Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[scott holder]

Players must check in 30 minutes prior to listed start time. One list (errata to 1 Jul 10), 6’ x 4’ tables for 15mm/25mm Mini; 8’ x 5’ tables for 25mm Theme/Open; 4’ x 4’ for 15mm Mini. 2.5 hr rounds for Mini, 3.5 hr rounds for rest.

Thursday

Mini Open, 15mm
Noon - 9:30 PM; 1200 pts. Round 1: Noon; Round 2: 3:30 PM; Round 3: 7 PM.

Warrior National Invitational Championship Prelim
Noon - 1 PM; 25mm, By Invitation Only, 1600 pts. Round 1: Noon; Round 2: 5:30 PM.

Friday

The Byzantines Theme, 15mm & 25mm
9 AM – 11 PM; 1600 pts. Round 1: 9 AM; Round 2: 1:30 PM; Round 3: 7 PM. Eligible Armies list in other thread here in the Forum.

Saturday

Open, 15mm & 25mm
9 AM - 11 PM; 1600 pts. Round 1: 9 AM; Round 2: 1:30 PM; Round 3: 7 PM.

Warrior National Invitational Championship Finals
Noon - 11 PM; 25mm, By Invitation Only, 1600 pts. Round 1: 9 AM; Round 2: 1:30 PM; Round 3: 7 PM.


The Barbarian Foot Rules will be in effect with the following additions:
-Willing close order Irr foot can counter-charge impetuous foot -Eager close order Irr foot who counter-charge can be impetuous

The following X-Rules will be in effect:

X 5.11. Eager. Add a new bullet to the section "Bodies are eager while any of the following apply": If the body is entirely Reg B.

X 6.2 Close Order Marching. Steady Reg close order foot may march on march segment 3. Steady Irr loose foot may march on march segment 3 but take a fatigue point for doing so.

X 17.1. SHC/SHCm Troop Cost. Subtract 6 points from the final cost of an SHC/SHCm element if general's, subtract 8 points if other. This applies to Reg and Irr elements.


You may exceed the point limit of your army (1600/1200 or variable as layed out in the Theme rules) by the cost of the cheapest element in your list but your opponent gets 5 times that value subtracted from his raw score when determining the basic score under the 5-0 system. Lists must be FHE with correcting errata available from our website. Biblical Warrior and Dark Age Warrior lists must come from the new, pdf-only versions should you decide to play them.

DEPLOYMENT

Pre-Set Terrain; Table Assignment: Tables with pre-set terrain will be assigned to players at random for each round of games.
• Players may wind up playing on the same table more than once.
• Mongol player can dice to pick up two pieces of terrain, using usual Mongol List Rules, modified by climate, after players have chosen table side.

Choice of Table Edge. Players dice for table edge, high roll choosing the side, die roll of player with more scouting points (SPs) modified as follows:
• 3:1 or more SPs @ +4
• 2:1 or more SPs (but fewer than 3:1) @ +3
• more SPs (but fewer than 2:1) @ +2

Deployment – Order of Commands:
• After both players have written deployment orders, an out-scouted player deploys all commands first, then the out-scouting player deploys all commands.
• If neither player out-scouts the other, the player with fewer SPs deploys their first command; players then alternate in deploying commands.
• Commands are deployed in order of size, largest to smallest, measured by number of units.
• If more than one command has the same number of units, player chooses which to deploy first.
• Camp does not count for command size, but may be deployed with any command.

Deployment - Zones. The zones in which forces deploy vary by the ratio of players’ SPs.
• 3:1 or more = lesser force deploys up to 360p from baseline, greater force deploys up to the centerline
• 2:1 or more (but fewer than 3:1) = lesser force deploys up to 240p from the centerline, greater force deploys up to the centerline
• Less than 2:1 = both forces deploy up to 120p from the centerline
• There is no force marching/fatigue points for deploying in the forward zone, where allowed to do so by SP ratio
• Either player may conceal units as an ambush in their deployment area, even if the player is out-scouted and the ambush is in the forward zone

Artillery and such which deployes further than 240p from the base edge of the table, still counts as if it force marched for shooting eligibility purpposes only.

[Fred Stratton]

The last statement about artillery and such, does that include missile troops? Thank you.

[scott holder]

No.

It's meant to ensure that while force marching is now somewhat "free" in terms of fatigue points, deploying artillery and such outside the "original" 240p rear zone still means it can't fire, etc., per the rules.

scott

[lilroblis]

I would hate someone to show up late

[Ewan McNay]

Well, unless it's Derek .

I am really happy to be playing again this year - I think that the level of enthusiasm up in New England is higher than for a while, and certainly no trophies going down to FL this year...

</trashtalk>

[jamiepwhite]

I predict all the 25mm trophies will be at Steve's Gym, lined up on a neat shelf for us to post pictures of later. You can have the 15mm trophies up north in the cold states.

Jamie

[Ewan McNay]

I would suggest a beer bet or something, but you weak-blooded southerners don't have any decent beer anyway..

[scott holder]

I still don't have an ump for the Theme. My army just arrived from Sri Lanka yesterday so I'm busily putting spears on figures, mounting and flocking bases which means I play or nobody plays.

scott

[Ewan McNay]

I nominate Derek

[Ewan McNay]

Just finished round 3 of the NICT, first Sat game. A decent showing, especially today; I think we have 24 players in 25mm and a 15mm tournament also. The 25mm is split 12-12 NICT and Open, so it's a smaller field than many years - makes it hard to avoid a particular opponent! Wide variety of armies - from Sean Scott's Condotta to Derek's massed LTS, B Tang Chinese; several big foot armies of all varieties (Viking, Irish, Japanese, Inca) as well as my Sassanids, Ghaznavid, Grenadine, Early Byzantine, Swiss, another Tang, Neo-Assyrian, Seleucid - it really is a hugely mixed field, which is kind of cool.

In the Theme on Fri, Scott McDonald running Timurid won the 25mm, with Dan Woyke 2nd - slightly odd, as Dan's raw score was 9 compared to Scott Holder's 11, but the adjustments based on 'strength of schedule' put Dan a fraction ahead of Scott. The 15mm Theme was only 4 players, and my Early Paleologans passed all but 2 of about 20 wavers for being charged by Derek's Ottoman horde, so they came out on top; Todd K's Arabs never lost a game, with 3-3 and 4-3 against Derek and I as well as a 5-point win against Don Carter, but couldn't quite catch up.

And now back to round 4 of the NICT!

[Ewan McNay]

...which was an excellent game, but underlined that I need to let go of control of my destiny sometimes . Playing Dave M's Swiss, who - understandably - set up in a corner, I went looking for a good place to attack; never found it.

Moved all the way to the far baseline on my right (killing the couple of Swiss LC units in the process), and I thought had time to pivot and return to the left, but ran out of time. Did get one flank charge on a pikeblock with some LC, but they were on a hill and the LC still take a -2 for 'halted higher' even when fighting a shieldless flank - so no effect, and it was the last bound anyway.

Dave commented, correctly probably, that I should have sent both sets of elephants right to the far baseline and attacked there (both my left and the centre had steep hills, no way am I fighting Swiss pike there!) with the attack on the very edge of the board to secure at least one flank. Still not a great fight for me, but I probably don't rout quickly if ever and I at least have a shot at getting more than 1 point from the game - as it turned out, winning 2-1 instead of 1-0 would have been enough for the NICT, but so would losing 5-2!

[Last game against Dennis' Neo-Assyrians was an easy win - expensive Reg B LHI with JLS, D, Sh are pretty much a dream opponent for SHC lancers, and EHC L, B do not do well trying to face down Reg D LC B alone - but also the least enjoyable of the weekend. Oh well.]

That Swiss game killed me: I ended with 21 raw points, 2 ahead of Rob Turnbull's Seleucid, but whereas I had 10 from Thurs and 11 from Sat, Rob had I think 6 from Thurs - including the loss to me - and 13 on Sat, and because carryover *only* counts Saturday, I got no benefit from the Thursday wins over Rob and Steve Rawls, and Rob's adjusted score was clearly ahead of mine. [Something like 39.2 to 37.6 - Scott will post exact numbers at some stage - whereas scoring 2 against Dave would have taken me over 40. Mea culpa... this is in no way anything other than congratulation to Robert, who played well and grabbed his chances perfectly, including an impressive 5-2 win over Dan Woyke's Inca in the last round; my SAO colleague failed me there ]

Non-gaming highlights of the weekend included greatly enjoying friends embracing their inner 12 year-olds , seeing Todd K almost collapse into giggles as one LI unit passed umpteen waver tests to frustrate Derek, the delight of seeing Rich Kroupa's gorgeous and massed Vikings - *VIKINGS* in the NICT!! - and the Sat evening wine and catching up with friends I see too rarely.

Many thanks to Scott and Steve (who umped the Theme), and also to Eric Turner for the stellar terrain efforts; maybe the time has finally come to retire the Sassanids, but I'm not convinced... the preset terrain really would make it nice to have some terrain troops, though!

[Historian]

I like the term “Strength of Schedule.” Some regard this scoring as absurd, because your standing relies on the standings of your opponents, which is out of your control. But that is going to happen anyway, and at least this at least factors the effect in.

I recall coming in 2nd place at Cold Wars one year, after losing all four games. But as the pairings went, I happened to play against the players that finished 1st, 3rd, and 4th for the tourney. All my losses were all 5-3’s or 4-3’s, and I went into the 4th round in 4th place, replaying a fight against the current 3rd place. I lost again with another 4-3, while the players in 1st and 2nd played to a 1-1. Propelling 3rd into 1st, and me to 2nd.

The good thing about “Strength of Schedule” is that it encourages big mix it up’s, and discourages 1-0 fights.

[srawls]

I lost 4 of the 5 games I played in the NICT and I can state I still enjoyed myself immensely this year. There didn't seem to be any of the rules arguments that have plagued the Warrior and 7th events in years past. Everyone was on the whole gracious and friendly, at least as far as my opponents were concerned. Thanks Scott, for once again putting on a great tournament!

As for the theme, we had 16 players in 25mm and 4 in 15mm. In 25's, the first round scores were on the whole really low, with most of the top tier players scoring 1's and 2's. In the second and third rounds, the scores popped back up to what I would think are more "normal" levels. Ewen is correct in saying it was Dan's opponents strong second and third round scores that pushed him past Scott to second place, even though Scott had 11 pts in raw score vs. Dan's 9.

It was really good seeing all of you guys again. I wish we all lived closer and could do this more often.

Steve Rawls

[lilroblis]

Great tournament - but you typically have to win all three on Saturday to have a chance - but the rules encourage fighting.
Not a problem for me - as yet again my pike fought in every battle - sometimes all three blocks - the game I lost on Saturday - 5-3 - I killed 600 points of his army - (including half points for off table) and lost over 1200 - including my camp (which we had to compute as he still had 90 minutes to capture it after my last unit left the table)
Last game Dan and I thought we were out of it and had a ding dong battle, lots of beer and fun and ended with one of uis winning big. I got a huge up roll that saved my bacon, and learned that the rule that you can shoot overhead at elephants makes them invaluable in a game against missile armed troops.
My commentary concludes with what I said while drinking beer after my second game on Saturday - If I was a soldier I would like a general like Ewan who suffered the minimum casualties on his side, in gaming I want to play someone who is going all out for a win (as that enables multiple combats and takes some dice out of it) - relying on one roll to win the game seems like a huge risk - and always ends up with a couple of very low scoring games (even though you may win some big).
Next year I think we should have a prize for the most casualties in a tournament (taken) - maybe a gladiator cup?
Robert

[Historian]

Sounds like a suitabably disgusting prize.