Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[John Murphy]

Todd: Looked over the sample game. It was obviously a lot of work and
something that will be very helpful - you did a great job on it. I
have a couple suggestions, though, that might make it easier to
follow. You refer to most of the units by a number and player name.
It gets a bit confusing as you go into the presentation except in
cases like HTW or Irreg A that are so obvious.

I suggest you change the player names to something more obvious like
Wolfgang and Anthony or something. And wether you do or not it might
help to stick the unit type names in there more often just for
reference.

The only other point to make about this great peice of work is that
you refer in several places to units charging other units.

Check with Jon but I believe technically they are charging in a
direction and an enemy unit just happens to be in their path in that
direction. While usually this is a moot point it is not always and in
something for the uninitiated it would be good to at least point that
out once before applying the terminology.

For example, if you protect your flank with a skirmish unit the enemy
can literally charge right through it since it has to evade and hit
you in the now-exposed flank. I had this very situation in a game (a
desperation-time move on my part, would not have really made any
difference) but the other more experienced player convinced me it was
not the case and I had to turn to follow his evading cavalry. I asked
Jon and he said I had been right.

So I would submit it is an important distinction to make, at least
once to beginners, before just saying "charges unit so-and-so".

That presumes I am not mis-understanding what Jon told me. Check with
him.

But all that should not be permitted to obscure the fact that this is
a wonderfully useful little etude.

Larry: Many lists use MC sometimes with an option to upgrade to HC or
behind an HC front rank. A big set of them I believe are the various
Gallo-Germano-Gothic barbaroi such as my "Germanic Follower Cavalry"
in my Patrician Romans. What do you need armor for when the other guy
will blow his waver test? How's that for planning!

[Todd Schneider]

The Next Sample Game will have more distinctive names and units, I promise.
:-)



The issue I ran across in this one is that most of the units in the armies
involved were very similar. If I had said Aarons MI, I would have been
referring to 4 different units.



<<<The only other point to make about this great piece of work is that
you refer in several places to units charging other units.

Check with Jon but I believe technically they are charging in a
direction and an enemy unit just happens to be in their path in that
direction. While usually this is a moot point it is not always and in
something for the uninitiated it would be good to at least point that
out once before applying the terminology.>>>



Had a situation arose in game where more than one unit was in the declared
charge path, I agree with you, and I would have gone into greater detail
about it. As it was, in every case (looking back through it pretty quickly,
there was only one target in each of the declared charges (well, except for
the 8E German Infantry unit charge, there were two), and honestly, I didn’t
want to burden the newcomers to the game with rules and situations that
didn’t arise.



I do have a list of some rules that were not addressed, either directly or
indirectly, in this game, and am going to attempt to work them into the next
Sample Battle.



I appreciate the feedback.



Todd

_____

From: J. Murphy [mailto:jjmurphy@...]
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 11:00 PM
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [WarriorRules] Sample Game, MC, other stuff



Todd: Looked over the sample game. It was obviously a lot of work and
something that will be very helpful - you did a great job on it. I
have a couple suggestions, though, that might make it easier to
follow. You refer to most of the units by a number and player name.
It gets a bit confusing as you go into the presentation except in
cases like HTW or Irreg A that are so obvious.

I suggest you change the player names to something more obvious like
Wolfgang and Anthony or something. And wether you do or not it might
help to stick the unit type names in there more often just for
reference.

The only other point to make about this great peice of work is that
you refer in several places to units charging other units.

Check with Jon but I believe technically they are charging in a
direction and an enemy unit just happens to be in their path in that
direction. While usually this is a moot point it is not always and in
something for the uninitiated it would be good to at least point that
out once before applying the terminology.

For example, if you protect your flank with a skirmish unit the enemy
can literally charge right through it since it has to evade and hit
you in the now-exposed flank. I had this very situation in a game (a
desperation-time move on my part, would not have really made any
difference) but the other more experienced player convinced me it was
not the case and I had to turn to follow his evading cavalry. I asked
Jon and he said I had been right.

So I would submit it is an important distinction to make, at least
once to beginners, before just saying "charges unit so-and-so".

That presumes I am not mis-understanding what Jon told me. Check with
him.

But all that should not be permitted to obscure the fact that this is
a wonderfully useful little etude.

Larry: Many lists use MC sometimes with an option to upgrade to HC or
behind an HC front rank. A big set of them I believe are the various
Gallo-Germano-Gothic barbaroi such as my "Germanic Follower Cavalry"
in my Patrician Romans. What do you need armor for when the other guy
will blow his waver test? How's that for planning!





_____

Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
HYPERLINK
"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/W
arriorRules/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
HYPERLINK
"mailto:WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe"Warrior
Rules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the HYPERLINK
"http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/"Yahoo! Terms of Service.


---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 4/15/2004



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 4/15/2004



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

[John Murphy]

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Todd Schneider"
<thresh1642@s...> wrote:
> The Next Sample Game will have more distinctive names and units, I
promise.
> :-)

The _next_ sample game? How are you gonna top this one? Man, Todd,
that's great.

btw I think I am going to try your idea also about a waver log.
Wether its a chicken or an egg it is certainly a good measuring stick.
It will be interesting to see the results after several games,
especially if I also keep track beside it of where I am gaining, and
where my opponents are gaining, points.

[Todd Schneider]

John,



FWIW< from my noobish point of view, wavers are a part of the game a lot of
newer players overlook when first starting out, but they are key to what’s
going on.

What I did was right down when I took a waver and why, and I tired to cram
as much information into it as possible, so I’d end up with something like



“Spearman unit failed waver, shook due to second cause of disorder, recoiled
from combat 2nd time…”

Or “Legion broke after seeing friendly body route within 120, rolled 2 but
failed due to enemy behind flank.”

Or “Knight unit broke after rolling down three and opponent rolling up 3”



I’ve gotten away from writing them down lately, because I feel comfortable
enough with knowing why and where I am taking a waver. Whats killing me on
the tabletop these days is mistaches, and I am working on how to avoid them,
and if unavoidable, how to deal with them.



Although, I must say last night against Jon I failed more wavers in one
evening than I have in a long time.



Todd



<<<btw I think I am going to try your idea also about a waver log.
Whether its a chicken or an egg it is certainly a good measuring stick.
It will be interesting to see the results after several games,
especially if I also keep track beside it of where I am gaining, and
where my opponents are gaining, points.>>>



_____

From: J. Murphy [mailto:jjmurphy@...]
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 11:52 PM
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Sample Game, MC, other stuff



--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "Todd Schneider"
<thresh1642@s...> wrote:
> The Next Sample Game will have more distinctive names and units, I
promise.
> :-)

The _next_ sample game? How are you gonna top this one? Man, Todd,
that's great.

btw I think I am going to try your idea also about a waver log.
Wether its a chicken or an egg it is certainly a good measuring stick.
It will be interesting to see the results after several games,
especially if I also keep track beside it of where I am gaining, and
where my opponents are gaining, points.





_____

Yahoo! Groups Links

* To visit your group on the web, go to:
HYPERLINK
"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/WarriorRules/"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/W
arriorRules/

* To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
HYPERLINK
"mailto:WarriorRules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe"Warrior
Rules-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

* Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the HYPERLINK
"http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/"Yahoo! Terms of Service.


---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 4/15/2004



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.659 / Virus Database: 423 - Release Date: 4/15/2004



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

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 4/22/2004 9:28:36 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
thresh1642@... writes:

> Although, I must say last night against Jon I failed more
> wavers in one
> evening than I have in a long time.>>

That armenian EHC just doesn't know how to keep its nose out of the initial
clash...lol