Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Frank Gilson]

Previous message thread is below my text.

Scott Holder mentioned my name . So I'll make a comment. Typically we have
units of close order foot that can be front two ranks JLS or LTS with a
third rank Bow, or front rank LTS with a 2nd rank of Crossbow.

Mr. Holder does make a good presentation of when you would use these types
of troops. Basically they draw off enemy missile fire very very well being
shooters to front so your cavalry or elephants or whatnot don't get shot up.

Since that back rank of missile guys is just there to draw away shooting,
and doesn't do much, it can't cost much or you're spending too many points
on it. They should be shieldless MI with missile weapon. I'd even want them
to be D morale if possible, saving many more points.

So, an ideal type of unit for this would be 6 elements big, two ranks of MI
LTS,Sh, and a third rank of MI B. All but one front rank element Reg D.
Total cost? 78 points. Being regular gives them some maneuver advantages.

I like less the single rank of LTS backed by a single rank of CB, and
probably wouldn't buy such troops as they fight inefficiently given LTS can
fight from two ranks, but CB can only fire over one rank.

Frank

*********************************************************
I'm looking at a couple of lists that contain mixed capasity units.
I don't have much experience working with LTS front rank Bw rear rank
types of units. Can someone tell me why I'd bother? My limited
experience has been that the support shot never even generates a CPF
or even close to what a second rank of LTS would, so help me to
understand the errors of my ways? :)

>I'm sure there are loads of cost-benefit analysis from folks like Frank
>that
dicate why one should or should not buy these and my comments don't take
that
into account.

>Ideally, you aim for 2 ranks of "fighting foot" and a third rank of bow
>(please
note I don't use the "Bw" phraseology from the somewhat abstract
game>grin<).
That won't generate an upfront CPF either but it does add a little something
into the final CPF calculation.

>Moreover, having a unit that shoots is what you're using to suck off your
opponent's shooting. I think that the current player curve in Warrior
completely underestimates this "counter ploy" to army lists like Derek's
Silla
Koreans. In one way, this is where armies like the Anglo-Danish actually
work
well. Two ranks of Fryd Spearmen backed up by a 3rd rank of Fyrd Bowmen.
Sure,
they're vulnerable to certain opponents but they're also great black holes
for
shooting priorities AND don't take hardly any shooting damage. Plus they
bash
the crap out of those Reg 12E blocks of MI bowmen once they close. The
issue is
probably how you fight against all the other stuff but if looking at this in
a
vacuum, shooting priority hose ups is what you're aiming at with last back
rank
of bow.

>Again, I'm sure there's some cost-benefit formula that probably dictates
AGAINST doing something along these lines. And you really need to juggle
units
in terms of who is supporting whom and what are your follow up shock units,
etc.
Very fun to try and master.

_________________________________________________________________
Expand your wine savvy — and get some great new recipes — at MSN Wine.
http://wine.msn.com

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Frank,
Don't forget that you can exchange ranks with your Bows in the 2nd rank
when faced by annoying lights or other bow types. Also look at your points
again. I think the cost is only 74 for a Reg "D" MI 2/3 LTS,Sh 1/3 MI B. . .
And note that I agree with you here! Great minds think alike. Better yet, @
78 points you could upgrade an element to "C" class and not have to waiver test
for prompted charges!
kelly

Frank Gilson <franktrevorgilson@...> wrote:
Previous message thread is below my text.

Scott Holder mentioned my name . So I'll make a comment. Typically we have
units of close order foot that can be front two ranks JLS or LTS with a
third rank Bow, or front rank LTS with a 2nd rank of Crossbow.

Mr. Holder does make a good presentation of when you would use these types
of troops. Basically they draw off enemy missile fire very very well being
shooters to front so your cavalry or elephants or whatnot don't get shot up.

Since that back rank of missile guys is just there to draw away shooting,
and doesn't do much, it can't cost much or you're spending too many points
on it. They should be shieldless MI with missile weapon. I'd even want them
to be D morale if possible, saving many more points.

So, an ideal type of unit for this would be 6 elements big, two ranks of MI
LTS,Sh, and a third rank of MI B. All but one front rank element Reg D.
Total cost? 78 points. Being regular gives them some maneuver advantages.

I like less the single rank of LTS backed by a single rank of CB, and
probably wouldn't buy such troops as they fight inefficiently given LTS can
fight from two ranks, but CB can only fire over one rank.

Frank

*********************************************************
I'm looking at a couple of lists that contain mixed capasity units.
I don't have much experience working with LTS front rank Bw rear rank
types of units. Can someone tell me why I'd bother? My limited
experience has been that the support shot never even generates a CPF
or even close to what a second rank of LTS would, so help me to
understand the errors of my ways? :)

>I'm sure there are loads of cost-benefit analysis from folks like Frank
>that
dicate why one should or should not buy these and my comments don't take
that
into account.

>Ideally, you aim for 2 ranks of "fighting foot" and a third rank of bow
>(please
note I don't use the "Bw" phraseology from the somewhat abstract
game>grin<).
That won't generate an upfront CPF either but it does add a little something
into the final CPF calculation.

>Moreover, having a unit that shoots is what you're using to suck off your
opponent's shooting. I think that the current player curve in Warrior
completely underestimates this "counter ploy" to army lists like Derek's
Silla
Koreans. In one way, this is where armies like the Anglo-Danish actually
work
well. Two ranks of Fryd Spearmen backed up by a 3rd rank of Fyrd Bowmen.
Sure,
they're vulnerable to certain opponents but they're also great black holes
for
shooting priorities AND don't take hardly any shooting damage. Plus they
bash
the crap out of those Reg 12E blocks of MI bowmen once they close. The
issue is
probably how you fight against all the other stuff but if looking at this in
a
vacuum, shooting priority hose ups is what you're aiming at with last back
rank
of bow.

>Again, I'm sure there's some cost-benefit formula that probably dictates
AGAINST doing something along these lines. And you really need to juggle
units
in terms of who is supporting whom and what are your follow up shock units,
etc.
Very fun to try and master.

_________________________________________________________________
Expand your wine savvy — and get some great new recipes — at MSN Wine.
http://wine.msn.com




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:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes

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