Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Greg Regets]

Ok ... so I really don't have a question about IPW vs. SHK. ;-)

But ... I do have a question about units with SHC in the front and
EHC in the back.

This is really cool, and saves tons of points. Is there any plan to
incorporate that into SHC offerings on previous lists?

The reason I ask is that in the last two list books, literally every
SHC offering but one, allows you to build that way, and I remember
posts in the past about how SHC had a poor point/performance ratio.

This seems a useful solution.

Thanks ... g

[joncleaves]

I think we have gone back and done this look (SHC/EHC) for all the lists and I
think the list errata reflects that.

If there is some list you'd like me to look into specifically, please let me
know.

J

[Greg Regets]

About the only army I can think of offhand is Nike's. I'll take a
look at the rest of the books tonight.

I just really like the way FHE did this in the newer lists, and think
more armies should get this opportunity.

It might also be an interesting way of looking at potential SHC in
the MIR/LIR list, where historical text and pictures on monuments are
a little contrary.

Thanks ... g




--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> I think we have gone back and done this look (SHC/EHC) for all the
lists and I think the list errata reflects that.
>
> If there is some list you'd like me to look into specifically,
please let me know.
>
> J

[Greg Regets]

About the only army I can think of without looking is Nike Byz. ...
but I will be glad to look over my list books and submit a list.

I really like the way FHE has done the SHC/EHC combination in the
last few list books. It gives a much better bang for the buck for
fully armored cavalrymen.

I wasn't sure if this was done for historical reason, or to more
properly simulate the effect of the troops, but I do like it. I would
imagine it was more the latter than the former, based on Sassanids,
etc ... but either way, it seems to give a much more accurate
historical performance!

Thanks ... g



--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> I think we have gone back and done this look (SHC/EHC) for all the
lists and I think the list errata reflects that.
>
> If there is some list you'd like me to look into specifically,
please let me know.
>
> J

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Jon,
Could you ask your team to look at giving this option to the Thematic and
Nike Byzantines?

kw

JonCleaves@... wrote:
I think we have gone back and done this look (SHC/EHC) for all the lists and I
think the list errata reflects that.

If there is some list you'd like me to look into specifically, please let me
know.

J

Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
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.



---------------------------------
Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday!
Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web

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

[Phil Gardocki]

One of the reasons for the points/performance for SHC, is that the points
system predate Rev 7, where all super heavies counted shielded, even without
shields. And they were costed with this advantage, a SHC upgrade from EHC
is a 4 point upgrade, 2 for the armor, 2 for the shield. When Rev 7 came
out, Barker removed the always shielded benefit, but did not change the
point system.

Phil

-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Regets <greg.regets@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Monday, March 07, 2005 10:01 AM
Subject: [WarriorRules] IRR LMI, IPW vs. SHK L Sh ... was Picts and Halberds


>
>
>Ok ... so I really don't have a question about IPW vs. SHK.
>
>But ... I do have a question about units with SHC in the front and
>EHC in the back.
>
>This is really cool, and saves tons of points. Is there any plan to
>incorporate that into SHC offerings on previous lists?
>
>The reason I ask is that in the last two list books, literally every
>SHC offering but one, allows you to build that way, and I remember
>posts in the past about how SHC had a poor point/performance ratio.
>
>This seems a useful solution.
>
>Thanks ... g
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Mark Mallard]

In a message dated 08/03/2005 00:23:30 GMT Standard Time,
greg.regets@... writes:

It might also be an interesting way of looking at potential SHC in
the MIR/LIR list, where historical text and pictures on monuments are
a little contrary.




And dont forget the seleucids of course where different units of cavalry
were sometimes brigaded together when numbers of superior troops were small.

mark mallard


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