Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Patrick Byrne]

> From: Quahog25@...
> Reply-To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 08:01:47 EDT
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules]legionaries weak?
>
> Their problem in all Barker based sets is their vulnerability to
> attack cav, which is why Caesar has such a terrible record in tournaments.
> (As another contributor to this List very perceptibly asked - name ONE
> example, out of all Ancient history, where cavalry rode down infantry
> frontally. It was very rare.)


I have seen the Romans be not so good in tourney's, but that's usually
because it is a timed event.

While playing at home, we play most games to foreseeable conclusion. In
these cases, the Romans usually take the Cav charge, and the true test of
the battle are the waver checks made by the adjacent legionaries. Being B
class, their chances are rather good. Often times the Legionaries are able
to support themselves and counterattack.

So I ask, are weak legionaries a tournament issue or is it a game issue? so
much to where the Roman's can't win on the field of battle given a full days
fight?

If it is just a tournament issue, then I would think the tournaments have
there special rule or make it some sort of X-rule that gets instigated.


BTW, I think it would be overkill to give the MIR just one more advantage
against cav.
-PB

[scott holder]

BTW, I think it would be overkill to give the MIR just one more
advantage
against cav.

>Heh heh, don't expect to see that from me! By the second half of the
MIR period, the tactical system of roman legions was drastically
different due to changing manpower issues and external threats.

>Everything I've discussed to date centers on the Marian and EIR
periods.

>Good point from another email regarding "timed games". We found the
EIR Romans in FW against the Armenians did exactly that, suck up the cav
charge and out-grind the opponent and pass waver tests. If you roll 1s
on waver tests, you deserve to lose:):)

Scott
List Ho

[Greg Regets]

Patrick ...

Perfect timing! See the last post and you will get my opinion on why the Romans
have been beaten in our tournaments. If you want specific examples of each game
I was involved in (or watched as a referee)against the Romans, please email me
offline.

Greg
gar@...
----- Original Message -----
From: Patrick
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2002 8:31 AM
Subject: [WarriorRules] Roman Tournay Armies



> From: Quahog25@...
> Reply-To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 08:01:47 EDT
> To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [WarriorRules]legionaries weak?
>
> Their problem in all Barker based sets is their vulnerability to
> attack cav, which is why Caesar has such a terrible record in tournaments.
> (As another contributor to this List very perceptibly asked - name ONE
> example, out of all Ancient history, where cavalry rode down infantry
> frontally. It was very rare.)


I have seen the Romans be not so good in tourney's, but that's usually
because it is a timed event.

While playing at home, we play most games to foreseeable conclusion. In
these cases, the Romans usually take the Cav charge, and the true test of
the battle are the waver checks made by the adjacent legionaries. Being B
class, their chances are rather good. Often times the Legionaries are able
to support themselves and counterattack.

So I ask, are weak legionaries a tournament issue or is it a game issue? so
much to where the Roman's can't win on the field of battle given a full days
fight?

If it is just a tournament issue, then I would think the tournaments have
there special rule or make it some sort of X-rule that gets instigated.


BTW, I think it would be overkill to give the MIR just one more advantage
against cav.
-PB


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

Height: 4 5 6 7 ft 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 in
Weight:
Sex: F M






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



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



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