Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

--- In WarriorRules@y..., JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> JM
>
> I think you have Dave's comments all wrong. His opponent did not
screen the only massed archer unit on the tabel, but instead fought
it with his weakest unit and lost - go figure. Then he did it again.
>

My apologies for my error. I read it as saying his bondi archers did
all the heavy fighting (by his choice) while the huscarls stood
around and watched.

Excuse the tone of the post as well. Didn't mean it that way.


> The armor on the Bondi is an error in the FW list, but possible as
an upgrade to one unit in the main list where the effect of the armor
is diffused. I think we have the Viking list accurately portrayed.
>
> And no list is meeting my approval if someone made them
into 'gods'. The Aztec list will be interesting and capable. But
they will not be 'gods'.
>
> J

I do find it interesting how different rule systems portray troops in
different ways. When I was playing 7th many years ago, the Aztecs
emerged as a great counter to the wedging SHK armies.

Then DBM came out and made them hordes. They might still be able to
overwhelm a knight army with massive numbers, but the odds were not
as good.

I guess I'm going to have to get my brain turned around again to
figure out which armies work for competitions and which don't.
Unfortunately, my Nikephorian Byzanitnes are based for DBM and the
guy I bought them off of used a hard epoxy to hold them to the base.
Unless I want a bunch of footless figures, I won't be rebasing them
for Warrior.

John Meunier

--- In WarriorRules@y..., JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> John
>
> I do not see any reason why you should have to rebase a DBM NByz
army to make a Warrior army out of it. Is there a particular troop
type you are thinking of?
>
> jon


Jon:

Well I can live with the wedged SHC on double depth bases, but the
DBM skutatoi are a line of spears (LTS) and a line of archers on a
double depth (40mm) base.

Fast warrior has them as 2/3 LTS, backed by a third row of Bws.

I guess I could just paint up an independent row of LTS armed guys to
put in front of the double based elements I know how. The depth would
be off for the overall formation, though.

I no longer have the old 6th/7th edition lists, so I don't recall how
the full list has everything listed.

Some of my kavallaroi are also based as two lancer figures and one
horse archer figure on the same base. (As is suggested in DBM).

This isn't tragic, but Nikephorians are one list that has the most
problems between Warrior/DBM/Armati/Might of Arms because off the
DBEs.

John

--- In WarriorRules@y..., JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> John
>
> You don't have to change any of that. Warrior provides for double
depth bases (see end of 2.512 on page 13). The two lancer one horse
archer kavallaroi elements are fine, in fact very aethestic in my
opinion.
>
> If you use three rank deep skutatoi, you may have to make another
rank of LTS in some units, but your double element lts/b stands are
fine for ranks two and three.
>
> We were very sensitive to this issue and I think we have done all
we could. But I will issue further clarifications to make it work
before I am going to ask anyone to rebase.
>
> Jon


Well, chalk up on satisfied customer. Thank you.

Maybe I do have a Warrior army after all. And an excuse to buy
some more lead.

John