Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

I have revised the examples below

Patrick Byrnes wrote:


> 1. A Unit of IrrC LMI JLS,SH (not previously damaged) receives 3 CPF from
prep
> shooting. They test for waiver because of 2 CPF and can not choose a
response. >>

Why can't they?

My previous answers otherwise hold.

Is it me. I can not find anywhere where it say IRG C LMI JLS SH have to respond if shot at unless shot by HG or Artillary. I thought he was talking about MTD??
Robert.

--- In WarriorRules@y..., parrishbob@a... wrote:
> Is it me. I can not find anywhere where it say IRG C LMI JLS SH
have to
> respond if shot at unless shot by HG or Artillary. I thought he was
talking
> about MTD??
> Robert.


Simple.
Look through 11.1 Results of Prep Shooting. Irregular LMI (and
indeed Irregular LHI) can only CHOOSE to avoid a waver test if they
happen to be: (Bullet 1) in skirmisher formation; or (Bullet 4)
Irregular A.

Under no other conditions are Irregular loose foot given a way to
avoid a waver test from 2 CPF prep shooting.

The condition you refer to is Bullet 2, which ONLY applies to:
"...close or REGULAR LOOSE formation foot..."

QUESTION JON (Bullet 2):
This condition requires the body to count shielded to ALL shooting.
In circumstances where the 2 CPF is taken from some shielded PLUS some
shieldless shooting (which includes HG, Art, fire, naptha, since no
troops count shielded to these weapons - Note C, 8.92), my friends
and I have always ruled it triggers a waver, since shields do not
protect from ALL the shooting. Is this the correct reading?

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 4/14/2001 08:04:44 Central Daylight Time, quirk@...
writes:

<< QUESTION JON (Bullet 2):
This condition requires the body to count shielded to ALL shooting.
In circumstances where the 2 CPF is taken from some shielded PLUS some
shieldless shooting (which includes HG, Art, fire, naptha, since no
troops count shielded to these weapons - Note C, 8.92), my friends
and I have always ruled it triggers a waver, since shields do not
protect from ALL the shooting. Is this the correct reading?
>>

Yep.

Dear Jon,

a lot of this may be covered in my earlier posting on "Prep Shooting
..."


--- In WarriorRules@y..., JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> <<To make this clear, you could reword the bold entry at the top of
the waver test listings in 5.141 from: "Bodies take waver tests in the
> following situations:" to:"Bodies immediately take wavering tests
for each and every of the
> following situations:">>
>
> It will be something like that.

Good. In retrospect, I would have shouted a few words as follows:
"Bodies IMMEDIATELY take waver tests for EACH AND EVERY of the
following situations:"

You could then also add under 11.1 RESULTS OF PREP SHOOTING:

"If a chosen response is INVALIDATED LATER THAT BOUND before it can be
enacted, the wavering test becomes immediately obligatory."

This prevents weaseling out of the 2 CPF result on the basis that
"Well I chose when I had to (i.e. during prep shooting), so it's not
my fault that later circumstances prevent me from doing so..."

It also makes clear that if, during prep shooting results, you don't
immediately take the "Harm Minimisation" policy, you IMMEDIATELY test
wavering .



> <<snipped long recommendation to look at 240 pace general in line of
command waver to LOS>>
>
> Not changing it.

Cool, but how about guidelines for dealing with generals who respond
to events that they strictly cannot perceive? This was the thrust of
my role-play of "How does your general know about that?" Response:
"Oh, it's out of sight, is it? - FIRST you must dice to receive a
communication..." Then, on receiving it, you must transmit the
responding message... Two CinCs CAN conspire to forget about the "fog
of war" effect... How do YOU deal with this complicity when there is
no independant umpire?

I know this is a complication, but when you've played in multi-player
games where to simply ask for another drink is to trigger a
communication prompt, it becomes critical.

>
> <<Say I am initially steady, but take 3 CPFs from support shooting.
Disorder (but not fatigue) precedes hand-to-hand (11.2) Now in
hand-to-hand I
> am lucky enough to not take twice as many hand-to-hands, so I don't
break, but I'm unfortunate enough to take ANOTHER 3 CPFs from h-2-h as
> well. Is the 3 CPF hand-to-hand result a second cause of disorder,
causing a waver test?>>
>
> Yes. Waver test.

Cool. I see in another of your communications that you will detail
what results are "Combat Results". I hope it will clarify my unlikely
though experienced situation (it was prep-shot-disordered SHK L SH
impetuously charging English LB 2HCW with extra units eligible to
support shoot the knights - very messy! The knights took 3 CPF support
shooting and failed the "Become disordered combat result whilst
already disordered" and then took another 3 CPF from hand-to-hand -
blood and guts all over the place!!!! A great wargame!!!!!!!!)


>
> <<What if I am disordered BEFORE receiving 3 CPF support shooting??
We read it (11.2) that a wavering test for 3 CPFs support shooting
ALONE
> would apply BEFORE hand-to-hand combat is adjudicated.>>
>
> Correct

My thoughts exactly.

See my comments above about your promised listing as to what
constitutes a combat result, and (most importantly) when it is tested
for.


>
> <<...if my 2 CPF response is to charge,
> and I CHOOSE to do this FIRST before I waver for "become disordered
combat result when already disordered">>
>
> You can't choose that yet. You have to waver first. Wavers are
immediate and suspend game functions (including prep shooting
responses) until they have been rolled and resolved.


This screws you up. You claim that waver tests are immediate. Yet the
2 CPF is a choice. When is the choice made? Your above reply
suggests it is not immediate after all.

But assuming I take your above response as gospel, then before I
"choose that yet..." (i.e. to respond to 2 cpf with a charge) I have
to waver for 3 CPF disorder... OK I see it now, if I'm not already
disordered the 3 CPF result is irrelevant, in which case the 2 CPF
THEN cuts in... But that's a voluntary test, so when do I choose, and
I've sent another email on this subject...

>
> <<...should I fail the disorder waver, I must then test for NOW
being unable to respond with a charge
> to 2 CPF?>>
>
> Possibly. Some troops could still halt and comply with their
responses, for example.

My fault. I was referring to troops that respond to CPF prep shoot
with a charge. You are quite right that other troops have "Harm
Minimisation Strategies" available.

I am however disturbed by your failure to address the real issue,
which is the timing of a CHOSEN waver test vis-a-vis an OBLIGATORY
wavering test.

>
> <<One point of contention for the wavering tests. For Routing
Friends -
> change the parenthesised wording to:
> (Exception: if the router/broken body is a body entirely of LI,
> E-class troops, expendables)>>
>
> Damn, thought I did that.
>
> Jon

Sorry, Jon. Almost, but not quite.

I quote the download available February 2001. The parenthetical clause
(5.141) reads: (exceptions: bodies entirely of LI or E class,
expendables).

Some pedantic turds would read this to say the TESTING body is exempt
if it is a body entirely of LI or E class, expendables. Whereas the
intention is that the routing/broken body is a body entirely of LI or
E class, expendables. Or am I misinterpreting turd?

Terry:
Say I am initially steady, but take 3 CPFs from support shooting.
Disorder (but not fatigue) precedes hand-to-hand (11.2) Now in
hand-to-hand I am lucky enough to not take twice as many
hand-to-hands, so I don't break, but I'm unfortunate enough to take
ANOTHER 3 CPFs from h-2-h as well. Is the 3 CPF hand-to-hand result a
second cause of disorder, causing a waver test?>>
> Jon:
> Yes. Waver test.

Terry:
Cool.

What if I am disordered BEFORE receiving 3 CPF support shooting??
We read it (11.2) that a wavering test for 3 CPFs support shooting
ALONE would apply BEFORE hand-to-hand combat is adjudicated.>>

> Jon:
> Correct

Terry:
Cool, but if the disordered charger takes 3 CPFs from support shooting
and fails the waver, what tactical factors can he count?

Well if this is the case and it does sound plausible I hate to tell how many years I have been doing it wrong(?). Was there a clarifing interp ever published? I have been out of the loop since 7.4. Perhaps a line in the new rules stating that Irregular close or loose formation foot must test waiver Others May..
Thanks.
Robert P.

[joncleaves]

<< This screws you up. You claim that waver tests are immediate. Yet the
2 CPF is a choice. When is the choice made? Your above reply
suggests it is not immediate after all.>>

???? The choice is made after calculating CPF from prep shooting. Just like
it always has.

[joncleaves]

<< Cool, but if the disordered charger takes 3 CPFs from support shooting
and fails the waver, what tactical factors can he count? >>


Everything but the fatigue from SS.

[joncleaves]

The only ways Irr loose foot can get out of a 2CPF from prep waver are to be
skirmishing or Irr A. I'm pretty sure it has always been that way, but it
sure is in Warrior.

[joncleaves]

<< > << Cool, but if the disordered charger takes 3 CPFs from support
shooting
> and fails the waver, what tactical factors can he count? >>
>
>
> Everything but the fatigue from SS.
>
He doesn't count impetuous even if the original charge was impetuous,
because shaken troops can't be impetuous. Oh, and he counts shaken. >>

Ok, guess I did not understand the question. The above is correct, though.
Jon

On Sat, 14 Apr 2001 JonCleaves@... wrote:

> << Cool, but if the disordered charger takes 3 CPFs from support shooting
> and fails the waver, what tactical factors can he count? >>
>
>
> Everything but the fatigue from SS.
>
He doesn't count impetuous even if the original charge was impetuous,
because shaken troops can't be impetuous. Oh, and he counts shaken.


Mark

Mark Stone || strider@... || http://digitalpilgrim.com
"A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing
left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."
-Antoine de Saint-Exupery

[Phil Gardocki]

Does he count charging?
Phil



<< > << Cool, but if the disordered charger takes 3 CPFs from support shooting >  and fails the waver, what tactical factors can he count? >>
> > > Everything but the fatigue from SS.
> He doesn't count impetuous even if the original charge was impetuous,
because shaken troops can't be impetuous. Oh, and he counts shaken. >>

Ok, guess I did not understand the question.  The above is correct, though.
Jon

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

Ok, let's do this step wise and see if it makes sense.

EHK vs foot.
Assumptions.
1.Foot are close and have a missile weapon and LTS (let's stack the
odds here)
2. No terrain features for higher/lower etc.

Prep shoot.
Foot shoots EHK for 3cpf. EHK become disordered (3cpf) and decide to
charge self prompted (2cpf table) rather than waver test.

Charge declarations.
EHK declare impetuous charge.

Combat
Foot support shoot EHK and roll +2. This negates the -2 for
target ending in combat. EHK suffer another 3cpf. This is a SECOND
disorder and must be diced for immediatly. EHK roll a "1" and fail.
So they shake but end in contact.

H-t-H
EHK count
L vs foot weapon factor,
+2 for charging (no +1 for impet due to shake.)
EHK deduct
-2 for facing LTS
-2 for shaken,
-1 for being disordered,
-1 for being tired on contact (+3 fatigue from the PREP shoot, +2 for
charge, +1 for being impet, +1 for being Knights)
-3 for the support shoot (-1 for each CPF from support shooting)

Results.
If the knights get another disorder result from the H-t-H, they do not
test as it is part of the Support shoot/H-t-H result. If they receive
3cpf and twice as many, they rout. No matter what happens now, the
EHK are on their way home. It's only a question of when.


--- In WarriorRules@y..., PHGamer@a... wrote:
> Does he count charging?
> Phil
>
>
>
> > << > << Cool, but if the disordered charger takes 3 CPFs from
support
> > shooting
> > > and fails the waver, what tactical factors can he count? >>
> > >
> > >
> > > Everything but the fatigue from SS.
> > >
> > He doesn't count impetuous even if the original charge was
impetuous,
> > because shaken troops can't be impetuous. Oh, and he counts
shaken. >>
> >
> > Ok, guess I did not understand the question. The above is
correct, though.
> > Jon
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com
> >
> >
> >

[joncleaves]

Yes, he counts charging.