Warrior Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules
A Four Horsemen Enterprises Rules Set
 
  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups AlbumAlbum   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

New World Theme at Historicon 2013
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> Events
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bill Low
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 330

PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2013 7:58 pm    Post subject:

Jamie asks a couple of very good questions ... thanks, Jamie! ... two of which tap into general list-writing issues and one (the first) into an ongoing discussion on NWW.

First General List Issue:

Warrior, of course, uses standardized troop types to represent historical armies from different locations over a very long period of time. This is one of its great strengths, but it also means that you have to try to find the best matchups among the standardized types for the historical facts, such as we know them.

In the case of the Post-Conquest Inca, we know that (to the extent we know any of this stuff) they had a limited number of mounted troops, that they used captured Spanish weapons and that Manco Inca Yupanqui (and presumably some of his nobles) rode into action outfitted with full Spanish gear -- morion and breastplate. At the same time, we are not seeing that the Inca mounted were very effective on the battlefield. While this may well be attributable to the terrain (after all, the Araucanians and Chichimecs, at opposite ends of this universe, made very effective use of cavalry), we have chosen to reflect it with a “downgrade” from HK to HC (and from L to JLS, plus training/morale capped at Irr C). Not ideal, but a simple and fairly elegant way of addressing the issue. Treating them as MC with an available upgrade with QCA is also a plausible alternative, but less reflective of what we see as the facts (i.e., the availability of captured Spanish armor, rather than giving the rider a quilted tunic). It would, however, be hard to get one’s mind around the idea of Inca as EHK, which is what happens when you give QCA to the Almagrist HK, and no evidence of which we are aware of Inca barding.

Ongoing Discussion:

We are, however, aware of a number of references to Inca foot using QCA, apart from the Post-Conquest mounted, though it may actually have been made largely of wool or other fibers. We are looking at that now, and may conclude that there is enough support to make it available to high-grade Inca infantry in the Imperial (and possibly Post-Conquest) periods. If we can find good evidence of Araucanians (or other periods in Chanca and Inca history) where this was prevalent, we can consider adding that as well. Unfortunately, the sources available in English for native forces in South America, at the time of the conquest and its immediate aftermath, are much less satisfactory than what we have for Mexico at similar stages, which are themselves limited, and a lot of what we would need as source material to reach any reasonable conclusions is probably not available. So just our best guess.

Second General List Issue:

Forward-zone TFs are pretty rare in Warrior, at least partly because they are potentially very powerful but also because they can have a big impact in slowing the game down. The few armies who get them tend to have several factors (some inferred) in their favor: lived in a suitable terrain, fortified their cities and fought defensively most of the time, and present a relatively low risk of an unbalancing impact.

The Olmeca-Xicallanca, for example, seemed to meet these tests; plus there were too few of them to fight very much in the open, so they would have “had” to fight from cover.

Inca, OTOH, are one of the premier open terrain fighting armies in the book; they don’t need any help in holding terrain or standing up to other theme armies. They did live in suitable terrain and they may have used fixed fortifications, but they were not generally a “defensive” army that typically fought from behind fortifications (despite the fighting around Sacsayhuaman during the Inca Revolt, it is not entirely clear that that enormous structure was in fact a “fortress”).

So probably no stone walls in the forward zone for Inca.

Fun stuff. Appreciate the interest. Thanks!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 5922
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 3:04 pm    Post subject:

A heads up:

Go to the first post and you'll see that we've uploaded the latest Beta lists for the theme. These are what you need to use at Hcon for the THEME ONLY!

scott

_________________
These Rules Suck, Let's Paint!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website
jamiepwhite
Recruit
Recruit


Joined: 21 Apr 2006
Posts: 210
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 7:56 pm    Post subject: Revisions

Could you briefly describe what changed between the revisions?

Thanks,

Jamie
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Bill Low
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 330

PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 2:29 pm    Post subject:

There are always a lot of corrections, adjustments and minor changes to the lists, whenever they get updated, but the two major changes from the beta version published in January are the following:
• New list for Age of Discovery Portuguese
• Quilted Cotton Armor now more widely available, esp. for South American armies

There are also some new requirements for lists with multiple Subject Sub-Generals, additional formation options and adjusted minimums and maximums, mostly to make armies more fun but also to eliminate some irritating obstacles to making up a playable list.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 5922
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 12:31 pm    Post subject:

First another update to the lists. Yeah, yeah, so sue us. We're trying to get this right. Main changes were Spanish artillery crews now start out at Reg C with an upgrade to Reg B, consistent numbers of them across lists, reduced the HG option in Cimarroon, more consistency-izing among European contingents and some tweaks to the Portuguese list.

scott

_________________
These Rules Suck, Let's Paint!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website
jamiepwhite
Recruit
Recruit


Joined: 21 Apr 2006
Posts: 210
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Mon Apr 08, 2013 8:49 pm    Post subject: More thinking about Inca cav

Played against Inca at Dereckcon, the Inca HC was indeed ineffective. I just wanted to list a few options but I'm leaning towards none of these being much better.

Inca calvary options
RC HK L Sh - way too effective
IC HK L Sh - way too effective
RC HK JLS Sh - Would stop the Inca cav from skirmishing or scouting, would move better but charge a little worse if no general
IC HK JLS Sh - no skirmishing or scouting, would move slower marching, but would be a mixed bag when charging, sometime better, sometimes worse
RC HK 1SA Sh - no skirmishing or scouting, would move better, not as good charging without a general
IC HK 1SA Sh - no skirmishing or scouting, would move slower marching, mixed bag when charging depending on the target

RB/RC/IB/IC HC/MC L Sh - L would be way too effective
IB HC JLS Sh - would be nice to upgrade one element per general, more just a playability thing
RB HC JLS Sh - Oh joy, Inca as Late Imperial Roman cavalry. Way too maneuverable but not much of a threat frontally
IC HC JLS Sh - The current decision
RC HC JLS Sh - same as RB, not the right choice

IC HC 1SA Sh - side arm HC, stops the skirmishing behavior and still leaves the Inca cav marginally effective
IC MC 1SA Sh - cheap Inca cav, would distort the list by giving Inca a troop for running off light troops.

Switching from JLS to 1SA might be a little more historical, do you think it would better?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Bill Low
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 330

PostPosted: Tue Apr 30, 2013 10:11 pm    Post subject: Introduction to NWW Theme Lists

This post contains introductory remarks on the eligible armies for the NWW Theme. Probably no great insights if you have already spent some time with them, but may be helpful in orienteering your way in, if you haven't.

We tried hard to make sure that there is plenty of variety among the NWW eligible lists. With the same challenge last year, for the Hoplite Theme, we ultimately felt pretty good about the results; let us know how we are doing this time.

* * * * *

New World Warrior – Theme Eligible Armies

Europeans: Spanish Conquistador (List 26) is basicallly the Tlaxcallan sublist from the old Aztec army. Spanish Colonial (List 27) adds EHK, Pikes and more Europeans, at the expense of losing the top-flight Indian allies. The Portuguese (List 29) get Irr HK, some different types of Europeans and LB-armed Indians. Also, a (smallish) English contingent may be taken by the Cimaroons (see below).

Aztecs: Each of the four sublists in the old Aztec list now has its own army list. Aztecs (List 7) get back their S, plus more Irr A, but are burdened (blessed?) with required C and D troops. Tlaxcallan gets lots of high-quality B-armed (who can also get HTH weapons) plus some cheap Cholultecan allies. Texcoco (List 9) gets fewer B upgrades, but better allies. Huexotzinca (List 10) can go either way: all B upgrades for the national list (may be the only one in the book that can do this) or a horde of cheap Cholultecans … who have most everything that the Aztecs get, but at “half” the price.

Huaxtec: A new list, with a horde of Irr C LMI that can be upgraded to A/C units … kind of like Turkomens … and also an option for the Nobles to come as high-grade regular elites. Likely pretty powerful vs. other NWW lists, but not sure how well they would stand up to the Europeans.

Tarascan: Unchanged from the preceding edition … plenty of cheap B-armed, plus high-grade elites who can circulate … except that it is now separate from Chichimec.

Chichimec: Two big changes include access to LC in the Colonial period (if that seems odd, think about the Apaches) and optional A/D split for Irr C LMI (like what was done with Northern Barbarians in Oriental Warrior).

Mixtec/Zapotec: The two sublist nationalities in the old list now each have their own; basically similar, except that the Mixtecs have to be at least one-half Irr, and get better morale upgrades, while the Zapotecs have to be at least one-half Reg, but can bring LTS-armed MI Mixe and Chontal.

Chinantec: A new list, with MI/LMI options, and lots of LTS that can be upgraded to 2HCT. Not a shooting army, but in a straight-up HTH fight could be very tough on other Mesoamerican armies.

Maya: Each of the sublists in the old Maya list has been broken out, and now has its own (Lists 16-20). The substratum is generally similar … lots of JLS or LTS, supplemented by clubs and cutting weapons … with the morale and training upgrades varying by period. The biggest differentiator among these lists is the changing character of intrusive elements from Central Mexico, who seemed to have been constantly flowing through the Maya lands. Plus, they get some extra bennies: Hurled Hornet Nests and (in List 16) a special terrain replacement rule.

Inca: Again, each of the sublists in the old Inca list has its own list now (Lists 22-24). There has been some relief from irritating little things that hindered effective army building, and some new options (including a few Irr A upgrades), but the game-changer in the Theme could still be the prevalence of HTW. Still considering Jamie’s thoughtful comments on how best to treat Post-Conquest Inca Cavalry. Chanca (List 21) is pretty much the same as it was before.

Araucanian: Also pretty much the same as before, i.e., just as tough. But maybe even a little more effective, in the context of a predominantly infantry-army Theme, since they have lots of cheap Lancers. Not sure they are ready to take on the European HK, but as they come only as Irr HC with L, Sh, but they could be able to give even them some trouble.

Cimaroon: A new list, representing communities of runaway Slaves and Free Blacks living outside Spanish authority throughout the region. Especially prominent in Central America, where they joined with English pirates (like Drake) in attacking Spanish towns and treasure caravans. Looks like a tough army to face. Also gets a special terrain rule and a typical (if on the small side) European contingent.

Hawaiian: Ed Bernhardt’s list, high-jacked for NWW (sorry, Ed!), given some English support and list rules that allow placement of fortifications in the forward zone and some terrain replacement. One big change from Ed’s list is the ability to buy “shields” … not that they used them, but (as Ed pointed out) they seemed to have some tricks that gave them some protection that we can reflect with a Sh option. We did something similar with the Imbangala in the Kongo/Angola list in African Warrior.

Toltec: Imperial period Toltec are not very different from the way they were before, but the sublists are all broken out, with the successor states being further separated into the “true” successors of List 5 (generally degraded across the board) and the most successful of them all, Azcapotzalco (List 6), where you will find the Tepanecs (the army formerly known as “Aztecs in Exile”). One big benefit is the availability of Aztec Mercenaries, who can be Irr A in (the generally earlier) List 5 period or Reg B in List 6.

Early Lists: Teotihuacan (1), formerly in a prequel sublist of Toltec, is now in its own list. While probably not equal to the later “Aztec” lists, there are lots of close-order LTS that might cause the Aztecs some trouble and they are something of a poster child for the Elite Dart-Throwers special rule. Another oldie but goodie, Olmeca-Xicallanca, gets dart-throwers, hordes of cheap Barbarian Infantry and a list rule that allows them to place fortifications in the forward zone.

*****

Special Rules. In addition to the lists themselves, there is some more chrome in the special rules at the front of the booklet. Circulating Combatants and Barbarian Infantry are still there, but now we have Elite Dart-Throwers (special shooting rule), new rules for War Dogs (making them much more flexible and useful) and Quilted Cotton Armor (particularly good vs. S). War Dogs may be too good; let us know if that seems to be the case.

Allies. Most of the lists allow an allied contingent to brought from one or more of the other national lists. This is handled a little differently this time; there is no specific list of what you can bring as allies, so long as the troops are consistent with the min/max (halved) in the national list. Experience will show whether the halving of the min/max is enough; if you are having trouble with that, let us know; we may just eliminate the min/max altogether for allies. (The new rules for allied contingents are set out upfront with the special rules. Check them out for the details.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
jamiepwhite
Recruit
Recruit


Joined: 21 Apr 2006
Posts: 210
Location: Florida

PostPosted: Fri May 03, 2013 1:50 am    Post subject: Inca war dog comments

I faced the Inca war dogs at the last Derekcon. If we were playing them right, then they are a nifty expendable that didn't seem overpowered to me.

1. Not mounted, so doesn't make open or loose infantry waver.
2. Got scythed bonus immediately when charging
3. Paid fatigues for charging like light infantry
4. Got shot as unshielded light infantry which hurt
5. Fought as 4 horses and armed driver of a scythed chariot
6. Gets to rally after charging and then goes after nearest enemy unit.

Rob's two war dogs each got off several charges. The ability to charge, rally, and charge again was good. Getting shot up hurt, so that was pretty even to me. Not causing waivers but being much cheaper to charge and could rally, again seemed pretty even to me. One war dog band hit a Zulu unit but didn't roll up and got munched, the other unit got outflanked finally and was destroyed by a flank charge.

Jamie
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 5922
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Tue May 07, 2013 6:14 pm    Post subject:

I'm hoping to get a chance to run a Conquistador list with artillery, then one with no artillery but using the war dogs.

Thanks for the info. I always forget you can rally these canines.

scott

_________________
These Rules Suck, Let's Paint!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website
Historian
Recruit
Recruit


Joined: 27 Feb 2011
Posts: 239
Location: Pennsylvannia

PostPosted: Fri Jun 07, 2013 3:08 pm    Post subject: 15mm signups?

I can borrow an Incan 15mm army for the Friday tourney. Do we have many 15mm signups?
_________________
Phil
Japanese telephones work pretty much like ours, except the person on the other end can't understand you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message [ Hidden ] Visit poster's website
lilroblis
Legionary
Legionary


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 516
Location: Cleveland Ohio

PostPosted: Tue Jun 11, 2013 8:09 pm    Post subject: Cimaroon - what a joy to play

All I can say is one of the most fun armies I have played in years - thinking of running it in Nationals - regretting umpiring
So said - my earlier concerns of kissings ones sister very much addressed this should be a fun theme - great work Bill, and others
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 5922
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 11:24 am    Post subject:

Phil: Signups? In advance? Hahahahahahahahahahaha, we have you been all these years? Seriously, I have no idea. I do think we've got 2-3 committed already and all we need are 4 players in order to give everybody 3 rounds of gaming so get the army, show up and see what happens.

Robert: Who knows, you might still be able to play.

scott

_________________
These Rules Suck, Let's Paint!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website
lilroblis
Legionary
Legionary


Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 516
Location: Cleveland Ohio

PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 1:44 pm    Post subject: new world warrioe

I hope to play - as I said some really fun armies making this a good theme with lots of variation
But I owe umpiring - starting to read the rules again
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 5922
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Wed Jun 12, 2013 4:06 pm    Post subject:

I think Bill said that he was loaning 15mm armies to Jim Bisigani and Marc Cribbs. Toss in Phil and potentially Robert as a player/ump and there's our 4 players.

scott
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> Events All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group