Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Mark Stone]

> Message: 20
> Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 03:26:02 -0000
> From: "Peter Celella" <pcelella@...>
> Subject: Re: JLS Tactics
>
> I was looking over the Early Visigoth List in Imperial Warrior some
> more in light of the JLS Tactics discussion, and realised that in
> addition to the mass of Irr C MI JLS, Sh it contains, it also has an
> option for Dacian Warriors Irr C LMI JLS, Sh, half of which can be
> upgraded to 2HCW. This would seem to be an interesting combination.
> Could one still deploy 12E units of MI JLS, with the LMI in support,
> maybe with the lanced armed HC also? Any recommendations on how to
> set this type of organization up, and how to go about combat and
> maneuvering tactics with it on the tabletop?
>
> Peter
>

Peter,

Well, I sat down and took a long look at the Early Visigothic list. After
overcoming my deep qualms about close order JLS-armed foot, I think that there
are some interesting things you could do with this list. So let me offer an
overview/analysis, and then a suggested variant.

Caveat: I'm writing this from the perspective of taking this army into open
tournament play, where you may face everything from SHK to chariots to
elephants. Putting together an in-period variant would be much easier.

First off, this is one of those lists that would really benefit from getting two
versions in a tournament rather than one. You really do want to fight it one way
against cav armies and another way against foot armies. Nonetheless, we'll
assume one version and work with that handicap.

Obviously you're going to have large blocks of JLS-armed troops as your main
line troops, and have to figure out how to make those viable. More on that
later. Supposing you can get those blocks to function as effective "shock
absorbers", how are you going to then win with this army?

Since your Foot Warrior upgrade to Irr A is for "each unit" the usual approach
of having smaller high morale units in between larger units won't work (at
least not directly). On the flip side, your Foot Warrior blocks will always be
eager, making it harder for your opponent to break them through a series of
failed wavers.

Your cavalry can be lance-armed, and that's a very good thing. You probably want
several such units, but as they are HC and thus vulnerable to shooting and
vulnerable to heavier armored cav (K and SHC), they'll need to operate in a
counter-punching role.

You have the Dacians, and this is where you'll want to get your reserve of
small, high morale units. Only half can be Irr B, and you want some units that
are entirely Irr B. Thus the correct approach would be to buy a large block of
Irr C Dacians (this also gives you something to hold rough terrain with), and
then several smaller units of Irr B Dacians to interleave between your large
blocks of foot Warriors.

This list actually has some quite decent light troops, and that's not to be
ignored. You get plenty of LI with bow. Unfortunately none of it can have
shields, but still it's useful. You get good LC, and should certainly take a 12
figure unit of Hunnic LC as they will tear through any other light troops they
come into contact with.

Finally, notice that your Foot Warriors can get detachments of LI archers.
Against cavalry opponents, this suggests an intriguing tactic, one I've never
tried, but one which might be quite successful. Here's my thinking on this:

In terms of casualties your Foot Warriors put out, there's a disadvantage
against cav to being disordered. That disadvantage is not huge against the most
heavily armored cav (K and SHC) however, since you'll do relatively little to
them whether you're steady or disordered. And in terms of casualties received,
being disordered doesn't actually hurt you that much. Unobstructed, cav can
easily charge you impetuously, which has the same effect as charging disordered
foot. In other words, if your opponent wants that extra +2, he can pretty much
get it.

So getting a Foot Warrior block disordered against heavily armored cav is a
negative, but not a huge negative. Here's where the detachments come in. Note
that in 2.53, it says "If a separated detachment routs and meets its parent
body, then the detachment is automatically joined with the parent and the whole
becomes a disordered block with the detachment forming the rear ranks."

Now imagine this: you have a large Foot Warrior block with a small LI detachment
in front of it. Instead of evading or recalling back from shooting and other
threats, you just keep the LI up there, even if it means taking a waver test
with the LI to do so. Force him to charge your LI with his mounted to get rid
of it, and then stand to receive the charge allowing yourself to be routed. The
LI will rout back through the Foot Warriors, joining them and having the whole
become a disordered block, and the mounted will do a converted charge into the
Foot Warriors and thus -- this is the key -- take significant additional
fatigue.

Look at an ideal scenario. You have 8 elements of Foot Warriors in a 2 wide, 4
deep column (counting as a 24 figure unit). 79 paces in front is a 4 element
detachment of LI, being approached by 2 stands of Irr B SHK L,Sh. Through some
combination of prep shooting and/or support shooting you manage to get 1 CPF on
the SHK, who charge your LI impetuously and rout them. This results in a
converted charge into the Foot Warriors. Over the 2 bounds involved here, no
one else can interfere with the Foot Warriors (that's the way converted charges
work), which is good: he can't pile in additional help right away. And look what
happens to the knights. They take:
- 1 CPF in prep and/or support
- 1 CPF for charging
- 1 CPF for being knights charging
- 2 CPF for being impetuous
- 1 CPF for charging consecutive bounds
- 1 CPF for charging in the converted charge
- 1 CPF for being knights charging in the converted charge
- 2 CPF for being impetuous in the converted charge

That puts them at 10 fatigue before any of the rest of his army gets to respond,
and without you doing any hand to hand casualties. If you roll up with your Foot
Warriors and/or LI, he's probably at 11 or 12 fatigue. Now (on the 3rd bound)
he'll have a small Dacian unit ready to charge him in the flank thus bringing
him to exhaustion, and he's trying to do a CPF to what counts as a 28 figure
unit with 6 tired knights. They should be 6@5 which is 24; not a CPF unless he
rolls up.

Now, this ideal scenario for you is one that your opponent won't easily walk
into. Many times you'll no doubt end up evading the LI back rather than
standing and deliberately routing. Your opponent can circumvent the problems
you've posed with various combined arms tactics. But now that means he's going
to have to dedicate 2 or 3 units to each Foot Warrior block that he wants to
break, which should give you numerical superiority elsewhere on the
battlefield.

So here's the setup, as I envision it. You have a middle battle line of Foot
Warrior blocks, with LI detachments in front. One flank is anchored in rough
terrain, occupied by a large block of Dacians and possibly some accompanying
LI. The other flank is in the open, and is held by LI and LC, including Huns.
Small high morale Dacian units intersperse the Foot Warrior blocks, and
lance-armed cav forms a reserve that can aid either the Foot Warriors or help
you with the open flank held by your light troops.

The battle plan: you'll attempt to win the battle in one of two ways. First,
your Foot Warriors are bait, tempting your opponent to charge them, allowing
you to counter-punch with Dacians and lancers. The Foot Warriors should push
forward steadily, pressuring your opponent into dealing with them. If your
opponent has mostly infantry and/or elephants, then the Foot Warriors are
actually dangerous in their own right, all the more so with the supporting
Dacian and lancer contingents.

Second, you push aggressively with the light troops on one wing. Force march
some LI. Move LI and LC up aggressively, and try really hard to turn your
opponent's flank on that wing. If he opposes you with light troops, you should
be able to win because you have high quality lights for hand to hand combat. If
he opposes you with something other than light troops, you should be able to
bend his line back because you're faster than he is. You may also be able to
harm him with shooting from your lights. If he opposes you with shooters (loose
order foot, 4-to-a-stand), then you'll want to angle your nearest Foot Warrior
block in that direction, as they have no fear of shooters.

In sum: steady advance up the middle, guarded by rough terrain on one flank.
Aggressive push on the other flank, attempting to turn your opponent's flank or
at least bend back his line creating a hinge you can concentrate on. Win on the
flank, or win in the middle by countering his response with your high morale
and high damage-causing units (Dacians and lancers).

So here's the 1600 point list to implement these tactics:

CinC and 2 subgenerals each with 2 stands Irr B HC L,JLS,Sh
3x Foot Warriors, each 2 stands Irr A, 6 stands Irr C MI JLS,Sh
3x Archer detachments, each 4 stands Irr C LI B
1x Dacian Warriors, 6 stands Irr C LMI JLS,Sh
3x Dacian Warriors, each 2 stands Irr B LMI 2HCW,JLS,Sh/JLS,Sh
1x Nobles, 2 stands Irr B HC L,JLS,Sh
1x Hunnic cav, 2 stands Irr B HC L,B,Sh
1x Hunnic skirmishers, 6 stands Irr C LC JLS,B,Sh
1x Alans, 6 stands Irr C LC JLS,B,Sh
2x Dacian Archers, 6 stands Irr C LI B
1x Javelinmen, 4 stands Irr C LI JLS,Sh

17 units plus 3 detachments
242 figures total
60 scouting points


-Mark Stone

[joncleaves]

Good stuff, as always, Mark. Always good to see someone who is aware of the
nuances of detachments.

One thing:

<<Since your Foot Warrior upgrade to Irr A is for "each unit" the usual approach
of having smaller high morale units in between larger units won't work (at
least not directly). On the flip side, your Foot Warrior blocks will always be
eager, >>

That is not quite correct. The A troops in the front rank will keep the unit
from ever being uneasy, which is what you meant, but the unit is not eager due
to this - that is something different (and 'lesser') than never being uneasy.

Jon

Mark:

Wow!

This is really incredibly helpful, and greatly insightful
information. It's much, much more than I was ever hoping to get for
help. I appreciate it very much.

I'll have to spend some time digesting everything, but it seems to
have put me on a sensible path.

Thanks again.

Peter

> 3x Dacian Warriors, each 2 stands Irr B LMI 2HCW,JLS,Sh/JLS,Sh

One other question on the above notation for the Dacian Warriors.
What does the /JLS,SH mean? Are both elements in the unit identical,
carrying both 2HCW and JLS, or do you mean one element with 2HCW and
one with JLS only?

I think both elements are identical - correct?

Peter

[Mark Stone]

--- On August 9 Peter Celella said: ---

>> 3x Dacian Warriors, each 2 stands Irr B LMI 2HCW,JLS,Sh/JLS,Sh
>
> One other question on the above notation for the Dacian Warriors.
> What does the /JLS,SH mean? Are both elements in the unit identical,
> carrying both 2HCW and JLS, or do you mean one element with 2HCW and
> one with JLS only?

It means one element armed with both 2HCW and JLS, as well as shield, and one
element armed with just JLS and shield.

Note that the list says "extra to give Dacian Warriors 2HCW... 0-1/2"

So that means that the 2HCW is in addition to JLS, and that up to half of your
stands can have this additional armament. You really only need it in the front
rank, and you really only want it for the small Irr B units. Arming the large
18 figure unit this way would be a mistake, since it would then count
shieldless on a second bound of hand to hand combat. The 18 figure unit is
there to be durable and hold out. The small Irr B units are there to maximize
damage on first contact.


-Mark Stone

That's really cool! Now if the opponent introduces a second unit of knights
though, they will hit the unscreened foot like an avalanche will they not?
They would almost certainly rout. On the other hand, at 2 knight regiments
for a much cheaper regiment of foot you are seriously winning the points
trade off. Sounds like a good tactic to me.

Now, it seems to me that this would work well with any light infantry
screen? Just let the LI Stand and receive the knights charge. If they rout
through the Foot behind them that is cessation cured disorder, so the Foot
are not even Disordered for the converted charge right?

The LI can even be rallied behind the lines.

I think that the Irregular LI unit also needs to be at least 8 figs, so that
they don't go Poof! when the knights are 5 @ more. Its bad if there is
nothing left for the knights to pursue into the next unit.


Allan


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Stone" <mark@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, August 09, 2004 2:46 PM
Subject: [WarriorRules] re: Early Visigothic


> > Message: 20
> > Date: Sat, 07 Aug 2004 03:26:02 -0000
> > From: "Peter Celella" <pcelella@...>
> > Subject: Re: JLS Tactics
> >
> > I was looking over the Early Visigoth List in Imperial Warrior some
> > more in light of the JLS Tactics discussion, and realised that in
> > addition to the mass of Irr C MI JLS, Sh it contains, it also has an
> > option for Dacian Warriors Irr C LMI JLS, Sh, half of which can be
> > upgraded to 2HCW. This would seem to be an interesting combination.
> > Could one still deploy 12E units of MI JLS, with the LMI in support,
> > maybe with the lanced armed HC also? Any recommendations on how to
> > set this type of organization up, and how to go about combat and
> > maneuvering tactics with it on the tabletop?
> >
> > Peter
> >
>
> Peter,
>
> Well, I sat down and took a long look at the Early Visigothic list. After
> overcoming my deep qualms about close order JLS-armed foot, I think that
there
> are some interesting things you could do with this list. So let me offer
an
> overview/analysis, and then a suggested variant.
>
> Caveat: I'm writing this from the perspective of taking this army into
open
> tournament play, where you may face everything from SHK to chariots to
> elephants. Putting together an in-period variant would be much easier.
>
> First off, this is one of those lists that would really benefit from
getting two
> versions in a tournament rather than one. You really do want to fight it
one way
> against cav armies and another way against foot armies. Nonetheless, we'll
> assume one version and work with that handicap.
>
> Obviously you're going to have large blocks of JLS-armed troops as your
main
> line troops, and have to figure out how to make those viable. More on that
> later. Supposing you can get those blocks to function as effective "shock
> absorbers", how are you going to then win with this army?
>
> Since your Foot Warrior upgrade to Irr A is for "each unit" the usual
approach
> of having smaller high morale units in between larger units won't work (at
> least not directly). On the flip side, your Foot Warrior blocks will
always be
> eager, making it harder for your opponent to break them through a series
of
> failed wavers.
>
> Your cavalry can be lance-armed, and that's a very good thing. You
probably want
> several such units, but as they are HC and thus vulnerable to shooting and
> vulnerable to heavier armored cav (K and SHC), they'll need to operate in
a
> counter-punching role.
>
> You have the Dacians, and this is where you'll want to get your reserve of
> small, high morale units. Only half can be Irr B, and you want some units
that
> are entirely Irr B. Thus the correct approach would be to buy a large
block of
> Irr C Dacians (this also gives you something to hold rough terrain with),
and
> then several smaller units of Irr B Dacians to interleave between your
large
> blocks of foot Warriors.
>
> This list actually has some quite decent light troops, and that's not to
be
> ignored. You get plenty of LI with bow. Unfortunately none of it can have
> shields, but still it's useful. You get good LC, and should certainly take
a 12
> figure unit of Hunnic LC as they will tear through any other light troops
they
> come into contact with.
>
> Finally, notice that your Foot Warriors can get detachments of LI archers.
> Against cavalry opponents, this suggests an intriguing tactic, one I've
never
> tried, but one which might be quite successful. Here's my thinking on
this:
>
> In terms of casualties your Foot Warriors put out, there's a disadvantage
> against cav to being disordered. That disadvantage is not huge against the
most
> heavily armored cav (K and SHC) however, since you'll do relatively little
to
> them whether you're steady or disordered. And in terms of casualties
received,
> being disordered doesn't actually hurt you that much. Unobstructed, cav
can
> easily charge you impetuously, which has the same effect as charging
disordered
> foot. In other words, if your opponent wants that extra +2, he can pretty
much
> get it.
>
> So getting a Foot Warrior block disordered against heavily armored cav is
a
> negative, but not a huge negative. Here's where the detachments come in.
Note
> that in 2.53, it says "If a separated detachment routs and meets its
parent
> body, then the detachment is automatically joined with the parent and the
whole
> becomes a disordered block with the detachment forming the rear ranks."
>
> Now imagine this: you have a large Foot Warrior block with a small LI
detachment
> in front of it. Instead of evading or recalling back from shooting and
other
> threats, you just keep the LI up there, even if it means taking a waver
test
> with the LI to do so. Force him to charge your LI with his mounted to get
rid
> of it, and then stand to receive the charge allowing yourself to be
routed. The
> LI will rout back through the Foot Warriors, joining them and having the
whole
> become a disordered block, and the mounted will do a converted charge into
the
> Foot Warriors and thus -- this is the key -- take significant additional
> fatigue.
>
> Look at an ideal scenario. You have 8 elements of Foot Warriors in a 2
wide, 4
> deep column (counting as a 24 figure unit). 79 paces in front is a 4
element
> detachment of LI, being approached by 2 stands of Irr B SHK L,Sh. Through
some
> combination of prep shooting and/or support shooting you manage to get 1
CPF on
> the SHK, who charge your LI impetuously and rout them. This results in a
> converted charge into the Foot Warriors. Over the 2 bounds involved here,
no
> one else can interfere with the Foot Warriors (that's the way converted
charges
> work), which is good: he can't pile in additional help right away. And
look what
> happens to the knights. They take:
> - 1 CPF in prep and/or support
> - 1 CPF for charging
> - 1 CPF for being knights charging
> - 2 CPF for being impetuous
> - 1 CPF for charging consecutive bounds
> - 1 CPF for charging in the converted charge
> - 1 CPF for being knights charging in the converted charge
> - 2 CPF for being impetuous in the converted charge
>
> That puts them at 10 fatigue before any of the rest of his army gets to
respond,
> and without you doing any hand to hand casualties. If you roll up with
your Foot
> Warriors and/or LI, he's probably at 11 or 12 fatigue. Now (on the 3rd
bound)
> he'll have a small Dacian unit ready to charge him in the flank thus
bringing
> him to exhaustion, and he's trying to do a CPF to what counts as a 28
figure
> unit with 6 tired knights. They should be 6@5 which is 24; not a CPF
unless he
> rolls up.
>
> Now, this ideal scenario for you is one that your opponent won't easily
walk
> into. Many times you'll no doubt end up evading the LI back rather than
> standing and deliberately routing. Your opponent can circumvent the
problems
> you've posed with various combined arms tactics. But now that means he's
going
> to have to dedicate 2 or 3 units to each Foot Warrior block that he wants
to
> break, which should give you numerical superiority elsewhere on the
> battlefield.
>
> So here's the setup, as I envision it. You have a middle battle line of
Foot
> Warrior blocks, with LI detachments in front. One flank is anchored in
rough
> terrain, occupied by a large block of Dacians and possibly some
accompanying
> LI. The other flank is in the open, and is held by LI and LC, including
Huns.
> Small high morale Dacian units intersperse the Foot Warrior blocks, and
> lance-armed cav forms a reserve that can aid either the Foot Warriors or
help
> you with the open flank held by your light troops.
>
> The battle plan: you'll attempt to win the battle in one of two ways.
First,
> your Foot Warriors are bait, tempting your opponent to charge them,
allowing
> you to counter-punch with Dacians and lancers. The Foot Warriors should
push
> forward steadily, pressuring your opponent into dealing with them. If your
> opponent has mostly infantry and/or elephants, then the Foot Warriors are
> actually dangerous in their own right, all the more so with the supporting
> Dacian and lancer contingents.
>
> Second, you push aggressively with the light troops on one wing. Force
march
> some LI. Move LI and LC up aggressively, and try really hard to turn your
> opponent's flank on that wing. If he opposes you with light troops, you
should
> be able to win because you have high quality lights for hand to hand
combat. If
> he opposes you with something other than light troops, you should be able
to
> bend his line back because you're faster than he is. You may also be able
to
> harm him with shooting from your lights. If he opposes you with shooters
(loose
> order foot, 4-to-a-stand), then you'll want to angle your nearest Foot
Warrior
> block in that direction, as they have no fear of shooters.
>
> In sum: steady advance up the middle, guarded by rough terrain on one
flank.
> Aggressive push on the other flank, attempting to turn your opponent's
flank or
> at least bend back his line creating a hinge you can concentrate on. Win
on the
> flank, or win in the middle by countering his response with your high
morale
> and high damage-causing units (Dacians and lancers).
>
> So here's the 1600 point list to implement these tactics:
>
> CinC and 2 subgenerals each with 2 stands Irr B HC L,JLS,Sh
> 3x Foot Warriors, each 2 stands Irr A, 6 stands Irr C MI JLS,Sh
> 3x Archer detachments, each 4 stands Irr C LI B
> 1x Dacian Warriors, 6 stands Irr C LMI JLS,Sh
> 3x Dacian Warriors, each 2 stands Irr B LMI 2HCW,JLS,Sh/JLS,Sh
> 1x Nobles, 2 stands Irr B HC L,JLS,Sh
> 1x Hunnic cav, 2 stands Irr B HC L,B,Sh
> 1x Hunnic skirmishers, 6 stands Irr C LC JLS,B,Sh
> 1x Alans, 6 stands Irr C LC JLS,B,Sh
> 2x Dacian Archers, 6 stands Irr C LI B
> 1x Javelinmen, 4 stands Irr C LI JLS,Sh
>
> 17 units plus 3 detachments
> 242 figures total
> 60 scouting points
>
>
> -Mark Stone
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>

[Mark Stone]

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

> Message: 12
> Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 19:12:43 -0400
> From: "Allan Lougheed" <redcoat24@...>
> Subject: Re: re: Early Visigothic
>
> That's really cool! Now if the opponent introduces a second unit of knights
> though, they will hit the unscreened foot like an avalanche will they not?
> They would almost certainly rout. On the other hand, at 2 knight regiments
> for a much cheaper regiment of foot you are seriously winning the points
> trade off. Sounds like a good tactic to me.

Well, think about the timing of all this:
- Bound N, knight unit 1 goes into the LI
- Bound N+1, knight unit 1 resolves a converted charge into the Foot Warriors,
thus precluding any involvment from knight unit 2
- Bound N+2, the second knight unit gets to play, but so does your small unit of
Dacians. If knight unit 1 expanded to occupy both elements' frontage of the Foot
Warriors, then there's no room for knight unit 2 anyway.

All in all, you're pretty safe from an immediate rout.

>
> Now, it seems to me that this would work well with any light infantry
> screen? Just let the LI Stand and receive the knights charge. If they rout
> through the Foot behind them that is cessation cured disorder, so the Foot
> are not even Disordered for the converted charge right?
>
> The LI can even be rallied behind the lines.
>

Well, part of the problem is this: 6 figures of tired cav fighting against
disordered MI will do: other cav vs. MI = 3 +1 (following up) +2 (mtd vs.
disordered foot) -1 (tired) = 5. 6@5 = 24. So you want to be bigger than a 24
figure unit. 8 stands of MI as 2 wide, 4 deep, counts as exactly 24 figures;
not good. But when the LI detachment joins you, suddenly you're bigger than a
24 figure unit and he's not doing a CPF without rolling up.

> I think that the Irregular LI unit also needs to be at least 8 figs, so that
> they don't go Poof! when the knights are 5 @ more. Its bad if there is
> nothing left for the knights to pursue into the next unit.
>

I hadn't considered this possibility, and you're right, there is a potential
problem here. The problem is you need the MI unit to be at least 8 stands, and
then the maximum size allowed for a combined parent-detachment body would be 4
additional detachment stands (remember, the whole cannot exceed 12 stands).

But if the LI blow up within 80p of the MI, that's probably OK. The knights will
be in a mandatory rally (destroyed all h-t-h opponents), and the MI will be
close enough to charge them impetuously. The knights will likely be tired, and
about to pile on a bunch of additional charging fatigue, and the MI can
actually do a CPF or 2 in an impetuous charge against them; more if they roll
up.

Anyway, all these are details that may not even come up in any given battle. The
point is to show that the interaction between a large block of MI and a small LI
detachment is complicated in ways that benefit the Visigoths and confound an
opponent. None of these complexities are unsolvable for your opponent, but they
do turn a bunch of close order javelinmen that would otherwise be dead meat into
a challenge that has to be thought through with care.

And that's all you can really ask for of any line troops. These guys aren't
there to win the battle. They are there to survive long enough for you to
create other opportunities, and with the interplay with detachments they are
capable of fullfilling their role.


-Mark Stone

> Well, think about the timing of all this:
> - Bound N, knight unit 1 goes into the LI
> - Bound N+1, knight unit 1 resolves a converted charge into the Foot
Warriors,
> thus precluding any involvment from knight unit 2
> - Bound N+2, the second knight unit gets to play, but so does your small
unit of
> Dacians. If knight unit 1 expanded to occupy both elements' frontage of
the Foot
> Warriors, then there's no room for knight unit 2 anyway.
>
> All in all, you're pretty safe from an immediate rout.



I didn't realize that a converted charge precludes other units from
charging the target. good to know

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 8/11/2004 17:55:43 Central Daylight Time,
redcoat24@... writes:

I see, I'm treating them as regulars, in which case 8 elements is 32
figures. That's a miscommunication on my part.>>
Reg or Irreg, 8E of MI two E wide and four E deep counts as 24 figs for CPF.
See 10.3, second paragraph.

Jon




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

>
> Well, part of the problem is this: 6 figures of tired cav fighting against
> disordered MI will do: other cav vs. MI = 3 +1 (following up) +2 (mtd vs.
> disordered foot) -1 (tired) = 5. 6@5 = 24. So you want to be bigger than a
24
> figure unit. 8 stands of MI as 2 wide, 4 deep, counts as exactly 24
figures;
> not good. But when the LI detachment joins you, suddenly you're bigger
than a
> 24 figure unit and he's not doing a CPF without rolling up.


I see, I'm treating them as regulars, in which case 8 elements is 32
figures. That's a miscommunication on my part.

All the same, for a Regular unit of 32 figs, a screen of LI does the same
job right. They would take the initial charge and then harmlessly rout
through to the rear. Assuming the Infantry unit behind is big enough to soak
up the converted charge, they have a reasonable chance right?

I'm just thinking this approach might work for other armies too.

Of course, a decent knight player might use archers to force the LI to
recall before the charge happens.

Allan

Oh that's what you guys meant, Sorry I'll catch up!

----- Original Message -----
From: <JonCleaves@...>
To: <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 2004 7:05 PM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] re: Early Visigothic


> In a message dated 8/11/2004 17:55:43 Central Daylight Time,
> redcoat24@... writes:
>
> I see, I'm treating them as regulars, in which case 8 elements is 32
> figures. That's a miscommunication on my part.>>
> Reg or Irreg, 8E of MI two E wide and four E deep counts as 24 figs for
CPF.
> See 10.3, second paragraph.
>
> Jon
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>