Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Greg Regets]

This board is entirely too quiet! We just can't allow Jon and Scott
to get this much work done ... not without a fight at least. :-)

If you were writing "The Art of War" for Warrior, what would you add?

I will go first, since it's my post. This is pretty basic stuff.
Hopefully others will contribute thoughts on other topics within this
overall scope.

Chapter One - Light Troops

The right amount is of great benefit, too few can cause trouble, too
many can be out-and-out disturbing. When selecting, building and
fielding an army, this should be a well thought out process, rather
than taking a relatively "canned" amount of light troops. As part of
this process, one should consider;

a. There is obvious benefit to screening your shock troops, and
pinning the enemy, and yet getting in the way of your own fighters,
and especially your own shooters, can be problematic.

b. Battles can and are lost, by commands losing light troops such
that the overall command is somewhat close to the 50% retirement
level - then being pushed over the edge in a main body engagement
they may actually be winning.

c. No troop type is quite as good at spreading out the enemy, as
light cavalry. This is primarily due to movement and potential shock
power. The flip side of course is vulnerablity to shooting, and cost.
Many find light infantry a useful and cheaper alternative, and yet a
larger amount of light infantry must be fielded to do the same task,
to the point where the overall level may cause an army to fall prey
to item b ... interestingly enough, to an army that chooses to use
light cavalry as it's screen type. One can almost find humor in that.

d. Light troops can be very useful in lengthening your battle line.
Again, the flip side is that the line is not lengthened against an
enemy that will dedicate himself to the defeat of your light troops.
Many choose to accomplish this lengthening by placing light troops in
the interior, under the notion that they are more easily protected.
Again, the flip side is, that if they are defeated of forced to
withdraw, they have vacated a possibly vulnerable position.

e. Using light troops in conjunction with the enemy's shooting
priorities has become an art form. Many find this highly suspect from
a historical nature (myself included), but at a certain level and
with certain types of armies, it has become as important a tactic of
light troops as their screening, pinning, or missile power.

**********

I'm sure there is more that can be added on this topic, and hopefully
others will post and give the board a bit of life again.

g

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 11/5/2003 10:25:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, gar@...
writes:

> We just can't allow Jon and Scott
> to get this much work done ... not without a fight at
> least. >>

Damn - between Warrior Battles and the roman list rules for IW, I *was* getting
a lot of work done.... :)

[Chris Bump]

Niiiiiiiiice Post Greg.
Definitely gets the juices flowing thinking of what to post that can measure up
to this. Might make a nice add on book too Jon, an edited version of the quips
that will hopefully follow this.
Chris

In a message dated 11/5/2003 10:25:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, gar@...
writes:

> I'm sure there is more that can be added on this topic, and
> hopefully
> others will post and give the board a bit of life again.

[joncleaves]

In a message dated 11/5/2003 11:13:37 AM Eastern Standard Time, cncbump writes:

> Might make a nice add on book too Jon, an edited version of
> the quips that will hopefully follow this.>>

I'll save all the ones I actually agree with.... ;)

[joncleaves]

Greg has taken the time to start a well-intentioned tactical discussion and,
although I tend to personally dislike where these end up, he has put a lot of
thought into his comments and they are blissfully free of the type of
self-back-patting that often comes with this. So, out of respect for his
efforts, I thought I'd chime in.

> When selecting, building and fielding an army, this [the selection of light
troops] should be a well thought out process, rather than taking a relatively
"canned" amount of light troops.

I could not agree more.

> a. There is obvious benefit to screening your shock troops, and
> pinning the enemy, and yet getting in the way of your own fighters,
> and especially your own shooters, can be problematic.>>

Too often it seems players simply put light troops in front of their heavier
stuff with the thought of screening, only to find that the combination of troops
involved makes the lights a roadblock and not a security force. When placing
light troops, pay careful attention to the rules for interpenetration with
respect to the movement distance of the 'shock troop' and how/when/why that unit
will pass through the lights, or vice versa. Pay attention to the fact that two
moving units that interpenetrate each other disorder both - the lights have to
be stationary to not disorder the heavier unit. I 'rehearse' the move of the
heavies through - so i know how far back they have to be and what the impact of
the enemy giving the LI 2 CPF in prep shooting will be if it happens on the turn
I want to interpenerate. This is less of a problem with regular LI, who can
often contract to get out of the way.

If you are a new player, NEVER place your LC in front of anything. More newbie
games are lost due to misplaced LC than any other cause, IMHO. They don't
interpenetrate much and other troops take a waver test when they break.
I am not sure LC in front of other troops is a good idea for veteran Warrior
players, either...lol

> e. Using light troops in conjunction with the enemy's shooting
> priorities has become an art form. Many find this highly suspect from
> a historical nature (myself included), but at a certain level and
> with certain types of armies, it has become as important a
> tactic of light troops as their screening, pinning, or missile power.>>

It is better to view this interaction from a macro, not a micro, sense. You are
getting your archers into a shooting duel so that other troops may close. It
isn't any more complicated than that. All miniature games suffer from the
player having more info than the 'unit' commanders on the ground actually would
- best not to use that knowledge as though you really would have it and draw
conclusions. That said, Greg has made a very astute observation that archer
duels are often a better form of screening than simply placing LI in front of
other troops.


Just my $0.02

Jon

When one addresses the art of war, one must look
inside one's self. Indeed, is it not the task of the
Zen archer to aim, not for the target, but at himself?
Verily, if you would snatch the pebble from the
master's hand, Grasshopper, choose an army that
matches your own personality and playing style. I
can't claim credit for this wisdom, Phil Barker put it
in the books years ago. Still, a lot of gamers haven't
figured it out yet and it shows.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree