Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

Fellow Warrior Enthusiasts

Although the writing of these rules is not generally a democratic process, in
this instance I could really use the benefit of as many opinions as possible.

The number one headache in the writing of Warrior is the handling of charges
that make initial contact with only a small portion of an opposing unit. I
am lip-deep in this issue and it is the only remaining 'problem' we need to
solve in the core rules. I do not need a wide open debate, as we HAVE
decided some aspects of this. So I am going to carefully frame my request
for your help.

First, here's the basic issue:

How do we want to handle charges where one part of one element can reach the
edge of an enemy body, but no other element of the charging body can reach
that edge within its max charge move?

Second, here are the ground rules:
1. This is NOT a discussion of any other thing that would make the charge
illegal: fitting in the space available, passable gaps, cancelled charge,
etc. Assume the theoretical charge is otherwise legal. Note that this is
not just about flank charges, but many of them cause 'angled' issues.
2. There will be no 'wraparound' in Warrior. A body's elements will always
be in side edge contact with other elements of the body. Period. What you
find in diagram 13 of the 93 interp book for WRG 7th will not be in Warrior.
I can personally guarantee it. Mechanically, 'wraparound' is already in the
game and reflected in adjacent elements fighting in subsequent bounds of a
melee.
3. 'Pivoting to face' and 'lining up' WILL occur. We have decided against
the 'armati/tactica' method of leaving units in contact at all kinds of crazy
angles. This is primarily due to Warrior being a figures-in-contact based
melee system. I have no intention of trying to solve how two players in
competition figure out how many figures are fighting between two units that
'clipped' each other at a 57-degree angle. It works in Armati/Tactica since
you are counting a standard value no matter how many figures contact.
4. I am going to give you three basic choices of how to handle this. ALL
you need to do if you like one of these choices is respond with:
Angled charge issue: <choice #>.
There is no need to tell me why you like it, unless you feel it absolutely
necessary.
If you have some other method to offer or a modification of one of the
choices offered, then describe it and discuss its merits. The choices given
all have good pros and bad cons, there is no need to go over them all again.
I am looking for a feel for how the guys who actually play ancients at this
level want this handled. Or, if possible, the better solution my tiny brain
can not come up with after weeks of trying.

Choices:

#1: If you make contact with any part of one element, pivot the entire body
to make edge to edge contact. Any 'extra' movement by an element is free.
This is the 'warhammer' solution. Pros: simple. Cons: A six element long LC
unit gets a heck of a free move.

#2: If you make contact with any part of one element, continue pivoting
until an element runs out of charge move. Those elements whose charge move
is exceeded are kept back 20 paces until the first bound of combat is fought.
This is the WRG 7.6/93 interp book solution. Pros: we've played this way.
Cons: still allows a long unit a lot of free move. They just can't fight
right away.

#3: If you make contact with any part of one element, continue pivoting
until an element runs out of charge move, even while echeloning forward. If
any front rank element cannot make contact, the charge cannot be made. This
is the current Warrior solution. Pros: more restrictive than #2, it prevents
the free move deal for long units. Cons: would prevent a charge where one
element can make contact, but others cannot. This means a player who is
close with part of his unit, but not enough of it, will have to wait to
charge next bound, possibly 'missing' an opportunity to charge an exposed
flank.

#4: write in candidate.

The reason I am offering this up is that I had been intending to use #3. But
it occurs to me that the greater Warrior-playing community may not mind all
that free move. If a majority of you don't, I'll go with the simpler
solution and save a LOT of rule writing.

Have at me.
Jon

[Dave Markowitz]

#2

[joncleaves]

Well, Dave, you have set the standard for answers! Thanks.

My choice:

> #1: If you make contact with any part of one element, pivot the
>entire body to make edge to edge contact. Any 'extra' movement by
>an element is free. This is the 'warhammer' solution. Pros:
>simple. Cons: A six element long LC unit gets a heck of a free move.

Proviso- as long as the charging player understands that under NO
circumstances do they get a "free" charge on units they are now able
to contact if such unit(s) were outside the original charge reach and
not included in the original charge declaration. We play this way in
Australia. (MS Office Powerpoint posted to show move.)

As I pointed out in an earlier post, #3 allows for a charge
DECLARATION (and responses) before the charge MOVE is made and
measured. If the charge is disallowed due to "not getting there",
are the responses (waver tests, counter charges) ignored? And are
cancelled charges now allowed to happen? (LHI vs cav, non-imp foot vs
imp foot etc)

[joncleaves]

Steve

Your vote is logged and I agree with your proviso.

One note on #3, we do have (in the current draft of Warrior, which is to say
NOT the one available on line) a rule for not allowing a player to benefit
from a declared charge subsequently discovered to be illegal. That language
will stay no matter which way we go.

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Hi Jon, I vote for #2. Thanks for asking!

KJW

Option #1...let 'em all hit.
--

On Mon, 1 Jan 2001 21:29:06
JonCleaves wrote:
>Fellow Warrior Enthusiasts
>
>Although the writing of these rules is not generally a democratic process, in
>this instance I could really use the benefit of as many opinions as possible.
>
>The number one headache in the writing of Warrior is the handling of charges
>that make initial contact with only a small portion of an opposing unit. I
>am lip-deep in this issue and it is the only remaining 'problem' we need to
>solve in the core rules. I do not need a wide open debate, as we HAVE
>decided some aspects of this. So I am going to carefully frame my request
>for your help.
>
>First, here's the basic issue:
>
>How do we want to handle charges where one part of one element can reach the
>edge of an enemy body, but no other element of the charging body can reach
>that edge within its max charge move?
>
>Second, here are the ground rules:
>1. This is NOT a discussion of any other thing that would make the charge
>illegal: fitting in the space available, passable gaps, cancelled charge,
>etc. Assume the theoretical charge is otherwise legal. Note that this is
>not just about flank charges, but many of them cause 'angled' issues.
>2. There will be no 'wraparound' in Warrior. A body's elements will always
>be in side edge contact with other elements of the body. Period. What you
>find in diagram 13 of the 93 interp book for WRG 7th will not be in Warrior.
>I can personally guarantee it. Mechanically, 'wraparound' is already in the
>game and reflected in adjacent elements fighting in subsequent bounds of a
>melee.
>3. 'Pivoting to face' and 'lining up' WILL occur. We have decided against
>the 'armati/tactica' method of leaving units in contact at all kinds of crazy
>angles. This is primarily due to Warrior being a figures-in-contact based
>melee system. I have no intention of trying to solve how two players in
>competition figure out how many figures are fighting between two units that
>'clipped' each other at a 57-degree angle. It works in Armati/Tactica since
>you are counting a standard value no matter how many figures contact.
>4. I am going to give you three basic choices of how to handle this. ALL
>you need to do if you like one of these choices is respond with:
>Angled charge issue: <choice #>.
>There is no need to tell me why you like it, unless you feel it absolutely
>necessary.
>If you have some other method to offer or a modification of one of the
>choices offered, then describe it and discuss its merits. The choices given
>all have good pros and bad cons, there is no need to go over them all again.
>I am looking for a feel for how the guys who actually play ancients at this
>level want this handled. Or, if possible, the better solution my tiny brain
>can not come up with after weeks of trying.
>
>Choices:
>
>#1: If you make contact with any part of one element, pivot the entire body
>to make edge to edge contact. Any 'extra' movement by an element is free.
>This is the 'warhammer' solution. Pros: simple. Cons: A six element long LC
>unit gets a heck of a free move.
>
>#2: If you make contact with any part of one element, continue pivoting
>until an element runs out of charge move. Those elements whose charge move
>is exceeded are kept back 20 paces until the first bound of combat is fought.
> This is the WRG 7.6/93 interp book solution. Pros: we've played this way.
>Cons: still allows a long unit a lot of free move. They just can't fight
>right away.
>
>#3: If you make contact with any part of one element, continue pivoting
>until an element runs out of charge move, even while echeloning forward. If
>any front rank element cannot make contact, the charge cannot be made. This
>is the current Warrior solution. Pros: more restrictive than #2, it prevents
>the free move deal for long units. Cons: would prevent a charge where one
>element can make contact, but others cannot. This means a player who is
>close with part of his unit, but not enough of it, will have to wait to
>charge next bound, possibly 'missing' an opportunity to charge an exposed
>flank.
>
>#4: write in candidate.
>
>The reason I am offering this up is that I had been intending to use #3. But
>it occurs to me that the greater Warrior-playing community may not mind all
>that free move. If a majority of you don't, I'll go with the simpler
>solution and save a LOT of rule writing.
>
>Have at me.
>Jon
>


Get FREE Email/Voicemail with 15MB at Lycos Communications at
http://comm.lycos.com

[Greg Regets]

#2

-----Original Message-----
From: JonCleaves@... [mailto:JonCleaves@...]
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 8:29 PM
To: WarriorRules@egroups.com
Subject: [WarriorRules] Angled charges and pivoting to conform


Fellow Warrior Enthusiasts

Although the writing of these rules is not generally a democratic process,
in
this instance I could really use the benefit of as many opinions as
possible.

The number one headache in the writing of Warrior is the handling of charges

that make initial contact with only a small portion of an opposing unit. I
am lip-deep in this issue and it is the only remaining 'problem' we need to
solve in the core rules. I do not need a wide open debate, as we HAVE
decided some aspects of this. So I am going to carefully frame my request
for your help.

First, here's the basic issue:

How do we want to handle charges where one part of one element can reach the

edge of an enemy body, but no other element of the charging body can reach
that edge within its max charge move?

Second, here are the ground rules:
1. This is NOT a discussion of any other thing that would make the charge
illegal: fitting in the space available, passable gaps, cancelled charge,
etc. Assume the theoretical charge is otherwise legal. Note that this is
not just about flank charges, but many of them cause 'angled' issues.
2. There will be no 'wraparound' in Warrior. A body's elements will always

be in side edge contact with other elements of the body. Period. What you
find in diagram 13 of the 93 interp book for WRG 7th will not be in Warrior.

I can personally guarantee it. Mechanically, 'wraparound' is already in the

game and reflected in adjacent elements fighting in subsequent bounds of a
melee.
3. 'Pivoting to face' and 'lining up' WILL occur. We have decided against
the 'armati/tactica' method of leaving units in contact at all kinds of
crazy
angles. This is primarily due to Warrior being a figures-in-contact based
melee system. I have no intention of trying to solve how two players in
competition figure out how many figures are fighting between two units that
'clipped' each other at a 57-degree angle. It works in Armati/Tactica since
you are counting a standard value no matter how many figures contact.
4. I am going to give you three basic choices of how to handle this. ALL
you need to do if you like one of these choices is respond with:
Angled charge issue: <choice #>.
There is no need to tell me why you like it, unless you feel it absolutely
necessary.
If you have some other method to offer or a modification of one of the
choices offered, then describe it and discuss its merits. The choices given

all have good pros and bad cons, there is no need to go over them all again.

I am looking for a feel for how the guys who actually play ancients at this
level want this handled. Or, if possible, the better solution my tiny brain

can not come up with after weeks of trying.

Choices:

#1: If you make contact with any part of one element, pivot the entire body

to make edge to edge contact. Any 'extra' movement by an element is free.
This is the 'warhammer' solution. Pros: simple. Cons: A six element long
LC
unit gets a heck of a free move.

#2: If you make contact with any part of one element, continue pivoting
until an element runs out of charge move. Those elements whose charge move
is exceeded are kept back 20 paces until the first bound of combat is
fought.
This is the WRG 7.6/93 interp book solution. Pros: we've played this way.

Cons: still allows a long unit a lot of free move. They just can't fight
right away.

#3: If you make contact with any part of one element, continue pivoting
until an element runs out of charge move, even while echeloning forward. If

any front rank element cannot make contact, the charge cannot be made. This

is the current Warrior solution. Pros: more restrictive than #2, it
prevents
the free move deal for long units. Cons: would prevent a charge where one
element can make contact, but others cannot. This means a player who is
close with part of his unit, but not enough of it, will have to wait to
charge next bound, possibly 'missing' an opportunity to charge an exposed
flank.

#4: write in candidate.

The reason I am offering this up is that I had been intending to use #3.
But
it occurs to me that the greater Warrior-playing community may not mind all
that free move. If a majority of you don't, I'll go with the simpler
solution and save a LOT of rule writing.

Have at me.
Jon

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

[joncleaves]

Tom
I'm definitely into some games on these weekends coming up!
Jon

I like this approach as well. Count my vote along side Steve's; including
his proviso.

Kevin

-----Original Message-----
From: JonCleaves@... [mailto:JonCleaves@...]
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 10:37 AM
To: WarriorRules@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Re: Angled charges and pivoting to conform


Steve

Your vote is logged and I agree with your proviso.

One note on #3, we do have (in the current draft of Warrior, which is to say

NOT the one available on line) a rule for not allowing a player to benefit
from a declared charge subsequently discovered to be illegal. That language

will stay no matter which way we go.

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

[Tim Brown]

Choice #2

Jon,

I am new to the egroup so I feel like I am intruding on an ongoing
conversation. I was not going to respond to anything for awhile to
give myself a chance to catch up. But your inquiry of the group has
spurred me on.

I am for option #1 along with the provision offered by honeyman@. I
think we can make the whole angled charge issue even less complicated
by simplyfing this even more. I am not 100% up my rules. I have
only played intermittantly over the last 15 or 16 years. But I think
all charging bodies should only charge straight ahead. They can do
all the maneuvering they want in the approach phase. But when the
order to charge is given it is Tally Ho! Straight ahead. If the
front corner of the charging body contacts the targets flank then
line them up as a flank line up. If the charging body contacts any
part of the target body's front edge or front corners (assuming
charging the target's front)then it lines up along the front
(assuming it can fit, etc). Pros: Makes the charge phase quicker
and avoids corner and pivoting haranging to get it just right. All
of that had to be done in approaches. Option #1 allowing for
pivoting to conform even with extra move distance also favors the
aggressive player making for quicker bloodier games. The fact that
the charger had to line up ahead of time should also reduce arguments
about what is legal and what is not. Posted a Power Point slide to
express myself.

Regardless of the final decision don't you think option #1 deserves a
game or two of playtesting? We do have a couple of long weekends
coming up. :)

Tom Keegan

[Harlan Garrett]

#2

Harlan Garrett

-----Original Message-----
From: JonCleaves@... [mailto:JonCleaves@...]
Sent: Monday, January 01, 2001 8:29 PM
To: WarriorRules@egroups.com
Subject: [WarriorRules] Angled charges and pivoting to conform


Fellow Warrior Enthusiasts

Although the writing of these rules is not generally a democratic process,
in
this instance I could really use the benefit of as many opinions as
possible.

The number one headache in the writing of Warrior is the handling of charges
that make initial contact with only a small portion of an opposing unit. I
am lip-deep in this issue and it is the only remaining 'problem' we need to
solve in the core rules. I do not need a wide open debate, as we HAVE
decided some aspects of this. So I am going to carefully frame my request
for your help.

First, here's the basic issue:

How do we want to handle charges where one part of one element can reach the
edge of an enemy body, but no other element of the charging body can reach
that edge within its max charge move?

Second, here are the ground rules:
1. This is NOT a discussion of any other thing that would make the charge
illegal: fitting in the space available, passable gaps, cancelled charge,
etc. Assume the theoretical charge is otherwise legal. Note that this is
not just about flank charges, but many of them cause 'angled' issues.
2. There will be no 'wraparound' in Warrior. A body's elements will always
be in side edge contact with other elements of the body. Period. What you
find in diagram 13 of the 93 interp book for WRG 7th will not be in Warrior.
I can personally guarantee it. Mechanically, 'wraparound' is already in the
game and reflected in adjacent elements fighting in subsequent bounds of a
melee.
3. 'Pivoting to face' and 'lining up' WILL occur. We have decided against
the 'armati/tactica' method of leaving units in contact at all kinds of
crazy
angles. This is primarily due to Warrior being a figures-in-contact based
melee system. I have no intention of trying to solve how two players in
competition figure out how many figures are fighting between two units that
'clipped' each other at a 57-degree angle. It works in Armati/Tactica since
you are counting a standard value no matter how many figures contact.
4. I am going to give you three basic choices of how to handle this. ALL
you need to do if you like one of these choices is respond with:
Angled charge issue: <choice #>.
There is no need to tell me why you like it, unless you feel it absolutely
necessary.
If you have some other method to offer or a modification of one of the
choices offered, then describe it and discuss its merits. The choices given
all have good pros and bad cons, there is no need to go over them all again.
I am looking for a feel for how the guys who actually play ancients at this
level want this handled. Or, if possible, the better solution my tiny brain
can not come up with after weeks of trying.

Choices:

#1: If you make contact with any part of one element, pivot the entire body
to make edge to edge contact. Any 'extra' movement by an element is free.
This is the 'warhammer' solution. Pros: simple. Cons: A six element long
LC
unit gets a heck of a free move.

#2: If you make contact with any part of one element, continue pivoting
until an element runs out of charge move. Those elements whose charge move
is exceeded are kept back 20 paces until the first bound of combat is
fought.
This is the WRG 7.6/93 interp book solution. Pros: we've played this way.
Cons: still allows a long unit a lot of free move. They just can't fight
right away.

#3: If you make contact with any part of one element, continue pivoting
until an element runs out of charge move, even while echeloning forward. If
any front rank element cannot make contact, the charge cannot be made. This
is the current Warrior solution. Pros: more restrictive than #2, it
prevents
the free move deal for long units. Cons: would prevent a charge where one
element can make contact, but others cannot. This means a player who is
close with part of his unit, but not enough of it, will have to wait to
charge next bound, possibly 'missing' an opportunity to charge an exposed
flank.

#4: write in candidate.

The reason I am offering this up is that I had been intending to use #3.
But
it occurs to me that the greater Warrior-playing community may not mind all
that free move. If a majority of you don't, I'll go with the simpler
solution and save a LOT of rule writing.

Have at me.
Jon

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

[joncleaves]

Don

See my reply to Pat's forward of your mail (which I had not read yet). I
will handle that situation after we settle on pivoting rules.

Jon

[joncleaves]

Thanks for your comments and your vote, Terry. We'll add what you said to
what we are looking at.
Also thanks for joining us. You and three other guys just put us over the
100-member mark on this egroup. Kinda makes it all worthwhile...

Jon