Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

Have just played a full sized, but modest 1500 point game, of Lysimachids vs
Indians in about six hours. So we are getting quicker but as my brother plays
very slowly even DBM games can take that long!
Queries that came up in this game are:
1. A disordered unit gets a become disordered result from combat and cannot
recoil fully when called to do so. Is this one waver test or two?
2. If the winning unit in the above example cannot follow up at all, because the
loser was already in contact with friends to rear, does it still get a follow up
bonus on a technicality?
3. Skirmish formation is retained as long as the unit only moves using wheels?
So you can't do a straight approach move?
A note for Scott who poo-poohed my suggestion a few months ago when I said my
Parthian light cavalry often get shot to pieces by Regular LMI with Jls. Well, I
played FW Parthians vs Hellenistic Greeks and it happened again. The trick is
you cannot afford to be caught not in skirmishers and that will last for one
move at long range. Next turn they will close you down and then it's 50/50
whether you can counter the hell out of there. If you don't chances are you will
be badly shot up. That said what I ended up doing was trading off a couple of
badly shot up lights to enable the cataphracts to get into position to deliver
their of charges and fortunately the LMI failed their wavers in the open.
Any ideas out there on how to use the Cataphract/Light combo better?
Many thanks and now off to do Spanish vs Hellenistics.
Paul


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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 6/25/2002 03:20:29 Central Daylight Time,
PAUL.JACQ@... writes:


> 1. A disordered unit gets a become disordered result from combat and cannot
> recoil fully when called to do so. Is this one waver test or two?

In the same combat - one.

> 2. If the winning unit in the above example cannot follow up at all, because
> the loser was already in contact with friends to rear, does it still get a
> follow up bonus on a technicality?

It gets following up. Don't call that a technicality myself...

> 3. Skirmish formation is retained as long as the unit only moves using
> wheels? So you can't do a straight approach move?
>

Of course you can. Seems you like the literal, so consider yourself to be
doing wheels of 0 degrees if you like..... :)

Jon



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

[Chris Bump]

In a message dated Tue, 25 Jun 2002 7:53:37 AM Eastern Standard Time, JonCleaves
writes:

> > follow up bonus on a technicality?
>
> It gets following up. Don't call that a technicality
> myself...

Here is another contrary to how we've been playing down here. I don't disagree
with it, mind you, but again I think that these types of things are more
important in clarifications than in FAQ or certainly typos. The average new
player is likely going to assume that the only way to earn a follow up bonus is
in fact to follow up. IF this cannot happen for what ever reason, then
logically how can the momentum bonus be awarded? I am not arguing with the
rule, but rather pointing out a potential misunderstanding for the new player or
for one who is not participating on this site.
Chris

[joncleaves]

Chris

You are correct that the rules do not EXPLICITLY state that if an enemy body
cannot recoil you still get the follow-up tactical factor. It does state:

"A unit contacted to front and rear is not physically moved on the table but
counts as ceased recoiling, is disordered, and both opponents get the follow-up
bonus to their hand-to-hand combat factor. "

Which is enough of a precedent that this is a FAQ issue at best. I will not see
the clarifications become FAQ-length. The standard for the two is different.

Jon

> > 3. Skirmish formation is retained as long as the unit only moves using
> > wheels? So you can't do a straight approach move?
> >
>
> Of course you can. Seems you like the literal, so consider yourself to be
> doing wheels of 0 degrees if you like.....
>
> Jon

Jon,
I know I can move other than in wheels. I was trying to point out what it
says from a novices point of view who is likely to read it literally rather
than us old timers who read it as only changes direction using wheels.
Paul

[joncleaves]

Paul, that was a smiley face at the end of that sentence. Man, I can't win....

[Chris Bump]

In a message dated Tue, 25 Jun 2002 11:35:59 AM Eastern Standard Time,
JonCleaves writes:

>
>
> Paul, that was a smiley face at the end of that sentence. Man, I can't
win....
>
Something about the burden of command......;^)

[Don Coon]

Not Patrick and I "out of town to often to be in the loop" boy. We give the
+1 even when the recoiling opponent recoils 0p due to other circimstances.
BTW Chris, this is just like a routing unit getting 2 FP if it has a rout
move reduced to 0p (rare, but can happen).

Don

> Here is another contrary to how we've been playing down here. I don't
disagree with it, mind you, but again I think that these types of things are
more important in clarifications than in FAQ or certainly typos. The
average new player is likely going to assume that the only way to earn a
follow up bonus is in fact to follow up. IF this cannot happen for what
ever reason, then logically how can the momentum bonus be awarded? I am not
arguing with the rule, but rather pointing out a potential misunderstanding
for the new player or for one who is not participating on this site.
> Chris

[Chris Bump]

In a message dated Tue, 25 Jun 2002 4:35:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
jjendon@... writes:

> Not Patrick and I "out of town to often to be in the loop" boy. We give the
> +1 even when the recoiling opponent recoils 0p due to other circimstances.
> BTW Chris, this is just like a routing unit getting 2 FP if
> it has a rout
> move reduced to 0p (rare, but can happen).
>
> Don

Yep,
I'm sure that you are right. I humble myself before all for making the
erroneous statement about what is done in DFW. It is in fact not the case.
Still feel the clarification is in order, but that is just my ridiculously large
ego demanding that I get the last word. IF the stars would align as they are
supposed to I could end this absurd travel and get back to what is important and
know the rules from practice and not have to rely upon memory.
Chris

[Don Coon]

> I'm sure that you are right. I humble myself before all for making the
erroneous statement about what is done in DFW. It is in fact not the case.
Still feel the clarification is in order, but that is just my ridiculously
large ego demanding that I get the last word. IF the stars would align as
they are supposed to I could end this absurd travel and get back to what is
important and know the rules from practice and not have to rely upon memory.
> Chris

Word!

Don