Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

<< Very sorry for all the questions >>

No prob.

<<1. Wedge (AGAIN???) Yes, again.
Infantry Not all troop types that can form wedge have weapons that can be
used by a second rank. Viking huscarls are armed with 2HCW and (under
7th) can fight in wedge. By not allowing this formation, this troop... >>

Once again, until the appropriate FHE list is published, troops listed as
fighting in wedge get 1.5 ranks on first contact IF AND ONLY IF they are NOT
already armed with a 1.5 or 2 rank weapon. Therefore, for example, Viking
huscarles armed only with 2HCW and listed as fighting in wedge WOULD count
1.5 ranks at first contact. Please pass this word along as it is the fourth
time in two weeks I have had to answer this one.

<<Cav.
It is unfortunate that by removing a formation that only occurs in a few
lists (Teutonic is the most famous)other lance armed cavalry become almost
unbeatable.>>

This is untrue. Hundreds of games of WRG 7.6 show it to be perfectly ok, and
we are keeping it.

<<by allowing L armed cav to fight 1.5 ranks...L armed cav, of ANY type,
becomes stronger AT NO COST.>>

That is correct.

<< Even L armed LC starts looking good.>>

Better, but not a whole lot. And I have no problem with L armed LC standing
toe to toe with JLS armed LC.

<< SHC will be unstoppable>>

This is not the case. SHC are better, but certainly not unstoppable.

<<Frontal charges into
pike blocks starts to look attractive. And achievable.>>

Slightly better, but not game-breaking. SHK ruled their day and didn't go
away due to the pike, longbow or crossbow, but due to the handgun, the
wide-spread and effective use of which ends our period. If they are tough,
that's fine, they cost a lot and they were tough in history. Now if sea
peoples start breaking pike, we have a problem!

<< Irr A Rajput
EHC will clear the table with the right dice rolls.>>

With the right dice rolls, any Irr A can clear the table!

<<If you remove this "little used" formation>>

We did not get rid of it, it was 'gotten rid of' by WRG 7.6, a
Barker-approved change. We support the concept because it works.

<<, get rid of testudo as
well. The same justification can be used for it. >>

We did not get rid of wedge, we will be limiting it to those troops that can
be shown to have benefitted directly in combat by the use of a wedge-like
'formation'.
And no, we don't need any help researching what troops need to be listed as
'wedging' in our lists. We have that under control. I do not have the time
to devote to a wedge debate on this egroup. Have at it if you want to, but I
will not be able to respond.

<<LI and recall moves.
LI have one use in combat - to delay the enemy. Under the Warrior rules, the
following scenario is very much likely to occur...>>>

Its a long scenario, so I won't repeat it, but the recall takes precedence
over the 'compulsory' charge. The LI must charge IF ABLE. If they chose to
recall, they are NOT ABLE to charge. I will ensure the wording makes this
clear.

<<The real problem I see here is that steady close or loose are able to
make a full approach move each bound and push back LI without
expending any effort>>

If the LI chooses not to waver test, the above is true. That is exactly how
it is supposed to work.

<<This must be looked at as it changes the way LI are used and removes the
"trigger" to force close or loose to charge.>>

It has been looked at. WRG 7.6 has been in effect for some time. I take it
from all this that the 7.6 changes are new to you. I am sorry about that,
and I can tell you that the action we are taking is to ensure there is no
Warrior 1.1. We may have a typo creep through, but once published, there
will be no RULES CHANGES. If you buy the rulebook, you have all the basic
rules there will ever be. If we let a typo get through, we will make the
correction available free of charge.

Jon

[scott holder]

<< SHC will be unstoppable>>

This is not the case. SHC are better, but certainly not unstoppable.

>As I was drafting 7.6, this thought did cross my mind and I made it clear to
the player base on the East Coast that I might further restrict the rule based
on what SHC might be able to do. All the "live" playtesting and subsequent
use of 7.6 in tourneys did not bear out any further modifications to prevent
SHC from becoming the super troop type. Seriously, we've got a boatload of
games played using the 1.5 rank lance rule and it has not unbalanced the game.
All it's done is bring more armies into the competitive mix.

<<Frontal charges into
pike blocks starts to look attractive. And achievable.>>

Slightly better, but not game-breaking. SHK ruled their day and didn't go
away due to the pike, longbow or crossbow, but due to the handgun, the
wide-spread and effective use of which ends our period. If they are tough,
that's fine, they cost a lot and they were tough in history. Now if sea
peoples start breaking pike, we have a problem!

>It's still a crap shoot, always was before. There is NO difference. Before
7.6, wedging SHK had the same chance against pike blocks as ANY SHK does now
(5 figures @whatever). All I did was open things up for more armies,
particularly in the medieval period, and get rid of the dumbest aspect of 7th,
namely how crappy wedging German SHK could roundly trounce their elite French
counterparts given "normal" dice throws. During the last 18 months, I have
seen a few more attempts at SHK trying to break pike blocks but not many. And
most players still tend to want to use their SHK at more lucrative (ie easier
to kill) targets since if they don't beat the pike block, the SHK are either
dead or effectively out of the game. Most tourney players I know just don't
like those odds and I haven't seen any flurry of guys running knight armies
trying to gang up their "wedges" on hapless pike blocks. Of course nothing
stops the last turn "send stuff flying hither and yon to see what might happen
before time is called" tactic:):)

<<If you remove this "little used" formation>>

We did not get rid of it, it was 'gotten rid of' by WRG 7.6, a
Barker-approved change. We support the concept because it works.

>Er, um, Jon, let me clarify this. Phil didn't "approve" any changes per se.
He merely said "Scott, if *you* want to put out something "unofficially",
*knudge knudge, wink wink*, I won't care since you're the only person who
still "supports" the rules. Seriously, Phil made it pretty clear that he
didn't care what direction I took things but I did make sure it was okay with
him to proceed in that matter (7.6) before, um, proceeding.

<<, get rid of testudo as
well. The same justification can be used for it. >>

We did not get rid of wedge, we will be limiting it to those troops that can
be shown to have benefitted directly in combat by the use of a wedge-like
'formation'.

>We got rid of the geometric representation of the wedge on the tabletop. As
lists come out, there will be "list rules" that will allow for "wedge-like
effects". And the testudo doesn't cause the geometric hassles the wedge did
throughout the US experience with 7th.

<<This must be looked at as it changes the way LI are used and removes the
"trigger" to force close or loose to charge.>>

It has been looked at. WRG 7.6 has been in effect for some time. I take it
from all this that the 7.6 changes are new to you.

>Go to http://www.dauphinehotel.com/ancient.htm for the 7.6 changes. The LI
change was one that was discussed at great length and carefully (I hope)
worded for exactly the effect we wanted. We also made sure this one was
playtested rather extensively just to see how it would affect things. It
simply makes LI slightly more brittle since the owning player must make a
decision (waver or not) in order to "trigger" something on the opposing side.
Quite frankly, I've been amazed at how seamless this change has been on
players. At least the same 50 players I see twice a year at the East Coast
conventions.

Scott

[joncleaves]

<<>Er, um, Jon, let me clarify this. Phil didn't "approve" any changes per
se.
He merely said "Scott, if *you* want to put out something "unofficially",
*knudge knudge, wink wink*, I won't care since you're the only person who
still "supports" the rules. Seriously, Phil made it pretty clear that he
didn't care what direction I took things but I did make sure it was okay with
him to proceed in that matter (7.6) before, um, proceeding.>>

Yes, fellow horseman, I got all that. Where I'm from that's called approval!

Very sorry for all the questions but I need to get clarification and
put some points across. Some of them have been flogged to death
(what is it with flagulation in this group?)but I am putting across
some thoughts from others I've spoken to here in Oz.

1. Wedge (AGAIN???) Yes, again.
Infantry
Not all troop types that can form wedge have weapons that can be used
by a second rank. Viking huscarls are armed with 2HCW and (under
7th) can fight in wedge. By not allowing this formation, this troop
type loses 2/5th of it's fighting figures. Likewise the berserks
will count either 3 2HCW or 6 SA per element, also losing 2/5th of
their fighting figures.

Cav.
It is unfortunate that by removing a formation that only occurs in a
few lists (Teutonic is the most famous)other lance armed cavalry
become almost unbeatable. It has been mentioned about the "cost" of
certain formations. With wedge, there are two costs. The first is
that the unit must use an approach move to form it. This can reduce
movement to 40 paces if the unit is irregular. This is the "cost"
you pay for having irregular troops. The second, and most expensive
cost is, if the wedge doesn't kill the oppponent on the first go, it
reverts to a disordered block. A very big cost. By removing the
need to form wedge by allowing L armed cav to fight 1.5 ranks AND
removing the "cost" of being disordered in the second round of
combat, L armed cav, of ANY type, becomes stronger AT NO COST. Even
L armed LC starts looking good. SHC will be unstoppable, 6 fighting
on a one element frontage plus able to shoot. Frontal charges into
pike blocks starts to look attractive. And achievable. Irr A Rajput
EHC will clear the table with the right dice rolls.

If you remove this "little used" formation, get rid of testudo as
well. The same justification can be used for it. (Did I hear cheers
from the LB crowd???)

LI and recall moves.
LI have one use in combat - to delay the enemy. Under the Warrior
rules, the following scenario is very much likely to occur. Yes, I
will be loading the dice but as anything can happen in a tournement...

Approach phase.
A unit of 4 elements (2x2) New Kingdom Egyptian MI B Reg C approachs
the nearest enemy - a 6 element (3x2)unit Kushite LI JLS, Sh Irr A.
The Kushite, likewise approaches. The LI have presidence so approach
their full move and do not form skirmish. The MI also advance their
full move and finish at 40 paces from the LI.

Counter/Retirement phase
Under rule 6.36, if the LI are not in disordering terrain, they must
either take a waver test OR decide to recall if they are within 40
paces of close or loose steady foot. As this section clearly states
that this MUST be done in the Counter/Retirment phase, the LI must
decide to test waver or elect to recall. Rule 1. Never EVER waver
test if an alternative exists. The LI decide to recall.
NOTE: Since the MI now know that the LI will automatically run away,
no charge needs to be made and the "free charge" still exists.

Prep shooting.

MI = B vs LI @ 1 x 16 = 24 (at even throw)
LI = JLS vs MI @ 2 + 3 (shieldless) x 9 = 36 (at even throw)
If the MI thows down 1, casulaties are 16 and not enough to force LI
to recall from 2 CPF. If the LI roll even, the MI take 2 CPF and
must waver test. If they fail, the MI will shake. As I said I was
loading the dice, the MI shot down 1, the LI rolls even. Waver test,
unfortunately for the MI, they roll a 1. They shake.

Charge declarations.

The ALL Irr A LI unit are on Probe Orders.

Problems are;
1. The LI have a legal target to charge(shaken and disordered MI)
2. Under Probe, they MUST charge if able.
3. In Counters, they elected to Recall rather than waver test.

Do they;
1. Charge impetuously thereby fulfilling their orders?
2. Do nothing and recall at the End phase?

If this had happened at 80 paces OR to cav, there would be no
problem, the LI could charge to their little hearts content.

The real problem I see here is that steady close or loose are able to
make a full approach move each bound and push back LI without
expending any effort (read compulsory charges) until they get into
the situation where they push LI back onto something worthwhile then
declare their compulsory charge and hope for the converted charge.
They could even do this until the LI fell off the back of the table
and STILL not have been forced to make their FIRST COMPULSORY
charge. I know a Galation player that would be foaming at the mouth
to be allowed to do this.

This must be looked at as it changes the way LI are used and removes
the "trigger" to force close or loose to charge. D grade troops will
benefit greatly from this rule as the player can delay having to make
that fatal prompt / waver test after they have made their compulsory
charge.

A long read but one I'm sure will need to be addressed.

Cheers

[joncleaves]

<< Again a fair comment however, B grade Knights of any list are no
worse than their French equivalents. So much for the French elan.>>

Yes, but they are not getting trashed by germans, either.

<<Fair enough - "A nod is as good as a wink to a blind bat" as they
say. A free beer to anyone who can name where THAT came from. >>

Monty Python. I think Michael Palin actually said it.

<< OK but one last Parthian shot - this does go against the call for no
list-specific formations / weapons etc.>>

Oh, we will have some list specifics. Very definitely. I do not know of a
call not to have them. Who is so calling?

<< Yes. We play 7.4 with some amendments. These amendments came from
many telephone conversations between Phil Barker and Noel (can't
spell last name) who was the president of the Canberra Wargamers
Assoc.>>

Bugeia. Noel did some great work.

<< Did and many thanks. Now where can I get 7.5?????>>

Cower, knave. You do mean to wait for Warrior, don't you? :)

<< When can can the LI approach again? Since they Recalled in good
order and did not evade, are they able to approach in the next
approach phase? I have looked over the 15 Oct rules but cannot find
a ruling. >>

Oops. Caught me with my pants down there. The list of reasons to rally
should (and now does) say "made a recall move last bound." Thanks, that was
a good one.

<< I might WANT the LI in front of the close but it is not an acceptable
risk to do this if a waver test is required regardless of the morale
grade of the LI involved.>>

Indeed, Steve, you have made it clear that the waver is never acceptable to
you. However, that is not the standard on which the rule was built.

<<In the end, I must agree to disagree.>>

Agreed!

Roll up and win!!
Jon

<<<<< Several snips here >>>>>
> This is not the case. SHC are better, but certainly not
unstoppable.
>
> >As I was drafting 7.6, this thought did cross my mind and I made
it clear to
> the player base on the East Coast that I might further restrict the
rule based
> on what SHC might be able to do. All the "live" playtesting and
subsequent
> use of 7.6 in tourneys did not bear out any further modifications
to prevent
> SHC from becoming the super troop type. Seriously, we've got a
boatload of
> games played using the 1.5 rank lance rule and it has not
unbalanced the game.
> All it's done is bring more armies into the competitive mix.

OK, fair comment

> <<Frontal charges into
> pike blocks starts to look attractive. And achievable.>>
>
> Slightly better, but not game-breaking. SHK ruled their day and
didn't go
> away due to the pike, longbow or crossbow, but due to the handgun,
the
> wide-spread and effective use of which ends our period.

Again a fair comment however, B grade Knights of any list are no
worse than their French equivalents. So much for the French elan.

> <<If you remove this "little used" formation>>
>
> We did not get rid of it, it was 'gotten rid of' by WRG 7.6, a
> Barker-approved change. We support the concept because it works.
>
> >Er, um, Jon, let me clarify this. Phil didn't "approve" any
changes per se.
> He merely said "Scott, if *you* want to put out
something "unofficially",
> *knudge knudge, wink wink*, I won't care since you're the only
person who
> still "supports" the rules. Seriously, Phil made it pretty clear
that he
> didn't care what direction I took things but I did make sure it was
okay with
> him to proceed in that matter (7.6) before, um, proceeding.

Fair enough - "A nod is as good as a wink to a blind bat" as they
say. A free beer to anyone who can name where THAT came from. :)

>
> <<, get rid of testudo as
> well. The same justification can be used for it. >>
>
> We did not get rid of wedge, we will be limiting it to those troops
that can
> be shown to have benefitted directly in combat by the use of a
wedge-like
> 'formation'.
>
> >We got rid of the geometric representation of the wedge on the
tabletop. As
> lists come out, there will be "list rules" that will allow
for "wedge-like
> effects". And the testudo doesn't cause the geometric hassles the
wedge did
> throughout the US experience with 7th.

OK but one last Parthian shot - this does go against the call for no
list-specific formations / weapons etc.

>
> <<This must be looked at as it changes the way LI are used and
removes the
> "trigger" to force close or loose to charge.>>
>
> It has been looked at. WRG 7.6 has been in effect for some time.
I take it
> from all this that the 7.6 changes are new to you.
>

Yes. We play 7.4 with some amendments. These amendments came from
many telephone conversations between Phil Barker and Noel (can't
spell last name) who was the president of the Canberra Wargamers
Assoc.

> >Go to http://www.dauphinehotel.com/ancient.htm for the 7.6
changes.

Did and many thanks. Now where can I get 7.5?????

<<< snip >>>

My last on LI - with the changes, JLS armed LI are never going to be
in a position to exploit favourable results from frontal prep
shooting unless they choose the waver test first. If they pass, they
force the charge but for Irr D LI . . . .
If they test and fail I assume they will not recall but must be
charged. If they then fail a second waver (charged while shaken)
they rout. End result is a routing unit of LI for no gain except to
trigger a charge that could have evaded away from anyway.

When can can the LI approach again? Since they Recalled in good
order and did not evade, are they able to approach in the next
approach phase? I have looked over the 15 Oct rules but cannot find
a ruling. Do the LI need to "rally" from their Recall? If so, they
cannot approach next bound but can charge if they are with 120
paces. If they do not need to "rally", are they free to approach in
the next bound? At least this would give them some benefit of
shooting the snot out of some patsy close foot who failed a waver or
who become disordered due to shooting.

Also, from the other side of the table, if I had close foot, I would
do everything in my power to ensure I was ALWAYS at 40 paces of LI so
I can force them back into better targets. But then, I am that sorta
guy.

I guess what I am trying to say is "what are the risks if I do such
and such?" As the player, I must decide what risks, if any, I will
allow my troops to take. If I decide to play safe, I will anything
and everything to avoid waver tests. If I decide that I need to take
risks (rash subs / order / troop types etc) I must be the final
arbiter as to what risks are acceptable. I have found that LI 40
paces in front of close foot is ALWAYS acceptable. If I get shot, I
run away, if I get charged, same thing. As it is, the slowest I can
run is 80 paces and BEST they can run is 80 paces. I cannot be
caught so there is NO risk to the LI. Loose, on the other hand.......

I might WANT the LI in front of the close but it is not an acceptable
risk to do this if a waver test is required regardless of the morale
grade of the LI involved.

In the end, I must agree to disagree.

Cheers

Jon,

Damn and blast! So not only do I owe you a beer but you knew Noel's
last name! !

And yes, I cower before thee Oh great and Noble Horseman. So when
will they be ready huh? And the lists? Pushy type of fellow yes?

Many thanks for your patience. Now I'll see what else I can nit-pick.

Cheers

[Don Coon]

Steve Honeyman wrote:

> Fair enough - "A nod is as good as a wink to a blind bat" as they
> say. A free beer to anyone who can name where THAT came from. :)

Monty Python.

I like Shiner Boch.

Don

[Don Coon]

Steve Honeyman wrote:
>
> Jon,
>
> Damn and blast! So not only do I owe you a beer but you knew Noel's
> last name! !

I guess Jon beat me to it - know what I mean nudge nudge?

I understand if it was a one beer offer.

Don

[joncleaves]

Bring me one of those great aussie beers.
Noel's hard work had a great deal of influence on me as a novice ancients
gamer.

Nit-pick away!

Jon