Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

Some answers to Don's thoughts that may be of interest to all.

<< What about this. When a body wider than 1 element charges, each element
of the body may move up to its tactical move in an attempt to reach the
enemy body (or a line extending the enemy body front). Any elements
that make contact are pivoted to conform to the enemy body (or line
extending his front). The first element that does not make contact
(with the enemy body or the line extending his front) is pivoted to be
in side edge contact with the rest of its body, but is echeloned back
20p.>>

So far this is option #2, and the way it is played in WRG tourneys here in
the states.

<< Each succesive element in the body that does not make contact is
echeloned bach a further 20p.>>

This would be something new, making this, say, option 2a.

<<The line extending the enemy front is an important add to this concept.
If a 2X2 body with 120p charge reach is 40p from a 1X2 enemy, he should
not have to echelon because his 2nd element does not contact the enemy
(he would have reached him if he was there).>>

I totally agree with the 'line extending...' concept. If we hold any
noncontacting elements back (whatever distance), this will be part of that
rule.

<<Also note that the line extending the enemies front may also be a line
extending his flank if that is the side being hit.>>

Yep.

<<What this does is add a graduated penalty for long bodies. If you
charge 3 elements wide and hit with 1, your other elements will be
echeloned back 20p and 40p respectively. As a larger body misses with
more elements, the echelon will grow causing disorder. This is a
compramise between the "disordered" camp, and the "not disordered" camp.>>

I am not really looking for such a compromise. First, this isn't really a
democracy, but input from trusted members of the salient group. However, IF
we end up with a 'echelon more than 40p gets you disordered' rule, AND under
the final version of the charge rule we let some noncontacting elements hang
back some distance on the initial move then there MAY be some angled charges
that end up in disorder.
The problem with the 40p echelon rule is that 40p is a different distance for
different order units. An HI unit will never be disordered from this as its
elements are less than 40p deep and I have no plans for letting an element
lose side edge contact with its own body. HC in 25mm will also never have
this happen to them, but HC in 15mm could. That makes no sense to me as a
rules writer. Still working on it, but want to make a decision on angled
charges first.

What I can tell you is that option #3 is out. No one wants it, and that
makes me very glad I opened this one up to the group. Shows my instincts
still work to some degree.

Jon

Also note that if a body 3 or more elements wide hits with an element
other than one on the end, the echelon will form a reverse v shape, as
elements to either side of the contacting element echelon back.

Also, in subsequent bouns, echeloned elements may move up to be in line
with the contacting element(s) up to thier tactical move. The prevents
(an extremely unlikely case) a 12 element wide body contacting enemy on
one end from move the 12th element on the other end 220p in bound 2 to
catch up.

I think this is a good compramise. The penalty gets larger as the body
gets larger. 4 element wide bodies (very rare in these parts) will
almost cetainly be disordered.

The wording will need to be cleaned up and made hole proof.

This should satisfy all #2 voters, and hopefully grab the "disorder"
guys too.

Don

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





----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path:
<sentto-1947030-796-978786094-JonCleaves=aol.com@returns.onelist.com>
Received: from rly-xa02.mx.aol.com (rly-xa02.mail.aol.com [172.20.105.71])
by air-xa01.mail.aol.com (v77.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 06 Jan 2001 08:02:02 -0500
Received: from mo.egroups.com (mo.egroups.com [208.50.144.78]) by
rly-xa02.mx.aol.com (v77.27) with ESMTP; Sat, 06 Jan 2001 08:01:55 -0500
X-eGroups-Return:
sentto-1947030-796-978786094-JonCleaves=aol.com@returns.onelist.com
Received: from [10.1.4.54] by mo.egroups.com with NNFMP; 06 Jan 2001
13:01:45 -0000
X-Sender: jendon@...
X-Apparently-To: WarriorRules@egroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 6 Jan 2001 13:01:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 27013 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2001 13:01:33 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Jan 2001
13:01:33 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO bunyip.flash.net) (209.30.2.15) by mta3 with
SMTP; 6 Jan 2001 14:02:38 -0000
Received: from flash.net (216-215-83-215.flash.net [216.215.83.215]) by
bunyip.flash.net (8.9.3/Pro-8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA06537 for
<WarriorRules@egroups.com>; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 07:01:31 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <3A5718D8.9EAD5BE3@...>
Organization: FlashNet User
X-Sender: "Donald Coon" <jendon@...> (Unverified)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en]C-FLASHNET (Win95; I)
To: WarriorRules@egroups.com
References: <e8.ec58c89.278760c9@...>
From: Donald Coon <jendon@...>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: list WarriorRules@egroups.com; contact
WarriorRules-owner@egroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list WarriorRules@egroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 07:08:40 -0600
Reply-To: WarriorRules@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Digest Number 134
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

>>

[Greg Regets]

Jon ....

This was my thought all along, but was not part of your options so I left it
alone. To me, you move each element in the direction of the charge straight
ahead and if you have enough charge distance to hit, you conform. Elements
that do not hit would drop back behind. If this causes a disordering
penetration, well thats your problem. This system is simple and eliminates a
bit of the fireworks show.

-----Original Message-----
From: JonCleaves@... [mailto:JonCleaves@...]
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 9:57 AM
To: WarriorRules@egroups.com
Subject: [WarriorRules] Angled Charges Current Thinking


Some answers to Don's thoughts that may be of interest to all.

<< What about this. When a body wider than 1 element charges, each element
of the body may move up to its tactical move in an attempt to reach the
enemy body (or a line extending the enemy body front). Any elements
that make contact are pivoted to conform to the enemy body (or line
extending his front). The first element that does not make contact
(with the enemy body or the line extending his front) is pivoted to be
in side edge contact with the rest of its body, but is echeloned back
20p.>>

So far this is option #2, and the way it is played in WRG tourneys here in
the states.

<< Each succesive element in the body that does not make contact is
echeloned bach a further 20p.>>

This would be something new, making this, say, option 2a.

<<The line extending the enemy front is an important add to this concept.
If a 2X2 body with 120p charge reach is 40p from a 1X2 enemy, he should
not have to echelon because his 2nd element does not contact the enemy
(he would have reached him if he was there).>>

I totally agree with the 'line extending...' concept. If we hold any
noncontacting elements back (whatever distance), this will be part of that
rule.

<<Also note that the line extending the enemies front may also be a line
extending his flank if that is the side being hit.>>

Yep.

<<What this does is add a graduated penalty for long bodies. If you
charge 3 elements wide and hit with 1, your other elements will be
echeloned back 20p and 40p respectively. As a larger body misses with
more elements, the echelon will grow causing disorder. This is a
compramise between the "disordered" camp, and the "not disordered" camp.>>

I am not really looking for such a compromise. First, this isn't really a
democracy, but input from trusted members of the salient group. However, IF

we end up with a 'echelon more than 40p gets you disordered' rule, AND under

the final version of the charge rule we let some noncontacting elements hang

back some distance on the initial move then there MAY be some angled charges

that end up in disorder.
The problem with the 40p echelon rule is that 40p is a different distance
for
different order units. An HI unit will never be disordered from this as its

elements are less than 40p deep and I have no plans for letting an element
lose side edge contact with its own body. HC in 25mm will also never have
this happen to them, but HC in 15mm could. That makes no sense to me as a
rules writer. Still working on it, but want to make a decision on angled
charges first.

What I can tell you is that option #3 is out. No one wants it, and that
makes me very glad I opened this one up to the group. Shows my instincts
still work to some degree.

Jon

Also note that if a body 3 or more elements wide hits with an element
other than one on the end, the echelon will form a reverse v shape, as
elements to either side of the contacting element echelon back.

Also, in subsequent bouns, echeloned elements may move up to be in line
with the contacting element(s) up to thier tactical move. The prevents
(an extremely unlikely case) a 12 element wide body contacting enemy on
one end from move the 12th element on the other end 220p in bound 2 to
catch up.

I think this is a good compramise. The penalty gets larger as the body
gets larger. 4 element wide bodies (very rare in these parts) will
almost cetainly be disordered.

The wording will need to be cleaned up and made hole proof.

This should satisfy all #2 voters, and hopefully grab the "disorder"
guys too.

Don

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





----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Return-Path:
<sentto-1947030-796-978786094-JonCleaves=aol.com@returns.onelist.com>
Received: from rly-xa02.mx.aol.com (rly-xa02.mail.aol.com [172.20.105.71])

by air-xa01.mail.aol.com (v77.31) with ESMTP; Sat, 06 Jan 2001 08:02:02
-0500
Received: from mo.egroups.com (mo.egroups.com [208.50.144.78]) by
rly-xa02.mx.aol.com (v77.27) with ESMTP; Sat, 06 Jan 2001 08:01:55 -0500
X-eGroups-Return:
sentto-1947030-796-978786094-JonCleaves=aol.com@returns.onelist.com
Received: from [10.1.4.54] by mo.egroups.com with NNFMP; 06 Jan 2001
13:01:45 -0000
X-Sender: jendon@...
X-Apparently-To: WarriorRules@egroups.com
Received: (EGP: mail-6_3_1_3); 6 Jan 2001 13:01:33 -0000
Received: (qmail 27013 invoked from network); 6 Jan 2001 13:01:33 -0000
Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 6 Jan
2001
13:01:33 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO bunyip.flash.net) (209.30.2.15) by mta3 with
SMTP; 6 Jan 2001 14:02:38 -0000
Received: from flash.net (216-215-83-215.flash.net [216.215.83.215]) by
bunyip.flash.net (8.9.3/Pro-8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA06537 for
<WarriorRules@egroups.com>; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 07:01:31 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <3A5718D8.9EAD5BE3@...>
Organization: FlashNet User
X-Sender: "Donald Coon" <jendon@...> (Unverified)
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en]C-FLASHNET (Win95; I)
To: WarriorRules@egroups.com
References: <e8.ec58c89.278760c9@...>
From: Donald Coon <jendon@...>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Mailing-List: list WarriorRules@egroups.com; contact
WarriorRules-owner@egroups.com
Delivered-To: mailing list WarriorRules@egroups.com
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com>
Date: Sat, 06 Jan 2001 07:08:40 -0600
Reply-To: WarriorRules@egroups.com
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Digest Number 134
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

>>

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

Hi Jon,

it's quirk - umm - Terence (sorry about the lack of real name before)

Just like to say thanks for all the debate - rules writers discussing
issues with wargamers is a new experience for me, so thanks for taking
the time and effort to do so. Greatly appreciated. And I agree that
the process can't really be democratic - the authors must be the
final authority, but I believe this rules set is in good hands.

This egroup has re-kindled my enthusiasm for wargaming, so I'm looking
forward to your Warrior Core Rules coming out. The draft looks good,
and the section on detachments was quite illuminating. Hooray!


Looking over the postings, I find Don's thinking (#797) similar to but
probably better expressed than mine.

Tom Keegan raised a very good point regarding the simulation snapshot:

"Thought about disordering for incomplete angled charges. I think
Steve is right. More so I think there is not realy a realism issue
here. The body has not really had anything happen to them to cause
disorder......they just have not completed their charge in the time
available for our simulation. We are essentially taking a snap shot
in time to asses combat results then we start the clock again. When
the clock starts again they can complete the charge with the rest of
their body. Option #2 is probably the best simulation of this.
Sorry Jon.....but can I change my choice to option #2 instead of #1."

Philosophically, just what is realistic? And realistically, what is
playable?

The problem with leaving a unit with staggered elements (as suggested
by Don and also by me: consider it a snapshot of a charge in
progress) is that it can get very very messy on the table. It opens up
new situations (e.g what if the non-contacting elements have a charge
declared on them next bound as they strive to finish their own
charge?) which would need more rules and, as always, the devils are in
the details. How many cans of worms do you want to open?

In this light, simple is best, provided you are happy with the level
of realism it offers.

My vote is Option 2, no disorder, no extra fatigue. If you think I'm a
traitor to my own cause - well, it wasn't a crusade - I just thought
there were some issues surrounding this topic that could be explored
further. Again, thanks for the opportunity for open rational debate.


My last questions on this topic are:

1) When are the (eligible) non-contacting elements finally moved into
contact?

My thoughts are that simple is best, and make it part of that bound's
Staff Moves (very last phase). Keeps everything tidy. Besides, they
may get caught up in After-Comabt results first -

Q: What if their unit is recoiled - would you (next bound) treat all
elements as recoiled, or some as recoiled and some as charging, or...
Really, it's the interaction with After Combat Results that could
cause difficulties, no matter when the final elements are moved.

If you wait till next bound before moving the final elements into
contact, it opens up the possibility of those charging elements being
charged by a third party - very messy indeed, on table and for rules.

2) Assuming the charged unit was eligible to support shoot the
charging unit, would it also be eligible to do so a second time at the
elements that are finishing their charge?

My thought is No, even if the charge movement is finished next bound.
Finishing the charge move some time after combat explicitly shows that
the opportunity for support shooting the charge is now over.

Cheers,

Terence

[joncleaves]

Terrence

Great comments, thanks. It is looking very much like #2 at this point.
Which relieves me to no end since that rule is already substantially written
(in the interp book) and has many, many games under its belt.

<< 1) When are the (eligible) non-contacting elements finally moved into
contact?>>

At this point, at the end of combat resolution on the charging bound.

<< Q: What if their unit is recoiled - would you (next bound) treat all
elements as recoiled, or some as recoiled and some as charging, or...
Really, it's the interaction with After Combat Results that could
cause difficulties, no matter when the final elements are moved.>>

They'd recoil to be lined up with the contacting elements.

<< 2) Assuming the charged unit was eligible to support shoot the
charging unit, would it also be eligible to do so a second time at the
elements that are finishing their charge?>>

Nope, no danger of that.

Jon