Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Dave Smith]

Gents;

I'll be rolling some Warrior bones next week at the 25mm Open, and I
am seeking advice on some list issues. I will be fielding EIR, and
I'm wrestling between trying to float like a butterfly, or sting like
a bee. To wit, fielding Commagene cataphracts and heavy on
legionaires with a max terrain option, or lightening up the OOB with
Jewish/Arab light cav, light infantry, etc. This army, by default, is
a heavy foot army, which is okay in 25mm, but would appreciate any
feedback. TIA.

Dave

Dave:

I'll be playing in the 25mm Open also - glad to hear there will be at
least some other players at that scale who aren't in the NICT. I don't
know what advice I can give, but I'll be playing Early Visigoths.
Wouldn't mind a semi-historical matchup against the EIR.

Peter

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "David Smith" <davidsmith@k...>
wrote:
> Gents;
>
> I'll be rolling some Warrior bones next week at the 25mm Open, and I
> am seeking advice on some list issues. I will be fielding EIR, and
> I'm wrestling between trying to float like a butterfly, or sting like
> a bee. To wit, fielding Commagene cataphracts and heavy on
> legionaires with a max terrain option, or lightening up the OOB with
> Jewish/Arab light cav, light infantry, etc. This army, by default, is
> a heavy foot army, which is okay in 25mm, but would appreciate any
> feedback. TIA.
>
> Dave

[Ewan McNay]

On Thu, 14 Jul 2005, David Smith wrote:
> I'll be rolling some Warrior bones next week at the 25mm Open, and I
> am seeking advice on some list issues. I will be fielding EIR, and
> I'm wrestling between trying to float like a butterfly, or sting like
> a bee. To wit, fielding Commagene cataphracts and heavy on
> legionaires with a max terrain option, or lightening up the OOB with
> Jewish/Arab light cav, light infantry, etc. This army, by default, is
> a heavy foot army, which is okay in 25mm, but would appreciate any
> feedback. TIA.

I assume this is in an Open context. So, you have to play to your
strength: you're going to be spending a lot of points on the HI, and you
need to fight with them and deliver them effectively to a target. I
*think* that of the two options you offer, light troops are more likely to
aid in this (and I would go for LI, probably, which Romans excel at,
whereas the LC is not world-beating.

Trying to afford sensible quantities of SHC in an army already paying for
hugely expensive foot is not, I think, the way to go.

MHO as ever .

E

[Dave Smith]

Thanks Ewan. I was leaning that direction, but am grateful to get
your opionion.

Dave



ewan.mcnay@y... wrote:

I assume this is in an Open context. So, you have to play to your
strength: you're going to be spending a lot of points on the HI, and
youneed to fight with them and deliver them effectively to a target. I
*think* that of the two options you offer, light troops are more
likely to aid in this (and I would go for LI, probably, which Romans
excel at, whereas the LC is not world-beating.

Trying to afford sensible quantities of SHC in an army already paying
for hugely expensive foot is not, I think, the way to go.

MHO as ever .

[Dave Smith]

Hi Peter;

Looking forward to it. Thanks.

Dave




--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Peter Celella" <pcelella@c...>
wrote:
> Dave:
>
> I'll be playing in the 25mm Open also - glad to hear there will be
at
> least some other players at that scale who aren't in the NICT. I
don't
> know what advice I can give, but I'll be playing Early Visigoths.
> Wouldn't mind a semi-historical matchup against the EIR.
>
> Peter
>
> --- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "David Smith"
<davidsmith@k...>
> wrote:
> > Gents;
> >
> > I'll be rolling some Warrior bones next week at the 25mm Open,
and I
> > am seeking advice on some list issues. I will be fielding EIR,
and
> > I'm wrestling between trying to float like a butterfly, or sting
like
> > a bee. To wit, fielding Commagene cataphracts and heavy on
> > legionaires with a max terrain option, or lightening up the OOB
with
> > Jewish/Arab light cav, light infantry, etc. This army, by
default, is
> > a heavy foot army, which is okay in 25mm, but would appreciate
any
> > feedback. TIA.
> >
> > Dave

[Mark Stone]

--- On July 14 Dave Smith said: ---

> I'll be rolling some Warrior bones next week at the 25mm Open, and I
> am seeking advice on some list issues. I will be fielding EIR, and
> I'm wrestling between trying to float like a butterfly, or sting like
> a bee. To wit, fielding Commagene cataphracts and heavy on
> legionaires with a max terrain option, or lightening up the OOB with
> Jewish/Arab light cav, light infantry, etc. This army, by default, is
> a heavy foot army, which is okay in 25mm, but would appreciate any
> feedback. TIA.

I'm going to partially dissent from Ewan's opinion.

I agree that LI is a greater strength of the Roman list than LC, and that LI
should therefore form the core of your skirmisher contingent. You don't need to
go Arab for that, however.

I do think that one or two units of cataphracts are worth the points, and I say
this from experience (sort of). Out here on the West Coast I've watched Rich
Gagliasso refine his EIR list for about a year now. Originally he played
without the SHC, and had a number of games where he really struggled to get the
legions into battle effectively. More recently, he's added two units of SHC to
the mix, and had much better results.

On the face of it, this seems odd, given that legionaries and SHC beat and are
vulnerable to many of the same things (beat: most infantry, lots of cav;
vulnerable to: elphants).

There are two differences, as I see it. First -- and this is the more obvious,
but more minor difference -- if SHC beats foot, it is _always_ disordered,
whereas in some important situations the legionaries beat foot without
disordering it. Following a steady, recoiling foe gains you some ground, but
not necessarily much else. Following a recoiling, disordered foe opens all
kinds of possibilities.

Second -- and most important -- the SHC give the Romans a tempo advantage they
otherwise lack. Having shock cavalry is a vital part of forcing your opponent's
hand in many situations. If I have a unit of loose order, missile-armed troops
then, absent cavalry, the legions are going to chase these guys all day without
catching them as they skirmish, evade, evade. With SHC lurking on the line the
choice to go into skirmish gets much more complicated. As the skirmishing
player, I'm now looking at a waver test for being charged, and/or the
possibility of being caught in an evade. And in general, it is a good thing for
the Romans to put down a shock unit that will go last in approaches half the
time, and go after foot all the time. So many small interactions can turn your
way when you have that kind of tempo working for you.

Now, a consequence of this approach with the Romans is that you _really_ don't
hold a lot of frontage because you have so many expensive units. This too is an
area where I've seen Rich's play evolve dramatically over the last year.
Previously, he would simply build "Fortress Rome", putting up his ditched
palisades in his rear zone and sitting within whatever frontage he was
comfortable with. Inevitably this led to problems. It was such a passive
approach that his opponent could line up exactly the one attack he wanted and
drive it home.

Currently Rich has adopted a different strategy. He takes four rough terrain
picks (either woods, brush, or a mix, depending on how vulnerable he expects
his auxilia to be) and tries to get at least one in the middle of the table;
doesn't matter which side of the center line it's on, but as close to the
middle as possible. He then force marches LI and auxilia to anchor his "inside"
flank with that center terrain feature, and fights the battle entirely on one
side of it. This works best, by the way, if he's not outscouted, which means
taking a small amount of LC (say, 6 stands). By the end of the game Rich often
finds his inside flank starting to collapse, and he may lose some points there.
But it buys him time to drive the legions and SHC home, scoring points. And
better to win 5-3 (or even lose 5-3) than win 1-0 or 2-1.

Rich, if you're reading this and get a chance before Historicon, perhaps you
could post your current version of EIR for folks to take a look at?


-Mark Stone

[Frank Gilson]

I generally agree with Mark's extensive post, based on data from
observing Rich.

Ewan's point about good LI is important also.

You want and can get Irr C LI S,Sh and Reg C LI JLS,Sh.

I would definitely take 1 or 2 units of SHC L.

There's Reg B LC B available, some of that is a good idea, very
flexible and will help keep you from being outscouted.

You should use your LC and LI in conjunction as a skirmish wing. Your
LI can draw shooting away from your LC, and then you can charge enemy
LI or LC with your light infantry, or your LC, as circumstances
dictate.

Frank

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "David Smith" <davidsmith@k...>
wrote:
> Gents;
>
> I'll be rolling some Warrior bones next week at the 25mm Open, and I
> am seeking advice on some list issues. I will be fielding EIR, and
> I'm wrestling between trying to float like a butterfly, or sting
like
> a bee. To wit, fielding Commagene cataphracts and heavy on
> legionaires with a max terrain option, or lightening up the OOB with
> Jewish/Arab light cav, light infantry, etc. This army, by default,
is
> a heavy foot army, which is okay in 25mm, but would appreciate any
> feedback. TIA.
>
> Dave

[Dave Smith]

Mark Stone <mark@d...> wrote:
I'm going to partially dissent from Ewan's opinion.


<snipped excellent advice>

Thanks for this Mark. I actually exchanged email with Rich a few
months ago about his EIR and how he used them. I may have to go with
the figures I have, which includes the Commagene cat's. To counter
the potential elephant problem, I'll probably upgrade 1 Legionaire
element to Reg A, and load up the Auxilia with JLS, S, Sh backed by a
rank of archers, or something similar.

Brush is a Roman's best friend it appears! ; )

Dave

[Dave Smith]

"Frank Gilson" <franktrevorgilson@h...> wrote:
I generally agree with Mark's extensive post, based on data from
observing Rich.


<snipped excellent commentary>


Thanks to you as well Frank. Looking forward to meeting you guys next
week, although I'm sure you'll be immersed in the NICT, while us n'er-
do-wells flop around the Open....but having fun nonetheless.


Dave