Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Doug]

> The only real arbiter of incendiary missile effectiveness is playtesting.

But haven't the factors been the same for the last 20 years? What's
suddenly new WRT the circumstances in which you can buy them?
***

The article on Skirmisher Doctrine on the NASAMW site doesn't mention
their use. Would giving one shot of fire to skirmishers alter the
dynamics?

[Ewan McNay]

On Wed, 26 Oct 2005, Doug wrote:
> > The only real arbiter of incendiary missile effectiveness is playtesting.
>
> But haven't the factors been the same for the last 20 years? What's
> suddenly new WRT the circumstances in which you can buy them?

Well - in 7th, one could only buy such as part of the 'adjust for
fortifications' phase which essentially never happpened.

So, there's no period close to 20 years. not that Jon'll respond wrt 7th
anyway .

I actually think that much of the confusion has been with regard to
ranges; the other part of the problem, perhaps, is with regard to cost
(which was likely playested little under Warrior as it was not expected to
happen, would be my guess). Consider that an infantryman with fire
syphon, an utterly useless weapon whose only benefit is to fire at
artillery factors, costs an inordinate amount (to the point where I've
never seen them in use under 7th or Warrior. Never). Now some folks are
suggesting that one can not only duplicate that benefit, but perhaps gain
a longer range and more ranks firing, for a much lower cost by buying
incendiaries. That's a problem.

I've been pondering - Jon asked me what my preferred response would be. I
think that it would actually be to permit them under any circumstances,
but to adjust the cost. Something like 5 points (that's a WAG of course)
per figure per shot. Then you can have the added flexibility - and, yes,
take a unit designed to mow down SHC - but at a price more commensurate; I
suspect it'd relegate them to the same place as deployment of SHC and
elephants in the woods. That is, rare but fun. However, this is never
going to happen, which (I think) is too bad.

Back in reality of a rulebook about to go to the printer, the best
compromise is maybe to go with the 'only if opposing fortifications or by
list rule' approach - flawed, but I don't have a better solution that I
think would meet that rulebook deadline.

And, honestly, I don't especially worry about it .

> ***
>
> The article on Skirmisher Doctrine on the NASAMW site doesn't mention
> their use. Would giving one shot of fire to skirmishers alter the
> dynamics?

Yes.

Incidentally, I think people have been reading 'bridge building' for
'bridge bidding' - which are rather different .