Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Todd Schneider]

Truthfully, I am not sure what title this posts hould
have, as it encompasses more than a few things....

However, it's slow at work so I've been perusing the
List books for awhile and the Berber List in Holy
Warrior Caught my eye. Had I not been so invested in
Romans at this point, I do think that this list would
be one I would be putting together.

Here's the List I came up with:

2E CINC Irr B HC L, Sh @ 160 pts
2E SubG Irr B HC L, Sh @ 110 pts
2E SubG Irr B EHK L, Sh @ 130 pts

3 x 4E Berber Cavalry Irr C LC L, Sh @ 73 each, 219
total
2 x 6E Berber Spearmen Reg C MI LTS, JLS, Sh @ 130
each
2 x 6E Javelinmen Irr C LI JLS, Sh @ 61 each
10E Slingers Irr C LI S, Sh @ 85
6E Archers Irr C LI B, Sh @ 61
2 x 2E Spanish Cavalry Irr B EHK L, Sh @ 111 each
3 x 4E Christian Moogs Irr B LMI 1/2 HTW, JLS, Sh; 1/2
HTW, JLS @ 79 Each

Total 1606 points
54 Scouting points

I took the Spearmen as Regs because I want them to
last longer in combat. They aren't the shock troops in
this list, the Moogs are, and the EHK and HC are
closers. I kept the LC as C's because I am not that
good enough player yet to not ensure they won't be
running after the first LI unit that gets within 160p.

One of my main questions would be how neccessary is
the 1st Berber Sub General? Other than command
points, which given the nature of this list in that 7
units that might be able to charge don't need to be
prompted (The LC and LI on a flank or against an
already disorganized enemy), unless I am interpreting
something wrong), is it 110 points that might be
better spent on another Spear unit (or possible Bow
Unit? Without the Sub Gen, it would be 1 Command of 9
units and the Spanish Contingent of 5 units.

They big key in this list is the LI battle, and how
well it can screen and hold the enemy in order for me
to maneuver my forces into posistions advantageous to
them.

Thanks for the feedback,
Todd

[Ewan McNay]

Todd Schneider wrote:
> Here's the (Berber) List I came up with:
>
> 2E CINC Irr B HC L, Sh @ 160 pts
> 2E SubG Irr B HC L, Sh @ 110 pts
> 2E SubG Irr B EHK L, Sh @ 130 pts
>
> 3 x 4E Berber Cavalry Irr C LC L, Sh @ 73 each, 219
> total
> 2 x 6E Berber Spearmen Reg C MI LTS, JLS, Sh @ 130
> each
> 2 x 6E Javelinmen Irr C LI JLS, Sh @ 61 each
> 10E Slingers Irr C LI S, Sh @ 85
> 6E Archers Irr C LI B, Sh @ 61
> 2 x 2E Spanish Cavalry Irr B EHK L, Sh @ 111 each
> 3 x 4E Christian Moogs Irr B LMI 1/2 HTW, JLS, Sh; 1/2
> HTW, JLS @ 79 Each
>
> Total 1606 points
> 54 Scouting points
>
> I took the Spearmen as Regs because I want them to
> last longer in combat. They aren't the shock troops in
> this list, the Moogs are, and the EHK and HC are
> closers. I kept the LC as C's because I am not that
> good enough player yet to not ensure they won't be
> running after the first LI unit that gets within 160p.

I agree with having the LC as C class. I might even agree with having
them as L rather than JLS, I think. And I can make arguments for 3x4E
or 2x6E both ways.

I agree with making the spearmen regular, but in that case I would not
double-arm the back rank, as you'll very rarely be charging. [A
similar comment applies to the Spanish EHK, where a back rank of HK is
just fine]

The LI is OK - shielded, variety of weapons - but no better, being
both irregular and C class (i.e. relatively expensive). Partly as a
consequence, you have only 17 units, all irregular other than the
spearmen, which is not going to give you many opportunities to mass on
target. Moreover, you only have 4 units of LI despite the need (which
you note) to win the light battle. Running into an opponent with more
and/or regular light units may prove very tricky. Also, I would
certainly go for 2x8E rather than 10E and 6E; I might make the bow
unit 10E and slingers 6E, but probably not. The upshot of all this is
that having to spend 270 points on only 4 mediocre LI units is a
biggish negative for me. The army in general is paying a lot for
irregular command points on troops that you'd really rather have as
regulars. In terms of frontage, your non-LI cover 23 elements, or say
5' of an 8' table in 25mm with some gaps. That's not much for an
irregular, foot-based army, and another worry.

Relying on the Moogs to hit is your best option, agreed, but that in
turn means that you're relying on finding suitable targets - basically
opposing close or irregular loose foot; elephants will not enjoy the
moogs but are pretty immune to the K follow-up and the moogs are in
small units so will vanish fast. [The spearmen should be able to
neutralise elephants if handled aggressively, though, which is a good
thing.] Against armies without such target foot you will have trouble
getting wins, I think. Some examples of problem oppponents include
manouvre mounted (byzantines etc.), knights (who will beat both your
foot and your K), missile forces (who will likely shooot up the Moogs
badly), steppe armies whether regular or irregular (although they'll
find you difficult to beat also).

Of the troops you didn't take, the stand-out are the available reg,
shielded LMI bowmen.

> One of my main questions would be how neccessary is
> the 1st Berber Sub General? Other than command
> points, which given the nature of this list in that 7
> units that might be able to charge don't need to be
> prompted (The LC and LI on a flank or against an
> already disorganized enemy), unless I am interpreting
> something wrong), is it 110 points that might be
> better spent on another Spear unit (or possible Bow
> Unit? Without the Sub Gen, it would be 1 Command of 9
> units and the Spanish Contingent of 5 units.

Definitely bow rather than spear. Dropping the HC gives you a 6E unit
of reg bowmen; I'd be considering droppping some LI or command factors
(LC or moogs) and taking more bowmen.

> They big key in this list is the LI battle, and how
> well it can screen and hold the enemy in order for me
> to maneuver my forces into posistions advantageous to
> them.

Given this - with which I agree - I think you have to realise that (i)
your LI screen will not suffice to pinat least ~30% of the time (WAG),
and (ii) even when it does, your other forces are going to take a
*long* time to get into place. Dropping the sub means that you are
also likely to be deploying before the opposition, which is a further
burden to getting matchups.

I ran Berber under the previous list several times (including I think
Dogs of War one year). I'm not a fan of this list, though. Sorry .

[Todd Schneider]

>--- Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@...> wrote:
>
>I agree with making the spearmen regular, but in that
>case I would not double-arm the back rank, as you'll
>very rarely be charging. A similar comment applies
to >the Spanish EHK, where a back rank of HK is
>just fine.

I must be missing something in the Math. The Spearmen
start out as JLS, Sh, you spend the points to add the
LTS.

If fighting foot, the back rank not being LTS doesn't
matter as much, as Other Infantry and P/LTS are the
same factors against the most common types.
If fighting mounted though, Other Infantry is worse.

So, If being charged by say, HK, the dual armed troops
would be 6@5, whereas if the back rank didn't have LTS
it would be 4@5 and 2@2. Against EHK and SHK the
numbers get worse, 4@3 and 2@0.

Todd

[Ewan McNay]

Todd Schneider wrote:
>>--- Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@...> wrote:
>>
>>I agree with making the spearmen regular, but in that
>>case I would not double-arm the back rank, as you'll
>>very rarely be charging. A similar comment applies
>
> to >the Spanish EHK, where a back rank of HK is
>
>>just fine.
>
>
> I must be missing something in the Math. The Spearmen
> start out as JLS, Sh, you spend the points to add the
> LTS.
>
> If fighting foot, the back rank not being LTS doesn't
> matter as much, as Other Infantry and P/LTS are the
> same factors against the most common types.
> If fighting mounted though, Other Infantry is worse.
>
> So, If being charged by say, HK, the dual armed troops
> would be 6@5, whereas if the back rank didn't have LTS
> it would be 4@5 and 2@2. Against EHK and SHK the
> numbers get worse, 4@3 and 2@0.

Assuming these numbers are correct - don't have rules to hand - then I
think they make my point, really: you're going to lose to mounted that
want to charge you, while still beating up mounted that aren't going
to charge you (e.g. HC) and receiving the same amount of damage from
the mounted because they're still facing LTS. Against HK
specifically, I grant that while you're still fine on even dice, the
loss of rear-rank LTS may play a role in some dice situations.
Against infantry, JLS-only is (as you note) the same at contact and
actually better in subsequent bounds. Against elephants it's a wash.

Not a big deal, given the number of points involved, but I'm reluctant
to less-than-optimise, which I see this as doing. YMMV.

[Tim Brown]

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Ewan McNay <ewan.mcnay@y...>
wrote:
>
wash.
>
> Not a big deal, given the number of points involved, but I'm
reluctant
> to less-than-optimise, which I see this as doing. YMMV.

I think you're right, but only if the spearmen are regs. Given a unit
of 24, personally I'd double arm them and make em irregs. That way,
they're more flexible as to whom they can realistically fight. Close
order foot often don't get into combat unless their opponent wants
them to, and the ability to hit at 2 full ranks while impetuous
_could_ make a big difference against legionaires, pikes, etc. 24@5
+10 vs 24@4+25 in terms of points is a wash. As for lasting, it would
take quite a bit to kill off a 24 man unit - figure 7 CPF = 168. Not
too much can do that in a round or two. Given our rounds only last
four hours I'd take my chances that they'd survive. More likely
they'll shake, then rout. Being irreg or reg wouldn't matter.