Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Codered]

I was wondering how do you guys go about figuring out what lists you want to try out? Is it because you enjoy the history of that nation? Is it because of the style of play you enjoy?

I am fairly new to Warrior and have some friends getting involved looking at various lists and it got me wondering how everyone goes about choosing out of the 200+ available lists.

[AntiokosIII]

Play what you love. I started playing ancients in 1975 or so in WRG 4th edition. I had Seleukids. I have read about the bold, brilliant, and clinically insane Antiokos Megas ever since, and I still have a Seleukid army (plus about 5 others in 25's , over 20 in 15s). Play an army whom you can love even when it loses. Play an army you want to be the world's leading expert on, and then read all about them and BECOME an expert. Play an army you love.

[scott holder]

I guess it depends on what you want out of the game.

There is a definite core group of gamers who pick an army purely on their pereception of how it will perform in an Open tourney environment. Every other consideration.....well, there are no other considerations.

Another group pick an army based on their fascination with the historical period or specific person as was mentioned above. They play simply because they love the history of the army. Okay, a sub-set of this group might also try to take a "B List" period army they love and try to get really good with it and thus compete at the "A List" level.

Yet another group plays armies based on figures. You'd be surprised at the number of players in this category. They play an army purely because they love the figures. This is how I first started playing Khmer, the old Garrison Khmer figs (sadly, no longer available) were dynamite. Same thing with my Sumerians at the other end of the spectrum: the figures are so klunky, they have a real charm about them that somehow applies to the first army in the first army list book.

Much of the above blends together. Let's use Jon's NICT army as an example. He played Welsh, not exactly everybody's first pick of an "A List" NICT army, yet, Jon played it at that level. He picked Welsh because of his family being Welsh. I've seen a lot of that over the years, typically from people of Scottish descent.

So, there's no real straight answer to this. You'll stumble onto what's appealing to you at some point.

scott

[Bill Chriss]

[Mark Stone]

Most dedicated players are have different armies that stem from different motivations.

I have Later Paleologan Byzantine because I love the history behind the army. Same for 1st Crusade. Generally, I'm really into the history of the Eastern Mediterranean from the 1st Crusade to the fall of Constantinople, and I have figures that can come together as pretty much any army in that region/period.

I have 10 Independent States because I believe it's an "A list" army. I know virtually nothing about the history of that period, and that probably won't change. But it is an excellent army in an open tournament format.

One other consideration people have not mentioned is playing style. For me, this has always been a primary consideration in army selection. I started out with a group of guys who were very much into light cavalry and skirmishing tactics, and so I'd often browse through the army list books thinking "What's a really good light cav army?" More recently I've been thinking instead about "What's a really good missile troop army?"

But I have a number of armies that stem from a whimsical interest in a particular tactical idea:
* Granadine, to experiment with lots of Reg B LC JLS,Sh
* Shang Chinese, to see if a chariot army can actually be viable
* Italian Condotta, to see if there's some list containing Swiss that doesn't suck

This kind of experimentation is easier to do in 15mm than in 25mm, and so I suspect that the motivations for putting together an army in 15mm are somewhat different than those in 25mm. But playing style / tactical feel can certainly be an important reason to select an army.


-Mark Stone

[lilroblis]

I like Scott's reply, for me I like a style of army, but I have found that I no longer play my ugly armies, because life is too short to play with ugly lead (given an alternate)
However I find that the army sucks me into reading the background, and there are some armies that are goodbut I would never collect because they just do not touch me eviserally

Robert

[Noel White]

I have only chosen two so far.

I went for Alexandrian Macedonian a few years ago (before the new rules).

1). It has a cool character for a general, and is associated with a dramatic time in history -- in which I was already interested. I wasn't keen on a "minor power" type list.
2). There are many different types of troops within the army -- it is flexible and powerful with combined arms. Good old steady pike-blocks, barbarous yahoos and lots of cavalry so I can charge stuff.
3). There is an excellent selection of miniatures available for all troop types. So it can look good -- really good.

The second army I chose was Late Achaemenid Persian. You can probably guess why. I needed a contemporary enemy for my Alex. The persians fit the bill. Though I feel they are somewhat underated in the Warrior lists, they are very flexible and entertaining (but bloody hard to paint).

I say pick something that is fun, rather than "killer in tournaments". That
is the point of playing with little soldiers. Besides, you'll lose many games before you get the hang of it.

Noel.

[Rhoxolani]

I choose a list because of the following reasons:

-The army and or period apeals to me.
-The Army is colourful in its make up (various troop types).
-Figures available (this is of course a practical reason), most of the time I will search the figures.
-As oponent fot an army I already have

The Armies that are on my "Armies to get list" are:

-Mithridatic: lots of Sarmatians, peltasts, Thracians and Armenians.
-Burgundian Ordnance: Knights in plate, and cause they are from burgundy.
-Armenians: Armenian cataphracts.
-An Sarmatian Army: I lo0ve Sarmatian cavalry
-An hellenistic period Army, cause we are playing ancients.


I I will ever buy these Armies I do not know But I'm already slowly building on the Mithridatic Army.

I do not buy an Army that is a killer Army but I try to make the best out of the Army that I choose.

Regards Friso

[jamiepwhite]

I've got five armies at home, here's why I chose them

1. Late Roman - I find the army and period interesting, so over the years I've accumulated the figs and built a huge collection of nearly all Essex late Roman figs.

2. Khmer - I was at a Historicon browsing the flea market and found a box of Khmer lead for $50. A whole 25mm army for $50, I didn't worry about how good it was. I've found that the Irregular figs are posed more nicely than the Essex figs but the figs aren't as tough.

3. Medieval Portuguese, Spanish, Greandine, 100 Years war, etc. I thought I would build a knight army and the figs for this list let you pretend they are many different lists.

4. Greek - Friend who's stopped playing left his army box at my house

5. Inca - Won a gift certificate at Historicon and Ral Partha was having a clearance sale on Inca figs. On sale and with a gift certificate, I think I spent about $50 dollars out of pocket.

Not the same reasons as everyone else, but thisis how I've collected different armies.

Jamie