Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 12/17/2003 16:46:56 Central Standard Time,
tebo.chris@... writes:
25mm is not "do-able" for those of us
not in driving distance.
I take a 25mm army every year across the country twice by plane to CW and
HCon. Not a problem.


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

Scott,

Interesting poll. I would have added preferred scale to the list of questions.
Alternating scale may be more of an inconvenience
than just sticking to one scale and may have skewed response to this question.
How many of us have the same army in both
scales? Not the newer players I would surmise.

The flaw with polls can be in the sample. Since you sampled 2003 participants
only, you are missing those that didn't participate.
Those not participating could possibly not have done so because of current
format.

Could I suggest that you poll all those that qualified in the last few years
as a sample of what should be done in the future?

I have spoken to some that have qualified and one reason that they may not
have attended is due to 25mm scale.
With the 9/11 issue and transporting troops via airplane, this have put a
serious damper on transporting 25mm scale.
15mm is quite easier since you can carry on board. If you play larger armies,
25mm is not "do-able" for those of us
not in driving distance.

And to pre-empt suggestions of checking in or shipping, I know folks that
would NEVER ship or check in their figures
due to having painted them. Their value is therefore not monetary but
"priceless" due the time, love and care
in painting their own figures.

Frankly, I love 25mm but the transport issue is a daunting one.

Thank you,

Chris Tebo

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, JonCleaves@a... wrote:
> In a message dated 12/17/2003 16:46:56 Central Standard Time,
> tebo.chris@h... writes:
> 25mm is not "do-able" for those of us
> not in driving distance.
> I take a 25mm army every year across the country twice by plane to
CW and
> HCon. Not a problem.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


Glad to hear it? How do you do this? Inquiring minds need to know! :-)

Chris

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 12/17/2003 17:27:32 Central Standard Time,
tebo.chris@... writes:
Glad to hear it? How do you do this? Inquiring minds need to know!
In a steel box that I carry on to the plane. There is typically a little
oohing and ahhing at security, but never any real delay.


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

[Greg Regets]

I have played only about five games in 25mm over the years, but
honestly feel the NICT should be in the 25mm scale. The grandness of
that scale is fitting for a national championship tournament.

It is my opinion that one list is a poor option. Most armies that
offer enough flexibility to make two varied lists, gain even more
benefit when the list count is reduces to one.

1600 points, 4 hours? Too many points ... games that are too long.
Then again, anything that eliminated the "wall anchored on the edge
of the world" effect, it a bonus in my book. I have never gotten the
point of this sort of combat. It is unrealistic, not historical, and
quite frankly, reminds me of lining up plastic soldiers and rolling
marbles at them.

Just my two cents ... g

[scott holder]

It is my opinion that one list is a poor option. Most armies that
offer enough flexibility to make two varied lists, gain even more
benefit when the list count is reduces to one.

>For years, wait a minute, a decade +, I believed exactly as you do. Once I
started running 1 list tourneys and elicited feedback from players, I became
very sold. 1 list tourneys result in MORE armies being played and viewed as
being viable, not less.

scott

[Harlan Garrett]

Greg,

I like your idea of no deployment in the flank zone. Maybe we should give
it a try at Saint Valentines' Days Massacre in February. Maybe end look at
adding it to the Texas Interps.

HG

-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Regets [mailto:gar@...]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 9:16 AM
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: NICT Poll and 25mm Scale


I have played only about five games in 25mm over the years, but
honestly feel the NICT should be in the 25mm scale. The grandness of
that scale is fitting for a national championship tournament.

It is my opinion that one list is a poor option. Most armies that
offer enough flexibility to make two varied lists, gain even more
benefit when the list count is reduces to one.

1600 points, 4 hours? Too many points ... games that are too long.
Then again, anything that eliminated the "wall anchored on the edge
of the world" effect, it a bonus in my book. I have never gotten the
point of this sort of combat. It is unrealistic, not historical, and
quite frankly, reminds me of lining up plastic soldiers and rolling
marbles at them.

Just my two cents ... g


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com



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: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Greg Regets]

Could it possibly be Scott, that the weapons changes of TOG 7.6 had
something to do with this, rather than the one list format?

We noticed a HUGE increase of armies being used when all lance armed
cavalry got 1.5 ranks, charging LTS got two, and crossbow had a 120p
short range.

Likewise, I would bet that the more balanced Warrior lists will yield
a greater variety still.

Thanks ... g



--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Holder, Scott"
<Scott.Holder@f...> wrote:
> It is my opinion that one list is a poor option. Most armies that
> offer enough flexibility to make two varied lists, gain even more
> benefit when the list count is reduces to one.
>
> >For years, wait a minute, a decade +, I believed exactly as you
do. Once I started running 1 list tourneys and elicited feedback
from players, I became very sold. 1 list tourneys result in MORE
armies being played and viewed as being viable, not less.
>
> scott

[joncleaves]

[Player hat on, game designer hat off]

I am in agreement with Greg on the points/hours issue. 1600 *may* be too many
points, but 4 hours is absolutely way too long. The issue is, Scott is right -
there is a core of gamers who routinely make the NICT cut who like to play slow.
Agonizingly so... :)

But, I agree with the poster who called Scott out on his sampling errors. It is
statistically incorrect to sample those who qualified this year only. It's
primarily the same old crowd - what did you think you would get for an answer?
lol NASAMW should poll the whole playership - who are all potential NICT
attendees. It may be that we are denying ourselves some folks who would come
and possibly also at the expense of some who would still qualify-attend under a
different format.

I will say that the old days of alternating scales were no fun, and even less so
were the even older days when both scales were played and the champ was from the
finalists in each scale and *that* game was played in alternating scales.

The NASAMW goal of fostering the 25mm scale due to its recruiting effect and
look on the table is working and I know I have painted two 25mm armies now
solely to be able to play in the NICT and am very glad that motivation existed.

Jon
[game designer hat back on]

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 12/18/2003 10:25:22 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Harlan.D.Garrett@... writes:

> Maybe end look at
> adding it to the Texas Interps.>>

Heads-up display engaged and tracking....

Tell me this is just a set of alternate game formats. Please. :)

Jon

[scott holder]

25mm is not "do-able" for those of us not in driving distance.

I take a 25mm army every year across the country twice by plane to CW and
HCon. Not a problem.

>Several players fly in with 25mm armies. Not a problem. I've flown with 25mm
armies, not a problem.

>I'm fully aware of all the intricacies of polling, what the results mean, what
they don't mean, how things could turn out differently if things were worded
differently, yadda yadda yadda. I only polled this year's NICT folks because I
didn't want 75 people weighing in with 137.6 opinions on stuff. I've NEVER
polled players this formally before and probably won't again if all I get is
people poking holes in my approach if the answers to some of the polling
questions don't fit what they want to see:):)

>We had our biggest NICT *ever* this year.....and it was in 25mm--and that from
back in the days when TOG was the ONLY game in town. Having 16 tables engaged
in 25mm games does many things that 15mm simply does not. 1) The public display
is impressive. 2) Games can go faster because of the table to scale ratio that
we debate endlessly in here. 3) See #1, because of that, we "compete" better
with another 25mm-only gaming system that shall go nameless but involves lotsa
dice:). 4) See #1, it allows us to better promote the rules system. Sure,
it has its drawbacks, any approach does, but IMNSHO, those drawbacks don't
outweigh the positives we've achieved by going only 25mm for the NICT. And we
don't have any of this "two champions" stuff, something I abhor.

>Fully a third of the participants in this poll were usually more 15mm players
than 25mm and another third are what I call "converted" 25mm players--those
folks who usta play 15mm until they were dragged kicking and screaming into the
scale and then saw the light:) Robert Turnball is one of the better
examples of that. The remaining third are old-school 25mm gamers. But, I know
who is who and was very impressed at how *most* players who responded stepped
back and looked at the "big picture". Therefore, I didn't see this as an
attempt to skew the results with a stacked pool of pollees. Yes, one or two
folks on BOTH sides of the issue were rather adamant about sticking to 25mm or
alternating but everybody else gave a much more balanced approach. The same
applied to all the questions. Yes, each one had one or two hard core adherents
to one side or the other. For example, Jon bitches about game length and he has
a sympathetic ear in terms of the Warrior honcho for NASAMW (me)...yet, I had
other players bitch just as hard about cutting the time. Who is right? Depends
on what opinion you hold. However, of the folks who replied on any given
question who didn't have an axe to grind, they gave me honest opinions.

>But, everybody will continue to hold to whatever opinion they want:)
Everybody has a pet peeve, Jon's is game length, Greg's might be one-list
tourneys, it goes on and on and on. I know from experience in this game and
running tourney's for a broad group of people (as opposed to a local group that
usually has it's share of quirks or group-specific preferences) that no format
pleases everybody. Therefore, what's been developed over the years (by me)
tends to be aimed at displeasing the fewest and offering up a reasonable
approach for the greater lump of players despite the loud protests of a vocal
minority (sound familiar?). Local tourneys are where all the neato goofy
alternative stuff should be allowed to flower. And yes, contrary to what Jon
sometimes suggests, change does creep into the system. The one-list tournament
is an example of something that "the same old crowd" initially resisted but now
look at the polling results from that same "old crowd"--they now skew toward
one-list tourneys. Table size for the Mini is another "change". Sigh.

>I shared the polling results to be considerate and to let everybody know that
I'd actually polled one of the most dedicated group of gamers around who fairly
represent a large block of the playership. I'd like to thank Jon for
acknowlodging my efforts (he refers to them as NASAMW's efforts) in terms of
promoting 25mm play, the elimination of all the old icky "dual scale tourneys"
for the NICT, etc. We are light years ahead of how this stuff usta run. The
NICT is like the NFL, changes occur and if you look back over a 10 year period,
they seem rather large. But year to year, it's a tinkering process and some
years, no tinkering goes on.

scott

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 12/18/2003 11:05:35 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Scott.Holder@... writes:

> I didn't want 75 people weighing in with 137.6 opinions on stuff. I've NEVER
polled players this formally before and probably won't again if all I get is
people poking holes in my approach if the answers to some of the polling
questions don't
> fit what they want to see:)>>

Discouraged by the chaos of democracy, Saddam Holder? lol

I call you by your NASAMW name in these debates to draw the clear line between
FHE and NASAMW. They are NOT the same thing and FHE's members do not all agree
with all, or can even effectively influence all, NASAMW decisions.

The idea of having an opinion = axe to grind so that opinion can't be honest
wasn't a fair comment. You signed up to be the ump for Warrior - suck it up and
find out what the playership wants. If that means sifting through 137.6
different opinions, then so be it.

However, I certainly do agree that NASAMW is more responsive to player needs
than previous and also NASAMW Warrior events simply looked superb at HCon last
year - outnumbering DBM and WAB....

Jon

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Strangely, I have to agree with Scott again (this is becoming a habit that I
will have to break and "NO I'm not one of the SYCOPHANTS!") But I seem to run
pretty much the same list at all of the tournaments I've attended. When I make a
list, I try to compensate for all of my opponents and use terrain to maximize my
effectiveness. This is where the "generalship" comes into play in my opinion.
Taking a set of circumstances and utilizing them to increase your chances of
victory. Your tactics and ultimately your dice will take care of the rest! And
ofcourse as many of you are aware, I run lots of "D" class troops to fill up the
rest of the Table! Woof, Woof! :)

kelly

"Holder, Scott" <Scott.Holder@...> wrote:
It is my opinion that one list is a poor option. Most armies that
offer enough flexibility to make two varied lists, gain even more
benefit when the list count is reduces to one.

>For years, wait a minute, a decade +, I believed exactly as you do. Once I
started running 1 list tourneys and elicited feedback from players, I became
very sold. 1 list tourneys result in MORE armies being played and viewed as
being viable, not less.

scott


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com




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.



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now

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

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Hey Harlan,

Can I have my Trapezitoi and Peltastoi back when I go to play in the
Republic of Texas?
kelly

"Harlan D. Garrett" <Harlan.D.Garrett@...> wrote:
Greg,

I like your idea of no deployment in the flank zone. Maybe we should give
it a try at Saint Valentines' Days Massacre in February. Maybe end look at
adding it to the Texas Interps.

HG

-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Regets [mailto:gar@...]
Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 9:16 AM
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: NICT Poll and 25mm Scale


I have played only about five games in 25mm over the years, but
honestly feel the NICT should be in the 25mm scale. The grandness of
that scale is fitting for a national championship tournament.

It is my opinion that one list is a poor option. Most armies that
offer enough flexibility to make two varied lists, gain even more
benefit when the list count is reduces to one.

1600 points, 4 hours? Too many points ... games that are too long.
Then again, anything that eliminated the "wall anchored on the edge
of the world" effect, it a bonus in my book. I have never gotten the
point of this sort of combat. It is unrealistic, not historical, and
quite frankly, reminds me of lining up plastic soldiers and rolling
marbles at them.

Just my two cents ... g


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com



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: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com





---------------------------------
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!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now

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

[Kelly Wilkinson]

Jon,
Are you going to be up at table top this coming Saturday or Monday? I might
just have something for you. . . You know since it's Christmas and all. . .

kw

JonCleaves@... wrote:
[Player hat on, game designer hat off]

I am in agreement with Greg on the points/hours issue. 1600 *may* be too many
points, but 4 hours is absolutely way too long. The issue is, Scott is right -
there is a core of gamers who routinely make the NICT cut who like to play slow.
Agonizingly so... :)

But, I agree with the poster who called Scott out on his sampling errors. It is
statistically incorrect to sample those who qualified this year only. It's
primarily the same old crowd - what did you think you would get for an answer?
lol NASAMW should poll the whole playership - who are all potential NICT
attendees. It may be that we are denying ourselves some folks who would come
and possibly also at the expense of some who would still qualify-attend under a
different format.

I will say that the old days of alternating scales were no fun, and even less so
were the even older days when both scales were played and the champ was from the
finalists in each scale and *that* game was played in alternating scales.

The NASAMW goal of fostering the 25mm scale due to its recruiting effect and
look on the table is working and I know I have painted two 25mm armies now
solely to be able to play in the NICT and am very glad that motivation existed.

Jon
[game designer hat back on]


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com





---------------------------------
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!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now

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