Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Mark Stone]

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

> Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:10:41 EST
> From: markmallard77@...
> Subject: Re: Re: tourney formats
>
> I know we are slow in playing our games maybe 30 mins a move but we deploy
> our terrain in a couple of minutes and our troops in say 15 max all over a
> coffee or beer. first move typically 15 minutes too. Its later that things
> get
> slowed down to 30 minutes a move, even more when the crunch starts. Combats
> including say 6 units, of all different types can take some time to resolve.
>
> It is the nitty gritty problem areas that slow us down and resolving combats
>
> we also so far have not used what i consider unfair terrain. i would not
> attack a fortification of some sort or cross some defended minor water etc. so
> the game would drag.

Couple of comments:

1. The whole idea of a chess-style time clock for moves is repugnant, and I'm
confident Scott and company will never go in that direction. It's the wrong
solution to the problem. I know Scott doesn't care for the "number of moves +
time limit" approach, but I'd like to hear more from those with some experience
with this tournament format.

2. If the parts of the game that are slowing you down are combat, then you're
doing everything right. If you have a bound that takes longer than 30 minutes to
resolve because there are five different exchanges of prep shooting and six
charges and/or hand to hand combat results to resolve, then you'll have no
difficulty achieving a decisive result in the time alotted.

3. Terrain is usually more of a psychological obstacle than an actual impediment
to game play. We just finished a tournament in California where we had two
"obstacle" armies. Frank Gilson played Knights of Saint John and routinely took
unfortified built over areas, which where then extended by stone walls
(temporary field fortifications to which the KStJ are entitled). Rich Gagliasso
played Early Imperial Romans and every game built himself a little fort of woods
and palisades in which to defend. I didn't see that players facing these two had
any difficulty coming to grips with them or achieving decisive results. Rich had
the tougher challenge; until the new Roman list rules come out, his legions just
aren't very good. The quintessential moment was watching Lenney Hermann send
wave after wave of Hsiung Nu Irr A MC into the Romans, and rolling up enough to
overcome all "obstacles", as it were. Frank won some games big, and lost some
games big, but clearly no one felt his position was unassailable.

The key is to have a plan, and to have it _before_ you get to the tournament.
OK, your opponent sets up behind and obstacle with a significant body of troops.
What are you going to do? Are you going to pile on shooting on a critical point,
because he's ceded the initiative to you and you can pick your point to attack?
Are you going to use a flank march to come in behind his fort? Can a combined
arms attack of shock foot one bound followed by shock cav next bound take out
his troops even behind an obstacle? Can you pick terrain in such as a way as to
maximize the frontage he has to cover, forcing him to over-extend himself even
with the obstacles?

There are many options. The key is to think them through and visualize them
_before_ you reach the gaming table. That way you won't fail your personal waver
test in the face of a daunting defensive position.


-Mark Stone