Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 2/14/2006 16:54:15 Central Standard Time,
scsabrecoach@... writes:

Greetings Jon,
Considering how many emails you get on list rules its safe to say that a
portion of the players have a problem with list rules.


Actually, Terry, public emails on this group represent only a small portion
of the feedback I get on Warrior. A portion of players will always have a
problem with somnething, but by far the list rules have been exceedingly
well-received.

Jon


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

Reading the discussion of the updated list rules for Roman legionaires
got me to thinking. The list rules are made to make troops behave
more accurately against historical opponents, which makes sense.

But the change also affects how they fight ahistorical opponents, such
as Todd's example with the SHK. But, as Scott has stated, this
doesn't matter, because its ahistorical.

But despite this, list rules and changes to them do have a profound
effect on gameplay beyond the historical interactions they're meant to
model, particularly in tournaments where games generally aren't
between historical opponents.

So, what would people think if list rules only applied when fighting
historical opponents (in or out of tournaments) and otherwise, as a
corollary to Scott's, "a spear is a spear is a spear," a, "spearman is
a spearman is a spearman."

Have fun!
Cole

Hmmmm.....as a EIR player this idea would be confusing to me...when fighting a
historical opponent's heavy cav (like Parthian SHC) my Legionaries would fight
one way but when fighting a non-historical opponent's heavy cav (like French
Knights) the Legionaries would fight another way. This would force me to adjust
my tactics from game to game depending on the different rules that applied which
could be somewhat confusing. This would also complicate army list generation.





Nicholas Cioran <ncioran@...> wrote:
Reading the discussion of the updated list rules for Roman legionaires
got me to thinking. The list rules are made to make troops behave
more accurately against historical opponents, which makes sense.

But the change also affects how they fight ahistorical opponents, such
as Todd's example with the SHK. But, as Scott has stated, this
doesn't matter, because its ahistorical.

But despite this, list rules and changes to them do have a profound
effect on gameplay beyond the historical interactions they're meant to
model, particularly in tournaments where games generally aren't
between historical opponents.

So, what would people think if list rules only applied when fighting
historical opponents (in or out of tournaments) and otherwise, as a
corollary to Scott's, "a spear is a spear is a spear," a, "spearman is
a spearman is a spearman."

Have fun!
Cole








SPONSORED LINKS
Miniature wargaming Wargaming Warrior

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.

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.


---------------------------------





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

[Ed Forbes]

Might as well say tournaments can only match historical opponents if we go down
this road.

Ed

-- "Nicholas Cioran" <ncioran@...> wrote:

Reading the discussion of the updated list rules for Roman legionaires
got me to thinking. The list rules are made to make troops behave
more accurately against historical opponents, which makes sense.

But the change also affects how they fight ahistorical opponents, such
as Todd's example with the SHK. But, as Scott has stated, this
doesn't matter, because its ahistorical.

But despite this, list rules and changes to them do have a profound
effect on gameplay beyond the historical interactions they're meant to
model, particularly in tournaments where games generally aren't
between historical opponents.

So, what would people think if list rules only applied when fighting
historical opponents (in or out of tournaments) and otherwise, as a
corollary to Scott's, "a spear is a spear is a spear," a, "spearman is
a spearman is a spearman."

Have fun!
Cole









Yahoo! Groups Links

We've been having this same discussion down here in Jacksonville. This is my
preferred solution to the "List Rule Problem".

Steve Rawls

On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 18:55:10 -0000, Nicholas Cioran wrote
> Reading the discussion of the updated list rules for Roman legionaires
> got me to thinking.  The list rules are made to make troops behave
> more accurately against historical opponents, which makes sense.
>
> But the change also affects how they fight ahistorical opponents, such
> as Todd's example with the SHK.  But, as Scott has stated, this
> doesn't matter, because its ahistorical.
>
> But despite this, list rules and changes to them do have a profound
> effect on gameplay beyond the historical interactions they're meant to
> model, particularly in tournaments where games generally aren't
> between historical opponents.
>
> So, what would people think if list rules only applied when fighting
> historical opponents (in or out of tournaments) and otherwise, as a
> corollary to Scott's, "a spear is a spear is a spear," a, "spearman is
> a spearman is a spearman."
>
> Have fun!
> Cole
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS

Miniature wargaming Wargaming Warrior
>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
 Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.
>   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.

>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------




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

We've been having this same discussion down here in Jacksonville. This is my
preferred solution to the "List Rule Problem".

Steve Rawls

On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 18:55:10 -0000, Nicholas Cioran wrote
> Reading the discussion of the updated list rules for Roman legionaires
> got me to thinking.  The list rules are made to make troops behave
> more accurately against historical opponents, which makes sense.
>
> But the change also affects how they fight ahistorical opponents, such
> as Todd's example with the SHK.  But, as Scott has stated, this
> doesn't matter, because its ahistorical.
>
> But despite this, list rules and changes to them do have a profound
> effect on gameplay beyond the historical interactions they're meant to
> model, particularly in tournaments where games generally aren't
> between historical opponents.
>
> So, what would people think if list rules only applied when fighting
> historical opponents (in or out of tournaments) and otherwise, as a
> corollary to Scott's, "a spear is a spear is a spear," a, "spearman is
> a spearman is a spearman."
>
> Have fun!
> Cole
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS

Miniature wargaming Wargaming Warrior
>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
 Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.
>   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.

>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------




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

[joncleaves]

There's a problem?

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Rawls <steve@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 16:10:10 -0500
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] List Rules (was Roman Legion stuff)


We've been having this same discussion down here in Jacksonville. This is my
preferred solution to the "List Rule Problem".

Steve Rawls

On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 18:55:10 -0000, Nicholas Cioran wrote
> Reading the discussion of the updated list rules for Roman legionaires
> got me to thinking. The list rules are made to make troops behave
> more accurately against historical opponents, which makes sense.
>
> But the change also affects how they fight ahistorical opponents, such
> as Todd's example with the SHK. But, as Scott has stated, this
> doesn't matter, because its ahistorical.
>
> But despite this, list rules and changes to them do have a profound
> effect on gameplay beyond the historical interactions they're meant to
> model, particularly in tournaments where games generally aren't
> between historical opponents.
>
> So, what would people think if list rules only applied when fighting
> historical opponents (in or out of tournaments) and otherwise, as a
> corollary to Scott's, "a spear is a spear is a spear," a, "spearman is
> a spearman is a spearman."
>
> Have fun!
> Cole
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS

Miniature wargaming Wargaming Warrior
>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.
> 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.

>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------




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




Yahoo! Groups Links






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

Greetings Jon,
Considering how many emails you get on list rules its safe to say that a portion
of the players have a problem with list rules. I have issues with a shaken
unit getting any benifits from a list rule. There is also a something for
nothing issue amongst these players. The latter can't really be fixed till you
completely redo everything, and that is years off. The former is an easy fix,
if you think it needs fixing.
Terry Dix


--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@... wrote:
>
> There's a problem?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Rawls <steve@...>
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 16:10:10 -0500
> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] List Rules (was Roman Legion stuff)
>
>
> We've been having this same discussion down here in Jacksonville. This is my
> preferred solution to the "List Rule Problem".
>
> Steve Rawls
>

[Bill Chriss]

> We've been having this same discussion down here in Jacksonville. This is
> my preferred solution to the "List Rule Problem".
>
> Steve Rawls
>
>

As Jon politely implies in his most recent, I see no problem in that FHE
repeatedly encourages people to run tournaments however the organizer sees
fit, with X-rules, etc. We constantly see invitations on this board to try
it and report the playtesting results.

For the record, I agree with those who have argued against any change in
rules or list rules in a tournament format, and I would probably not play
in a tournament that wasn't 'textbook' Warrior, but rather some local
variant. That, of course, however, is just one man's opinion.

I'd prefer playing my Greeks against any kind of Romans (or anyone else
for that matter) with no 'handicapping' or change in list rules. I think
that FHE's Roman list rules make sense, particularly in light of Jon's
explanation by way of rationale. I say that notwithstanding that the list
rules make them harder for me to beat.

No problem here. Bring 'em on, and Alexander's companions, Almughavars,
whatever. I have faith in the game system as is. BTW, anyone in favor of
changing the list rules so that armies with Hellene CinC's always get +2
on combat dice?

-Greek

[Todd Kaeser]

I realize that I've created a stirred pot - not truly my intent Jon (I'm sure
I'll pay for it this summer at Historicon :-)

The list rules may not always seem fair at times - especially out of time
period, but they have added a greater historical feel for each of the lists
affected. If we went back to the way things were - read TOG - there are a whole
other set of issues that we'd be dealing with and "bantering about" at the
moment. The FHE have done what they feel is best and they can always agree to
disagree - it is their set and we are to play by it. At least we have this
ability to discuss the merits of this and that and I appreciate it.

I'll just take my 2 units of knights and make sure the Romans don't have a 2nd
round of combat. There'a always a way.

Todd

hrisikos@... wrote:
> We've been having this same discussion down here in Jacksonville. This is
> my preferred solution to the "List Rule Problem".
>
> Steve Rawls
>
>

As Jon politely implies in his most recent, I see no problem in that FHE
repeatedly encourages people to run tournaments however the organizer sees
fit, with X-rules, etc. We constantly see invitations on this board to try
it and report the playtesting results.

For the record, I agree with those who have argued against any change in
rules or list rules in a tournament format, and I would probably not play
in a tournament that wasn't 'textbook' Warrior, but rather some local
variant. That, of course, however, is just one man's opinion.

I'd prefer playing my Greeks against any kind of Romans (or anyone else
for that matter) with no 'handicapping' or change in list rules. I think
that FHE's Roman list rules make sense, particularly in light of Jon's
explanation by way of rationale. I say that notwithstanding that the list
rules make them harder for me to beat.

No problem here. Bring 'em on, and Alexander's companions, Almughavars,
whatever. I have faith in the game system as is. BTW, anyone in favor of
changing the list rules so that armies with Hellene CinC's always get +2
on combat dice?

-Greek



SPONSORED LINKS
Miniature wargaming Wargaming Warrior

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.

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.


---------------------------------





---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

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

List rules are wonderful, as long as you are fighting historical opponents in a
non-tournament setting. As soon as you enter a tournament, where points should
be points, certain armies get very great advantages from the list rules for no
additional points cost. My belief is that this is really a NASAMW problem, not 
a FHE problem.

Steve "Not really trying to flog the dead horse" Rawls

On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 16:49:04 -0500, JonCleaves wrote
> There's a problem?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Rawls <steve@...>
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 16:10:10 -0500
> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] List Rules (was Roman Legion stuff)
>
> We've been having this same discussion down here in Jacksonville. This is my
> preferred solution to the "List Rule Problem".
>
> Steve Rawls
>
> On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 18:55:10 -0000, Nicholas Cioran wrote
> > Reading the discussion of the updated list rules for Roman legionaires
> > got me to thinking.  The list rules are made to make troops behave
> > more accurately against historical opponents, which makes sense.
> >
> > But the change also affects how they fight ahistorical opponents, such
> > as Todd's example with the SHK.  But, as Scott has stated, this
> > doesn't matter, because its ahistorical.
> >
> > But despite this, list rules and changes to them do have a profound
> > effect on gameplay beyond the historical interactions they're meant to
> > model, particularly in tournaments where games generally aren't
> > between historical opponents.
> >
> > So, what would people think if list rules only applied when fighting
> > historical opponents (in or out of tournaments) and otherwise, as a
> > corollary to Scott's, "a spear is a spear is a spear," a, "spearman is
> > a spearman is a spearman."
> >
> > Have fun!
> > Cole
> >
> >
> >
> > SPONSORED LINKS
>
> Miniature wargaming   Wargaming   Warrior  
> >
> >
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
> Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.
> >   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.  
>
> >
> >
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> SPONSORED LINKS
Miniature wargaming Wargaming Warrior
>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
>
 Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.
>    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.

>
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------



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

All you need to do is look at the problem from a different angle.
Come up with a creative way to deal with the list rule and all of a
sudden some one's reliance on a list rule becomes a handicap. If
you look at the big two tournaments and the people who win them you
will often find the winners do not use armies that have list rules.
If you try to look at them as ways to exploit how your opponent will
play you will find them to be worth the points they don't cost. :)

Ambrose

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Rawls" <steve@...> wrote:
>
> List rules are wonderful, as long as you are fighting historical
opponents in a non-tournament setting. As soon as you enter a
tournament, where points should be points, certain armies get very
great advantages from the list rules for no additional points cost.
My belief is that this is really a NASAMW problem, not  a FHE
problem.
>
> Steve "Not really trying to flog the dead horse" Rawls
>
> On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 16:49:04 -0500, JonCleaves wrote
> > There's a problem?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Steve Rawls <steve@...>
> > To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 16:10:10 -0500
> > Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] List Rules (was Roman Legion stuff)
> >
> > We've been having this same discussion down here in
Jacksonville. This is my
> > preferred solution to the "List Rule Problem".
> >
> > Steve Rawls
> >
> > On Tue, 14 Feb 2006 18:55:10 -0000, Nicholas Cioran wrote
> > > Reading the discussion of the updated list rules for Roman
legionaires
> > > got me to thinking.  The list rules are made to make troops
behave
> > > more accurately against historical opponents, which makes
sense.
> > >
> > > But the change also affects how they fight ahistorical
opponents, such
> > > as Todd's example with the SHK.  But, as Scott has stated,
this
> > > doesn't matter, because its ahistorical.
> > >
> > > But despite this, list rules and changes to them do have a
profound
> > > effect on gameplay beyond the historical interactions they're
meant to
> > > model, particularly in tournaments where games generally
aren't
> > > between historical opponents.
> > >
> > > So, what would people think if list rules only applied when
fighting
> > > historical opponents (in or out of tournaments) and otherwise,
as a
> > > corollary to Scott's, "a spear is a spear is a spear,"
a, "spearman is
> > > a spearman is a spearman."
> > >
> > > Have fun!
> > > Cole
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > SPONSORED LINKS
> >
> > Miniature wargaming   Wargaming   Warrior  
> > >
> > >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
------
> > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> > >
> > Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.
> > >   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.  
> >
> > >
> > >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------
------
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
> > SPONSORED LINKS
> Miniature wargaming Wargaming Warrior
> >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
----
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >
>  Visit your group "WarriorRules" on the web.
> >    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.
>
> >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

[Mark Stone]

--- On February 14 Steve Rawls said: ---

> List rules are wonderful, as long as you are fighting historical opponents in
a
> non-tournament setting. As soon as you enter a tournament, where points should
> be points, certain armies get very great advantages....

Well Steve, the mistaken assumption here is that in a tournament points should
be points. Jon, Scott, and company have been very clear on this list that the
point system is _not_ designed to tournament-equalize armies. You can debate
whether or not it _should_ be so-designed, but given that it is not presently
designed that way, list rule enabled troops are only one of many examples where
equal points do not produce equal fighting power.


-Mark Stone