Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Frank Gilson]

Rather than thinking about specific army lists, and what to play. I decided
to try to break some qualities about armies off and then rate a few lists by
those qualities.

What I came up with:
Shock Capability : Can this army hit hard with a relatively unavoidable
attack?
Skirmish Capability : Basically, does the army get decent lights?
Missile Fire : Are concentrated missile troops on the list?
Battle Line : Can the army get efficient, usually close order, foot?
Terrain Operations : Can the army deal with bad terrain situations?

Then there would be some "special abilities" like temporary fortifications,
obstacles, gimmicks.

If I rate a few armies as poor/average/good on the above...what do I get?

First off, 100 Years War English, which Dave Stier and I were able to win
the Team Warrior event at Cold Wars with:
Shock : Good - Regular and Irregular Super Heavy Knights
Skirmish Capability : Poor - no efficient light cavalry, very little
efficient light infantry
Missile Fire : Good - More longbowmen than you actually want to run
Battle Line : Average - Brigans qualify here, and there are enough of them
to matter
Terrain Operations : Good - heavily armored, axe wielding longbowmen
Special Abilities : Stakes for some longbowmen, Ditches that can go in
forward zone
So, the army's weakness is skirmishing...although massed missile fire can
counter that, it can only do so on the frontage you can cover, and the army
will often be outscouted. Apart from that, the army is very powerful in
various situations.

Next, Seleucid:
Shock : Average - I'm trying to fit the Elephants, and shieldless Lancers in
this category
Skirmish Capability : Good - some useful light cav, and plenty of useful
light infantry
Missile Fire : Poor - very little massed fire is available, and it's
vulnerable
Battle Line : Good - Pikemen definitely count
Terrain Operations : Poor - you want to give peltasts LTS, which makes them
do poorly in the woods
Special Abilities : Scythed Chariots, and the elephants have pikes
You can use Elephants and Pike to counter enemy shock units, or absorb them
and counterpunch, but are weak against concentrated enemy missile fire. Lack
of ability to operate well in terrain is a minor additional weakness.
Elephants are hard to classify (some shoot, some just charge, some have
pike, most don't).

Anybody care to comment?

Frank Gilson

_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee®
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

Frank this is a great idea for both new players and an old hand
trying to decide on a new army. One of the great things about this
hobby is how much fun army building can be. (i've enjoyed our
ongoing mail exchange reagrding various armies alot)

What I would love to see would be someone create some sort of web-
based database with a quick run-down of all the warrior armies.
This cold be thought of as an update of the "Courior" articles that
apeared years ago with quick review of most of the armies from TOG.

Might make for an ineresting project once all the Warrior lists are
published.

Martin

[scott holder]

What I would love to see would be someone create some sort of web-
based database with a quick run-down of all the warrior armies.
This cold be thought of as an update of the "Courior" articles that
apeared years ago with quick review of most of the armies from TOG.

>Written by moi:):)

scott

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 3/25/2004 4:12:04 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Scott.Holder@... writes:

> What I would love to see would be someone create some sort of web-
> based database with a quick run-down of all the warrior armies.
> This cold be thought of as an update of the "Courior" articles that
> apeared years ago with quick review of most of the armies
> from TOG.
>
> >Written by moi:)
>
> scott>>

Whenever we get to something like this, it would probably best be done with
something similar to a 'dissenting opinion' section - like a judicial decision -
so we could give the new player the best info possible. Having it written by
one person is problematic because one man's crap troop is another's key to
victory and we'd want the new guy to have all the info to make a sound decision
for himself.

J

[scott holder]

Whenever we get to something like this, it would probably best be done with
something similar to a 'dissenting opinion' section - like a judicial decision -
so we could give the new player the best info possible. Having it written by
one person is problematic because one man's crap troop is another's key to
victory and we'd want the new guy to have all the info to make a sound decision
for himself.

>I wouldn't dream of writing such an article again. The game and how it's
played is different. Just look at the Frank-Ewan-Mark discussion, then toss in
Damour's perspective and it's impossible to write something that has any
meaning:) That's why I like this game!

scott

[Frank Gilson]

We can use the Lickert scale, as Wanax suggests...but I intended
here to just go with Poor/Average/Good, given that it can be hard to
make these distinctions...and we'll generally disagree!

That is, where do you put Reg C LHI CB as shooters? I'd say no
better than average...as they're unshielded, yet expensive.

What about the distinction between EHK L,Sh and SHK L,Sh?

The categories I put forth seem to cover us well:
Shock/Skirmish/Missile/Line/Terrain

LI and LC are in the Skirmish category, not the missile, but some
troops can overlap...what if you run 18 figure Irr C LC B units, at
97 points in three ranks they are good skirmishers, but put out
decent firepower.

Some armies get small units of high morale reg loose order infantry
with some kind of missile weapon...these guys aren't generally going
to make the army a missile army, but contribute to skirmishing.

I guess I'm saying that these classifications are a little loose,
and just serve to put armies in some bins from which we can view
them.

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Gilson"
<franktrevorgilson@h...> wrote:
> Rather than thinking about specific army lists, and what to play.
I decided
> to try to break some qualities about armies off and then rate a
few lists by
> those qualities.
>
> What I came up with:
> Shock Capability : Can this army hit hard with a relatively
unavoidable
> attack?
> Skirmish Capability : Basically, does the army get decent lights?
> Missile Fire : Are concentrated missile troops on the list?
> Battle Line : Can the army get efficient, usually close order,
foot?
> Terrain Operations : Can the army deal with bad terrain situations?
>
> Then there would be some "special abilities" like temporary
fortifications,
> obstacles, gimmicks.
>
> If I rate a few armies as poor/average/good on the above...what do
I get?
>
> First off, 100 Years War English, which Dave Stier and I were able
to win
> the Team Warrior event at Cold Wars with:
> Shock : Good - Regular and Irregular Super Heavy Knights
> Skirmish Capability : Poor - no efficient light cavalry, very
little
> efficient light infantry
> Missile Fire : Good - More longbowmen than you actually want to run
> Battle Line : Average - Brigans qualify here, and there are enough
of them
> to matter
> Terrain Operations : Good - heavily armored, axe wielding
longbowmen
> Special Abilities : Stakes for some longbowmen, Ditches that can
go in
> forward zone
> So, the army's weakness is skirmishing...although massed missile
fire can
> counter that, it can only do so on the frontage you can cover, and
the army
> will often be outscouted. Apart from that, the army is very
powerful in
> various situations.
>
> Next, Seleucid:
> Shock : Average - I'm trying to fit the Elephants, and shieldless
Lancers in
> this category
> Skirmish Capability : Good - some useful light cav, and plenty of
useful
> light infantry
> Missile Fire : Poor - very little massed fire is available, and
it's
> vulnerable
> Battle Line : Good - Pikemen definitely count
> Terrain Operations : Poor - you want to give peltasts LTS, which
makes them
> do poorly in the woods
> Special Abilities : Scythed Chariots, and the elephants have pikes
> You can use Elephants and Pike to counter enemy shock units, or
absorb them
> and counterpunch, but are weak against concentrated enemy missile
fire. Lack
> of ability to operate well in terrain is a minor additional
weakness.
> Elephants are hard to classify (some shoot, some just charge, some
have
> pike, most don't).
>
> Anybody care to comment?
>
> Frank Gilson
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from
McAfee®
> Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?
cid=3963

[John Murphy]

Where in this do you fit something like the various FeudWar close
order troops who get 1.5 ranks of 2HCT when steady? A good bit more
threatening than just "line" but not quite mobile enough to
be "shock"?

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Gilson"
<franktrevorgilson@h...> wrote:
> The categories I put forth seem to cover us well:
> Shock/Skirmish/Missile/Line/Terrain

Can we task you Frank with solidifying the catagories and quality
definitions?

There is a guy named David Kujit (sp) on the DBA list. He has
developed a grading system for DBA big battle armies. It is a very
good system. Of course it is much easier to deal with armies in DBA
as the variation is much narrower within a given army, but perhaps I
can point you to his website if you'd like just to have a look see.

Anyway, I think you're on to something, so please continue to
expound. Thanks
Wanax


--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Gilson"
<franktrevorgilson@h...> wrote:
> We can use the Lickert scale, as Wanax suggests...but I intended
> here to just go with Poor/Average/Good, given that it can be hard
to
> make these distinctions...and we'll generally disagree!
>
> That is, where do you put Reg C LHI CB as shooters? I'd say no
> better than average...as they're unshielded, yet expensive.
>
> What about the distinction between EHK L,Sh and SHK L,Sh?
>
> The categories I put forth seem to cover us well:
> Shock/Skirmish/Missile/Line/Terrain
>
> LI and LC are in the Skirmish category, not the missile, but some
> troops can overlap...what if you run 18 figure Irr C LC B units, at
> 97 points in three ranks they are good skirmishers, but put out
> decent firepower.
>
> Some armies get small units of high morale reg loose order infantry
> with some kind of missile weapon...these guys aren't generally
going
> to make the army a missile army, but contribute to skirmishing.
>
> I guess I'm saying that these classifications are a little loose,
> and just serve to put armies in some bins from which we can view
> them.
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Gilson"
> <franktrevorgilson@h...> wrote:
> > Rather than thinking about specific army lists, and what to play.
> I decided
> > to try to break some qualities about armies off and then rate a
> few lists by
> > those qualities.
> >
> > What I came up with:
> > Shock Capability : Can this army hit hard with a relatively
> unavoidable
> > attack?
> > Skirmish Capability : Basically, does the army get decent lights?
> > Missile Fire : Are concentrated missile troops on the list?
> > Battle Line : Can the army get efficient, usually close order,
> foot?
> > Terrain Operations : Can the army deal with bad terrain
situations?
> >
> > Then there would be some "special abilities" like temporary
> fortifications,
> > obstacles, gimmicks.
> >
> > If I rate a few armies as poor/average/good on the above...what
do
> I get?
> >
> > First off, 100 Years War English, which Dave Stier and I were
able
> to win
> > the Team Warrior event at Cold Wars with:
> > Shock : Good - Regular and Irregular Super Heavy Knights
> > Skirmish Capability : Poor - no efficient light cavalry, very
> little
> > efficient light infantry
> > Missile Fire : Good - More longbowmen than you actually want to
run
> > Battle Line : Average - Brigans qualify here, and there are
enough
> of them
> > to matter
> > Terrain Operations : Good - heavily armored, axe wielding
> longbowmen
> > Special Abilities : Stakes for some longbowmen, Ditches that can
> go in
> > forward zone
> > So, the army's weakness is skirmishing...although massed missile
> fire can
> > counter that, it can only do so on the frontage you can cover,
and
> the army
> > will often be outscouted. Apart from that, the army is very
> powerful in
> > various situations.
> >
> > Next, Seleucid:
> > Shock : Average - I'm trying to fit the Elephants, and shieldless
> Lancers in
> > this category
> > Skirmish Capability : Good - some useful light cav, and plenty of
> useful
> > light infantry
> > Missile Fire : Poor - very little massed fire is available, and
> it's
> > vulnerable
> > Battle Line : Good - Pikemen definitely count
> > Terrain Operations : Poor - you want to give peltasts LTS, which
> makes them
> > do poorly in the woods
> > Special Abilities : Scythed Chariots, and the elephants have pikes
> > You can use Elephants and Pike to counter enemy shock units, or
> absorb them
> > and counterpunch, but are weak against concentrated enemy missile
> fire. Lack
> > of ability to operate well in terrain is a minor additional
> weakness.
> > Elephants are hard to classify (some shoot, some just charge,
some
> have
> > pike, most don't).
> >
> > Anybody care to comment?
> >
> > Frank Gilson
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from
> McAfee®
> > Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?
> cid=3963

This is a good question. I would also add that a determination would
depend largely on how these guys were run. If, as my current partner
Ambrose runs them like 6E 2HCT/Pa they are archer hunting line
troops, but if in 2 or 4E second wave they would be more of "after"
shock troops. Good question.
Wanax

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "J. Murphy" <jjmurphy@s...>
wrote:
> Where in this do you fit something like the various FeudWar close
> order troops who get 1.5 ranks of 2HCT when steady? A good bit more
> threatening than just "line" but not quite mobile enough to
> be "shock"?
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Gilson"
> <franktrevorgilson@h...> wrote:
> > The categories I put forth seem to cover us well:
> > Shock/Skirmish/Missile/Line/Terrain

[Dave Smith]

Gents;

It would also be interesting to see some thoughts on army
differences, vis-a-vis scale. I don't think I've seen where these
army classifications take scale into account....or does that matter.

Dave




--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Wanax Andron"
<spocksleftball@y...> wrote:
> This is a good question. I would also add that a determination
would
> depend largely on how these guys were run. If, as my current
partner
> Ambrose runs them like 6E 2HCT/Pa they are archer hunting line
> troops, but if in 2 or 4E second wave they would be more
of "after"
> shock troops. Good question.
> Wanax
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "J. Murphy" <jjmurphy@s...>
> wrote:
> > Where in this do you fit something like the various FeudWar
close
> > order troops who get 1.5 ranks of 2HCT when steady? A good bit
more
> > threatening than just "line" but not quite mobile enough to
> > be "shock"?
> >
> > --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Gilson"
> > <franktrevorgilson@h...> wrote:
> > > The categories I put forth seem to cover us well:
> > > Shock/Skirmish/Missile/Line/Terrain

[John Murphy]

Say, just for sake of discussion you understand, you had them

4E Reg C HI 2HCT, Sh

with the FeudWar list rules that allow
these up to 1.5 ranks of 2HCT anytime if steady
(i.e. they get it even standing still
although I do not think they count shielded in that case)

How to categorize (use) them, line or shock?

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Wanax Andron"
<spocksleftball@y...> wrote:
> depend largely on how these guys were run.

Personally I would call them line. They do not have the capability
in movement or impetuocity to potentially rout any realistic enemy on
contact. At best they will hit at 6@6 in the most favorable matchup,
but more likely they will take a hit at the halt however. Being
regular means they can manuver and thus, as someone pointed out, are
better as second wave fighters, and they therefore seem more in line
with line troops.

Another odd example is a unit like Sailors where RgC LHI 2HCT/HG/sh
or something similiar. They shoot, they have movement, and they can
hit without being hit, but it is entirely dependant upon the enemy as
to the role they will adopt.

Again, interesting question of which I am unable to be the final
arbiter.

Wanax

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "J. Murphy" <jjmurphy@s...>
wrote:
> Say, just for sake of discussion you understand, you had them
>
> 4E Reg C HI 2HCT, Sh
>
> with the FeudWar list rules that allow
> these up to 1.5 ranks of 2HCT anytime if steady
> (i.e. they get it even standing still
> although I do not think they count shielded in that case)
>
> How to categorize (use) them, line or shock?
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Wanax Andron"
> <spocksleftball@y...> wrote:
> > depend largely on how these guys were run.

[John Murphy]

So, you would say something like

Irr C LMI 1/2 2HCT 1/2 JLS

would make a better shock type? Even if they do not get the rank-and-
a-half 2HCT?

3@8 + 1.5@5or6 (28.5or30) vs 6@6 (30)

but twice the fatigue (+1 for impetuous) and much worse getting shot
on the way in

even 6@5 (no charge) is 24

cost analysis = 7 for the regs, 2 for the irregs
break-even unit size is around 3 figs
so the irregs defintely cheaper

I guess besides cost the other big difference (actually, to balance
against shooting vulnerability) is wether they can force themselves
on the enemy or wether the enemy has to co-operate

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Wanax Andron"
<spocksleftball@y...> wrote:
> They do not have the capability
> in movement or impetuocity to potentially rout any realistic enemy
on
> contact.

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 3/30/2004 1:39:00 PM Eastern Standard Time,
jjmurphy@... writes:

> 4E Reg C HI 2HCT, Sh
>
> with the FeudWar list rules that allow
> these up to 1.5 ranks of 2HCT anytime if steady
> (i.e. they get it even standing still
> although I do not think they count shielded in that case)>>

if they were steady and in first contact they would not be shieldless, even if
they stood to receive.

Jon

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Dave,

Ofcourse it matters! You don't see Chris Damour regularly playing 15mm
Vikings now do you!?!!! :)

kelly

David Smith <davidsmith@...> wrote:
Gents;

It would also be interesting to see some thoughts on army
differences, vis-a-vis scale. I don't think I've seen where these
army classifications take scale into account....or does that matter.

Dave




--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Wanax Andron"
<spocksleftball@y...> wrote:
> This is a good question. I would also add that a determination
would
> depend largely on how these guys were run. If, as my current
partner
> Ambrose runs them like 6E 2HCT/Pa they are archer hunting line
> troops, but if in 2 or 4E second wave they would be more
of "after"
> shock troops. Good question.
> Wanax
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "J. Murphy" <jjmurphy@s...>
> wrote:
> > Where in this do you fit something like the various FeudWar
close
> > order troops who get 1.5 ranks of 2HCT when steady? A good bit
more
> > threatening than just "line" but not quite mobile enough to
> > be "shock"?
> >
> > --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Frank Gilson"
> > <franktrevorgilson@h...> wrote:
> > > The categories I put forth seem to cover us well:
> > > Shock/Skirmish/Missile/Line/Terrain



---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/

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

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



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.

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