Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[Historian]

Jon,
My 2 cents of possible rules that could be revisited.
Regarding Detachments: When a detachment is absorbed by the parent, the parent acquires the fatigue of the detachment if the detachments fatigue is higher, and visa-versa.

This can create some “unrealistic” situations like this weekend where a detachment of 6 figures of LI with 14 fatigue caused its parent of 24 HI to go from zero to nearly exhausted when it joined.

Evaders choice: When a unit evades, it must either go “Away from the charge, or straight to its own rear.” This sometimes can be abused. In one incident, the skirmisher was charged directly from behind , and then opted to go straight to its own rear, thus heading straight into the charge. The reason was the evader was going to be caught and broken, and was avoiding downstream waver checks. (I also guess it could be argued that when caught, the evader could be shielded and fight back.)

Thought to amend this rule: “When the evade move is complete, all evading elements must be further away from the charger as when they started.”

If the Evade rule is being opened, I would also advocate that evaders could also opt to evade directly their front. After all, you can run away faster if you are running in the direction you are already facing. And the “…all evading elements must be further away from the charge…” amendment should keep it from being abused.

[joncleaves]

I get you. And I agree in principle that people are abusing that rule when they evade to their rear to go directly at the charger to avoid wavers, when its obvious what should happen is that they evade away.

The problem is, the rulebook is already unwieldy due to attempts to cover every base that can be abused. As each new abuse arose, my habit had been to correct it with rules.

The game is a simulation, and so breaks down a little when these ancient armies become little groups of missiles moving at all angles and in and causing surrounded situations. I am personally loathe to add more rules to correct poor behavior occuring inside ahistorical situations. But I am open to what the group wants. I'll talk to Scott about what he wants to do.

[lilroblis]

You get to second level complexities on this. If I am an evader I would try to maximize my distance from the charge - including turning 90 degrees and moving along the edge of impassable terran after ensuring the officer involved in getting me in such a poor position got to stay behind as a rearguard on foot - I would not neccessarily go directly to my rear or away from the charge - unless that made the most sense.
this assumes that a group of 100 riders can make that decision on the fly - and I have never been a rider in such a position so dont really understand the visbility - any re-enactors out there?
My vote leave it as it is - very seldom will this change a game beyond redemption

[scott holder]

Like Rob, while I see this happen, I don't consider it to be significant enough to warrant messing with.

Same for detachments. Yes, we do see them because some armies are built around them but for the most part, we don't. Again, it doesn't rise to the level of significance to warrant a change.

scott

[lilroblis]

My memory is that we cha nged to keeping seperate fatigue logs for detachments and their parent bodies - irrespective of where they are - am I correct?

[Frank Gilson]

The detachment rules now do not address fatigue specifically, thus fatigue for parent and detachment are tracked separately.

Upon joining nothing happens to the fatigue total of either body.