Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[captainjack75040]

Afternoon Scotty,

This is the second time I posted this question as the first one hasn't showed up. So, I apologize if the first does finally show up.

Ok, this question has to do with the HK required in the English 100 Years War List. We are required to field 6 elements of Knights with 2/3 being EHK and 1/3 of HK, L. Nowhere in the following Early, Middle or Late Periods do we have the option to upgrade the HK to EHK, SHK, add a Sh, or even drop the requirement of having the HK. Please in your spare time, (yes, I know that is a joke) will you look at this situation and make what you consider a proper change in regard to the HK.

Thanks in advance for your consideration of my question and response to it.

Jack

[Frank Gilson]

Why would you want to drop or upgrade HK L?

One of the great virtues of the 100YWE list are these HK L, which would otherwise be sergeants or hobilars on earlier/other lists.

Would you rather they were required HC L?

I find a unit of Reg B SHK L,Sh/HK L to be quite efficient, both as a mounted attacking unit, or dismounted as SHI/EHI 2HCW/JLS!

You can get entirely SHK units if you want, and can use SHK/HK, or HK units on their own...highly flexible.

Frank

[Ambrose Coddington]

I personally would take Frank's comments on list design of the 100 YWE very seriously.

He has won the teams at least 3 times with them along with Dave Styers.

I have had the dubious distinction of losing in the finals against the very same list three times as well.

Perhaps the answer to your question is to ask for some list creation assistance instead of worrying about list composition.

In my opinion there is nothing wrong with the 100 YWE.

[captainjack75040]

Evening Frank,

In my view I believe the negatives out weigh the positives. Several examples are the following:

1) If using the HK as a second rank for either EHK or SHK and the unit is pushed back and disordered, the unit would fight at the worst troop type. Not a good situation to be fighting shieldless HK against shield opposition.

2) HK which come under missile fire will suffer far more for being shieldless instead of shielded.

3) Shieldless HK against other lance armed cav count shieldless at first contact as well continue h-t-h combat.

The above examples are my main concern and why I seek the ability to upgrade the troop type to a heavier type or be able to give them SHs.

In all things, be well and safe.

Jack

[captainjack75040]

Evening Ambrose,

Being an old gamer starting back in 1967 with boardgames and moving up to miniatures in 1974 I have played WRG 5th, 6th and 7th Ed. with English 100 YR, Nik Byzantine, Late Roman and Early Germans.

I have done well with the English, winning several tournys thru out the 80s and early 90s. My desire to learn Warrior well and be competitive with the English and Byzantine is the upmost in my mind.

Having said the above, I appreciate yours and Frank's views and thoughts and welcome them and any others that people would like to give. It is a sport that is fun to play and also a hobby of history I enjoy.

In all things be well and safe.

Jack

[Frank Gilson]

I appreciate your concerns, and the very same are those I have faced playing with the army. Let me try to address them.

1) If using the HK as a second rank for either EHK or SHK and the unit is pushed back and disordered, the unit would fight at the worst troop type. Not a good situation to be fighting shieldless HK against shield opposition.

Actually, a disordered body counts as the troop type in the 2nd rank (HK in this case) but the shields of the front (SHK L,Sh); rule 9.41. If you look at the factors, most are only 1 different between SHK and HK. Yes, there are some other cases, but your knights should not be getting pushed back disordered by enemy infantry.

2) HK which come under missile fire will suffer far more for being shieldless instead of shielded.

Somewhat more, it is only +1, not far more. Nor should you expose your HK L to shooting if it can be avoided. Note that 100YWE has plenty of its own missile fire and priority for enemy shooting is to shoot at your archers, not at your HK L, which you can arrange by positioning units properly.

3) Shieldless HK against other lance armed cav count shieldless at first contact as well continue h-t-h combat.

True, however I generally run SHK/HK L,Sh/L units which start off quite well against enemy non-elephant mounted. If you chose to run entirely HK L units such would be as reserves that do not lead charges against the enemy, but respond to enemy involvement with your SHK and your archers to strike flanks or tired/disordered/halted enemy units.

In pointing out a potential 100YWE list, I find that the HK L provides the proper amount of cost efficiency to provide the army with enough mounted lancer units overall, in conjunction with enough archers and supporting troops.

Without HK L elements, using entirely SHK L,Sh, you will find you are short one or two knight units...an unacceptable situation very often.

Frank