Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[John Murphy]

Hi all,

Well, I played in my first-ever NICT in 20 years of various rules
sets this weekend. I am a terrible player who was not anywhere near
the top or even mid-range (in fact, was I actually dead last?) and
one might ask "who cares" but here it is anyway.

First congrats to all the players, and particularly to my opponents
for putting up with me as I was generally a sore loser and got tired
and cranky over the course of the weekend.

I ran the 1360-1390 version of Free Company (no 1444 brigans and
artillery), out of historical interest (currently reading Kenneth
Fowler's "Medieval Mercenaries") and a desire to have an army that
was not "HYWE" - even if it really is! I wanted to play something
close to what I played in the tourney that qualified me, so I went
with all up-armored and up-weapon'd expensive longbowmen, the most I
could take of these at 6x 4E units, and the 6 SHK/EHK units (2 reg
gens and 4 irregs) that fit the counter-punch play that I had been
using. And some miserable LI, a new thing for me so I did not
actually have 0 scouting points this time like I usually do.

First bound I played my doubles partner of the past two years, Mark
Hissam, who was running LIR. If I understand correctly, Mark did me
the favors of (a) forgetting he had 3rd rank bows for his CO legions
which he paid points for, and (b) setting up terrain to assist me in
flank protection, which having played two years running with my kind
of army he was well aware was an issue. Anyway, I came straight at
his auxilia, which were set up aux-legio-aux-legio-aux etc, with my
impetuous knights. What should have happened was for him to be
pushed back disordered and then charge in with his legios next bound
and kill me - but instead he blew something like 3 of his 4 waver
tests and a couple routed shaking the nearby legios. He also did not
force march anyone so my LI was able to occupy the hill and I
brought up the longbows behind to trade shots with him from an
elevated position. I had few problems with flank control with all
the terrain. Still, his counter-punching legios managed to get into
my engaged knights in a couple spots and the longbows had to go in
to their rescue. It wound up a 4-3 bloody win/draw in my favor,
which was a result that shocked the heck out of me for my first-ever
NICT game.

After a break to shop around, which was very nice, I drew Todd
Kaeser and the Berbers for round two. Todd and I seem to get paired
almost every major HMGS con in some game - I think we have played
three times in Lancaster in two years now. He seems to always do the
same thing to me and I have yet to find a way to deal with it. He
force marched his large amount of CO foot and used it to push my
longbowmen back onto their irregular knights behind who were caught
attempting to concentrate on a CO foot unit and blow it away in a
mass charge and so were unable to amneuver out of the way of
retreating longbowmen. The resulting traffic jam ensured Todd of a 5-
0 victory. It was my first realization that one can not play Irreg
knights the same as Regs with a first charge +2.

I expected to be finished with the NICT at that point and enjoy
Saturday off playing in the open or doing something totally
unrealted to ancients. But Scott informed me that 17 had made the
cut and I was #18 (as Todd and Mark both helped my adjusted score by
playing well) so I was playing in the NICT Saturday after all.

For round three I played Mike's Later Ottoman Turks, a historical
matchup in the sense that there were several Free Companies who had
gone crusading and probably were present at Nicopolis if not
elsewhere. Unfortunately my sub-general, with the entire right half
of my army, was unreliable and went on wait orders. Must have had
his pay in arrears, what I get for playing an army of mercenary
scumbag racketeers! To make matters worse, when I sent him new
attack orders on bound 3, as early as possible, he also interpreted
them as wait orders! Finaly on bound 4, as my minutes were in dire
need elsewhere, I got him to interpret his orders correctly but when
we measured out the minutes for his command he would not actually
act on them for another bound. By the start of bound 5, as he was
finally ready to act, his command went into retirement! Otherwise
this battle was more of the same, the CinC was unable to get his
Irreg knights to maneuver behind the longbowmen and concentrate on a
spot. TO make matters worse on the far right (on wait orders) the
longbows were disordered by bound 2 prep shooting and were
immediately charged by screaming fanatic Irreg A lance-armed LC,
blew their waver test, and were broken (either in HtH or as a result
of post-HtH wavers I forget). While nobody next to them failed their
immediate wavers it meant I had enemy behind flank when I wound up
checking other nearby longbows for being charged so the effect was
still there. At least I think that is about how it went. I think
this was another 5-0 loss.

Round four was Mike Mallamaci's Nikephorian Byzantines. Somewhat the
same story tactically for me. Mike actually had some targets for me
to hit but he gave my longbowmen a lot of trouble and I was unable
to free up the knights from behind them to hit a specific point
until the last bound. Then they were still a bit scattered about and
despite the fact that I managed to rally a shaken longbow unit from
early in the game he had shaken or broken several units just the
previous bound. I think I routed a LI unit for a 5-1 loss.

The final round was Sean's Swiss. He attempted to pull the same
trick as Todd always does to me (and Scott Holder, and Craig Scott,
and anyone with a bunch of CO foot) by force marching his 3 12E pike
blocks. This game I had learned about handling my Irreg knights and
did not let them sit behind the lines. I went straight for the mass
impetuous mounted charge on each of the flank pike blocks. Not the
best tactic when I had knights who are quite good dismounted
(impetuous SHI 2HCW backed by EHI JLS) but I didn't want to wait the
couple bounds to set it up in the last game so in I went. I actually
came at an angle and forced one of the blocks to go into orb. Given
the chance, it might have eventually worked as both blocks became
disordered and might have begun taking wavers. But there were two
big problems. First, his center block caught two units of my
longbows who forgot the Swiss could move so fast and didn't go into
skirmish - then he rolled up 3 with the 12E pike block to boot.
Second I now had no cavalry unegaged and, while I was able to
sacrifice another longbow unit to protect the flank of my engaged
knights for one turn, he continued to pass wavers and get in with
another knight unit the following turn. ANother game where I killed
one LI unit for a 5-1 loss.

Overall, most of my list decisions turned out to be poor choices.
Other than one game where the LI were useful to seize a central hill
for my longbows against an opponent with no LI in the area, they
were a waste of 100 points as I was still outscouted every game and
they generally just got in my own way.

I will not take all-LHI 1/2-2HCW&Sh LB units anymore, at least not
the whole army. I already knew this was not a great idea but did it
for consistency sake since it was what I had been playing. But they
are better used as shooters and the points saved for a couple more
knights I think.

The irregular knights I thought would be a nice change with their
impetuosity, but the problem here boiled down to numbers. With a
first-bound attack army they make sense, and in the two games I ran
them like this the impetuosity was useful, although their lack of
numbers in my list makes them unsuitable for this role on a grand-
tactical level. However, in a counter-punching role it proved
incredibly difficult to get the irregulars to concentrate on a point
rather being too spread out. They are also much more dangerous to
maneuver behind the lines than regulars. So not a bad choice out of
context but perhaps they require more numbers and to be used as more
of an immediate attack force than something which relies on being
screened by longbows for a couple bounds.

The good news is I played Eric Meuller's "Waterloo: 1692" on Friday.
This was an incredibly well-prepared and well-run demo game using an
adaption of Volley & Bayonnet for the post-ECW and pre-
Marlburian "League of Augsberg / Nine Years War" period. My vote for
the best convention demo game I have played in all the years I've
been going to Lancaster, simply because of how well thought out all
the play aids and scenario background were.

That is all I have, sorry for the length.