Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Todd <thresh1642@s...> wrote:
> Will it ever be as popular as 40K, or Flames of War? Is that the
goal we
> should aim for? Or should Warrior be the most popular Ancients
game out
> there?

I think those days are gone but there is no reason we can't compete
for a bigger slice of the market. I play Flames of War as well and
wouldn't expect a website like Battlefront's but the Vis Bellica site
is fairly simple, comparatively, which is why I used it as an example
(that and I've had few bits and pieces published on there)

> The question then becomes: What are you doing to increase the
> popularity of the game?
> How many Demonstration games have you put on the last calendar
year?

I'm planning on taking it to the local club that has no current
warrior players as well as introduce it to another club I am a member
of. Currently they only play GW games so I need to save their
immortal souls.

When Warrior Battles is released I will be more then happy to attend
any or all the WFB tournaments I can, now that I'm not vying for
trophies myself.

> Fast Warrior can and should be a great stepping stone to
get "Younger
> Blood" into the system. Pre packed Fast Warrior armies from Essex
run
> about $50.00 on average, and they also provide an excellent
opportunity
> to get younger people into painting their own figs as well.

Fair enough. Personally I don't like Essex figs so I have to build
from other sources. Regardless a FW army is fairly small and a
considerably smaller investment then, say, WFB. They also provide
useful starting points even if some of them bare little resemblance
to their larger cousins.

> I have to take small issue with this. For two years now we've been
> talking about having more tournaments, and trying to influence
gamers to
> travel outside their own city. For one reason or another, people
have
> found a reason to stay away. I do not know why.

Shame about the travel problem. I can see a problem with Warrior
tournaments that makes them less attractive to me - most seem to have
4 games over 2 days, correct? For me that is not enough to get me
travelling hundreds of kms. I want to be playing 3 games a day
preferably over a long weekend so 3 Sat/Sun and 2 on Mon. Often
tournaments end up being the only games I can play in due to work or
family commitments. I want it to be worthwhile.

Hey maybe the reason they can't travel is they can't afford to pay
for transport of the nurse and oxygen bottles?

Sorry couldn't resist, lucky I'm a relatively old fart too.
>
> We recently had a Team Tournament here in KC. It was a great
format,
> but in truth, we dropped the ball in setting up a location, and it
ended
> up being a two day affair. But you know something, it was a 2 day
> Affair over a holiday in a month where frankly, theres not a lot of
> outside conflicts that I can see. In the past, previous
suggestions
> have been shot down because the days looked at were the same as
another
> convention, or it was the prime vacation week of the year, or it
was
> football season, the reasons are endless, and legitimate to those
making
> them.

I started a WFB team tournament here in NSW a few years ago. We
played 4 games in one day at a reduced size. The format was very
successful, so successful we had to turn clubs away. The last one
was 12 clubs 4 players each (one in each team under 1 played at a
registered club so food and drinks were all available. No tin sheds,
airconditioning that actually worked etc. Why not look at a format
similar to that? More players can make a 1 day event then a 2 or 3
dayer. And, of course, Fast Warrior is excellent for something like
this.

Yes, I know that the number of Warrior players is a problem that WFB
doesn't have but then that was the whole point of my original post.
We need to look at the whole format of warrior events to make them
more attractive.

> "I don't like that its single list."

Bummer, so you have to meet all types of armies with the same army?
That's the only type of list I think should be allowed. Tournaments
should be about how well you play not how you tailor army lists.

> How can FHE overcome this sort of inertia? Is it even FHE's to
>overcome?

No, it's not FHE's job and I'm sorry if I put too much emphasis on
FHE's role. They are not GW or Battlefront. The emphasis should be on
the players and clubs.

> I didn't read it as condescending. I read as saying WAB players
are on
> the outside looking in because their system doesn't have a basing
method
> that meshes well with most of the other Ancoents games out there.
> However, I know Jon has sat down and figured out the measurements
needed
> to base 30mm figures for Warrior, we played a tournament last year
with
> them. I don't see them on the yahoo group, but I know they exist!
>
Forgot about the 30mm modifications. Mind you the fact you can't find
them may indicate the reason I can't and again shows the need for a
better web presence.

John O

John