Warrior Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules
A Four Horsemen Enterprises Rules Set
 
  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups AlbumAlbum   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

RULE: Fractions and rear ranks

 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> Egroup Archives
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Doug
Centurion
Centurion


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1412

PostPosted: Thu Feb 16, 2006 11:31 pm    Post subject: RULE: Fractions and rear ranks


>the answer isn't obvious, particularly because elsewhere in Warrior
>fractions DO round up (i.e. Rear rank shooting and fighting).

That reminds me -- when calculating rear ranks, do you:
a) sum the rear ranks and then divide by 2
or
b) divide each rank by 2, round up, and carry the subtotal for all the ranks?

I think its a) but I recall someone doing factors a long time ago & I
think he used b).

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Chris Bump
Legate
Legate


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1625

PostPosted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 6:26 pm    Post subject: Re: RULE: Fractions and rear ranks


In empathy of Cole and to highlight Doug's question it is not so
obvious, particularly to a new player. There are idiosyncracies to our
game that do not seem to make alot of sense. For example, a 4 element
body of lance armed cav fighting two elements abreast by 2 deep fight 9
figures.

Whereas two 6 man lancer units fighting the same single opponent as the
1 12 man lancer was get to use 10 men fighting because each 6 man unit
round up the 3 man back rank to 2 each. So somehow two seperate units
potentially even of different nationalities and languages and skill
sets can seemingly coordinate and fight more efficiently (bringing 10
men to bear vs 9) than a single organized unit.

So what is intuitively obvious to the experienced player may not be so
to newer or less experienced players. Redundancy may be of value.
Chris

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, Doug <rockd@...> wrote:
>
> >the answer isn't obvious, particularly because elsewhere in Warrior
> >fractions DO round up (i.e. Rear rank shooting and fighting).
>
> That reminds me -- when calculating rear ranks, do you:
> a) sum the rear ranks and then divide by 2
> or
> b) divide each rank by 2, round up, and carry the subtotal for all
the ranks?
>
> I think its a) but I recall someone doing factors a long time ago & I
> think he used b).
>

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Mark Stone
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2076
Location: Buckley, WA

PostPosted: Fri Feb 17, 2006 8:24 pm    Post subject: Re: RULE: Fractions and rear ranks


--- On February 17 Chris said: ---

> Whereas two 6 man lancer units fighting the same single opponent as the
> 1 12 man lancer was get to use 10 men fighting because each 6 man unit
> round up the 3 man back rank to 2 each. So somehow two seperate units
> potentially even of different nationalities and languages and skill
> sets can seemingly coordinate and fight more efficiently (bringing 10
> men to bear vs 9) than a single organized unit.
>
> So what is intuitively obvious to the experienced player may not be so
> to newer or less experienced players.

I have always assumed that part of the rationale here was to encourage the use
of historical unit sizes; knights typically operated in more like what we would
call a 2-stand unit than a 4-stand unit. This is somewhat akin to the way TOG
made 6@3=16 casualties, wherease 8@3 was 30 casualties. I believe there then
intent was to encourage Romans to operate in smaller units.

But I agree, these are nuances that it takes a while to recognize when you're a
beginner.

I would have thought, though, that the confusion would have been over why you
round off when you do, rather than Cole's attempt to round off where no
rounding off is needed, permitted, nor implied.


-Mark Stone

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> Egroup Archives All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group