Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 2/14/2005 17:16:41 Central Standard Time,
Eaglewars@... writes:

I guess this goes to show that army selection is not the end all in
tournament play.>>

Amen, brother!






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

Finally had a chance to look over Ewan's comments for the last two
NICT army selections. Seems he does not like my choices. He
rated my Anglo-Irish (2003) a 2/10 and my Medieval Irish (2004) also
a 2/10. Maybe he just does like the Irish? Could be an English
bias here? :)

I guess this goes to show that army selection is not the end all in
tournament play. After all, I did finish 9/30 in 2003 and 8/26 in
2004. My philosophy has always been to play with an army that you
feel comfortable with, not the current rage. Of course, I did bring
Hussites to both Cold Wars and Historicon in the past so it is hard
to me seriously sometimes. :)

Just a couple of thoughts on 2004. Even with only 11 units, the
Medieval Irish cover the table, so flanking them is difficult. I do
like lots of terrain, both offensively and defensively and this
makes an army of this type more effective. With fewer places to go,
the power of the army is more effective. Also, with small commands,
nearly the whole army must be destroyed before it goes away. That
being said, I did get a draw in a game where my opponent's entire
army was in retreat and I got a 4-3 win in a game where I lost
nearly 1000 points. All that goes to my playing style.

So now I am thinking about what to bring this year. How about Anglo-
Danish? Or maybe it is time to dust off the Early Vietnamese. Got
to love an army with 60 stands of LMI, JLS, SH and no cavalry.
Jacob

[Phil Gardocki]

Jacob,
Thanks for reminding me about the game I lost after killing over 1000
points....
Boy, that was ugly.

Phil


-----Original Message-----
From: Jacob Kovel <Eaglewars@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Monday, February 14, 2005 6:13 PM
Subject: [WarriorRules] NICT Army Lists


>
>
>Finally had a chance to look over Ewan's comments for the last two
>NICT army selections. Seems he does not like my choices. He
>rated my Anglo-Irish (2003) a 2/10 and my Medieval Irish (2004) also
>a 2/10. Maybe he just does like the Irish? Could be an English
>bias here?
>
>I guess this goes to show that army selection is not the end all in
>tournament play. After all, I did finish 9/30 in 2003 and 8/26 in
>2004. My philosophy has always been to play with an army that you
>feel comfortable with, not the current rage. Of course, I did bring
>Hussites to both Cold Wars and Historicon in the past so it is hard
>to me seriously sometimes.
>
>Just a couple of thoughts on 2004. Even with only 11 units, the
>Medieval Irish cover the table, so flanking them is difficult. I do
>like lots of terrain, both offensively and defensively and this
>makes an army of this type more effective. With fewer places to go,
>the power of the army is more effective. Also, with small commands,
>nearly the whole army must be destroyed before it goes away. That
>being said, I did get a draw in a game where my opponent's entire
>army was in retreat and I got a 4-3 win in a game where I lost
>nearly 1000 points. All that goes to my playing style.
>
>So now I am thinking about what to bring this year. How about Anglo-
>Danish? Or maybe it is time to dust off the Early Vietnamese. Got
>to love an army with 60 stands of LMI, JLS, SH and no cavalry.
>Jacob
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Ewan McNay]

It's all true. I'm really an Orangeman.

Jake of course reiterates the point I made, that he makes these armies
work a lot better than I would expect, greatly to his credit.

I'm not sure that fighting on a narrow frontage is necessarily a good
thing for the armies, though. Shieldless foot, no matter how cool and
brave, is going to lose a lot of the time; if it's then forced to rout
through other irreg foot, well..

[Yes, that's a worst case, of course]

I also think that relying on fighting in terrain, or using it to compress
the battlefield, is a good idea but not the basis for winning tournaments.
You can't force the opponent to come into that terrain, and it's actually
pretty unlikely that you'll be able to close down the table against an
uncooperative opponent. Not that it didn't happen to me with monotony in
the NICT as I threw 11 '1s' out of 20 terrain dice!

Anyway - congrats on the two top ten finishes, regardless, Jacob.

On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, Jacob Kovel wrote:
> Finally had a chance to look over Ewan's comments for the last two
> NICT army selections. Seems he does not like my choices. He
> rated my Anglo-Irish (2003) a 2/10 and my Medieval Irish (2004) also
> a 2/10. Maybe he just does like the Irish? Could be an English
> bias here?
>
> I guess this goes to show that army selection is not the end all in
> tournament play. After all, I did finish 9/30 in 2003 and 8/26 in
> 2004. My philosophy has always been to play with an army that you
> feel comfortable with, not the current rage. Of course, I did bring
> Hussites to both Cold Wars and Historicon in the past so it is hard
> to me seriously sometimes.
>
> Just a couple of thoughts on 2004. Even with only 11 units, the
> Medieval Irish cover the table, so flanking them is difficult. I do
> like lots of terrain, both offensively and defensively and this
> makes an army of this type more effective. With fewer places to go,
> the power of the army is more effective. Also, with small commands,
> nearly the whole army must be destroyed before it goes away. That
> being said, I did get a draw in a game where my opponent's entire
> army was in retreat and I got a 4-3 win in a game where I lost
> nearly 1000 points. All that goes to my playing style.
>
> So now I am thinking about what to bring this year. How about Anglo-
> Danish? Or maybe it is time to dust off the Early Vietnamese. Got
> to love an army with 60 stands of LMI, JLS, SH and no cavalry.
> Jacob
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Kelly Wilkinson]

As a person who's played Jake quite a bit, I almost can classify his style of
play as "In your face" with lots of 2Hcw, JLS guys. Shield are for sissy's and
get ready to rumble! His type of play guarantees a fun time as he either will
come out on top big or you will. Plus, he certainly can be sneaky the way he can
draw troops with lights. I've seen him do this on numerous occasions with his
Third Dynasty of UR army!

kelly wilkinson

Jacob Kovel <Eaglewars@...> wrote:

Finally had a chance to look over Ewan's comments for the last two
NICT army selections. Seems he does not like my choices. He
rated my Anglo-Irish (2003) a 2/10 and my Medieval Irish (2004) also
a 2/10. Maybe he just does like the Irish? Could be an English
bias here? :)

I guess this goes to show that army selection is not the end all in
tournament play. After all, I did finish 9/30 in 2003 and 8/26 in
2004. My philosophy has always been to play with an army that you
feel comfortable with, not the current rage. Of course, I did bring
Hussites to both Cold Wars and Historicon in the past so it is hard
to me seriously sometimes. :)

Just a couple of thoughts on 2004. Even with only 11 units, the
Medieval Irish cover the table, so flanking them is difficult. I do
like lots of terrain, both offensively and defensively and this
makes an army of this type more effective. With fewer places to go,
the power of the army is more effective. Also, with small commands,
nearly the whole army must be destroyed before it goes away. That
being said, I did get a draw in a game where my opponent's entire
army was in retreat and I got a 4-3 win in a game where I lost
nearly 1000 points. All that goes to my playing style.

So now I am thinking about what to bring this year. How about Anglo-
Danish? Or maybe it is time to dust off the Early Vietnamese. Got
to love an army with 60 stands of LMI, JLS, SH and no cavalry.
Jacob





Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
document.write('');

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



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! – Try it today!

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

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Ugly or not, it was one of the coolest games I have ever witnessed. Both of you
"Manned up" and fought like all good Irishmen. . . to the bloody end! In fact, I
think a song should be written as in days of old of the valor of the men that
died for the freedom of the Irish! :)

Gird Strongarm

"Philip H. Gardocki" <PHGamer@...> wrote:
Jacob,
Thanks for reminding me about the game I lost after killing over 1000
points....
Boy, that was ugly.

Phil


-----Original Message-----
From: Jacob Kovel <Eaglewars@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Monday, February 14, 2005 6:13 PM
Subject: [WarriorRules] NICT Army Lists


>
>
>Finally had a chance to look over Ewan's comments for the last two
>NICT army selections. Seems he does not like my choices. He
>rated my Anglo-Irish (2003) a 2/10 and my Medieval Irish (2004) also
>a 2/10. Maybe he just does like the Irish? Could be an English
>bias here?
>
>I guess this goes to show that army selection is not the end all in
>tournament play. After all, I did finish 9/30 in 2003 and 8/26 in
>2004. My philosophy has always been to play with an army that you
>feel comfortable with, not the current rage. Of course, I did bring
>Hussites to both Cold Wars and Historicon in the past so it is hard
>to me seriously sometimes.
>
>Just a couple of thoughts on 2004. Even with only 11 units, the
>Medieval Irish cover the table, so flanking them is difficult. I do
>like lots of terrain, both offensively and defensively and this
>makes an army of this type more effective. With fewer places to go,
>the power of the army is more effective. Also, with small commands,
>nearly the whole army must be destroyed before it goes away. That
>being said, I did get a draw in a game where my opponent's entire
>army was in retreat and I got a 4-3 win in a game where I lost
>nearly 1000 points. All that goes to my playing style.
>
>So now I am thinking about what to bring this year. How about Anglo-
>Danish? Or maybe it is time to dust off the Early Vietnamese. Got
>to love an army with 60 stands of LMI, JLS, SH and no cavalry.
>Jacob
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
document.write('');

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



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'

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

[Phil Gardocki]

And it was over in about 90 minutes...:)

-----Original Message-----
From: kelly wilkinson <jwilkinson62@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, February 15, 2005 12:53 AM
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] NICT Army Lists


>
>Ugly or not, it was one of the coolest games I have ever witnessed. Both of
you "Manned up" and fought like all good Irishmen. . . to the bloody end! In
fact, I think a song should be written as in days of old of the valor of the
men that died for the freedom of the Irish!
>
> Gird Strongarm
>
>"Philip H. Gardocki" <PHGamer@...> wrote:
>Jacob,
> Thanks for reminding me about the game I lost after killing over 1000
>points....
>Boy, that was ugly.
>
>Phil
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jacob Kovel <Eaglewars@...>
>To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com <WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com>
>Date: Monday, February 14, 2005 6:13 PM
>Subject: [WarriorRules] NICT Army Lists
>
>
>>
>>
>>Finally had a chance to look over Ewan's comments for the last two
>>NICT army selections. Seems he does not like my choices. He
>>rated my Anglo-Irish (2003) a 2/10 and my Medieval Irish (2004) also
>>a 2/10. Maybe he just does like the Irish? Could be an English
>>bias here?
>>
>>I guess this goes to show that army selection is not the end all in
>>tournament play. After all, I did finish 9/30 in 2003 and 8/26 in
>>2004. My philosophy has always been to play with an army that you
>>feel comfortable with, not the current rage. Of course, I did bring
>>Hussites to both Cold Wars and Historicon in the past so it is hard
>>to me seriously sometimes.
>>
>>Just a couple of thoughts on 2004. Even with only 11 units, the
>>Medieval Irish cover the table, so flanking them is difficult. I do
>>like lots of terrain, both offensively and defensively and this
>>makes an army of this type more effective. With fewer places to go,
>>the power of the army is more effective. Also, with small commands,
>>nearly the whole army must be destroyed before it goes away. That
>>being said, I did get a draw in a game where my opponent's entire
>>army was in retreat and I got a 4-3 win in a game where I lost
>>nearly 1000 points. All that goes to my playing style.
>>
>>So now I am thinking about what to bring this year. How about Anglo-
>>Danish? Or maybe it is time to dust off the Early Vietnamese. Got
>>to love an army with 60 stands of LMI, JLS, SH and no cavalry.
>>Jacob
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
>document.write('');
>
>---------------------------------
>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.
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term'
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>