Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

Thanks John and Jon, that clears up the discussion for me. In a way, a
tournament can be seen as a type of campaign. The way you might play the last
game is affected by your results in the previous games. This complicates the
decisions you might make and leads to a variety of tactics that you wouldn't use
in a one time battle. The whole process a little bit more like life itself and
for me, makes a better game. This also illustrates one of my long time theorys
of miniature list gaming which is: Even if your army is "defensive" in nature
you should include a good mix miniatures in your collection to provide an
alternate "offensive" mix. This keeps the enemy guessing and opens up options
for you. Warrior 14.1 Choosing Competion Armies says that you can have two
lists. It seems to me that in most cases, understanding the nature of your enemy
and choosing which of your lists you use, would minimalize the occurance of our
worst case senario, which was: Chariot army against a dug in army
derending a river.
That being said, it would be fun to experiment with a set of logistics rules.

JonCleaves@... wrote:
In a message dated 2/25/2006 13:59:16 Central Standard Time,
jjmurphy@... writes:

B loses every game, wins the tourney
unlike other tourney systems there is not a fixed pool of points
divided up so it is actually better to charge into a death trap and
take a chance rather than play to a 0-0 draw>>
Let's not jump to any conclusions based on a three round four player tourney
where everyone plays everyone else. That is an example of theory not
reflecting real life.

Jon




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




Yahoo! Groups Links










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