Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 5/5/2002 19:46:07 Central Daylight Time, scud@...
writes:


> Two questions arose from flank charges:
>
> A Roman LHI unit charged some LMI Dacians in the flank. Does this
> cause a Waiver Test for the Dacians? We searched through the rules
> and could not find a reference for waiver testing due to a flank
> charge. Maybe its all those other rule sets we have in our head, it
> seemed odd not to test from a flank shot. The Dacians did break from
> the resulting combat.


No, simply charging into the flank does not cause a waver test. Surprise
(5.5) is a similar cause, but has a very specific set of circumstances.

>
> A Roman LHI unit (fighting Dacian LMI to its front) was charged in
> the flank by Dacian LI. The LHI destroyed the LMI but recoiled from
> the LI. There was a Roman HI unit right next to the LHI.
> Ex.
> si> LHI HI
> lmi
>
> 1. What are the mechanics for a "sideways" recoil?

Same as for a rearward one.

>
> 2. We assumed that the LHI was inhibited from recoiling sideways
> into the HI, thus causing a 2nd disorder. Is this correct?
>

Correct.

J


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

[scott holder]

1. In the FW lists, are the units set? ie, in the Alexandrian
Macedonian list, are you limited to 1 4 element Hypaspist unit, and
1 8 element Phalangite, or can you break up the Phalangites into 2 4
element units?

>Yes. At some point down the line we *might* concoct some alternate
versions of specific lists for those that conceivably had some dual
character to em, but that's a ways off.

2. In converting the WRG Army lists (I use the August, 1981 Book 1),
I presume you multiply the number of figures into elements, and the
number of elements plus command into the unit.

>Correct.

3. I never played Seventh, so I also presume that when it says "up
to 20 regular commands at 10 points" you are limited to no more than
20 units?

>20 *regular* units. If it also allows, for example, 16 Irr units, you
could have, theoretically, 36 units in the entire army. Don't forget
that generals who are part of units eliminate the need for command
points and as such, don't count toward the aforementioned limits.

4. Is 12 the maximum number of elements you can put into a unit?

>That is correct.

[Kelly Wilkinson]

thanks Jon,
For some reason, I had it in my mind that impetuous close order LTS did not
get all 8 figures for charging. Thanks for the clarification.

kelly

JonCleaves@... wrote:

How many figures count fighting when close order LTS,Sh charge
impetuous into any foot unit.>>

8. 9.22

<< Also, are impetuous LTS,Sh considered
steady for purposes of getting all 8 figures to fight verses foot?>>

Impetuous has no impact on how many figures fight. Impetuous has nothing to do
with being steady or not - steady means not disordered (or shaken, which
includes disorder) or broken.

Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

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



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


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now

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

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Oh contrare Meine Freund!
But close enough. Jon defines it exactly in the book. I for some reason
remembered it incorrectly and wasn't sure.
kw

Chris Campbell <HGrueber@...> wrote:
Being Impetuous will affect the Tactical Modifier imposed on your
opponent for facing LTS though, and that -2 is nice!

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
>
> How many figures count fighting when close order LTS,Sh charge
> impetuous into any foot unit.>>
>
> 8. 9.22
>
> << Also, are impetuous LTS,Sh considered
> steady for purposes of getting all 8 figures to fight verses foot?>>
>
> Impetuous has no impact on how many figures fight. Impetuous has
nothing to do with being steady or not - steady means not disordered
(or shaken, which includes disorder) or broken.


Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT

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



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


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now

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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 1/25/2004 18:23:58 Central Standard Time,
oakleaf@... writes:
His Unit + a Detachment of Beserkir (Separated)
2 spear units
LI Unit
So 5 Units in total
I lose 2 spear units leaving 3 in command thus not demoralised if I
then join the Gen and the detachment together suddenly they are
retreat
Surely this is not the case !>>

It is not. They are a single body for many rules purposes, but still two
units for demoralization.
Jon


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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 4/19/2004 23:55:51 Central Daylight Time,
jjmurphy@... writes:
when you decide
it is time to stop futzing around and really learn how to win you
begin at the end of the game and work backwards.>.

Truer words have not recently been spoken. This is, in my opinion, the post
of the week...

Jon


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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 6/1/2004 12:39:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
mark@... writes:

> Jon, come on. Recognize what the real problem is here. You have said
stringently
> and repeatedly that the rules aren't going to change. The
> official rules.>>

That is because that is what the majority of our players want me to say. If all
1000 asked for change, I'd do it.

<< The Cold Wars and NICT-sanctioned rules.>>

Mehthinks that is the real issue. No one wants to playtest because most active
players want to use the same format as the 'big events' and any time spent
playtesting something different would be 'wasted'. Just a guess from what I
have heard as to why no one wants to playtest proposed changes - in fact, many
people have stated this explicitly right here.

Oh, NICT/Cold wars/HCon is set by NASAMW - not us. There is nothing whatsoever
preventing one or more of those tourneys including x-rules except participant
preference.

Jon