Warrior Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules
A Four Horsemen Enterprises Rules Set
 
  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups AlbumAlbum   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Xrules and really important stuff

 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> Egroup Archives
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
joncleaves
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 16447

PostPosted: Sat Mar 09, 2002 11:49 pm    Post subject: Re: Xrules and really important stuff


Scott - report to the alzheimer's support group.

Before anyone overreacts:

1. PLEASE remember that the "x" in x-rules stands for EXPERIMENTAL. If the
NASAMW wants to use one in an event, that is up to the NASAMW leadership, but is
not necessarily supported as a good idea by FHE.

2. The d10 experimental rule was not intended in any way to be used for
counters.

3. All the rules Scott discusses as seeming somewhat 'new' to him were of course
discussed at length by all FH and playtested before being finalized. This is
just part of his campaign to give me a heart attack before I turn 40.

4. I know I do not agree with the idea that stuff has to routinely be looked up
in 2-3 places. But a) I am obviously biased; b) I have been living these rules
for 2+ years now and c) I have received many mails here and offline about how
easy stuff is to find in the Warrior rulebook.

5. I am obviously not sure what 'gaps' Scott is talking about, but it is
possible they are related to an issue I have been working offline this week.
There are apparently players who are concerned that certain rules in Warrior are
not representative of the way similar situations were 'judged' on the tabletop
over the years by various umpires and that if the rule is not finalized the same
way it was 'judged' in the majority of cases in WRG 7th, then a lot of players
are going to get 'screwed' because they have learned/played/taken armies 'that
way'.
Don't worry your pretty little heads about this, because:

1. This isn't WRG 7th or 8th. It is Warrior.
2. A rule or clarification is going to be judged on its ability to replicate
history, its mechanical soundness and how it fits into the overall Warrior
scheme and NOT on how so-and-so judged a given situation in a WRG tourney five
years ago.
3. I am the rules horse instead of Scott for a reason. :)

There, the rules sky is not falling and everything is fine. Go back to your
regularly scheduled program.

Jon


_________________
Roll Up and Win!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 5874
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2002 4:21 am    Post subject: Xrules and really important stuff


Ed Bernhard and I played 4 games during his stay here at the Dauphine.
These were:

1) Neo-Assyrian vs Late Hebrew (BW lists of course) 25mm
2) Neo-Assyrian vs Akkadian/Late Sumerian (BW lists of course) 25mm
3) Japanese vs Yuan (NASAMW lists) 25mm
4) Hsiung-Nu vs Tibetan (NASAMW lists) 15mm

We ran the D10 xrule for wavers (and also used it for counters since
it's the same thing) and we used the tentative D100 alternative to this
(using -15 for each -1 in the D6 system). We disliked both systems
(yeah, 2 games ain't much to base it on but we know what we like and
don't like) for pretty much the same reasons. You need a another
die/dice above and beyond the D6 and D5 already used. Our simple brains
didn't need that added complication in an already complicated game. We
didn't feel it really added anything new or impacted the game in any
way. We did feel that the D10 base roll for E class troops is too low
(it should be 7, not 6). Basically, we tried both and said "icky" and
moved onto the other xrule for games 3-4. Now if we could come up with
a system that only used, let's say D10, great, we could get rid of the
anachronistic average die. I'll let minds that add numbers better work
out that x-rule:)Smile:)

Games 3-4 used the alternative method of reaching command demoralization
(this has meaning given the posts I've now caught up on from the last 4
days). The x-rule as it's currently written is for Fast Warrior but
it's one I plan on posting (at some point) for Warrior itself.
Determining demoralization level remains unchanged (each unit counts as
1 toward calculating a command's demoralization level) but in this
method, once you start playing the game, shaken troops count 0.5 to that
level instead of the current 1.0. Currently, once you shake a unit, you
can pretty much ignore it since you'll get all the points you want by
working over other units in a command in order to hit the 50%
demoralization limit. But with shaken units at 0.5, there's some real
incentive to make em break (obvious waver test implications plus you're
0.5 pts closer to hitting 50%). For example, a command with a
demoralization level of 6 has 2 units broken/destroyed and 1 unit shaken
is still 0.5 away from it's 50% level under this proposed X-rule. I now
need to break that shaken guy to push my opponent over the top. It also
adds a nice complexity to the odd-numbered commands that obviously now
proliferate under Warrior's 50% demoralization level.

We *loved* this rule. It allowed more expensive armies with smaller
command "content" to be a little hardier without the invincibility of
the old greater than 2/3s crap that we obviously wanted to change in
Warrior:)Smile:)

Although I love the rule, I don't wanna foist it off at Cold Wars since
all of us are gonna be plodding thru the nuances of the rules. But I
would like to run this at the Mini at Historicon for some "real life"
testing and encourage other people to try it and see how it goes, either
in Fast Warrior or Warrior. Once I get the Ho coordination completed,
I'll post this one as a "for real" X-rule.

IMPORTANT DIFFERENCES IN WARRIOR
Sheesh, you'd think I know these rules but, heh heh, as soon as the
signatures were dry on the LLC papers for Four Horsemen Enterprises, the
rules slipped from my grasp:)SmileSmile Ed and I found some of these really
new and different changes at about the same time Dave Markowitz was
making his post about the 1.5 ranks counting even if the JLS + does not
(which is a great and very nuanced change to the rules and their impact
on how armies now intereact). Here are the highlights Ed and I found:

1) Evaders don't ever every come back if they go off the table. It used
to be only shaken or broken evaders didn't come back. Now it's nobody.
So all you LC folks out there, rethink your skirmish angles:)Smile:)

2) Generals on lone staff elements never test for routing bodies. Wow,
this came up in every game of ours I guess because Ed and I just
happened to have generals on single elements.

3) The "imaginary" shooting arc. Yunno, this is the one where bodies
"extend their frontage" for shooting. Another very subtle rule change
that actually makes artillery halfway viable (at least in 25mm). It
also helps limit some gap issues since troops now think twice about
coming in off to one side of a unit in order to squeeze into a flank.
If said target unit can shoot, said attacker must be more careful in
setting up the attack unless he wants to get popped in prep shooting.

Finally, this was my first real run-thru playing the game for real and
having to connect the dots in some sections. I mean the answer to a
given question might have needed to be looked up in 2-3 different
sections to get a complete answer but in every instance, we could follow
the references, see the logic flow, and again, connect the dots to
arrive at an answer. This is *important* to newcomers. Answers to some
questions might not exist in one spot. Don't panic. If you follow the
logic, you'll get an answer.

Now there are some "gaps" that I'm not sure are covered in writing but
I'll be talking with Jon offline about those. It's one of those
situations where I know how I've done it all these years but couldn't
find it clarified one way or the other in Warrior.

But wow, once we started to "unlearn what we had learned" all these
years, the stuff was fairly easy to find and follow. Now if we could
just find a way to make the casualty rate charts easier to calculate,
heh heh heh.

Scott
Ump Ho in training


_________________
These Rules Suck, Let's Paint!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website

Recruit
Recruit


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 104

PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2002 5:59 am    Post subject: Re: Xrules and really important stuff


--- In WarriorRules@y..., JonCleaves@a... wrote:

> There, the rules sky is not falling and everything is fine. Go
back to your regularly scheduled program.
>
> Jon

I appreciate the reassurance, but I found Scott's post and questions
very interesting.

I just wanted him to include battle reports of some sort for those
four battles he fought.

I'm assuming he lost them all since he didn't describe them. :)

(Wondering if that will draw him out.)

John Meunier

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 5874
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2002 6:31 am    Post subject: Re: Xrules and really important stuff


Scott - report to the alzheimer's support group.

>Why? I was simply posting some initial feedback from what would be
considered a couple of "typical gamers"SmileSmile:)

Before anyone overreacts:

1. PLEASE remember that the "x" in x-rules stands for EXPERIMENTAL. If
the NASAMW wants to use one in an event, that is up to the NASAMW
leadership, but is not necessarily supported as a good idea by FHE.

>Correct. I'm simply tossing in my two cents worth giving semi-informed
opinions on x-rules I've played. The more we share x-rule experiences
here, the better people can judge whether or not they wanna use them at
any given tourney.

2. The d10 experimental rule was not intended in any way to be used for
counters.

>True but since the odds are the same, we sorta tried it anyway.

3. All the rules Scott discusses as seeming somewhat 'new' to him were
of course discussed at length by all FH and playtested before being
finalized. This is just part of his campaign to give me a heart attack
before I turn 40.

>I don't remember the evaders not returning bit or the lone general's
never testing but it's no big deal:)SmileSmile Seriously, I've found things
that are "new" to me but that could be 276 Fast Warrior, 36 Biblical
Warrior, and 13 Holy Warrior lists crowding out what space is left in my
brain for the actual rules themselves.

4. I know I do not agree with the idea that stuff has to routinely be
looked up in 2-3 places. But a) I am obviously biased; b) I have been
living these rules for 2+ years now and c) I have received many mails
here and offline about how easy stuff is to find in the Warrior
rulebook.

>Lemme stress that I found things easy to look up. But, complex
tabletop issues usually require complex answers. Therefore, a player
(both Ed and myself) might have a tabletop "event" that involved
disorder and interpenatration so we had to look them up in two places.
This is certainly not a criticism, just the opposite. But, on many many
many occasions we needed to look things up (mainly to make sure we were
still doing things right, remember, the Ump Ho has a lotta "old rules"
baggage to unload still) and had to follow the logic flow as outlined
above. Believe me, in the "old rules" we woulda never been able to do
that.

5. I am obviously not sure what 'gaps' Scott is talking about, but it is
possible they are related to an issue I have been working offline this
week. There are apparently players who are concerned that certain rules
in Warrior are not representative of the way similar situations were
'judged' on the tabletop over the years by various umpires and that if
the rule is not finalized the same way it was 'judged' in the majority
of cases in WRG 7th, then a lot of players are going to get 'screwed'
because they have learned/played/taken armies 'that way'.

>I have some diagrams of issues I simply want to go over with you
offline to make sure they're covered, or even need covering, or just
helping me find them. They don't involve w***** but kinda involve g***.

Don't worry your pretty little heads about this, because:

1. This isn't WRG 7th or 8th. It is Warrior.
2. A rule or clarification is going to be judged on its ability to
replicate history, its mechanical soundness and how it fits into the
overall Warrior scheme and NOT on how so-and-so judged a given situation
in a WRG tourney five years ago.

>This impacts me more than most because I do not want to perpetuate this
inadertantly, hence, I'm gonna be fairly open here about playing
experiences just so I can get it right.

Scott
Ump Ho


_________________
These Rules Suck, Let's Paint!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 5874
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2002 6:34 am    Post subject: Re: Xrules and really important stuff


I just wanted him to include battle reports of some sort for those
four battles he fought.

I'm assuming he lost them all since he didn't describe them. :)

>I personally find battle reports incredibly dull unless one part of
them illustrates a rule point or clarification, or nuance most people
don't know about. Hence, I don't bother to bore people with em.

Scott
List Ho


_________________
These Rules Suck, Let's Paint!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website
Don Coon
Imperator
Imperator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2742

PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2002 4:06 pm    Post subject: Re: Xrules and really important stuff


> 1) Evaders don't ever every come back if they go off the table. It used
> to be only shaken or broken evaders didn't come back. Now it's nobody.
> So all you LC folks out there, rethink your skirmish angles:)Smile:)

Huge rule that we in DFW all LOVE. I agree with your assement that
skirmishers have to be a bit more aware. We have found it adds more "chess"
type thinking.

> 2) Generals on lone staff elements never test for routing bodies. Wow,
> this came up in every game of ours I guess because Ed and I just
> happened to have generals on single elements.

Another HUGE rule change that DFW players ADORE! I have always thought
generals should be a bit more resistant to waver tests. Now if you choose a
non fighting CINC, you get a nice level headed dude, who realizes the
importance of trying to hold his boys together.

> 3) The "imaginary" shooting arc. If said target unit can shoot, said
attacker must be more careful in
> setting up the attack unless he wants to get popped in prep shooting.

Great rule. Shooters that were not on the ends always had this privledge,
and now all elements have it. As you said, moving in on missle boys takes
some thought now.

> I mean the answer to a given question might have needed to be looked up in
2-3 different
> sections to get a complete answer but in every instance, we could follow
> the references, see the logic flow, and again, connect the dots to
> arrive at an answer. This is *important* to newcomers

We have found this to be mostly true. There are a couple of spots where we
would like a few more cross references, but hey you can customize your
rulebook with a graphite scribing rod!

> But wow, once we started to "unlearn what we had learned" all these
> years, the stuff was fairly easy to find and follow.

I am soo glad to see the para. It is an essential point IMHO. Warrior is a
new game and must be learnde separate from any game you may have played
before.

Don

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Patrick Byrne
Centurion
Centurion


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1433

PostPosted: Sun Mar 10, 2002 6:18 pm    Post subject: Re: Xrules and really important stuff


What IS up with the x @ 8 line? How was that mathematically formated?

All the others are mathematically based. The @ 8 line though.....
-PB


Scott Wrote.
> Now if we could just find a way to make the
> casualty rate charts easier to calculate,
> heh heh heh.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  

Legionary
Legionary


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 300

PostPosted: Mon Mar 11, 2002 3:31 am    Post subject: Re: Xrules and really important stuff


In a message dated 03/10/2002 11:33:59 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
ewan.mcnay@... writes:


> On Sat, 9 Mar 2002, Holder, Scott <FHWA> wrote:
> > 1) Evaders don't ever every come back if they go off the table. It used
> > to be only shaken or broken evaders didn't come back. Now it's nobody.
> > So all you LC folks out there, rethink your skirmish angles:)SmileSmile
>
> Huh. This one felt negative at first, but on a moment's thought much less
> so - how often does an evader actually go off table? Very gamey, though -
> adds a much bigger component to the edge-of-the-world effect.
>
>

It does come into play in FAST Warrior with its much smaller table. Or at
least it did in my two solo run throughs today.

John


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

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2742
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Mon Mar 11, 2002 7:32 am    Post subject: Re: Xrules and really important stuff


On Sat, 9 Mar 2002, Holder, Scott <FHWA> wrote:
> 1) Evaders don't ever every come back if they go off the table. It used
> to be only shaken or broken evaders didn't come back. Now it's nobody.
> So all you LC folks out there, rethink your skirmish angles:)Smile:)

Huh. This one felt negative at first, but on a moment's thought much less
so - how often does an evader actually go off table? Very gamey, though -
adds a much bigger component to the edge-of-the-world effect.

> 2) Generals on lone staff elements never test for routing bodies. Wow,
> this came up in every game of ours I guess because Ed and I just
> happened to have generals on single elements.

This sounds smart.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> Egroup Archives All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group