (108)-LATE IMPERIAL ROMAN
34 (110)-PATRICIAN ROMAN

ENEMIES OF ROME (Imperial Warrior)
1 (77)-Meroitic Kushite-no chariots
2 (7-Early Armenian-Tigranes can't be CinC
3 (79)-Early German
4 (80)-Early Rhoxolani Sarmatian
5 (81)-Siracae/Iazyges Sarmatian
6 (82)-Nabataen Arab
7 (83)-Parthian-Late Period only
8 (84)-Bosporan-no Pontic Period
9 (85)-Commagene
14 (90)-Later Judean-no Marians, Parthians
15 (91)-Dacian
16 (92)-Ancient British
17 (93)-Blemye/Nobade
19 (95)-Later Moorish-no Byzantines
20 (96)-Alans-no Georgians, Turkomans, Cumans, Tartars
21 (97)-Jewish Revolt
22 (9-Caledonian
24 (100)-Early Visigothic
25 (101)-Early Vandal
26 (102)-Early Ostrogothic
27 (103)-Sassanid Persian-no Arabs or Kushans 28 (104)-Burgundi
29 (105)-Gepid-no Byzantines, Slavs
30 (106)-Early Franks, et al
31 (107)-Palmyran
33 (109)-Hunnic
35 (111)-African Vandal
36 (112)-Later Visigothic-no Byzantines

ENEMIES OF ROME (Dark AgeWarrior)
1 (113)-Scots-Irish
2 (114)-Picts-Early Period Only
3 (115)-Early Saxons, Frisian, etc all-no Welsh
6 (118)-Romano-British
10 (122)-Early Lombard-no Bulgars, Avars

I'm going to ignore the Dark Age lists as I didn't have them to hand;
I recall Jon rating the Picts (double-armed IrrB LMI, a la Illyrians)
and I've previously praised the Romano-Brits, who might be close to
the top of my list in 15mm with their masses of cheap regular troops.

Moreover, I'm going to ignore the Roman lists - the early legions,
special rules notwithstanding, are not my thing and I just can't be
bothered with their options. LIR is a good list but *so* boring .

So, on to the middle group, and some highly idiosyncratic, biased, and
likely inconsistent commentary. I make no claims for optimisation -
this was very fast skimming.

Kushites - might be almost viable, and IrrA LMI 2HCW, JLS, Sh will
certainly provide shock. However, taking the 'all IrrA' option gets
expensive very fast, and there are too many poor compulsories - irr
loose/close bowmen, IrrD MI LTS. Back on the good side are 4HLCh and
even 2 El. But not enough to inspire an actual list.

Armenian - the SHC/LC combo is available in several lists, of which
this is not the best.

Early German - might be OK in theme, with a couple of A class MI
blocks and the allied rebel auxilia as one option, or more general
nuttiness across the board, plus enough LI. In general, though,
suffers from being too diffuse, relying on JLS as a weapon, and being
immobile.

Early Rhoxolani - if you're going to have a loose cav army, have one
with lances, list rule for 1.5 ranks or not.

Later Rhoxolani - hey, we worked out to use lances. But we threw away
the shields! Doh! Someone find me an Alan advisor..

Nabatean - well, we lost both the lances and the bows, trying to
befriend some camels. Bad trade.

Parthian - a list! [Too bad that the cataphract camels are
ridiculously priced. They're one of my favourite unique-flavour troops]

CinC as Irr B SHC L w/ 1E EHC L, B
3 x Sub, ditto. Two are camel-proofed, to go alongside:
6E IrrD MCm B, Sh
2 x 2E SHC/EHC, L
2 x 2E HC L, B
4 x 8E IrrD LC B*
6E Reg D LMI LTS, JLS, Sh
4 x 6E Reg D LI S or JLS or B, Sh
12E IrrD LI B

* I don't know how to take IrrD (or even IrrC, but especially IrrD)
horse archers. I could make a case for 6E, 8E, 9E, even 12E units.
Experience, anyone?

This gets you six good SHC units; adding the camels makes a very
potent anti-cav strike force. Against non-pointy-stick foot you
should be fine - but that's likely to be hard to find in theme given
the fulcrum rule and pike availability. The Greek foot is cheap,
regular, and enough not to lose in terrain while winning in the open,
likely.

Bosporan - Pontic, with available pike, seems best for this infantry
force. I actually did a list, but wasn't happy - you can get roughly
8x4E peltasts, 4x4E pike, and a bare minimum of supporting lights and
cav. Good *if* you can fight on a very small frontage, but not
otherwise. I would have liked to take Scythian Allies, but the points
just didn't seem to work out. Oh, wait - just noticed that Pontic is
not allowed in any case. So, scratch the pikes, add a few Scythians,
but I'm still not convinced.

Commagene - the most pike-heavy army available. In fact, with no
Pontic, the only one, I think (and recall Frank making the same
comment). The SHC are unfortunately all-SHC, hence very expensive,
and at least partly C class. Still, you can get a reasonable if
compact combined arms force, something like:
CinC as Reg B SHC L
sub ditto B/C
2 x 2E Reg C LC JLS, Sh
2 x 8E Irr D LC B, 1E 'C'*
3 x 8E Reg D MI P, Sh, 1E 'C'
Sub in LHI/LMI 4E peltast unit
2 x 4E LHI/LMI peltasts
6E Reg C LMI B
6E Irr D LMI B (compulsory)

There's an obvious lack of LI, and that's probably a killer - there's
LI available, just nothing I'd want to give up, really. One option
would be to make the CinC a pikeman, and drop the SHC sub, going with
just one unit of SHC and getting some LI. That's likely smart, even
if it really minimises your fast punch.

Hasmonean and Spartacan are actually both interesting, just not
permitted - a shame. [how is Spartacus not an enemy of Rome? ]. I
put together what I think is a tough Spartacan list a la Chris
Damour's Viking setup, with the advantage of some close order in the line:

CinC as 2E LHI/LMI HTW, JLS, Sh
2 x Sub ditto
4 x 2E ditto
4 x 12E MI: 3E IrrC LTS, Sh, 3E IrrD JLS, Sh, 6E IrrD IPW
4 x 12E LMI JLS, Sh: 6E IrrC, 6E IrrD
2 x 12E IrrD LI B, 1/2 Sh

The obvious problem is the lack on an army standard to make everyone
eager - this would be a case where I might well buy a sacred standard!
- so the LMI especially will want woods and marsh to play in.

The Hasmoneans are another peltast-based force, and I like peltasts.
They can get 6x4E LMI plus 3x4E LHI/LMI including a Greek Sub, 4x2E
LC, 2x2E EHC, 3 decent Irr LI units and 2x2E Reg LI. On a brushy
table, very tough, and able to play in the open too. A little like an
Inca, but sacrificing missiles for improved close combat and with
better support troops, perhaps. Anyway, not in play for the theme.

That leads us to the Later Judeans - and this is the reason why I
would likely not take Parthians, as I think they're better taken as a
Judean Ally here. Doing that gives you something like:
Judean EHC CinC
3 x 4E Reg B peltasts
6E Reg C LH/MI peltasts
6E Irr C LI S, Sh
6E Irr C LI JLS, Sh
10E Irr C LI B, 1/2 Sh
- that's all for the Judeans . Then the Parthian allies:
Ally as SHC/EHC Irr B L
2 x 2E SHC/EHC Irr B L
2 x 8E Irr D LC B*
9E Irr D LC B
10E Irr D LC B

Only 15 units, but should be viable.

The rest of the book - other than the obvious Sassanids - didn't
inspire me. And I've typed enough.

[scott holder]

Hasmonean and Spartacan are actually both interesting, just not
permitted - a shame. [how is Spartacus not an enemy of Rome? ].

>It's simple if you think about it: the theme was built around the enemies of
the 4 "imperial" roman armies, Spartacan was too early. I'd toyed with the idea
of extending this back to the Marian era but then the army mix changed the
entire character of the theme. And, at some point, we'll get to those lists in
another theme so I felt it was better to not diffuse this theme any more than it
already is.

scott

[Ewan McNay]

JonCleaves@... wrote:
> A couple of observations:
>
> 1. He doesn't look at the roman lists with the new lists rules and i think
> that is a shame. They do a lot more than most think, and I'd like to see a
> player like Ewan put them on the table a couple times and get his thoughts.
I
> think they are especially viable in this theme, and while I like the
> sassanids, I would take a couple of those imperial roman lists over the
sassanids
> any time. Wait - I just did the other day.... :)

Jon may be right; my brain just rebels at Romans. I do think that
their list rules will lead to anyone taking Romans to be legion-heavy
- else, why go there? Now, the fulcum alleviates some of the problems
that would pose against say a Parthian otherwise - but that's still a
*lot* of points tied up into regular, decent-morale, HI. And LIR
don't get the new rules (thankfully!) - so one has to run likely MIR.
And even fulcum still loses to SHC unless there's another legion
coming in to replace, of course.

Now, Reg B veteran MIR legions can have darts - which is good, but
note that your 4E legion is now costing you 138 points. That's how to
end up with a pretty small frontage. LHI auxilia are also
cool-but-expensive, and are losing to even LMI peltasts in isolation,
and to LHI-fronted peltasts (of which there are a lot around).

Jon, care to put up the Roman list you used? I'd be very interested,
and it might well spark others' interest.

> The other thing about the roman list rules is that they make that Commagene
> list a lot less attractive....

That, I agree with.

> 2. Spartacans are the list I am looking at most for next year's 'no
> missile' contender. Great stuff there, although I am interested to see the
way Ewan
> would take them. Have to look into the differences... However, they are
> not in this theme as this is an Imperial theme and the Spartacans are a
> Marian enemy...

As Scott said. Fair enough. I may have gone overboard on the massive
D class units, of course, but it came out to something like 430 foot
figures, and easily stretching across an 8' table, or even a 6' table
in 15mm - better in 25mm.

> 3. I also like the Later Judeans. In addition to being a viable theme list
> I think they are a good choice for Dogs of War.....

Assuming that you count D-class command points toward your 480, and
that you don't go for oddness like imitation legions, that is going to
mean a *lot* of horse archers. There are 'only' 48E of IrrD LC at 6
points = 288, so you need to put them into 8, 6E units to get to 488.
I guess that's viable. Hope for no close terrain!

e

[scott holder]

Now, Reg B veteran MIR legions can have darts - which is good, but
note that your 4E legion is now costing you 138 points. That's how to
end up with a pretty small frontage.

>Let me remind everyone to read the application of the roman list rules to the
MIR list very carefully. They only applly to the Severan period which is
essentially the "really late early imperiod roman" period. None of the d-armed
MI legionaries have the list rule.

[Ewan McNay]

Huh. I thought I had been careful here.

Severan legions, sure. Then there's an upgrade to reg B as *either*
veterans *or* Post-Severan Triarii - so we're OK to have Reg B Severan
legions w/ list rules.

Then there's an upgrade to have D for *either* Post-Severan
Praetorians *or* Reg B legions. No limit placed on *which* Reg B legions.

BUT! Aha - checking the errata, there's an insertion in that last line
to limit the 'Reg B' to being post-Severan.

Check the errata, everyone .

Holder, Scott wrote:

> Now, Reg B veteran MIR legions can have darts - which is good, but
> note that your 4E legion is now costing you 138 points. That's
> how to end up with a pretty small frontage.
>
>
>> Let me remind everyone to read the application of the roman list
>> rules to the MIR list very carefully. They only applly to the
>> Severan period which is essentially the "really late early
>> imperiod roman" period. None of the d-armed MI legionaries have
>> the list rule.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo!
> Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/IMSolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>

[scott holder]

Check the errata, everyone :)

>Words to live by.

[Todd Schneider]

Well, I play both LIR and Marians…Following is the Marian List I would Like
to run one of these days, just to see how it would work:






CINC HI HI 182 "Reg A/B HTW, Sh, PA"


Sub Gen HI HI 112 "Reg A/B HTW, Sh,
P"

Numidian Ally LC 3E LC 124 "Irr B LC JLS, Sh"


#E


German Cav 2 1/2 HC; 1/2 MC Irr B
"JLS, Sh" 73

Legion 4 HI Reg B
"HTW, Sh" 122

Legion 4 HI Reg C
"HTW, Sh" 106

Legion 4 HI Reg C
"HTW, Sh" 106

Thracians 4 LMI Reg C "2HCW,
JLS, Sh" 90

Thracians 4 LMI Reg C "2HCW,
JLS, Sh" 90




Slingers 6 LI Irr C
"S, Sh" 61


Slingers 6 LI Irr C
"S, Sh" 61


Slingers 6 LI Irr C
"S, Sh" 61


Numidian Elephants 3 El Irr C 2 Crew
W/B 145

Numidian Elephants 3 El Irr C 2 Crew
W/B 145

Numidian Infantry 4 LI Irr C "JLS,
Sh" 49


Numidian Cavalry 4 LC Irr C "JLS, Sh"
73




1600 points, 37 Scouting Points.



The Only EIR Lists I have put together have been at 1200 points...





Todd



_____

From: JonCleaves@... [mailto:JonCleaves@...]
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2004 1:33 PM
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Various lists - H'Con theme. Long.



In a message dated 7/2/2004 11:49:42 Central Daylight Time,
ewan.mcnay@... writes:

Jon may be right; my brain just rebels at Romans. I do think that
their list rules will lead to anyone taking Romans to be legion-heavy
- else, why go there? Now, the fulcum alleviates some of the problems
that would pose against say a Parthian otherwise - but that's still a
*lot* of points tied up into regular, decent-morale, HI. >>

Yes, and it seems quite counter to your style to invest in high morale HI
and I would not try and convince you they are a good troop *for you*.. But
I
have seen some cool things from them in playtest and games since...

And LIR
don't get the new rules (thankfully!) - so one has to run likely MIR.
And even fulcum still loses to SHC unless there's another legion
coming in to replace, of course.>>
As Todd would say - that is what Roman generals are for.....lol But EIR
sadly cannot do that..




Jon, care to put up the Roman list you used? I'd be very interested,
and it might well spark others' interest.>>
I dumped it as I made changes shortly after. but it centered around
supporting the legions with 2 units of bolt shooters doing the things Mike
and I did
with them to win the teams two years ago, a couple of S/B armed auxilia for

the elephants and a mass of my new favorite troop type: Irr B MC L B. Talk

about a steal..lol and if shieldless MC doesn't teach you to split the
other
guy's fire, nothing will. :)



As Scott said. Fair enough. I may have gone overboard on the massive
D class units, of course, but it came out to something like 430 foot
figures, and easily stretching across an 8' table, or even a 6' table
in 15mm - better in 25mm.>>
Good points. My jury is still out on how to take them and I'll be fudging
with it all fall before I commit to painting a ton of foot...lol



> 3. I also like the Later Judeans. In addition to being a viable theme
list
> I think they are a good choice for Dogs of War.....

Assuming that you count D-class command points toward your 480, and
that you don't go for oddness like imitation legions, that is going to
mean a *lot* of horse archers. There are 'only' 48E of IrrD LC at 6
points = 288, so you need to put them into 8, 6E units to get to 488.
I guess that's viable. Hope for no close terrain!>>
You are quite right. i misspoke - I was originally looking at them as a
candidate for the 'no-missile' army and not Dogs. The issue is that with
either
the Parthian or marian allies there is a B-armed minimum. I am trying to
find an army with NO B...lol

J


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






Yahoo! Groups Sponsor



ADVERTISEMENT
HYPERLINK
"http://us.ard.yahoo.com/SIG=129eiele2/M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=gr
oups/S=1705059080:HM/EXP=1088879578/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/compa
nion.yahoo.com"click here


HYPERLINK
"http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=groups/S=
:HM/A=2128215/rand=365806816"



_____

Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
HYPERLINK
"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/W
arriorRules/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
HYPERLINK
"mailto:WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe"Warrior
Rules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the HYPERLINK
"http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/"Yahoo! Terms of Service.


---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.713 / Virus Database: 469 - Release Date: 6/30/2004



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.713 / Virus Database: 469 - Release Date: 6/30/2004



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