Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Ewan McNay]

On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Allan Lougheed wrote:
> Hi Ewan, I reposted my list, so your welcome to have another look if you
> like.
>
> The Idea I have with the Irr A JLS, Sh is that they attack an El unit that
> is already in contact with my spear unit. I've used it successfully against
> Burmese. The Irr A dont get shot because they are essentially in reserve. Of
> course, this depends on my spear block not breaking at contact.

The theory is OK. Let's run the numbers.

I'll assume that you get what you want, which is the El hitting with only
two elements *and* having an element hanging over - which given that the
initiative lies with the mounted is kinda a big assumption.

So: El come in and receive a support shot of 12*-1 = 8. They give out a
support shot of 6@0 = 6.

Then the infantry are 8 @ 3 -1 (facing El pike) = 16.
The El are 10 @ 2, plus 2 crew @2 (I think; doing this from memory...) and
2@3 = 20 + 4 + 5 = 29. Which is 1CPF with the support shot and the foot
are going back disordered.

Then, turn 2: 2HCT guys get 8 @ 0 is 8, as I'm not going to give *them*
an overlap as well - they're being hit by Ghaz infantry or Dailami or some
such. Incoming JLS guys get 5 @ 4 = 15.

El against 2HCT guys are 10@5 and crew now get something like 2@6 and 4@5,
for a total of 66, and an almost certain rout (even if the inf are getting
an overlap, they're taking an uneasy D waver now and in basically dead
shape). Against the incoming JLS guys they get 5@2, 1@2, 1@3 = 15, so
that 6-man unit is now tired and halted. note that this was a dead tie -
but the El are never going to lose overall while the infantry may. And in
bound 3 that 6-man unit is also dead.

I don't normally (ok, ever) run through numbers like this, so someone can
point out any errors. Basic message, though, is that no, I do not think
this foot combo can stand up to Ghaz El.

Your idea of combining three units against onee El unit - well, honestly,
as the El player, just how in heck are you planning to manage that?

>
> What if the Di Warriors and the 2 Tribal Irr A units cooperate vs and El
> unit? The two spear units would be on their own in that situation I guess.
> Is that a better idea?
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ewan McNay" <ewan.mcnay@...>
> To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:49 AM
> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] my 1200 pt Han List
>
>
> >
> > Allan, your list requires too much effort to try to read, I'm afraid. The
> > IrrA guys would be obvious targets for bowfire, and should not be able to
> > dent the El absent very good dice (they're too small).
> >
> > Allan Lougheed wrote:
> >
> >> That looks spookily familiar.
> >>
> >> I think to counter this, I should have aggressively pushed my 2 Infantry
> >> blocks right down the centre, each with a unit of tribal warriors (Irr A
> >> LMI
> >> JLS Sh) for a counter punch. On the widest flank, put my nomadic cavalry
> >> to
> >> delay and avoid dying as you say. On the other flank use the Di warriors,
> >> who might enjoy fighting elephants if they don't waver and some of the LI
> >> B.
> >>
> >> I think the tribal warriors might succeed in doing one of those elephant
> >> units in, combined with the 1.5 ranks of 2HCT.
> >>
> >> Do you think that's a sound plan?
> >>
> >> I'm surprised that spookily passed the spellcheck, I didn't think it was
> >> a
> >> word.
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: <ewan.mcnay@...>
> >> To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
> >> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 8:32 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] my 1200 pt Han List
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Interesting to hear of the Ghaznavid succcess. I was inspired by Mark to
> >>>look through OW and HW, and I think that the list has potential; the
> >>>*BIG*
> >>>problem is the absence of elephant-proofing for the cavalry (although
> >>>they
> >>>can be camel-proofed, despite having no camels in the list). So you are
> >>>essentially forced to have an elephant/infantry centre-wing, and a
> >>>refused
> >>>cavalry wing, I think.
> >>>
> >>>My list on initial construction was something like:
> >>>CinC in 3E unit of IrrB El, P/JLS/B with PA
> >>>Sub ditto with P
> >>>Sub ditto with P
> >>>3x2E Reg B HC L, B, Sh
> >>>6E IrrB LC B, 1/2 JLS, Sh*
> >>>6E and 4E Reg D HI JLS, B, Sh**
> >>>2x4E Reg B LHI, LTS or JLS, B, Sh (likely one of LTS, one of JLS;
> >>>possibly
> >>>two JLS).
> >>>3x4E Reg D LI B, Sh
> >>>some Irr LI B unit, I forget detail.
> >>>
> >>>Aiming to win with El supported by foot, delay on one flank (and fight on
> >>>short frontage, as Allan notes) with cav/LI/maybe a unit of Dailami.
> >>>
> >>>*Thinking likely able to match up against opposing LC and take wavers
> >>>where needed as eager B class.
> >>>
> >>>**My bane of Ghaznavid construction has always been the hideously
> >>>expensive all-HI compulsory foot. I want them as regular to allow for
> >>>regular LI and cav, so this is as cheap as they can be, although only 4E
> >>>are compulsory. They may work well with the El and Dailami, would be the
> >>>hope.
> >>>
> >>>Anyway, thoughts/suggestions for 1600-point Ghaz lists welcome.
> >>>
> >>>Yes, Kelly, I'll get to that 2000 point Khmer at some stage..
> >>>
> >>>E
> >>>
> >>>On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Allan Lougheed wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Hi there everyone, this is the list I took to the Pandemonium tournament
> >>>>this weekend. I finished second, defeating a Hohenstafen Sicillian army
> >>>>and Hoplites. Greg Hauser ran right over me with his Ghazvanid Army. His
> >>>>army had 3 elephant units. I have to give him full credit for how
> >>>>quickly
> >>>>he got into attack position. He was all over me on the second turn. For
> >>>>my part, I misjudged the matchups and tried to cover too much of the
> >>>>board. My army was spread too thin, and I couldn't concentrate my
> >>>>forces.
> >>>>
> >>>>Anyway, I wanted to post my list for comments. I find that I win most of
> >>>>the game in the woods with my Tribal warriors and on the flanks with my
> >>>>nomadic cavalry. My Infantry contributed very little, except to hold a
> >>>>portion of the battlefield. I think this will be a different story at
> >>>>higher point levels. The infantry are in large units to absorb damage
> >>>>and
> >>>>hold a line. For HTH, they can contract frontage and be 1.5 ranks of
> >>>>2HCT. As long as they're winning, their happy.
> >>>>
> >>>>Here is the list;
> >>>>
> >>>> Unit
> >>>> Elements
> >>>>
> >>>> Points
> >>>> Scout
> >>>> Break
> >>>>
> >>>> Han General
> >>>> 2
> >>>> Reg A LCh CB PA Std
> >>>> 156
> >>>> 2
> >>>> 1
> >>>>
> >>>> Shu
> >>>> 8
> >>>> Reg D HI 1/2 2HCT, Sh 1/2 MI CB
> >>>> 138
> >>>> 0
> >>>> 1
> >>>>
> >>>> Shu
> >>>> 8
> >>>> Reg D HI 1/2 2HCT, Sh 1/2 MI CB
> >>>> 138
> >>>> 0
> >>>> 1
> >>>>
> >>>> Yue Warriors
> >>>> 2
> >>>> Irr A LMI JLS, Sh
> >>>> 55
> >>>> 0
> >>>> 1
> >>>>
> >>>> Yue Warriors
> >>>> 2
> >>>> Irr A LMI JLS, Sh
> >>>> 55
> >>>> 0
> >>>> 1
> >>>>
> >>>> Han Skirmishers
> >>>> 4
> >>>> Reg D LI B
> >>>> 26
> >>>> 2
> >>>> 1
> >>>>
> >>>> Han Skirmishers
> >>>> 4
> >>>> Reg D LI B
> >>>> 26
> >>>> 2
> >>>> 1
> >>>>
> >>>> Di Warriors
> >>>> 4
> >>>> Irr C LMI JLS, B, Sh
> >>>> 73
> >>>> 0
> >>>> 1
> >>>>
> >>>> Di Archers
> >>>> 8
> >>>> Irr C LI B
> >>>> 57
> >>>> 4
> >>>> 1
> >>>>
> >>>> Baggage
> >>>> 4
> >>>> Irr D Tr
> >>>> 0
> >>>> 0
> >>>> 0
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Sub Total
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 724
> >>>> 10
> >>>> 4.5
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Xiongnu General
> >>>> 2
> >>>> Irr B HC JLS, B, 1/2 Sh P Std
> >>>> 124
> >>>> 2
> >>>> 1
> >>>>
> >>>> Xiongnu Nobles
> >>>> 2
> >>>> Irr B HC JLS, B, 1/2 Sh
> >>>> 79
> >>>> 2
> >>>> 1
> >>>>
> >>>> Xiongnu Nobles
> >>>> 2
> >>>> Irr B HC JLS, B, 1/2 Sh
> >>>> 79
> >>>> 2
> >>>> 1
> >>>>
> >>>> Xiongnu Archers
> >>>> 6
> >>>> Irr C LC JLS, B, 1/2 Sh
> >>>> 97
> >>>> 18
> >>>> 1
> >>>>
> >>>> Xiongnu Archers
> >>>> 6
> >>>> Irr C LC JLS, B, 1/2 Sh
> >>>> 97
> >>>> 18
> >>>> 1
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Sub Total
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 476
> >>>> 42
> >>>> 2.5
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Total
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 1200
> >>>> 52
> >>>> 7
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

It sure doesn't look good. I would change some of the numbers, for example I
am fighting 1.5 ranks ( I've contracted my frontage) so I have 12 guys
fighting instead of 8. But the elephant still wins so I'm not going bore
anyone with going through the numbers. It sounds a lot like slow lingering
death.

The pike seems to be making the difference. Against my Burmese opponent, he
usually runs a 2E El unit because they are so expensive I suppose. He has no
pike to reduce my factors, and I can usually manage to get those Irr A guys
into the elephants flank. In one battle I broke 2 of his 3 El units in one
turn this way, Honest!

I guess plan B is to launch bags of peanuts from my bolt throwers. Perhaps
this could be an X rule or a new Stratagem.

Greg's suggestion was to bring a lot of converged bow fire and force him to
halt or start taking wavers. Good advice but not easy for Han to do with
mainly crossbow.

So we know how not to do it, what should I be doing instead, any idea's?


Thanks for you comments.

Allan

----- Original Message -----
From: <ewan.mcnay@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:54 PM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] my 1200 pt Han List


>
> On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Allan Lougheed wrote:
>> Hi Ewan, I reposted my list, so your welcome to have another look if you
>> like.
>>
>> The Idea I have with the Irr A JLS, Sh is that they attack an El unit
>> that
>> is already in contact with my spear unit. I've used it successfully
>> against
>> Burmese. The Irr A dont get shot because they are essentially in reserve.
>> Of
>> course, this depends on my spear block not breaking at contact.
>
> The theory is OK. Let's run the numbers.
>
> I'll assume that you get what you want, which is the El hitting with only
> two elements *and* having an element hanging over - which given that the
> initiative lies with the mounted is kinda a big assumption.
>
> So: El come in and receive a support shot of 12*-1 = 8. They give out a
> support shot of 6@0 = 6.
>
> Then the infantry are 8 @ 3 -1 (facing El pike) = 16.
> The El are 10 @ 2, plus 2 crew @2 (I think; doing this from memory...) and
> 2@3 = 20 + 4 + 5 = 29. Which is 1CPF with the support shot and the foot
> are going back disordered.
>
> Then, turn 2: 2HCT guys get 8 @ 0 is 8, as I'm not going to give *them*
> an overlap as well - they're being hit by Ghaz infantry or Dailami or some
> such. Incoming JLS guys get 5 @ 4 = 15.
>
> El against 2HCT guys are 10@5 and crew now get something like 2@6 and 4@5,
> for a total of 66, and an almost certain rout (even if the inf are getting
> an overlap, they're taking an uneasy D waver now and in basically dead
> shape). Against the incoming JLS guys they get 5@2, 1@2, 1@3 = 15, so
> that 6-man unit is now tired and halted. note that this was a dead tie -
> but the El are never going to lose overall while the infantry may. And in
> bound 3 that 6-man unit is also dead.
>
> I don't normally (ok, ever) run through numbers like this, so someone can
> point out any errors. Basic message, though, is that no, I do not think
> this foot combo can stand up to Ghaz El.
>
> Your idea of combining three units against onee El unit - well, honestly,
> as the El player, just how in heck are you planning to manage that?
>
>>
>> What if the Di Warriors and the 2 Tribal Irr A units cooperate vs and El
>> unit? The two spear units would be on their own in that situation I
>> guess.
>> Is that a better idea?
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Ewan McNay" <ewan.mcnay@...>
>> To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:49 AM
>> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] my 1200 pt Han List
>>
>>
>> >
>> > Allan, your list requires too much effort to try to read, I'm afraid.
>> > The
>> > IrrA guys would be obvious targets for bowfire, and should not be able
>> > to
>> > dent the El absent very good dice (they're too small).
>> >
>> > Allan Lougheed wrote:
>> >
>> >> That looks spookily familiar.
>> >>
>> >> I think to counter this, I should have aggressively pushed my 2
>> >> Infantry
>> >> blocks right down the centre, each with a unit of tribal warriors (Irr
>> >> A
>> >> LMI
>> >> JLS Sh) for a counter punch. On the widest flank, put my nomadic
>> >> cavalry
>> >> to
>> >> delay and avoid dying as you say. On the other flank use the Di
>> >> warriors,
>> >> who might enjoy fighting elephants if they don't waver and some of the
>> >> LI
>> >> B.
>> >>
>> >> I think the tribal warriors might succeed in doing one of those
>> >> elephant
>> >> units in, combined with the 1.5 ranks of 2HCT.
>> >>
>> >> Do you think that's a sound plan?
>> >>
>> >> I'm surprised that spookily passed the spellcheck, I didn't think it
>> >> was
>> >> a
>> >> word.
>> >>
>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: <ewan.mcnay@...>
>> >> To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
>> >> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 8:32 PM
>> >> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] my 1200 pt Han List
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>>Interesting to hear of the Ghaznavid succcess. I was inspired by Mark
>> >>>to
>> >>>look through OW and HW, and I think that the list has potential; the
>> >>>*BIG*
>> >>>problem is the absence of elephant-proofing for the cavalry (although
>> >>>they
>> >>>can be camel-proofed, despite having no camels in the list). So you
>> >>>are
>> >>>essentially forced to have an elephant/infantry centre-wing, and a
>> >>>refused
>> >>>cavalry wing, I think.
>> >>>
>> >>>My list on initial construction was something like:
>> >>>CinC in 3E unit of IrrB El, P/JLS/B with PA
>> >>>Sub ditto with P
>> >>>Sub ditto with P
>> >>>3x2E Reg B HC L, B, Sh
>> >>>6E IrrB LC B, 1/2 JLS, Sh*
>> >>>6E and 4E Reg D HI JLS, B, Sh**
>> >>>2x4E Reg B LHI, LTS or JLS, B, Sh (likely one of LTS, one of JLS;
>> >>>possibly
>> >>>two JLS).
>> >>>3x4E Reg D LI B, Sh
>> >>>some Irr LI B unit, I forget detail.
>> >>>
>> >>>Aiming to win with El supported by foot, delay on one flank (and fight
>> >>>on
>> >>>short frontage, as Allan notes) with cav/LI/maybe a unit of Dailami.
>> >>>
>> >>>*Thinking likely able to match up against opposing LC and take wavers
>> >>>where needed as eager B class.
>> >>>
>> >>>**My bane of Ghaznavid construction has always been the hideously
>> >>>expensive all-HI compulsory foot. I want them as regular to allow for
>> >>>regular LI and cav, so this is as cheap as they can be, although only
>> >>>4E
>> >>>are compulsory. They may work well with the El and Dailami, would be
>> >>>the
>> >>>hope.
>> >>>
>> >>>Anyway, thoughts/suggestions for 1600-point Ghaz lists welcome.
>> >>>
>> >>>Yes, Kelly, I'll get to that 2000 point Khmer at some stage..
>> >>>
>> >>>E
>> >>>
>> >>>On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Allan Lougheed wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>>Hi there everyone, this is the list I took to the Pandemonium
>> >>>>tournament
>> >>>>this weekend. I finished second, defeating a Hohenstafen Sicillian
>> >>>>army
>> >>>>and Hoplites. Greg Hauser ran right over me with his Ghazvanid Army.
>> >>>>His
>> >>>>army had 3 elephant units. I have to give him full credit for how
>> >>>>quickly
>> >>>>he got into attack position. He was all over me on the second turn.
>> >>>>For
>> >>>>my part, I misjudged the matchups and tried to cover too much of the
>> >>>>board. My army was spread too thin, and I couldn't concentrate my
>> >>>>forces.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Anyway, I wanted to post my list for comments. I find that I win most
>> >>>>of
>> >>>>the game in the woods with my Tribal warriors and on the flanks with
>> >>>>my
>> >>>>nomadic cavalry. My Infantry contributed very little, except to hold
>> >>>>a
>> >>>>portion of the battlefield. I think this will be a different story at
>> >>>>higher point levels. The infantry are in large units to absorb damage
>> >>>>and
>> >>>>hold a line. For HTH, they can contract frontage and be 1.5 ranks of
>> >>>>2HCT. As long as they're winning, their happy.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Here is the list;
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Unit
>> >>>> Elements
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Points
>> >>>> Scout
>> >>>> Break
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Han General
>> >>>> 2
>> >>>> Reg A LCh CB PA Std
>> >>>> 156
>> >>>> 2
>> >>>> 1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Shu
>> >>>> 8
>> >>>> Reg D HI 1/2 2HCT, Sh 1/2 MI CB
>> >>>> 138
>> >>>> 0
>> >>>> 1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Shu
>> >>>> 8
>> >>>> Reg D HI 1/2 2HCT, Sh 1/2 MI CB
>> >>>> 138
>> >>>> 0
>> >>>> 1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Yue Warriors
>> >>>> 2
>> >>>> Irr A LMI JLS, Sh
>> >>>> 55
>> >>>> 0
>> >>>> 1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Yue Warriors
>> >>>> 2
>> >>>> Irr A LMI JLS, Sh
>> >>>> 55
>> >>>> 0
>> >>>> 1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Han Skirmishers
>> >>>> 4
>> >>>> Reg D LI B
>> >>>> 26
>> >>>> 2
>> >>>> 1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Han Skirmishers
>> >>>> 4
>> >>>> Reg D LI B
>> >>>> 26
>> >>>> 2
>> >>>> 1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Di Warriors
>> >>>> 4
>> >>>> Irr C LMI JLS, B, Sh
>> >>>> 73
>> >>>> 0
>> >>>> 1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Di Archers
>> >>>> 8
>> >>>> Irr C LI B
>> >>>> 57
>> >>>> 4
>> >>>> 1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Baggage
>> >>>> 4
>> >>>> Irr D Tr
>> >>>> 0
>> >>>> 0
>> >>>> 0
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Sub Total
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> 724
>> >>>> 10
>> >>>> 4.5
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Xiongnu General
>> >>>> 2
>> >>>> Irr B HC JLS, B, 1/2 Sh P Std
>> >>>> 124
>> >>>> 2
>> >>>> 1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Xiongnu Nobles
>> >>>> 2
>> >>>> Irr B HC JLS, B, 1/2 Sh
>> >>>> 79
>> >>>> 2
>> >>>> 1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Xiongnu Nobles
>> >>>> 2
>> >>>> Irr B HC JLS, B, 1/2 Sh
>> >>>> 79
>> >>>> 2
>> >>>> 1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Xiongnu Archers
>> >>>> 6
>> >>>> Irr C LC JLS, B, 1/2 Sh
>> >>>> 97
>> >>>> 18
>> >>>> 1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Xiongnu Archers
>> >>>> 6
>> >>>> Irr C LC JLS, B, 1/2 Sh
>> >>>> 97
>> >>>> 18
>> >>>> 1
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Sub Total
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> 476
>> >>>> 42
>> >>>> 2.5
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Total
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> 1200
>> >>>> 52
>> >>>> 7
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Ewan McNay]

Allan - if you can get the matchups you want *and* get troops into the
other guy's flank, it probably doesn't matter what you're actually using .

I did wonder about the 2HCT in two ranks; in fact, the fact that such
troops *would* have a fair chance to throw off elephants is (I suspect)
dodgy anyway. You should not be surprised to lose when your opponent's
shock troops hit your dregs!

I'll try to take a look at the Han at some stage. Certainly a lot more of
the reg LMI guys, I think.

Allan Lougheed wrote:

> It sure doesn't look good. I would change some of the numbers, for example I
> am fighting 1.5 ranks ( I've contracted my frontage) so I have 12 guys
> fighting instead of 8. But the elephant still wins so I'm not going bore
> anyone with going through the numbers. It sounds a lot like slow lingering
> death.
>
> The pike seems to be making the difference. Against my Burmese opponent, he
> usually runs a 2E El unit because they are so expensive I suppose. He has no
> pike to reduce my factors, and I can usually manage to get those Irr A guys
> into the elephants flank. In one battle I broke 2 of his 3 El units in one
> turn this way, Honest!
>
> I guess plan B is to launch bags of peanuts from my bolt throwers. Perhaps
> this could be an X rule or a new Stratagem.
>
> Greg's suggestion was to bring a lot of converged bow fire and force him to
> halt or start taking wavers. Good advice but not easy for Han to do with
> mainly crossbow.
>
> So we know how not to do it, what should I be doing instead, any idea's?
>
>
> Thanks for you comments.
>
> Allan
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <ewan.mcnay@...>
> To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 9:54 PM
> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] my 1200 pt Han List
>
>
>
>>On Tue, 1 Mar 2005, Allan Lougheed wrote:
>>
>>>Hi Ewan, I reposted my list, so your welcome to have another look if you
>>>like.
>>>
>>>The Idea I have with the Irr A JLS, Sh is that they attack an El unit
>>>that
>>>is already in contact with my spear unit. I've used it successfully
>>>against
>>>Burmese. The Irr A dont get shot because they are essentially in reserve.
>>>Of
>>>course, this depends on my spear block not breaking at contact.
>>
>>The theory is OK. Let's run the numbers.
>>
>>I'll assume that you get what you want, which is the El hitting with only
>>two elements *and* having an element hanging over - which given that the
>>initiative lies with the mounted is kinda a big assumption.
>>
>>So: El come in and receive a support shot of 12*-1 = 8. They give out a
>>support shot of 6@0 = 6.
>>
>>Then the infantry are 8 @ 3 -1 (facing El pike) = 16.
>>The El are 10 @ 2, plus 2 crew @2 (I think; doing this from memory...) and
>>2@3 = 20 + 4 + 5 = 29. Which is 1CPF with the support shot and the foot
>>are going back disordered.
>>
>>Then, turn 2: 2HCT guys get 8 @ 0 is 8, as I'm not going to give *them*
>>an overlap as well - they're being hit by Ghaz infantry or Dailami or some
>>such. Incoming JLS guys get 5 @ 4 = 15.
>>
>>El against 2HCT guys are 10@5 and crew now get something like 2@6 and 4@5,
>>for a total of 66, and an almost certain rout (even if the inf are getting
>>an overlap, they're taking an uneasy D waver now and in basically dead
>>shape). Against the incoming JLS guys they get 5@2, 1@2, 1@3 = 15, so
>>that 6-man unit is now tired and halted. note that this was a dead tie -
>>but the El are never going to lose overall while the infantry may. And in
>>bound 3 that 6-man unit is also dead.
>>
>>I don't normally (ok, ever) run through numbers like this, so someone can
>>point out any errors. Basic message, though, is that no, I do not think
>>this foot combo can stand up to Ghaz El.
>>
>>Your idea of combining three units against onee El unit - well, honestly,
>>as the El player, just how in heck are you planning to manage that?
>>
>>
>>>What if the Di Warriors and the 2 Tribal Irr A units cooperate vs and El
>>>unit? The two spear units would be on their own in that situation I
>>>guess.
>>>Is that a better idea?
>>>
>>>
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "Ewan McNay" <ewan.mcnay@...>
>>>To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
>>>Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 8:49 AM
>>>Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] my 1200 pt Han List
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Allan, your list requires too much effort to try to read, I'm afraid.
>>>>The
>>>>IrrA guys would be obvious targets for bowfire, and should not be able
>>>>to
>>>>dent the El absent very good dice (they're too small).
>>>>
>>>>Allan Lougheed wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>That looks spookily familiar.
>>>>>
>>>>>I think to counter this, I should have aggressively pushed my 2
>>>>>Infantry
>>>>>blocks right down the centre, each with a unit of tribal warriors (Irr
>>>>>A
>>>>>LMI
>>>>>JLS Sh) for a counter punch. On the widest flank, put my nomadic
>>>>>cavalry
>>>>>to
>>>>>delay and avoid dying as you say. On the other flank use the Di
>>>>>warriors,
>>>>>who might enjoy fighting elephants if they don't waver and some of the
>>>>>LI
>>>>>B.
>>>>>
>>>>>I think the tribal warriors might succeed in doing one of those
>>>>>elephant
>>>>>units in, combined with the 1.5 ranks of 2HCT.
>>>>>
>>>>>Do you think that's a sound plan?
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm surprised that spookily passed the spellcheck, I didn't think it
>>>>>was
>>>>>a
>>>>>word.
>>>>>
>>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>>From: <ewan.mcnay@...>
>>>>>To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
>>>>>Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 8:32 PM
>>>>>Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] my 1200 pt Han List
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Interesting to hear of the Ghaznavid succcess. I was inspired by Mark
>>>>>>to
>>>>>>look through OW and HW, and I think that the list has potential; the
>>>>>>*BIG*
>>>>>>problem is the absence of elephant-proofing for the cavalry (although
>>>>>>they
>>>>>>can be camel-proofed, despite having no camels in the list). So you
>>>>>>are
>>>>>>essentially forced to have an elephant/infantry centre-wing, and a
>>>>>>refused
>>>>>>cavalry wing, I think.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>My list on initial construction was something like:
>>>>>>CinC in 3E unit of IrrB El, P/JLS/B with PA
>>>>>>Sub ditto with P
>>>>>>Sub ditto with P
>>>>>>3x2E Reg B HC L, B, Sh
>>>>>>6E IrrB LC B, 1/2 JLS, Sh*
>>>>>>6E and 4E Reg D HI JLS, B, Sh**
>>>>>>2x4E Reg B LHI, LTS or JLS, B, Sh (likely one of LTS, one of JLS;
>>>>>>possibly
>>>>>>two JLS).
>>>>>>3x4E Reg D LI B, Sh
>>>>>>some Irr LI B unit, I forget detail.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Aiming to win with El supported by foot, delay on one flank (and fight
>>>>>>on
>>>>>>short frontage, as Allan notes) with cav/LI/maybe a unit of Dailami.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>*Thinking likely able to match up against opposing LC and take wavers
>>>>>>where needed as eager B class.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>**My bane of Ghaznavid construction has always been the hideously
>>>>>>expensive all-HI compulsory foot. I want them as regular to allow for
>>>>>>regular LI and cav, so this is as cheap as they can be, although only
>>>>>>4E
>>>>>>are compulsory. They may work well with the El and Dailami, would be
>>>>>>the
>>>>>>hope.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Anyway, thoughts/suggestions for 1600-point Ghaz lists welcome.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yes, Kelly, I'll get to that 2000 point Khmer at some stage..
>>>>>>
>>>>>>E
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Allan Lougheed wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hi there everyone, this is the list I took to the Pandemonium
>>>>>>>tournament
>>>>>>>this weekend. I finished second, defeating a Hohenstafen Sicillian
>>>>>>>army
>>>>>>>and Hoplites. Greg Hauser ran right over me with his Ghazvanid Army.
>>>>>>>His
>>>>>>>army had 3 elephant units. I have to give him full credit for how
>>>>>>>quickly
>>>>>>>he got into attack position. He was all over me on the second turn.
>>>>>>>For
>>>>>>>my part, I misjudged the matchups and tried to cover too much of the
>>>>>>>board. My army was spread too thin, and I couldn't concentrate my
>>>>>>>forces.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Anyway, I wanted to post my list for comments. I find that I win most
>>>>>>>of
>>>>>>>the game in the woods with my Tribal warriors and on the flanks with
>>>>>>>my
>>>>>>>nomadic cavalry. My Infantry contributed very little, except to hold
>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>portion of the battlefield. I think this will be a different story at
>>>>>>>higher point levels. The infantry are in large units to absorb damage
>>>>>>>and
>>>>>>>hold a line. For HTH, they can contract frontage and be 1.5 ranks of
>>>>>>>2HCT. As long as they're winning, their happy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Here is the list;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unit
>>>>>>> Elements
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Points
>>>>>>> Scout
>>>>>>> Break
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Han General
>>>>>>> 2
>>>>>>> Reg A LCh CB PA Std
>>>>>>> 156
>>>>>>> 2
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Shu
>>>>>>> 8
>>>>>>> Reg D HI 1/2 2HCT, Sh 1/2 MI CB
>>>>>>> 138
>>>>>>> 0
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Shu
>>>>>>> 8
>>>>>>> Reg D HI 1/2 2HCT, Sh 1/2 MI CB
>>>>>>> 138
>>>>>>> 0
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yue Warriors
>>>>>>> 2
>>>>>>> Irr A LMI JLS, Sh
>>>>>>> 55
>>>>>>> 0
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yue Warriors
>>>>>>> 2
>>>>>>> Irr A LMI JLS, Sh
>>>>>>> 55
>>>>>>> 0
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Han Skirmishers
>>>>>>> 4
>>>>>>> Reg D LI B
>>>>>>> 26
>>>>>>> 2
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Han Skirmishers
>>>>>>> 4
>>>>>>> Reg D LI B
>>>>>>> 26
>>>>>>> 2
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Di Warriors
>>>>>>> 4
>>>>>>> Irr C LMI JLS, B, Sh
>>>>>>> 73
>>>>>>> 0
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Di Archers
>>>>>>> 8
>>>>>>> Irr C LI B
>>>>>>> 57
>>>>>>> 4
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Baggage
>>>>>>> 4
>>>>>>> Irr D Tr
>>>>>>> 0
>>>>>>> 0
>>>>>>> 0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sub Total
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 724
>>>>>>> 10
>>>>>>> 4.5
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Xiongnu General
>>>>>>> 2
>>>>>>> Irr B HC JLS, B, 1/2 Sh P Std
>>>>>>> 124
>>>>>>> 2
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Xiongnu Nobles
>>>>>>> 2
>>>>>>> Irr B HC JLS, B, 1/2 Sh
>>>>>>> 79
>>>>>>> 2
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Xiongnu Nobles
>>>>>>> 2
>>>>>>> Irr B HC JLS, B, 1/2 Sh
>>>>>>> 79
>>>>>>> 2
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Xiongnu Archers
>>>>>>> 6
>>>>>>> Irr C LC JLS, B, 1/2 Sh
>>>>>>> 97
>>>>>>> 18
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Xiongnu Archers
>>>>>>> 6
>>>>>>> Irr C LC JLS, B, 1/2 Sh
>>>>>>> 97
>>>>>>> 18
>>>>>>> 1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sub Total
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 476
>>>>>>> 42
>>>>>>> 2.5
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Total
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1200
>>>>>>> 52
>>>>>>> 7
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[joncleaves]

Allan, a week ago I had a Han guards unit destroy (meant literally in game
terms) a Seleucid elephant unit on contact. It certainly can be done, but as
Ewan points out, it is about the combination of forces and tactics and not
isolated matchups.

All I ever use the idea of matchups for is to have a clear vision of what will
happen on even dice if unit X fights unit Y. By knowing this already, I am
thinking about my plan while my opponent is counting the factors.

I know which one-two units I would like to get lined up on an elephant block.
But my opponent is trying to avoid that, so the second order of thinking is what
do I use in my army to isolate the El from the things likely to be supporting
it. Then of course, my opponent is thinking how to stop my support troops from
stopping his support troops...etc, etc, Like fists marching up a bat while
picking sandlot teams, Warrior is about seeing the future and using that vision
to be one step ahead of the enemy...

J

[Ewan McNay]

JonCleaves@... wrote:
> I know which one-two units I would like to get lined up on an elephant
> block. But my opponent is trying to avoid that, so the second order of
> thinking is what do I use in my army to isolate the El from the things
> likely to be supporting it. Then of course, my opponent is thinking
> how to stop my support troops from stopping his support troops...etc,
> etc,

No idea what that analogy of fists and bats is about . But note Jon's
phrasing above: he is already assuming that he will be directing the
battle, his opponent responding. That's the first step to the win.

Which is why in large part so many of us here - *not* Jon, as the
exception - like good light troops, because it aids in getting us to wiin
the battle for that direction.

Excellent example at Bill's: my Sassanids against Jacob's Early
Hungarians. The fact that I have more LI/LC (LI in particular) allows me
to screen off his potent loose and close foot while crashing through his
mounted; the fact that he'd like to get his foot into play (and so any
thoughts of how I would best deal with that matchup) are obviated by
winning the first battle.

Of course, as I have also noted, there is a balance here also. If you
have a ton of even Mongol Reg LC, you can win the 'dirction' battle, but
are still going to run into a problem when your opponent starts 5 32-man
pike units on the centre line supported by peltasts and elephants, even if
- **especially if** - he has *no* LI or LC!

[joncleaves]

No idea what that analogy of fists and bats is about .>>

Its a baseball thing. I am sure that cricket and fox hunting kept you from
learning this vaulable lesson early....lol

<< But note Jon's
phrasing above: he is already assuming that he will be directing the
battle, his opponent responding. That's the first step to the win.>>

Damned straight! Seriously - excellent point by Ewan. Directing the battle is
what it is all about.

<<Which is why in large part so many of us here - *not* Jon, as the
exception - like good light troops, because it aids in getting us to wiin
the battle for that direction.>>

Yes, always the nonconformist, I. Those light troops still have to be in a
command somewhere.... I especially like the part where the enemy's shock attack
comes barreling in against what he thought he wanted to tangle with only to
discover the tangling isn't so easy and the rest of my army is not so pinned as
he thought it was... :)

We do agree that fundamentally in a points-even battle one has to have a strike
element and a means of marginalizing the rest of the other guy's army so it can
be brought to bear.

Unless of course the other guy has 401+ points of light troops trying to pin me
and then there is no reason to fight the rest at all... ;)

J

[Ewan McNay]

I especially like the part where the enemy thinks he is about to kill off
my light troops only to discover that this is not so easy and my strike
forces are about to bring out some stale bread.... for the mopping up...

;)

JonCleaves@... wrote:

> No idea what that analogy of fists and bats is about .>>
>
> Its a baseball thing. I am sure that cricket and fox hunting kept you
> from learning this vaulable lesson early....lol
>
> << But note Jon's phrasing above: he is already assuming that he will
> be directing the battle, his opponent responding. That's the first
> step to the win.>>
>
> Damned straight! Seriously - excellent point by Ewan. Directing the
> battle is what it is all about.
>
> <<Which is why in large part so many of us here - *not* Jon, as the
> exception - like good light troops, because it aids in getting us to
> wiin the battle for that direction.>>
>
> Yes, always the nonconformist, I. Those light troops still have to be
> in a command somewhere.... I especially like the part where the
> enemy's shock attack comes barreling in against what he thought he
> wanted to tangle with only to discover the tangling isn't so easy and
> the rest of my army is not so pinned as he thought it was...
>
> We do agree that fundamentally in a points-even battle one has to have
> a strike element and a means of marginalizing the rest of the other
> guy's army so it can be brought to bear.
>
> Unless of course the other guy has 401+ points of light troops trying
> to pin me and then there is no reason to fight the rest at all...
>
> J
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[joncleaves]

I especially like the part where the enemy thinks he is about to kill off
my light troops only to discover that this is not so easy and my strike
forces are about to bring out some stale bread.... for the mopping up...

;)>>

Well, pardner, there's only one way to resolve this line of thinking, and I do
look forward to that time when it comes.

J

[Ewan McNay]

Likewise.

I would look forward to it even more if my 'practice' for the NICT did not
normally consist of the first two or three games *of* the NICT.. :)

JonCleaves@... wrote:

> I especially like the part where the enemy thinks he is about to kill off
> my light troops only to discover that this is not so easy and my strike
> forces are about to bring out some stale bread.... for the mopping up...
>
> >>
>
> Well, pardner, there's only one way to resolve this line of thinking, and I do
look forward to that time when it comes.
>
> J
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Greg Regets]

Yankee's sure talk a lot of smack ... ;-)

On a more serious note, I do think some players are effective counter-
punchers, and can make you think you are empressing your will on
them, when all you are really doing is walking into a carefully
planned trap.

Warrior and FHE deserve credit for putting everyone in the same page
of rules, and eliminating local interps. It's great to play people
from other areas and see how differently they play. It's even curious
to see lists and comments on the Warrior board from people that you
know win in their own area, but you just wonder if they have seen
some of what happens in other areas, and vice-versa of course.

Thaks ... g


--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> I especially like the part where the enemy thinks he is about to
kill off
> my light troops only to discover that this is not so easy and my
strike
> forces are about to bring out some stale bread.... for the mopping
up...
>
> >>
>
> Well, pardner, there's only one way to resolve this line of
thinking, and I do look forward to that time when it comes.
>
> J

[Todd Kaeser]

I am in agreement with Ewan - I would prefer not having to "warm-up" during the
NICT. I realize it's all about numbers and we've done it many times in the past
with the NICT (being a 4+ round tournament) but I would prefer to run a 4th
round on Sunday vs. having a all day Thursday and Saturday NICT.

Todd K

Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@...> wrote:
Likewise.

I would look forward to it even more if my 'practice' for the NICT did not
normally consist of the first two or three games *of* the NICT.. :)

JonCleaves@... wrote:

> I especially like the part where the enemy thinks he is about to kill off
> my light troops only to discover that this is not so easy and my strike
> forces are about to bring out some stale bread.... for the mopping up...
>
> >>
>
> Well, pardner, there's only one way to resolve this line of thinking, and I do
look forward to that time when it comes.
>
> J
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/

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.



---------------------------------
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web

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

[Ewan McNay]

I'm not in agreement with Todd agreeing with me - I like the NICT
format, really (except that it should also have a Sunday game). I just
wish I had more gaming time the rest of the year...

Todd Kaeser wrote:

> I am in agreement with Ewan - I would prefer not having to "warm-up"
> during the NICT. I realize it's all about numbers and we've done it
> many times in the past with the NICT (being a 4+ round tournament) but
> I would prefer to run a 4th round on Sunday vs. having a all day
> Thursday and Saturday NICT.
>
> Todd K
>
> Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@...> wrote: Likewise.
>
> I would look forward to it even more if my 'practice' for the NICT did
> not normally consist of the first two or three games *of* the NICT..
>
>
> JonCleaves@... wrote:
>
>
>> I especially like the part where the enemy thinks he is about to kill
>> off my light troops only to discover that this is not so easy and my
>> strike forces are about to bring out some stale bread.... for the
>> mopping up...
>>
>> >>
>>
>> Well, pardner, there's only one way to resolve this line of thinking,
>> and I do look forward to that time when it comes.
>>
>> J
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
>
>
> --------------------------------- Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/
>
> 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.
>
>
> --------------------------------- Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
> Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[joncleaves]

Todd, Ewan, et al

I believe you will shortly be receiving a mail asking your opinion
on the NICT format.

Not really something for this group, but thought you should know
that it is about that time.

J

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Ewan,

Your wish can be answered if you take a job here in the Kansas City,
Missouri metropolitan area. We boast one of the largest cells of Warrior players
in the country with the benefit of Jon Cleaves residing within less than 40
minutes and Scott Holder 2.5 or so hours away. Imagine this, we could then boast
having the 2nd, third, and 4th place players to the NICT in one area. Imagine
the "LOVE" that this would inspire for the game! :)

Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@...> wrote:
I'm not in agreement with Todd agreeing with me - I like the NICT
format, really (except that it should also have a Sunday game). I just
wish I had more gaming time the rest of the year...

Todd Kaeser wrote:

> I am in agreement with Ewan - I would prefer not having to "warm-up"
> during the NICT. I realize it's all about numbers and we've done it
> many times in the past with the NICT (being a 4+ round tournament) but
> I would prefer to run a 4th round on Sunday vs. having a all day
> Thursday and Saturday NICT.
>
> Todd K
>
> Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@...> wrote: Likewise.
>
> I would look forward to it even more if my 'practice' for the NICT did
> not normally consist of the first two or three games *of* the NICT..
>
>
> JonCleaves@... wrote:
>
>
>> I especially like the part where the enemy thinks he is about to kill
>> off my light troops only to discover that this is not so easy and my
>> strike forces are about to bring out some stale bread.... for the
>> mopping up...
>>
>> >>
>>
>> Well, pardner, there's only one way to resolve this line of thinking,
>> and I do look forward to that time when it comes.
>>
>> J
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
>
>
> --------------------------------- Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/
>
> 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.
>
>
> --------------------------------- Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
> Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/

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.



---------------------------------
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web

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

Hey:

I don't think we do too bad in the Northeast either for Warrior
players. Two of the Four Horsemen live in Connecticut (Jake and Bill),
and it seems to me that there are quite a few other players in the
area. Two Sundays ago at Bill's house, there must have been at least
20 players show up for at least part of the time, all without some
reasonable driving distance.

I know I'm not a TOG Dinosaur, but I'm up for a game against anyone
anytime I can make it (and anyone playing me can certainly get a quick
ego boost to their Warrior skills).

An Ewan - we have been getting together at Jake's on a fairly regular
basis.

Peter

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, kelly wilkinson
<jwilkinson62@y...> wrote:
> Ewan,
>
> Your wish can be answered if you take a job here in the Kansas
City, Missouri metropolitan area. We boast one of the largest cells of
Warrior players in the country with the benefit of Jon Cleaves
residing within less than 40 minutes and Scott Holder 2.5 or so hours
away. Imagine this, we could then boast having the 2nd, third, and 4th
place players to the NICT in one area. Imagine the "LOVE" that this
would inspire for the game!
>
> Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@y...> wrote:
> I'm not in agreement with Todd agreeing with me - I like
the NICT
> format, really (except that it should also have a Sunday game). I
just
> wish I had more gaming time the rest of the year...
>