Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

Jon

This is not quite the same point as in the ealier parts of the
thread on list rules and FW, but I was assessing the points of a few
current FW lists (assuming the general is priced as a 100pt CinC)
and there seemed to be some pretty wide variations.

I can understand +/- 25 points or so around a mean, whatever you
choose that to be, but the variation between, for example, the EIR
and Early German seems extreme. I have not got my exact
calculations to hand but it seemed to me (unless I totally fouled up
my analysis) that the EIR were about 768 pts and the Early Germans
somewhere in the 610s (612/616 or so).

1. Am I (a) right or (b) being a complete idiot? If (b) ignore 2-4
below :-)

2. If I'm right was this intentional?

3. Whatever the cause, do the constraints of FW in terms of
deployment and start separation negate some of the effects of such
discrepancies?

4. Are the revised FW armies going to be closer in point terms or
does such discrepancy really not matter in the constraints of FW?

5. Will there be a guide of how to 'build' 500-800 point FW style
forces in the new edition (for example, take FHE lists and halve
minima and maxima)?

Regards

Edward


--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
>
....
> We'd also appreciate any feedback on your use of the main list
rules with
> the existing FW lists.
> Jon
>

[joncleaves]

3. Whatever the cause, do the constraints of FW in terms of
deployment and start separation negate some of the effects of such
discrepancies?>>

Yes.

<<4. Are the revised FW armies going to be closer in point terms or
does such discrepancy really not matter in the constraints of FW?>>

It doesn't matter that much, but we are going back over them with a fine tooth
comb as part of the revision process and to incorporate main list rules and
errata.

<<5. Will there be a guide of how to 'build' 500-800 point FW style >>

Yes.

Jon

Thanks for the quick reply. I'm looking forward to the revised
rulebook already.

Kind regards

Edward

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> 3. Whatever the cause, do the constraints of FW in terms of
> deployment and start separation negate some of the effects of such
> discrepancies?>>
>
> Yes.
>
> <<4. Are the revised FW armies going to be closer in point terms
or
> does such discrepancy really not matter in the constraints of FW?>>
>
> It doesn't matter that much, but we are going back over them with
a fine tooth comb as part of the revision process and to incorporate
main list rules and errata.
>
> <<5. Will there be a guide of how to 'build' 500-800 point FW
style >>
>
> Yes.