Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Ewan McNay]

It occurred to me, as I was looking to choose a Theme army, that this would make a good exercise for a newish player interested in army list composition. The limited set of lists - see http://www.nasamw.org/warrior_historicon_theme_army_li.htm#2006%20-%20High%20Medieval - is fairly large, but not unmanageable (and, inter alia, I note that Hussites are allowed - joy ); and it offers a wide variety of armies from barbarian foot through solid trained foot to massed knights to light cav to massed longbowmen.

The limitations - e.g. no elephants! - mean that list *design* is also a little simpler, if not yet simple. So: pick four or five that appeal, work out some 1600 point lists, see how they compare. How will they face up to opposing SHK? LB? spear wall? What will they try to kill of those, and how?

Anyway, just a thought. [For context, I imagine that I'll run through maybe 20 lists before picking an army to play in this Theme. Some of that is figure-dependent, of course; Swiss are going to be killer now that they're freed from the ludicrous limitations of command factors in the old lists, but I have exactly zero figures that could plausibly pretend to be Swiss pikemen...

[Ambrose Coddington]

My process to army selection usually follows a much different path. I look at a bunch of lists with troops that I like. Then I try to figure out what I intend to do as an overall plan. Then I write a few lists accordingly. If the army falls short I move on to the next army list and try again.

But I do tend to look for things that are outside of the usual sequence of play in an effort to bend the factor tables in a way that is hopefully unexpected.

Ambrose