Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Mike Turner]

I'm an experienced wargamer (try to stay away from the old reference),
but have only been playing Warrior for the last five years. I've been
a playtester and on the group since its beginning, and "my" observation
is that the most question/discussion/arguements come up over what I'd
call "gimmicks".

There is a list of them, and I know most players can think of the half
dozen to dozen or so units/elements/operations I'm talking about.

Aren't we as a group shooting ourselves in the foot over these?

Personally I'd much rather say I beat my opponent by my good use of
lights, or countering to expose his weakness, or simply out maneuvering
him. If the "gimmick" was the reason for my victory, it is a little
less satisfying.

Were these things in history! Certainly (or they wouldn't be in the
lists)! Should they be in list? yes. But we should all understand
they were a gimmick when the ancient general pulled it on his opponent,
and 99% of the time when we do it during a tournament it is against a
non-historical opponent. So should the results be the same?

Whenever something is out of the norm it will cause friction and can't
always be covered absolutely by the rules, so we should not be
surprised when "discussions" arise. I guess what I'm saying is, we
don't help ourselves as a "Warrior Community" when we get in heated
discussion over these things, we should almost always expect the
discussion will result from their use.

My $.02,
Mike

[Doug]

>"my" observation
>is that the most question/discussion/arguements come up over what I'd
>call "gimmicks".
>
>There is a list of them, and I know most players can think of the half
>dozen to dozen or so units/elements/operations I'm talking about.

Good point. A list of them would be appreciated, as well as a
paragraph on how they are used/abused. This would help new players
get a glimpse into the issue of "advanced gamesmanship vs cheese."

A list might also be useful in case someone wants to put on games for
beginners, where some of the items on the list might be prohibited.

[Kelly Wilkinson]

I agree.

kw

turner1118 <Turnerm@...> wrote:

I'm an experienced wargamer (try to stay away from the old reference),
but have only been playing Warrior for the last five years. I've been
a playtester and on the group since its beginning, and "my" observation
is that the most question/discussion/arguements come up over what I'd
call "gimmicks".

There is a list of them, and I know most players can think of the half
dozen to dozen or so units/elements/operations I'm talking about.

Aren't we as a group shooting ourselves in the foot over these?

Personally I'd much rather say I beat my opponent by my good use of
lights, or countering to expose his weakness, or simply out maneuvering
him. If the "gimmick" was the reason for my victory, it is a little
less satisfying.

Were these things in history! Certainly (or they wouldn't be in the
lists)! Should they be in list? yes. But we should all understand
they were a gimmick when the ancient general pulled it on his opponent,
and 99% of the time when we do it during a tournament it is against a
non-historical opponent. So should the results be the same?

Whenever something is out of the norm it will cause friction and can't
always be covered absolutely by the rules, so we should not be
surprised when "discussions" arise. I guess what I'm saying is, we
don't help ourselves as a "Warrior Community" when we get in heated
discussion over these things, we should almost always expect the
discussion will result from their use.

My $.02,
Mike






---------------------------------
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 the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!

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

[Mark Stone]

So, I find the label "gimmicks" really offensive.

You might as well say it's a "gimmick" to open a game of chess with something
other than a king's pawn or queen's pawn move.

Sorry, I will continue to use every rule at my disposal to find innovative ways
to win, I hope that Tim Brown and others will continue to do the same, and I
appreciate not be disparaged for putting the thought and creativity into this
that we do.

I think we've had enough insults for one week; can we try and get back to a more
gentelmanly tone?


-Mark Stone

[Bill Chriss]

> So, I find the label &quot;gimmicks&quot; really offensive.
>
> You might as well say it's a &quot;gimmick&quot; to open a game of chess
> with something
> other than a king's pawn or queen's pawn move.
>
> Sorry, I will continue to use every rule at my disposal to find
> innovative ways
> to win, I hope that Tim Brown and others will continue to do the same,
> and I
> appreciate not be disparaged for putting the thought and creativity into
> this
> that we do.
>
> I think we've had enough insults for one week; can we try and get back to
> a more
> gentelmanly tone?
>
>
> -Mark Stone
>

FWIW, and without judging any particular post, I second that motion and
agree with Mark's post in its entirety. No matter how many tactics I try,
it doesn't seem to improve my performance much anyway, so not to worry .


Greek

[Mike Turner]

Mark,

I attempted to respond to this quickly, but between computer/family
problems it took longer.

I apologize for the word "gimmicks", "strategems" or something else
would have been a better choice of words. I am sure the first time a
Greek (or whomever did it) sent Flaming Pigs at his opponent the
Greek word for gimmick was used. If not by the designer, then the
receiver.

My point, and I guess it wasn't clearly put, was that when using
strategems, etc. that are not part of the norm, or are specific to
certain lists we have to expect (especially as we include more newer
players) that it will result in discussion/looking through
rules/etc. When this happens in competition it can be even more so.

These rules, tactics, lists, etc. are in Warrior, and they should be,
because they were in history (I hope). But I think we should also
realize they will result in discussion afterwards. Probably similar
to the Greek "After Action Review" following the Flaming Pig attack.

Mike


--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Mark Stone <mark@d...> wrote:
> So, I find the label "gimmicks" really offensive.
>
> You might as well say it's a "gimmick" to open a game of chess with
something
> other than a king's pawn or queen's pawn move.
>
> Sorry, I will continue to use every rule at my disposal to find
innovative ways
> to win, I hope that Tim Brown and others will continue to do the
same, and I
> appreciate not be disparaged for putting the thought and creativity
into this
> that we do.
>
> I think we've had enough insults for one week; can we try and get
back to a more
> gentelmanly tone?
>
>
> -Mark Stone

[Bill Chriss]

>
> Mark,
>
> I attempted to respond to this quickly, but between computer/family
> problems it took longer.
>
> >
> My point, and I guess it wasn't clearly put, was that when using
> strategems, etc. that are not part of the norm, or are specific to
> certain lists we have to expect (especially as we include more newer
> players) that it will result in discussion/looking through
> rules/etc. When this happens in competition it can be even more so.
>

No need to apologize from my perspective, and I do expect such
eventualities after I light off my pigs or start my avalanche or let loose
my flaming arrows. I agree it ggoes with the terrritory, and hence have a
nice little file of e-mail clarifications from Jon, organized by subject,
for my opponent (or the umpire, if necessary) to review. Heck, that look
of consternation is part of the fun! It seldoms wins games for me but it
at least allows me to feel I have shown my opponent something new and
unexpected. Usually its just 20 points for him and a puff of smoke (or
rock dust as the case may be).


Greek


Greek