Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Mark Stone]

Quoting "WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com" <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>:

> Mark,
> Let us relook at your scenarios with all the stone walls in a list
> like Swiss. If I place the walls 120p from the centerline, and I
> forcemarch my LI HG to the wall, I will not be forced back from the
> wall by the enemy LI unless I'm outscouted. So I'm outscouted, but
> I've forcemarched my entire (or half) of my army forward. If the
> enemy doesn't reciprocate, I will gain the wall.

Um, yes you will be forced back. If the enemy force marches to the center line
opposite you, and you're 120 back from the center line, you'll each be forced
back 60. Not a big deal with LI who can then approach back up to the walls, but
just wanted to point out that setting up 120 back does not make you safe from
being pushed back by opposing force marchers.

> Now consider--as a mental exercise only--the stone wall in 6E
> sections placed in a crenalated fashion at 240p and 120p to a width
> of 24E. This particular defensive seems at first glance to be
> gemmicie gamesmanship, but no! This more reasonably represents the
> stone wall fields of Switzerland more reasonably that a single wall
> stretching some 1.2 kilometers. If part of the army is forcemarched
> to the forward walls now, the rear walls provide support once the non-
> forcemarched units get there. I forcemarch my LI to the forward
> walls, and bring up the rest of the army in the first bound to sit
> behind the back walls. Now the enemy will fight for the forward
> walls that once taken will become channels for counter attacks. The
> enemy, probably tired, force back across a wall (obsticle) now
> becomes disordered and will shortly rout.
>

This sounds like pure fantasy to me. If your forward walls are being covered by
shieldless LI, then even with the walls they will be vulnerable to any enemy LI
that have at least one of: shields, javelins, or impetuousity. Take an exteme
case: I have nothing better than Reg C LI B,Sh to throw at you. So my LI charges
your LI, which sits behind the walls to take the charge at the halt.
You get: +2 for defended obstacle
I get: +2 for shieldess (the walls only make you shielded against shooting, not
hand to hand), +1 for charging.
If you manage to do a CPF to me in support shooting (and I don't do one to you)
then we're even. If I lose, I happily break off. If you lose, then you ceded the
wall to me, and if I catch you in your mandatory break off you're routed.

So absolutely NOTHING of the enemy is going to end up coming across the walls
tired and disordered, and nothing more than mediocre enemy LI will be needed to
clear out your LI.

Sorry to be blunt, but the reality is that the Swiss are most effective as a
contingent of somebody else's army.


-Mark Stone

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Mark Stone <mark@d...> wrote:
> Quoting "WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com"
<WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>:
If I place the walls 120p from the centerline, and I
> > forcemarch my LI HG to the wall, I will not be forced back from
the
> > wall by the enemy LI unless I'm outscouted. So I'm outscouted,
but
> > I've forcemarched my entire (or half) of my army forward. If the
> > enemy doesn't reciprocate, I will gain the wall.
>
> Um, yes you will be forced back. If the enemy force marches to the
center line
> opposite you, and you're 120 back from the center line, you'll each
be forced
> back 60. Not a big deal with LI who can then approach back up to
the walls, but
> just wanted to point out that setting up 120 back does not make you
safe from
> being pushed back by opposing force marchers.

Let me state more clearly, as email is a very limited form of
communication. If you and I are both marching LI to the centerline,
then we will both move back 120p. YOu place walls prior to troop
placement, so if the wall is at 120p, and it is evident that both
will place force marches, then you place to the centerline unless
outscouted. The forceback will be to the wall. Otherwise, you gain
the wall.


The
> > enemy, probably tired, force back across a wall (obsticle) now
> > becomes disordered and will shortly rout.
> >
>
> This sounds like pure fantasy to me.
>
> So absolutely NOTHING of the enemy is going to end up coming across
the walls
> tired and disordered, and nothing more than mediocre enemy LI will
be needed to
> clear out your LI.

And your thought process, which is typical for Warrior, is exactly
why you set up the way I described. If the idea was to hold the far
walls, then I wouldn't put up LI HG to hold it. You will not rout
the defending LI without radical dice like the IrgA up roll, so the
most your attacking LI can hope for is to push my troops from the
wall. This is exactly what is wanted. I want the wall behind your
units more than in front of mine. The near walls with my shieldless
LMI I want to hold, but your troops I want trapped on my side of the
far wall so that my reserve units can get at them more easily and you
will have more difficulty supporting. Sorry if it seems fantasy to
you, but if you're coming at me with something full of K or massed
shooters I will win the contest of wall quick or go home early. :)

>
> Sorry to be blunt, but the reality is that the Swiss are most
effective as a
> contingent of somebody else's army.


This ultimately is true as shooting and shields (the two most
critical aspects of Warrior troops) are missing from the army. Then
again, I'm just using a radical example of how walls can be used in
conjunction with force marching.
Wanax