Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

John, Greg, Kelly, Jar-Jar Binks,

Guys I thank you for the online complements one and
all. I'm not sure if I'm crazy, evil, or any of the
other swell things associated with my name recently,
but I am sure of one truth reguarding me: To know me
is to remain in a state of confusion. I like it that
way, and it comes natural. :)

Warrior Content:

In deploying Normans I have set up with close order in
front of my HC. This precludes any HC marches in the
first bound, but then the close order foot will only
move 2 segments. With a few LI and LC on the flanks
to stop the enemy at a reasonable distance, the close
order will not be pinned to less than 2 segments. In
the second bound, I can then march the HC forward to
emplace left/right/center as needs dictate. In bound
three they would be close enough to charge. I can't
forsee anyone getting anything that would break 6E HI
on contact so in my estimation, bound three for HC
should work out fine.

Does anyone have any commentary to make on the above
strategem? All comments welcome :)

clone
tk5212




=====
Wake up and smell the Assyrians

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

[Greg Regets]

The only thing that bugs me about this strategy is the decision to not force
march your infantry to give your HC more room to maneuver, specifically in bound
2, march segment 4. When you march HC in bound 2, you will have to wheel one way
or the other in march segment 4 if your intent is to maneuver to either flank,
and guys marching 3, or with more room to maneuver, will get to watch you do it.
The risk is that they will choose not to play with your infantry and pile up on
your cavarly on one flank or the other, or throw some crap at your cavalry and
pile on somewhere else. If you force march your main body of infantry, your
first HC march segment can then be straight forward, which will do a much better
job disguising your intent.

This is just my opinion, of course.

Greg

----- Original Message -----
From: Wanax Andron
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 10:44 AM
Subject: [WarriorRules] All this flattery and a bonus blather


John, Greg, Kelly, Jar-Jar Binks,

Guys I thank you for the online complements one and
all. I'm not sure if I'm crazy, evil, or any of the
other swell things associated with my name recently,
but I am sure of one truth reguarding me: To know me
is to remain in a state of confusion. I like it that
way, and it comes natural. :)

Warrior Content:

In deploying Normans I have set up with close order in
front of my HC. This precludes any HC marches in the
first bound, but then the close order foot will only
move 2 segments. With a few LI and LC on the flanks
to stop the enemy at a reasonable distance, the close
order will not be pinned to less than 2 segments. In
the second bound, I can then march the HC forward to
emplace left/right/center as needs dictate. In bound
three they would be close enough to charge. I can't
forsee anyone getting anything that would break 6E HI
on contact so in my estimation, bound three for HC
should work out fine.

Does anyone have any commentary to make on the above
strategem? All comments welcome :)

clone
tk5212




=====
Wake up and smell the Assyrians

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

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.



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

I see your point. Here are two further
considerations. 1. All of my cavalry
are...teehee...IrrgA HC L/sh. So I kinda want the
enemy there. the infantry will work to channel the
enemy into their front anyway. 2. By concentrating on
my end of the board, not only will the enemy have to
cover more surface area with their army (outside arc)
but the tournament being 1200pt will mean he will have
to be weaker facing my infantry (3x6E) IrrC/D Hi/Mi
J/sh which frees them up to push. My hope is to
create a bubble in the enemy line. 3. By remaining
on my side of the board I don't have to reach so far
:)

Seriously, I've a tactical consideration that I won't
go into here...might be spys about...that also limits
my willingness to advance too far forward. Otherwise,
I just send the LC and LI out to stop all enemy
marches near the centerline.

clone tk5212

--- "Greggory A. Regets" <gar@...> wrote:
> The only thing that bugs me about this strategy is
> the decision to not force march your infantry to
> give your HC more room to maneuver, specifically in
> bound 2, march segment 4. When you march HC in bound
> 2, you will have to wheel one way or the other in
> march segment 4 if your intent is to maneuver to
> either flank, and guys marching 3, or with more room
> to maneuver, will get to watch you do it. The risk
> is that they will choose not to play with your
> infantry and pile up on your cavarly on one flank or
> the other, or throw some crap at your cavalry and
> pile on somewhere else. If you force march your main
> body of infantry, your first HC march segment can
> then be straight forward, which will do a much
> better job disguising your intent.
>
> This is just my opinion, of course.
>
> Greg
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Wanax Andron
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 10:44 AM
> Subject: [WarriorRules] All this flattery and a
> bonus blather
>
>
> John, Greg, Kelly, Jar-Jar Binks,
>
> Guys I thank you for the online complements one
> and
> all. I'm not sure if I'm crazy, evil, or any of
> the
> other swell things associated with my name
> recently,
> but I am sure of one truth reguarding me: To know
> me
> is to remain in a state of confusion. I like it
> that
> way, and it comes natural.
>
> Warrior Content:
>
> In deploying Normans I have set up with close
> order in
> front of my HC. This precludes any HC marches in
> the
> first bound, but then the close order foot will
> only
> move 2 segments. With a few LI and LC on the
> flanks
> to stop the enemy at a reasonable distance, the
> close
> order will not be pinned to less than 2 segments.
> In
> the second bound, I can then march the HC forward
> to
> emplace left/right/center as needs dictate. In
> bound
> three they would be close enough to charge. I
> can't
> forsee anyone getting anything that would break 6E
> HI
> on contact so in my estimation, bound three for HC
> should work out fine.
>
> Does anyone have any commentary to make on the
> above
> strategem? All comments welcome
>
> clone
> tk5212
>
>
>
>
> =====
> Wake up and smell the Assyrians
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>


=====
Wake up and smell the Assyrians

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

[Greg Regets]

I think tactical advice given by anyone will always reflect opinions formed by
games in their local area. In our area, the more experienced players tend to
play 'knight and shoot' armies, not because they are superior on the table, but
because that's what we seem to historically prefer.

Clearly your tactic would be difficult to pull off against that style of army,
as you will need your up rolls to get even on the factor chart against knights
and the foot archers, well, as the guy playing your army, you know fully well
what foot archers will give you.

Our style of armies tend to force HC/foot type armies to use the infantry in
close support of the cavalry, or face the music. :-)

Good luck though and quite frankly, its nice to see other guys playing "real
man' armies, and not armies dominated by over-rated things like elephants,
expendables and chariots!

Was that out loud? ~laughs~

Greg


----- Original Message -----
From: Wanax Andron
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 12:18 PM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] All this flattery and a bonus blather


I see your point. Here are two further
considerations. 1. All of my cavalry
are...teehee...IrrgA HC L/sh. So I kinda want the
enemy there. the infantry will work to channel the
enemy into their front anyway. 2. By concentrating on
my end of the board, not only will the enemy have to
cover more surface area with their army (outside arc)
but the tournament being 1200pt will mean he will have
to be weaker facing my infantry (3x6E) IrrC/D Hi/Mi
J/sh which frees them up to push. My hope is to
create a bubble in the enemy line. 3. By remaining
on my side of the board I don't have to reach so far
:)

Seriously, I've a tactical consideration that I won't
go into here...might be spys about...that also limits
my willingness to advance too far forward. Otherwise,
I just send the LC and LI out to stop all enemy
marches near the centerline.

clone tk5212

--- "Greggory A. Regets" <gar@...> wrote:
> The only thing that bugs me about this strategy is
> the decision to not force march your infantry to
> give your HC more room to maneuver, specifically in
> bound 2, march segment 4. When you march HC in bound
> 2, you will have to wheel one way or the other in
> march segment 4 if your intent is to maneuver to
> either flank, and guys marching 3, or with more room
> to maneuver, will get to watch you do it. The risk
> is that they will choose not to play with your
> infantry and pile up on your cavarly on one flank or
> the other, or throw some crap at your cavalry and
> pile on somewhere else. If you force march your main
> body of infantry, your first HC march segment can
> then be straight forward, which will do a much
> better job disguising your intent.
>
> This is just my opinion, of course.
>
> Greg
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Wanax Andron
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 10:44 AM
> Subject: [WarriorRules] All this flattery and a
> bonus blather
>
>
> John, Greg, Kelly, Jar-Jar Binks,
>
> Guys I thank you for the online complements one
> and
> all. I'm not sure if I'm crazy, evil, or any of
> the
> other swell things associated with my name
> recently,
> but I am sure of one truth reguarding me: To know
> me
> is to remain in a state of confusion. I like it
> that
> way, and it comes natural.
>
> Warrior Content:
>
> In deploying Normans I have set up with close
> order in
> front of my HC. This precludes any HC marches in
> the
> first bound, but then the close order foot will
> only
> move 2 segments. With a few LI and LC on the
> flanks
> to stop the enemy at a reasonable distance, the
> close
> order will not be pinned to less than 2 segments.
> In
> the second bound, I can then march the HC forward
> to
> emplace left/right/center as needs dictate. In
> bound
> three they would be close enough to charge. I
> can't
> forsee anyone getting anything that would break 6E
> HI
> on contact so in my estimation, bound three for HC
> should work out fine.
>
> Does anyone have any commentary to make on the
> above
> strategem? All comments welcome
>
> clone
> tk5212
>
>
>
>
> =====
> Wake up and smell the Assyrians
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
> http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been
> removed]
>
>


=====
Wake up and smell the Assyrians

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

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.



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

--- "Greggory A. Regets" <gar@...> wrote:

> Clearly your tactic would be difficult to pull off
> against that style of army, as you will need your up
> rolls to get even on the factor chart against
> knights and the foot archers, well, as the guy
> playing your army, you know fully well what foot
> archers will give you.

I'm most likely going to see Selucids (E, Pk, HC and
LC), Viking (all that LMI sh*t), some Burmesish crazy
number of men on elephant army, a couple of kniggits
and maybee 3 looser army types like mine :)

I can't face anything head to head with my army, so I
need to channel them into killzones. I have archers,
close order foot, HC, LC, and some LHI/LMI stuff.
Mostly, my plan is to get the enemy mounted and
elephants cluttered, then launch the trademark "CHARGE
OF THE NORMAN HC" and see what happens. I don't have
an army that can win through slow attrition, and I
most fear foot archers. I have to win big or loose
big and usually on bold gambits. however, I have a
few tricks up my sleeve. if successful, I'll do a
battle report. If not, I'll pretend someone else did
a battle report :)

If I had a copy of the 1st crusader list, I'd run
that. My plan for the crusaders would be to use the
IrrC MI B/J/sh as the centerpeice of the attack and
bulldoze them into the enemy mounted dashing off
mounted charges to either flank of the MI, and use the
other close order LTS armed foot to push push push.
However, I will be without the fearless Frankish J
armed archers and the lovable but goofy pilgrims this
goround.

I'll let you know what happens in any event.

boyd


>
> Our style of armies tend to force HC/foot type
> armies to use the infantry in close support of the
> cavalry, or face the music.
>
> Good luck though and quite frankly, its nice to see
> other guys playing "real man' armies, and not armies
> dominated by over-rated things like elephants,
> expendables and chariots!
>
> Was that out loud? ~laughs~
>
> Greg
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Wanax Andron
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 12:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] All this flattery and
> a bonus blather
>
>
> I see your point. Here are two further
> considerations. 1. All of my cavalry
> are...teehee...IrrgA HC L/sh. So I kinda want the
> enemy there. the infantry will work to channel
> the
> enemy into their front anyway. 2. By
> concentrating on
> my end of the board, not only will the enemy have
> to
> cover more surface area with their army (outside
> arc)
> but the tournament being 1200pt will mean he will
> have
> to be weaker facing my infantry (3x6E) IrrC/D
> Hi/Mi
> J/sh which frees them up to push. My hope is to
> create a bubble in the enemy line. 3. By
> remaining
> on my side of the board I don't have to reach so
> far
>
>
> Seriously, I've a tactical consideration that I
> won't
> go into here...might be spys about...that also
> limits
> my willingness to advance too far forward.
> Otherwise,
> I just send the LC and LI out to stop all enemy
> marches near the centerline.
>
> clone tk5212
>
> --- "Greggory A. Regets" <gar@...> wrote:
> > The only thing that bugs me about this strategy
> is
> > the decision to not force march your infantry to
> > give your HC more room to maneuver, specifically
> in
> > bound 2, march segment 4. When you march HC in
> bound
> > 2, you will have to wheel one way or the other
> in
> > march segment 4 if your intent is to maneuver to
> > either flank, and guys marching 3, or with more
> room
> > to maneuver, will get to watch you do it. The
> risk
> > is that they will choose not to play with your
> > infantry and pile up on your cavarly on one
> flank or
> > the other, or throw some crap at your cavalry
> and
> > pile on somewhere else. If you force march your
> main
> > body of infantry, your first HC march segment
> can
> > then be straight forward, which will do a much
> > better job disguising your intent.
> >
> > This is just my opinion, of course.
> >
> > Greg
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Wanax Andron
> > To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 10:44 AM
> > Subject: [WarriorRules] All this flattery and
> a
> > bonus blather
> >
> >
> > John, Greg, Kelly, Jar-Jar Binks,
> >
> > Guys I thank you for the online complements
> one
> > and
> > all. I'm not sure if I'm crazy, evil, or any
> of
> > the
> > other swell things associated with my name
> > recently,
> > but I am sure of one truth reguarding me: To
> know
> > me
> > is to remain in a state of confusion. I like
> it
> > that
> > way, and it comes natural.
> >
> > Warrior Content:
> >
> > In deploying Normans I have set up with close
> > order in
> > front of my HC. This precludes any HC marches
> in
> > the
> > first bound, but then the close order foot
> will
> > only
> > move 2 segments. With a few LI and LC on the
> > flanks
> > to stop the enemy at a reasonable distance,
> the
> > close
> > order will not be pinned to less than 2
> segments.
> > In
> > the second bound, I can then march the HC
> forward
> > to
> > emplace left/right/center as needs dictate.
> In
> > bound
> > three they would be close enough to charge. I
> > can't
> > forsee anyone getting anything that would
> break 6E
> > HI
> > on contact so in my estimation, bound three
> for HC
> > should work out fine.
> >
> > Does anyone have any commentary to make on the
> > above
> > strategem? All comments welcome
> >
> > clone
> > tk5212
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =====
> > Wake up and smell the Assyrians
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World
> Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
> >
> > 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.
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been
> > removed]
> >
> >
>
>
> =====
> Wake up and smell the Assyrians
>
>
=== message truncated ===


=====
Wake up and smell the Assyrians

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

[joncleaves]

Boyd

I don't get the comment about not having a 1st Crusade list...

[Greg Regets]

Don't sell your army short, the DAW list is a very good army with many creative
ways to fight and win. I get the feeling you are playing a bit of the 'baying
dog' here on this board.

I guess it takes one to know one. ;-)

Good luck and will look forward to seeing that battle report. :-)

Greg


----- Original Message -----
From: Wanax Andron
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] All this flattery and a bonus blather



--- "Greggory A. Regets" <gar@...> wrote:

> Clearly your tactic would be difficult to pull off
> against that style of army, as you will need your up
> rolls to get even on the factor chart against
> knights and the foot archers, well, as the guy
> playing your army, you know fully well what foot
> archers will give you.

I'm most likely going to see Selucids (E, Pk, HC and
LC), Viking (all that LMI sh*t), some Burmesish crazy
number of men on elephant army, a couple of kniggits
and maybee 3 looser army types like mine :)

I can't face anything head to head with my army, so I
need to channel them into killzones. I have archers,
close order foot, HC, LC, and some LHI/LMI stuff.
Mostly, my plan is to get the enemy mounted and
elephants cluttered, then launch the trademark "CHARGE
OF THE NORMAN HC" and see what happens. I don't have
an army that can win through slow attrition, and I
most fear foot archers. I have to win big or loose
big and usually on bold gambits. however, I have a
few tricks up my sleeve. if successful, I'll do a
battle report. If not, I'll pretend someone else did
a battle report :)

If I had a copy of the 1st crusader list, I'd run
that. My plan for the crusaders would be to use the
IrrC MI B/J/sh as the centerpeice of the attack and
bulldoze them into the enemy mounted dashing off
mounted charges to either flank of the MI, and use the
other close order LTS armed foot to push push push.
However, I will be without the fearless Frankish J
armed archers and the lovable but goofy pilgrims this
goround.

I'll let you know what happens in any event.

boyd


>
> Our style of armies tend to force HC/foot type
> armies to use the infantry in close support of the
> cavalry, or face the music.
>
> Good luck though and quite frankly, its nice to see
> other guys playing "real man' armies, and not armies
> dominated by over-rated things like elephants,
> expendables and chariots!
>
> Was that out loud? ~laughs~
>
> Greg
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Wanax Andron
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 12:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] All this flattery and
> a bonus blather
>
>
> I see your point. Here are two further
> considerations. 1. All of my cavalry
> are...teehee...IrrgA HC L/sh. So I kinda want the
> enemy there. the infantry will work to channel
> the
> enemy into their front anyway. 2. By
> concentrating on
> my end of the board, not only will the enemy have
> to
> cover more surface area with their army (outside
> arc)
> but the tournament being 1200pt will mean he will
> have
> to be weaker facing my infantry (3x6E) IrrC/D
> Hi/Mi
> J/sh which frees them up to push. My hope is to
> create a bubble in the enemy line. 3. By
> remaining
> on my side of the board I don't have to reach so
> far
>
>
> Seriously, I've a tactical consideration that I
> won't
> go into here...might be spys about...that also
> limits
> my willingness to advance too far forward.
> Otherwise,
> I just send the LC and LI out to stop all enemy
> marches near the centerline.
>
> clone tk5212
>
> --- "Greggory A. Regets" <gar@...> wrote:
> > The only thing that bugs me about this strategy
> is
> > the decision to not force march your infantry to
> > give your HC more room to maneuver, specifically
> in
> > bound 2, march segment 4. When you march HC in
> bound
> > 2, you will have to wheel one way or the other
> in
> > march segment 4 if your intent is to maneuver to
> > either flank, and guys marching 3, or with more
> room
> > to maneuver, will get to watch you do it. The
> risk
> > is that they will choose not to play with your
> > infantry and pile up on your cavarly on one
> flank or
> > the other, or throw some crap at your cavalry
> and
> > pile on somewhere else. If you force march your
> main
> > body of infantry, your first HC march segment
> can
> > then be straight forward, which will do a much
> > better job disguising your intent.
> >
> > This is just my opinion, of course.
> >
> > Greg
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Wanax Andron
> > To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 10:44 AM
> > Subject: [WarriorRules] All this flattery and
> a
> > bonus blather
> >
> >
> > John, Greg, Kelly, Jar-Jar Binks,
> >
> > Guys I thank you for the online complements
> one
> > and
> > all. I'm not sure if I'm crazy, evil, or any
> of
> > the
> > other swell things associated with my name
> > recently,
> > but I am sure of one truth reguarding me: To
> know
> > me
> > is to remain in a state of confusion. I like
> it
> > that
> > way, and it comes natural.
> >
> > Warrior Content:
> >
> > In deploying Normans I have set up with close
> > order in
> > front of my HC. This precludes any HC marches
> in
> > the
> > first bound, but then the close order foot
> will
> > only
> > move 2 segments. With a few LI and LC on the
> > flanks
> > to stop the enemy at a reasonable distance,
> the
> > close
> > order will not be pinned to less than 2
> segments.
> > In
> > the second bound, I can then march the HC
> forward
> > to
> > emplace left/right/center as needs dictate.
> In
> > bound
> > three they would be close enough to charge. I
> > can't
> > forsee anyone getting anything that would
> break 6E
> > HI
> > on contact so in my estimation, bound three
> for HC
> > should work out fine.
> >
> > Does anyone have any commentary to make on the
> > above
> > strategem? All comments welcome
> >
> > clone
> > tk5212
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > =====
> > Wake up and smell the Assyrians
> >
> >
> __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World
> Cup
> > http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
> >
> > 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.
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been
> > removed]
> >
> >
>
>
> =====
> Wake up and smell the Assyrians
>
>
=== message truncated ===


=====
Wake up and smell the Assyrians

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

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.



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

I didn't think it was out yet. Has Holy Warrior been
released? I'll check the website, but I didn't think
it was going to be out prior to Historicon. Perhaps I
transposed something. Happens


--- JonCleaves@... wrote:
> Boyd
>
> I don't get the comment about not having a 1st
> Crusade list...
>


=====
Wake up and smell the Assyrians

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com

[joncleaves]

The FHE list isn't out yet, but there are still several old lists available
until then.