Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

In a message dated Fri, 3 May 2002 12:59:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
JonCleaves@... writes:

>And if it were me, given that Warrior is better than DBM and is here to stay
and its authors are a zillion % more responsive to player's concerns, I'd just
rebase the damn Cav(O) to LC or whatever and stick with Warrior.  
>

Why is it that the Byzantine lists seem to create more problems with this
intra-rule compatibility issue than any other?

I have a DBM-based Nikephorian army (or anyway mostly the figures work for
Nikephorians) that I bought off a guy pretty cheap. I don't think I've seen two
rule sets that interpret the Nikephorians the same way. DBM with its nutty DBEs
is perhaps the most indiosyncratic of the lot, of course.

Since my Dark Age Warrior rules have not arrived yet (hint, hint to the Sales
ho), I still don't know how the list ho dealt with the problem of Byzantine
cavalry that has front rank L and back rank B. (I know Nikes aren't in Dark Age,
but I think Thematics had the same arrangement under "that other game" (TOG)).

Since all L now get 1.5 ranks, having a back row of B is a real problem when
facing Arab HC L,Sh cavalry.

John Meunier

[joncleaves]

John, I'll let the list ho talk to this in detail, but I am pleased to report
that there will be no L front B back troops in Warrior. One of my going in
positions in forming FHE was that we did away with such interpretations.

Pictures on pottery shards do not equal sensical troop formations. How troops
of the era fought and were employed takes precedence over any particular
representation of troops thought to fight together in any given 'unit'.

[scott holder]

Since my Dark Age Warrior rules have not arrived yet (hint, hint to the
Sales ho), I still don't know how the list ho dealt with the problem of
Byzantine cavalry that has front rank L and back rank B. (I know Nikes
aren't in Dark Age, but I think Thematics had the same arrangement under
"that other game" (TOG)).

>Paul Georgian (the author of all our Byzantine lists with small tweaks
by me) came up with an elegant solution. Kavallarioi essentially came
in two "flavors", lancers and "shooters" (for lack of a better term off
the top of my head). Said Kavallarioi were also broken down into what
we would consider "shock cav" and "skirmisher cav". Moreover, these two
types existed in 3:2 rations. So......it was very easy to break them
out into HC and LC, hence, all Kavallarioi Lancers have......lances and
all Kavallarioi "shooters" have bows.

>There is (and will be) no such thing as cav with a front rank of lance
and a second rank of "just bow". Remember, Warrior is an "effect" game
and if the mechanics somehow exclude an historical "effect", we will
figure out a way via the lists to achieve that effect.

Scott
List Ho