Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Greg Regets]

I guess we all have our moment. ;-)

Can I give my touchdown to Texas, when they play USC in the Rose Bowl?





--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
>
> Gosh, Greg, that was a home run...
>
> Oh wait - touchdown. lol
>
> Thanks
> Jon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Regets <greg.regets@g...>
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 15:02:56 -0000
> Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Jon: Swiss recoil issues
>
>
> Good Morning Ed ...
>
> I don't know if you will find this helpful, but with issues like
> this, it has been helpful to me.
>
> Rather than looking at specific troop matchups, one-on-one, look at
> the armies in general to see how they match up.
>
> My new army is Early Byzantine in 15mm, and when the Sassanid
Persian
> list came out, and I looked at the SHC/HC formation that were given
> to that army, I naturally cried foul. These formations are cheaper
> than my "Biscut Eaters", and usually beat them one-on-one. Not very
> historical, to be sure.
>
> Then again, when you match the armies against each other, the Early
> Byzantine is more than a match for the Sassanids, as a matter of
> fact, they usually beat them in battles very similar to the
> historical models ... low casualty conflicts with emphasis on
> maneuver.
>
> If you look at this logically ... FHE has a very difficult job just
> getting these armies to match against historical opponents. If you
> tried to take that to a unit by unit level ... well, that sounds
like
> an impossible task.
>
> In the instance of the Swiss, they would seem to me to match very
> well against all their opponents in the types of battles that
history
> gives us. To me, that passes the acid test.
>
> Thanks ... g
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[joncleaves]

You'll need to...

-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Regets <greg.regets@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 15:25:38 -0000
Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Jon: Swiss recoil issues


I guess we all have our moment. ;-)

Can I give my touchdown to Texas, when they play USC in the Rose Bowl?





--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
>
> Gosh, Greg, that was a home run...
>
> Oh wait - touchdown. lol
>
> Thanks
> Jon
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Regets <greg.regets@g...>
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 15:02:56 -0000
> Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Jon: Swiss recoil issues
>
>
> Good Morning Ed ...
>
> I don't know if you will find this helpful, but with issues like
> this, it has been helpful to me.
>
> Rather than looking at specific troop matchups, one-on-one, look at
> the armies in general to see how they match up.
>
> My new army is Early Byzantine in 15mm, and when the Sassanid
Persian
> list came out, and I looked at the SHC/HC formation that were given
> to that army, I naturally cried foul. These formations are cheaper
> than my "Biscut Eaters", and usually beat them one-on-one. Not very
> historical, to be sure.
>
> Then again, when you match the armies against each other, the Early
> Byzantine is more than a match for the Sassanids, as a matter of
> fact, they usually beat them in battles very similar to the
> historical models ... low casualty conflicts with emphasis on
> maneuver.
>
> If you look at this logically ... FHE has a very difficult job just
> getting these armies to match against historical opponents. If you
> tried to take that to a unit by unit level ... well, that sounds
like
> an impossible task.
>
> In the instance of the Swiss, they would seem to me to match very
> well against all their opponents in the types of battles that
history
> gives us. To me, that passes the acid test.
>
> Thanks ... g
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>








Yahoo! Groups Links






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

[Ed Forbes]

Hello Greg,

I agree with you 100%.

I see these discussions as serving two purposes in my mind. One, they let me
pick up points on the rules that were not obvious,and two, they help crystallize
my thoughts.


Ed
-- "Greg Regets" <greg.regets@...> wrote:
Good Morning Ed ...

I don't know if you will find this helpful, but with issues like
this, it has been helpful to me.
...
Rather than looking at specific troop matchups, one-on-one, look at
the armies in general to see how they match up.
Thanks ... g

[Ed Forbes]

Jon,

Actually, Swiss and German P do not lock in all of the same cases. LMI, LB/CB,
2hcw behind stakes. If the LB/CB roll down and do not disorder the P with only a
-2 in support, the German will not recoil and the Swiss will. P are 3 vs LMI -2
obstacle, -2 support for 12 at -1 which is 9. The LMI against the P are 4 at a 5
vs HI which is 16.

Ed
-- JonCleaves@... wrote:

The Swiss and German P lock in all the same cases. What is different about them
in this hand to hand? They are both (L)HI P as far as the hand to hand is
concerned. Even better to be Swiss as when they lock, they will change to 2HCT
and when they win, they will not be disordered by the obstacle.
Show me numbers, please, to continue this discussion, so I can see where the
error is?

J

-----Original Message-----
From: eforbes100@... <eforbes100@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 20:56:49 GMT
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Jon: Swiss recoil issues


The German P locks in all cases. The Swiss P lock at about 50/50. The Swiss P
charge is about 1/2 as effective as the German in a charge against Burgundian
LB. Not quite the same.

Ed

-- JonCleaves@... wrote:

Both the Germans and Swiss lock in such a fight on even dice.

No change is planned.

Jon







Yahoo! Groups Links






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





Yahoo! Groups Links

[joncleaves]

Ok, Ed, I will get back into this to try and show what the issue is. But if you
insist on using one on one matchups, you have to create the WHOLE situation, not
just a couple numbers.

Both the German and Swiss P (in a 1E wide column) are 12 @ 3 vs LMI. +1 for
charging, -2 for the obstacle and let say for argument, -2 for support. 12 @ 0
is nothing to a 4E LMI LB unit.

The LB unit back to either type of pike is 4 @ 5 (assuming 2HCW), -2 for the P
is 4 at 3. Nothing.

They lock on even dice, if the support does not disorder the P.

The two things you disregarded below are the charging factor for the P and the
-2 vs P for the 2HCW.

This also assumes a 4E Swiss unit, which is not how they are taken, typically.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: eforbes100@... <eforbes100@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 16:10:24 GMT
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Jon: Swiss recoil issues


Jon,

Actually, Swiss and German P do not lock in all of the same cases. LMI, LB/CB,
2hcw behind stakes. If the LB/CB roll down and do not disorder the P with only a
-2 in support, the German will not recoil and the Swiss will. P are 3 vs LMI -2
obstacle, -2 support for 12 at -1 which is 9. The LMI against the P are 4 at a 5
vs HI which is 16.

Ed
-- JonCleaves@... wrote:

The Swiss and German P lock in all the same cases. What is different about them
in this hand to hand? They are both (L)HI P as far as the hand to hand is
concerned. Even better to be Swiss as when they lock, they will change to 2HCT
and when they win, they will not be disordered by the obstacle.
Show me numbers, please, to continue this discussion, so I can see where the
error is?

J

-----Original Message-----
From: eforbes100@... <eforbes100@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 20:56:49 GMT
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Jon: Swiss recoil issues


The German P locks in all cases. The Swiss P lock at about 50/50. The Swiss P
charge is about 1/2 as effective as the German in a charge against Burgundian
LB. Not quite the same.

Ed

-- JonCleaves@... wrote:

Both the Germans and Swiss lock in such a fight on even dice.

No change is planned.

Jon







Yahoo! Groups Links






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





Yahoo! Groups Links










Yahoo! Groups Links






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

[Ed Forbes]

Jon,

That will teach me to look at these problems before my first cup of coffee.

Ed

-- JonCleaves@... wrote:


The two things you disregarded below are the charging factor for the P and the
-2 vs P for the 2HCW.

This also assumes a 4E Swiss unit, which is not how they are taken, typically.

Jon

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Okay,

Here's a really off the wall question. Since the pikes don't end in
contact for the shooting due to the obstacle and lose, does this mean they are
in contact with the troops behind the obstacle? If not would the front rank of
longbowmen be eligible to shoot in support shooting verses the knights?

kelly

"eforbes100@..." <eforbes100@...> wrote:
Jon,

Swiss recoil issues

First, lets take the example of German P attacking Burundian LB behind stakes.
The German HI P charges the LB. The P probably lose due to support shooting at
a 4 and -2 for the stakes. As P, they do not recoil, but are disordered in
place. The next bound supporting Kn charge in without the front rank of LB able
to support shoot as the front rank is a rank eligible to fight. The Kn and P
should win this bound, pushing the LB back disordered. This example will still
work if you substitute the Kn for just about anything for charges in the second
bound.


Now lets take the example of Swiss vs these same Burundian LB behind stakes. The
Swiss charge will probably lose to the LB and will be forced to recoil (or break
off). The LB holds as they are not required to follow up or pursue. Any charge
by supporting Kn or P against the LB the next bound will take full supporting
fire and also probably lose.


As the rule stands, Germans , and other medieval armies with P are better able
to crack a Burundian line than the Swiss. A bit out of the historical results
with armies that all fought each other at one time or another.


Ed




SPONSORED LINKS
Miniature wargaming Wargaming Four horsemen Warrior

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


---------------------------------






---------------------------------
Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

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

[Greg Regets]

It's not that they aren't in contact, its that the shooters across
the stakes don't take the minus for them being in contact. I THINK
this simulates that you are shooting at them while they are working
their way through the stakes, rather than them tearing ass at you.

The lack of ability to support shoot has to do with being in a rank
eligible to fight, not one who is in contact.

Not official of course, just my two cents.

g




--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, kelly wilkinson
<jwilkinson62@y...> wrote:
>
> Okay,
>
> Here's a really off the wall question. Since the pikes don't
end in contact for the shooting due to the obstacle and lose, does
this mean they are in contact with the troops behind the obstacle? If
not would the front rank of longbowmen be eligible to shoot in
support shooting verses the knights?
>
> kelly
>
> "eforbes100@j..." <eforbes100@j...> wrote:
> Jon,
>
> Swiss recoil issues
>
> First, lets take the example of German P attacking Burundian LB
behind stakes.
> The German HI P charges the LB. The P probably lose due to support
shooting at a 4 and -2 for the stakes. As P, they do not recoil, but
are disordered in place. The next bound supporting Kn charge in
without the front rank of LB able to support shoot as the front rank
is a rank eligible to fight. The Kn and P should win this bound,
pushing the LB back disordered. This example will still work if you
substitute the Kn for just about anything for charges in the second
bound.
>
>
> Now lets take the example of Swiss vs these same Burundian LB
behind stakes. The Swiss charge will probably lose to the LB and will
be forced to recoil (or break off). The LB holds as they are not
required to follow up or pursue. Any charge by supporting Kn or P
against the LB the next bound will take full supporting fire and also
probably lose.
>
>
> As the rule stands, Germans , and other medieval armies with P are
better able to crack a Burundian line than the Swiss. A bit out of
the historical results with armies that all fought each other at one
time or another.
>
>
> Ed
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Miniature wargaming Wargaming Four horsemen Warrior
>
> ---------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
> Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Shopping
> Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Greetings Greg,
Vegas says you need it
TD
University of Southern California fencing

-- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Greg Regets" <greg.regets@g...> wrote:
>
> I guess we all have our moment.
>
> Can I give my touchdown to Texas, when they play USC in the Rose Bowl?
>
>

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Thanks Greg,

kelly
&nbsp;
;
& nbsp;
&nbsp;
;
& nbsp;
&nbsp;
;


Greg Regets <greg.regets@...> wrote:
It's not that they aren't in contact, its that the shooters across
the stakes don't take the minus for them being in contact. I THINK
this simulates that you are shooting at them while they are working
their way through the stakes, rather than them tearing ass at you.

The lack of ability to support shoot has to do with being in a rank
eligible to fight, not one who is in contact.

Not official of course, just my two cents.

g




--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, kelly wilkinson
<jwilkinson62@y...> wrote:
>
> Okay,
>
> Here's a really off the wall question. Since the pikes don't
end in contact for the shooting due to the obstacle and lose, does
this mean they are in contact with the troops behind the obstacle? If
not would the front rank of longbowmen be eligible to shoot in
support shooting verses the knights?
>
> kelly
>
> "eforbes100@j..." <eforbes100@j...> wrote:
> Jon,
>
> Swiss recoil issues
>
> First, lets take the example of German P attacking Burundian LB
behind stakes.
> The German HI P charges the LB. The P probably lose due to support
shooting at a 4 and -2 for the stakes. As P, they do not recoil, but
are disordered in place. The next bound supporting Kn charge in
without the front rank of LB able to support shoot as the front rank
is a rank eligible to fight. The Kn and P should win this bound,
pushing the LB back disordered. This example will still work if you
substitute the Kn for just about anything for charges in the second
bound.
>
>
> Now lets take the example of Swiss vs these same Burundian LB
behind stakes. The Swiss charge will probably lose to the LB and will
be forced to recoil (or break off). The LB holds as they are not
required to follow up or pursue. Any charge by supporting Kn or P
against the LB the next bound will take full supporting fire and also
probably lose.
>
>
> As the rule stands, Germans , and other medieval armies with P are
better able to crack a Burundian line than the Swiss. A bit out of
the historical results with armies that all fought each other at one
time or another.
>
>
> Ed
>
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Miniature wargaming Wargaming Four horsemen Warrior
>
> ---------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
>
> Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
>
>
> ---------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Shopping
> Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>






SPONSORED LINKS
Miniature wargaming Wargaming Four horsemen Warrior

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


---------------------------------






---------------------------------
Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping

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

[joncleaves]

No sweat, Ed. I've done it too and its my rulebook...

-----Original Message-----
From: eforbes100@... <eforbes100@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 17:36:50 GMT
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Jon: Swiss recoil issues


Jon,

That will teach me to look at these problems before my first cup of coffee.

Ed

-- JonCleaves@... wrote:


The two things you disregarded below are the charging factor for the P and the
-2 vs P for the 2HCW.

This also assumes a 4E Swiss unit, which is not how they are taken, typically.

Jon







Yahoo! Groups Links






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