Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Todd Schneider]

Thanks for the eagle eyes there Ewan.

I have fixed it and sent version 2.1 of the battle to
Jon.

It fixes the mistake Ewan caught. Don Coon originally
had it as well, and I missed it. Sorry about that.
:-|

Anyways, I changed the combat results a little bit.
Instead of rolling down two (which I did to explain
the mechanic of Reg A Generals getting back net
minus's), the Roman CinC Now rolls up 1. That allows
him to gve out more casualties, so he is not doubled
when the Germans do 3@More. The Way the Die rolls
were working, the only way to keep the combat as close
to the orginal was to have the Roman roll a -3, and
use the Reg A General mechanic. However, the original
roll is a catastrophe, and I didn't want to add that
in, and besides, this way was fewer math problems. :-)

The first combat result is that the Romans lose and
recoil, and the Germans follow up and expand, which is
the original action.

The next bound, The Romans roll down two, which is
negated by the Reg A status of the general, the German
combat is the same, and the romans break.

I also adjusted the fatigue points for the units in
the following slides.


As always, if someone else sees a mistake, let me
know.
Todd

[Eric Turner]

The only mistake is you are not a member of N_*&%$, this just the
kind of involvement NEEDED. Just got back from a 3 day work trip only
to find the best thing in a long time on a mailing list. Todd this is
great. I see a new section in the website.

Eric

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Todd Schneider <thresh1642@s...>
wrote:
> Thanks for the eagle eyes there Ewan.
>
> I have fixed it and sent version 2.1 of the battle to
> Jon.
>
> It fixes the mistake Ewan caught. Don Coon originally
> had it as well, and I missed it. Sorry about that.
>
>
> Anyways, I changed the combat results a little bit.
> Instead of rolling down two (which I did to explain
> the mechanic of Reg A Generals getting back net
> minus's), the Roman CinC Now rolls up 1. That allows
> him to gve out more casualties, so he is not doubled
> when the Germans do 3@More. The Way the Die rolls
> were working, the only way to keep the combat as close
> to the orginal was to have the Roman roll a -3, and
> use the Reg A General mechanic. However, the original
> roll is a catastrophe, and I didn't want to add that
> in, and besides, this way was fewer math problems.
>
> The first combat result is that the Romans lose and
> recoil, and the Germans follow up and expand, which is
> the original action.
>
> The next bound, The Romans roll down two, which is
> negated by the Reg A status of the general, the German
> combat is the same, and the romans break.
>
> I also adjusted the fatigue points for the units in
> the following slides.
>
>
> As always, if someone else sees a mistake, let me
> know.
> Todd

[Todd Schneider]

The Sample game available for download is the updated version.

Thanks,
Todd


--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Todd Schneider <thresh1642@s...>
wrote:
> Thanks for the eagle eyes there Ewan.
>
> I have fixed it and sent version 2.1 of the battle to
> Jon.
>
> It fixes the mistake Ewan caught. Don Coon originally
> had it as well, and I missed it. Sorry about that.
>
>
> Anyways, I changed the combat results a little bit.
> Instead of rolling down two (which I did to explain
> the mechanic of Reg A Generals getting back net
> minus's), the Roman CinC Now rolls up 1. That allows
> him to gve out more casualties, so he is not doubled
> when the Germans do 3@More. The Way the Die rolls
> were working, the only way to keep the combat as close
> to the orginal was to have the Roman roll a -3, and
> use the Reg A General mechanic. However, the original
> roll is a catastrophe, and I didn't want to add that
> in, and besides, this way was fewer math problems.
>
> The first combat result is that the Romans lose and
> recoil, and the Germans follow up and expand, which is
> the original action.
>
> The next bound, The Romans roll down two, which is
> negated by the Reg A status of the general, the German
> combat is the same, and the romans break.
>
> I also adjusted the fatigue points for the units in
> the following slides.
>
>
> As always, if someone else sees a mistake, let me
> know.
> Todd

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 4/21/2004 11:22:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
eturner@... writes:

> The only mistake is you are not a member of N_*&%$, this just the
> kind of involvement NEEDED. >>

Special characters are cute, Eric, but such references are for NASAMWList, of
which Todd is a member.

<<Just got back from a 3 day work trip only
> to find the best thing in a long time on a mailing list.
> Todd this is
> great.>>

He poured an incredible amount of work into it. He is a huge asset to Warrior.

J

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 4/21/2004 11:22:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
eturner@... writes:

> The only mistake is you are not a member of N_*&%$, this just the
> kind of involvement NEEDED. >>

Special characters are cute, Eric, but such references are for NASAMWList, of
which Todd is a member.

<<Just got back from a 3 day work trip only
> to find the best thing in a long time on a mailing list.
> Todd this is
> great.>>

He poured an incredible amount of work into it. He is a huge asset to Warrior.

J