From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Sep 1 11:41:19 1998 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com by elara via ESMTP (951211.SGI.8.6.12.PATCH1502/951211.SGI.AUTO) for id LAA27317; Tue, 1 Sep 1998 11:41:13 -0500 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by gatekeeper.tripos.com (SMI-8.6/8.6.12) id LAA23276 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 1998 11:41:12 -0500 Received: from orion.starlink.com(206.26.42.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (4.1) id xma023251; Tue, 1 Sep 98 11:40:46 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) id JAA24601 for whancients-list; Tue, 1 Sep 1998 09:34:51 -0700 (MST) Received: from carlton.innotts.co.uk (root@carlton.innotts.co.uk [195.89.181.2]) by orion.starlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA24597 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 1998 09:34:48 -0700 (MST) Received: from gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk (mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk [195.89.181.242]) by carlton.innotts.co.uk (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id RAA24053 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 1998 17:23:18 +0100 (BST) Received: by GWMAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Tue, 1 Sep 1998 17:23:49 +0100 Message-ID: From: Jervis Johnson To: whancients@warpzone.com Subject: [WAB] WAB Points Values I Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1998 13:21:21 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Hello all, This is the firt part of a two part email explaining how I come up with the points values I use in the army lists I write. The second part of this message has the 'base line stats' I use as a _starting_ point for working out the points values for an army list. I must admit I've held off sending this information out for general consumption because I feared that people might just use it 'straight' to get points values for troops, rather than as a starting place as is intended. On the other hand the information would clearly be useful to those of you working on your own lists, so I've decided in the end to release it. All I ask is that you use the information with restraint and care! HOW IT WORKS ---------------------- I use my base stat line charts to get working points values for troops in an army list. If a troops types characteristics don't fit exactly it's usually quite easy to 'guestimate' a value based on what is on the charts. The value of any equipment is then added on, againing 'guestimating' the value of equipment not on the list These starting points values then get adjusted for things like special abilities, as well as 'gut instinct' if the system brings in a pv that seems too high or too low. To be honest, gut instinct is probably the most important guide to points values; some times a points value just seems wrong, though I'd be hard put to say exactly why. Having got a draft list, all you need to do is start using it, and you can then adjust points values as you go along based on the feedback you get. The important thing is not to be afraid to change a points value if it seems to be wrong, radically if need be. There are two other things well worth bearing in mind when working out the points values for troops in a list. The first is that "points values are internal", and the second is"if in doubt, apply a limit". Points Values Are Internal ------------------------------- By this I mean that the points values for a troop type are only really important with regards to other troops types *from the same list*. For example, there is not much point comparing a Knight from the WotR army list to a Roman Legionary from the Imperial Roman list. All that is important with regard one list and another is that an *army* picked from each list has an equal chance of winning (i.e. a 1,000 army from the WotR list has an equal chance of winning as a 1,000 point army from the Roman list). Returning to the Knight, his points value needs to be compared to the other troop types in the WotR list, and should be set to make players think "hmmmm, should I have more Knights or more Men At Arms, I'm just not sure....". Once you start playtesting the list you can adjust points values both on the 'micro-level', so that there are valid choices between different troop types in the list, and on a 'macro-level' so that it is balanced against other lists. If In Doubt Apply A Limit ------------------------------- Sometimes you'll find that a troop type seems potentially unbalancing, but to change it in any way would either make it not worth having, or would destroy the character of the list. When presented with such a dilema, I find the best thing to do is to apply a limit of some kind (usually 0-X units allowed), rather than changing the points values or rules. This is usually easily justifiable, as the units that give problems are usually the ones that tended to be rather rare. While on this subject, don't be afraid of including what may seem to be 'over the top' units in the army list. In my experience it is these that give an army its real character, and they shouldn't be avoided just because they are hard to balance out. This goes against a recent message on the list warning about a Warhammer (fantasy) style army list 'arms race'. Such criticisms of the Warhammer army books are actually unfounded, and contrary to popular opinion, newer lists perform no better in tournaments than the older ones (the last Warhammer Grand Tournament was won by a Goblin army(!), with an Empire army in 3rd place, while the army that statistically did worst was the recently 'revamped and updated' High Elf list). Where the new lists are better than the older ones is in the variety of troops with interesting special rules and abilities, and it tends to be this that players with older lists point to as 'what they want' in the next edition of their own lists. Anyway, the point is that you should be scared of being a bit over the top sometimes, as long as the result is characterful and playtesting shows that the resulting army is balanced. But that is quite enough of my ramblings. Following is the base points values charts I use, and which I hope that budding list writers will find of use. Jervis Johnson Warhammer Historical Wargames Ltd From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Sep 1 11:55:18 1998 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com by elara via ESMTP (951211.SGI.8.6.12.PATCH1502/951211.SGI.AUTO) for id LAA27752; Tue, 1 Sep 1998 11:55:16 -0500 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by gatekeeper.tripos.com (SMI-8.6/8.6.12) id LAA23665 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 1998 11:55:15 -0500 Received: from orion.starlink.com(206.26.42.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (4.1) id xma023640; Tue, 1 Sep 98 11:54:11 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) id JAA25404 for whancients-list; Tue, 1 Sep 1998 09:54:15 -0700 (MST) Received: from carlton.innotts.co.uk (root@carlton.innotts.co.uk [195.89.181.2]) by orion.starlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA25399 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 1998 09:54:12 -0700 (MST) Received: from gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk (mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk [195.89.181.242]) by carlton.innotts.co.uk (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id RAA25655 for ; Tue, 1 Sep 1998 17:42:45 +0100 (BST) Received: by GWMAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Tue, 1 Sep 1998 17:23:49 +0100 Message-ID: From: Jervis Johnson To: whancients@warpzone.com Subject: [WAB] Points Values Charts Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1998 13:21:45 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] WARHAMMER ANCIENT BATTLES POINTS VALUES ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Below are a number of 'base stat lines', along with a points value. Use these as a guideline to work out the base points cost for a model without any equipment (oo-er missus!). The important thing is that the characteristics below can act as a starting point. This especially applies to points values, which should be adjusted up or down in the light of playtesting and experience. I SAY AGAIN (sorry to shout) THE POINTS VALUES BELOW ARE A STARTING POINT AND SHOULD BE ADJUSTED UP OR DOWN IN THE LIGHT OF PLAYTESTING. RANK & FILE --------------------- NAME* M WS BS S T W I A Ld Pts Peasants 4 2 2 3 3 1 2 1 5 3 Skirmishers 5 2 3 3 3 1 3 1 5 3 Barbarians 5 3 3 3 3 1 3 1 5 4 Warriors/Regulars 4 3 3 3 3 1 3 1 7 5 Retainers 4 4 3 3 3 1 4 1 7 7 Guard 4 4 4 3 3 1 4 1 8 8 Nobles 5 4 4 3 3 1 4 1 6 8 Knights 4 4 3 4 3 1 4 1 8 9 Light Chariot 8 4 4 3 4 1 4 2 8 30 Heavy Chariot 6 4 4 4 4 2 4 4 8 50 Scythed Chariot 7 3 3 5 4 1 3 1 7 75 * Profile names ('Peasant', 'Warrior' etc) are descriptive titles only and should not be taken too literally! CHARACTERS ---------------------- Profile M WS BS S T W I A Ld Pts Officer* 4 4 4 4 3 2 5 2 8 60 Chieftain* 5 5 5 4 4 2 5 3 6 70 Hero* 4 5 5 4 4 2 5 3 8 80 General 4 5 5 4 3 3 6 2 9 115 Warlord 5 6 6 4 4 3 6 4 7 115 Feudal Lord 4 6 6 4 4 3 6 4 9 160 * Army standard bearer can use these stats and base points values too. ABILITIES --------------- Army General +25 points Army Standard +15 points Drilled +2 points Stubborn +3 points Light Troops +0 point Nomad Cavalry +3 points Warband +0 points Frenzy +4 points Hatred +3 points (+25 if character and applies to units led by him) Cause Fear +2 points Cause Terror +4 points Form shield wall +1 point CAVALRY ---------------- Points Value If Wearer: WS/BS 2 WS/BS 3 WS/BS 4+ Movement = 8, +1 save 8 10 12 Movement = 6, +1 save 6 8 10 Warhorse (+1 A) +2 +3 +4 Note: Characters can gnerally have a horse for free, and only pay the points cost to upgrade it to a warhorse. EQUIPMENT POINTS VALUES --------------------------------------------- HAND TO HAND WEAPONS Points Value If Wielder: WS 2 WS 3 WS 4 + Knife, improvised or hand weapon free free free Additional hand weapon 1 1 2 Double handed weapon 1 2 3 Halbard 2 2 3 Throwing Spear 1 1 2 Heavy Throwing Spear 2 2 3 Thrusting Spear 1 1 2 Pike 2 2 3 Kontos 2 2 3 Lance 2 2 3 MISSILE WEAPONS Points Value If Wielder: BS 2 BS 3 BS 4 + Javelin or Dart 1 1 2 Short Bow 1 1 2 (Composite) Bow 1 2 3 Long Bow 2 2 3 Crossbow 2 3 4 Sling 1 1 2 ARMOUR Points Value If Wearer: WS/BS 2 WS/BS 3 WS/BS 4 + Buckler free 1 1 Shield 1 1 2 Large Shield 2 2 3 Light Armour 1 2 3 Heavy Armour 2 3 4 Barding for steed 4 4 4 WACKY STUFF ----------------------- WAR ENGINES Points Value If Crew: BS 2 BS 3 BS 4 + Bolt Thrower S*3 S*5 S*7 Stone Thrower S*10 S*10 S*10 ELEPHANTS African Elephant 100 Indian Elephant 125 Crew as infantry* Mahout included above * count a howdah as a large shield for each crew. From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Wed Oct 28 08:48:23 1998 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall [192.160.145.217]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id IAA47754 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 08:48:21 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id IAA18074 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 08:48:20 -0600 Received: from orion.starlink.com(206.26.42.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (4.1) id xma017821; Wed, 28 Oct 98 08:46:51 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) id HAA28404 for whancients-list; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 07:39:15 -0700 (MST) Received: from carlton.innotts.co.uk (root@carlton.innotts.co.uk [195.89.181.2]) by orion.starlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA28387 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 07:39:12 -0700 (MST) Received: from gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk (mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk [195.89.181.242]) by carlton.innotts.co.uk (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id OAA17682; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 14:36:09 GMT Received: by mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id <44GSKNAK>; Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:38:39 +0100 Message-ID: From: Jervis Johnson To: whancients@warpzone.com Cc: Donald Effinger Subject: RE: [WAB] A few questions for Jervis... Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 15:38:39 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9011 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Donald Effinger asked the following questions about AoA: > 1. Will you include leaders/chieftains/officers to each list like the > Barbarian one has? I have used this army and it adds to the game I > think. You can create characters for your own games with names and > histories. I think it adds to the 'fun' of the game without being too > overboard really. Yeah, we could do it ourselves but maybe something > specific for each army? > A: The AoA are of necessity rather short, and so won't include the range of character options used in the full length lists like those in the WAB rules. However, we do plan to do a range of 'proper' army books, that will have longer and more detailed lists, and will include the full range of options. > 2. Do you intend to add real historical character stats as well? > A: Again, not in AoA, but they will certainly be included in the proper lists. > 3. Will you have much more in the way of troop types or a blurb about > each army? How about tactics common to each individual army? > A: Same answer! > 4. Have you worked with the Foundry or any other miniature company to > advise them to produce figs to fill in gaps in any lines? The Foundry, > for instance, doesn't have any figs for Alexander's army (although Old > Glory does). > A: As the Perry's make most of the Foundry range and are co-authors of the WAB rules, there is a certain amount of cross-over between the two companies! However, this isn't a formal, planned process (actually, none of the Warhammer Historical stuff could be called planned...), it's based on enthusiasm and interest. > 5. Do you see (down the road) future projects for WAB or is this the > end? What about more lists or the gunpowder era? > A: I think there'll be more stuff, but I'm not sure what or when. To be honest, the biggest problem we have with WAB at the moment is that there is a danger it will turn into hard work, and because of this after AoA is out we're going to ease up a bit and just let things develop at a easy-going, very laid back pace. After all, we do this in our spare time as a fun project rather than a serious business, and we want to keep it that way if we can. > Comments now... I like the system and it has opened up another area to > game for me that I hadn't gotten into before. We're having a great time > with these rules. Being selfish now, I'd like to see a gun powder set of > rules for use through the American Civil War. My SYW and F&I figs need a > solid set of rules. The current ones I'm using suck. > A: We did play some Napoleonic, ACW and Colonial games using the WH rules as a basis, and while they worked OK, it was clear that some major changes were needed to get a game that captured the character of these periods. Recently we had another go at a Colonial game using the new 40K system as the basis for the rules, and this worked *much* better, so we'd like to do some more experimenting using a modified set of 40K rules for gunpowder games. I'll let people know more as and when we get the chance to play some more games. > Now one question... Can chariots use the throwing spears as the cavalry > do? > A: Yes you can. Chariots count as cavalry for weapon use rules. Jervis Johnson From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Fri Oct 30 05:51:52 1998 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall [192.160.145.217]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id FAA10792 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 05:51:50 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id FAA01624 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 05:51:49 -0600 Received: from orion.starlink.com(206.26.42.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (4.1) id xma001606; Fri, 30 Oct 98 05:51:02 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) id EAA27377 for whancients-list; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 04:02:48 -0700 (MST) Received: from carlton.innotts.co.uk (root@carlton.innotts.co.uk [195.89.181.2]) by orion.starlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id EAA27241 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 04:02:04 -0700 (MST) Received: from gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk (mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk [195.89.181.242]) by carlton.innotts.co.uk (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id KAA17005 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 10:58:15 GMT Received: by mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id <44GSK3F3>; Fri, 30 Oct 1998 12:00:49 +0100 Message-ID: From: Jervis Johnson To: whancients@warpzone.com Subject: RE: [WAB] Cheiftains Date: Fri, 30 Oct 1998 12:00:48 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9011 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Keith Williamson asked: > If my unit gets hit by missle fire , is there a chance that the chieftain > takes a hit and wound ? > I says something about template weapons and "look out sir" > but what about normal missle fire ? > A: Not as such. You can target the character if he is in the front rank and the closest target (or equal closest), but he will benefit from the 'look out sire' rule for any hits you score. See page 42 of the rules 'Shooting At Characters'. Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Nov 17 12:25:18 1998 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall [192.160.145.217]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id MAA17455 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 1998 12:25:16 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id MAA16792 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 1998 12:25:16 -0600 Received: from orion.starlink.com(206.26.42.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (4.1) id xma016710; Tue, 17 Nov 98 12:24:27 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) id LAA04790 for whancients-list; Tue, 17 Nov 1998 11:23:30 -0700 (MST) Received: from carlton.innotts.co.uk (root@carlton.innotts.co.uk [195.89.181.2]) by orion.starlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA04783 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 1998 11:23:26 -0700 (MST) Received: from gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk ([195.89.181.242]) by carlton.innotts.co.uk (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id RAA11061 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 1998 17:04:14 GMT Received: by mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Tue, 17 Nov 1998 18:08:06 +0100 Message-ID: From: Jervis Johnson To: whancients@warpzone.com Subject: P: RE: [WAB] FAQ and Fleeing Troops Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 18:08:05 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] When a unit breaks in combat it is destroyed if its pursuers beat its dice roll. The pursuers don't have to actually catch the unit, just beating the dice roll is sufficent to destroy the unit. A similar thread to this came up on the 40K list recently, and the explanation of the units destruction is the same; they have been so closely persued by the enemy that what was a fairly orderly retreat turns into a full-scale and head-long rout. The fleeing unit's cohesion falls apart completely, and so it is removed from play as it can no longer function effectively as a combat unit. The pursuing unit then makes its pursuit move, in the direction the fleeing unit would have fled, and smacking into any enemy units that get in the way. If the later happens the pursuer counts as charging in the subsequent combat phase. We've always played the rule this way, and from experience reserve lines are still useful. For a start, assuming equal movement rates, a fleeing unit is odds on to get away, and a second line allows you to engage the pursuers with fresh units while the unit that was fleeing recovers. A second line also allows you to plug gaps resulting from units being destroyed. This said, it is rare for their to be enough troops on the table in a game of Warhammer for reserves to be really useful. (Try playing along the narrow width of the table instead of its length and adding a turn or two to game length if you want to make reserves more of a factor. This is also a good way of playing games that involve Nomad Horde armies). Jervis Johnson From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Wed Nov 18 14:56:00 1998 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall [192.160.145.217]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id OAA14341 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 1998 14:55:54 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id OAA22600 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 1998 14:55:55 -0600 Received: from orion.starlink.com(206.26.42.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (4.1) id xma022552; Wed, 18 Nov 98 14:43:57 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) id NAA10292 for whancients-list; Wed, 18 Nov 1998 13:44:49 -0700 (MST) Received: from carlton.innotts.co.uk (root@carlton.innotts.co.uk [195.89.181.2]) by orion.starlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA10287 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 1998 13:44:47 -0700 (MST) Received: from gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk (mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk [195.89.181.242]) by carlton.innotts.co.uk (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id UAA24024 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 1998 20:32:54 GMT Received: by mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Wed, 18 Nov 1998 21:36:47 +0100 Message-ID: From: Jervis Johnson To: whancients@warpzone.com Subject: RE: [WAB] Open Questions Alexander list Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1998 21:36:46 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Jeff Jonas asked the following questions: > Question: > 1.Wedge: Can all figures in a wedge fight if attacked in the flank or > rear? > Yes. > Suggestions: > 1. Hypaspist controversy: Since nobody can agree what the friggin > Hypaspists were armed with please allow them to have the options of a > large > shield (after all they are called (shield bearers), and at least they > should > have the option to be drilled (Chaeronea, dealing with chariots). My > personal conviction is that Hypaspists although in light formation should > be > able to form phalanx also- maybe at the cost of 1 movement point? I feel > that forcing Hypaspists to be armed with javelins is incorrect- this > should > be an option- thrusting spears should be the default equipment, augmented > by > extra javalins. I also believe that more than one Hypaspist unit should be > allowed if they are left in their current stats, Alexander's army usually > had three "regiments" of Hypaspists. > If this were a 'full' list, as opposed to a 2 page 'short' list I'd be tempted to agree with much of the above. However, going into this much detail is not what AoA is about, so I think that the Hypaspist option is pretty much OK as it is. > 2. Elephants should have barding options. Also the Ptolemies used African > elephants instead of Indian. > Barding sounds cool, especially as its a 'model driven' kind of thing. I'll probably stick to one type of elephant though, on grounds of keeping things simple. > 3. Allies- I feel that greek mercenaries should not be allowed as allies, > they should be included in the army list- maybe under phalanx type. > Allowing > to ally with the Theban Sacred band, and Spartan Hoplites is totally > unheard > of historically- and 100% of my allies would be picked from these crack > troops- especially against Romans. Therefore I suggest that Greek > mercenary > Hoplites be added to the list, and they should be cheaper with less > options > than phalangites. The same argument holds for Persians. > I actually don't agree on this one. If you want a historical army, you can field it with the list using Greeks or Persians as allies and simply not taking the troops types that weren't used. On the other hand, I can't see any reason why, for example, the Theban Sacred Band *couldn't* have fought in Alexander's army. All it would have taken is for the Greeks not to have opposed Philip and ally with him instead against the Persians... interesting 'what ifs' like this are rather fun, in my opinion, any way. > 4. We found long ago while play testing house rules that you cannot allow > light troops to attack main battleline units in the flank/rear and expect > the game to end up remotely resembling an ancient battle- in effect the > game > turned on who fielded the most elite light infantry! Therefore I suggest > as > a house rule and possible rule amendment that all troops acting as > skirmishers cannot remove a rank bonus and do not gain the flank/rear > bonus. > Formed light infantry affect units as normal, as does formed light > cavalry. > This hasn't really been the problem for us that it seems to have been for other players. However, AoA includes a couple of new 'optional rules' that will help mitigate this problem (but you'll need to wait until the book is published in January or February next before details of the new rules will be released!) > 5. I feel that the targeting of characters rule in WAB is out to lunch. > Characters are actually easier to hit than in WFB (where singling out that > scary warboss would seem easier!). Nobody's general will last against any > Missile army when targeted by 20 archers or bolt throwers over the period > of > a game. You have in effect sent generals skulking into the rear areas by > themselves-. > Again, its not a problem in our games. Remember you can only shoot at him if he's the closest model! > 6. Indian archers should have the range of longbows, but the striking > power > of regular bows- this increases the Indian bows ability without turning > the > Hydaspes into Agincourt! How come elephants in india cost 165 points? They > should go to Rome and round up some of those 65 points elephants! > Not wanting to start a whole new 'Indian Longbow' debate, I think I'll just stick with them the way they are! After all, the list does include an option to downgrade them if you want to. As for those Roman elephants, you'll just have to blame it on the superiority of Roman army quartermasters... Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Thu Dec 17 10:04:23 1998 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall [192.160.145.217]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id KAA86195 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 10:04:22 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id KAA23514 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 10:04:21 -0600 Received: from orion.starlink.com(206.26.42.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (4.1) id xma023491; Thu, 17 Dec 98 10:03:36 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) id IAA09500 for whancients-list; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 08:54:08 -0700 (MST) Received: from carlton.innotts.co.uk (root@carlton.innotts.co.uk [195.89.181.2]) by orion.starlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA09488 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 08:54:01 -0700 (MST) Received: from gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk (mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk [195.89.181.242]) by carlton.innotts.co.uk (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id PAA10672 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 15:50:41 GMT Received: by mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 16:54:20 +0100 Message-ID: From: Jervis Johnson To: WAB Mailing List Subject: [WAB] P: Slingshot, and News! Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 16:54:19 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] As a follow-up to RJM's message about Slingshot 200, I thought you all might be interested in my letter to Steve Neate about the article, especially is it also includes some information on projects we're working on at the moment (working on which also explain why I don't contribute to the mailing list as much as I'd like!). Jervis ---------- From: Jervis Johnson Sent: Thursday, December 10, 1998 14:08 To: 'editor@soa.org.uk' Subject: Reformed History > Hello Steve, > > Below is a letter for Guardroom, mainly inspired by Karl Ranitzsch's > article in Slingshot 200. I'd appreciate it if you could get get it in > Guardroom; don't worry, it's short(ish) and to the point, and you'll see > why I'd > like it printed after you've read it. I also use the letter to wax lyrical > about stuff we've been working on and which we hope to get out over the > course of nest year. Feel free to lop off the shameless advertising if you > don't want this kind of thing on the letters page. > > That's all for now, apart from to say that, Karl's article aside, I > thought that > issue 200 was really good. Congratulations, and keep up the good work. > > > Jervis > > FOR GUARDROOM > > It's a while since I've been in touch, but Karl Ranitzsch's article in > Slingshot 200 (Deformed History) has fired me up and I just had to put one > thing straight. Fortunately I'm used to being savaged by critics, and so > readers will no doubt heave a sigh of relief when I say I'm not going to > write a point by point rebuttal of Karl's work, as I've learnt that such > efforts are invariably a huge waste of time. At the end of the day both > Karl and I know we're right, so what's the point of arguing?!? > > However, in his article Karl rather implies that I'm some kind of anti-DBM > fanatic, bent on ridiculing Phil Barker's work, and ignorant and > comtemptuous of any other rules other than my own. This is not at all what > I said in the article, but to make things crystal clear, I'd like to state > for the record that I greatly admire the Wargames Research Group and all > that they have done for the ancient wargames hobby, and consider Phil > Barker to be one of greatest wargame designers of all time. Further, I > consider DBA and DBM to be innovative rules system that have almost > single-handedly saved ancient wargaming from the doldrums into it was of > danger of vanishing before they came out. I regularly play DBA (I just > love > its elegance and simplicty), and plan to carry on doing so. These, amongst > many others, are the reasons that we credit WRG with, and I quote, > 'keeping > the flame of ancient wargaming alive' in the Warhammer Ancient Battle > rulebook. It is also why I put the Games Workshop events organiser in > touch > with J D McNeil and suggested they hold one of the DBM Doubles Masters in > the gaming hall that is part of GW's Head Quarters. Really and truly, > this > hobby is to small to be riven by fractious arguments about which set of > rules is best. > > But enough of such things. Part of the reason of my recent silence is > that I've had my nose to the proverbial grindstone working away on 'Armies > Of Antiquity' (AoA for short). This is the first supplement for Warhammer > Ancient Battles, and is a 48 page book that has 22 new army lists. AoA > came about because quite a few of you have asked if there is any chance of > getting hold of an army list for your favourite army. To be honest we'd > originally planned to bring out army books at quite a leisurely pace, but > such has been the demand that Nigel Stillman, Allen Curtis and myself have > put together a selection of 'short' army lists for use with WAB for the > most popular ancient armies we can think of. Wargames Illustrated had a > preview version of the Ancient Greek list, while MWAN ran a preview > version of the Late Roman list, and if you've seen these you'll have some > idea of the format of the lists. AoA should be out by the time you read > this, includes lists for the following armies: > > Sumerian, Egyptian, Hittite, Trojan Wars, Assyrian, Persian, Ancient > Greek, Alexander & Successors, Indian, Republican Roman, Carthaginian, > Late Roman, Cataphract, Byzantine, The Nomad Hordes, Saracen, Saxon, > Viking, Norman, Crusader, Chinese, Samurai > > AoA will be followed by Nigel Stillman's Biblical period supplement, which > we hope will end up as something of a cross between a Warhammer fantasy > style army book and an Ospry book. We've just started editing the > manuscript, and Alan Perry has done a lovely piece of art as the cover. > > Meanwhile Stephen and Duncan Patten of Gripping Beast have been working > away on a similar supplement covering the Viking age in the British Isles, > and which they have promised faithfully to get finished by March. We have > long been fans of the Gripping Beast range of miniatures, so it has been a > real pleasure to work with them on this project, and it has to be said > that the dark ages are a period that is extremely well suited to the WAB > rules. > > There is more, but I won't go on. Suffice to say that with what we're > doing, Terry Gore's new rules, the Piquet ancient's supplement, and new > WRG material, 1999 should be a great year for ancient wargamers! > > Jervis Johnson > Warhammer Historical Wargames > From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Thu Dec 17 10:44:32 1998 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall [192.160.145.217]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id KAA90880 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 10:44:29 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id KAA25987 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 10:44:30 -0600 Received: from orion.starlink.com(206.26.42.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (4.1) id xma025955; Thu, 17 Dec 98 10:43:55 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) id JAA11925 for whancients-list; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 09:34:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from carlton.innotts.co.uk (root@carlton.innotts.co.uk [195.89.181.2]) by orion.starlink.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id JAA11917 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 09:33:57 -0700 (MST) Received: from gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk (mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk [195.89.181.242]) by carlton.innotts.co.uk (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id QAA13631 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 16:30:36 GMT Received: by mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 17:34:16 +0100 Message-ID: From: Jervis Johnson To: WAB Mailing List Subject: [WAB] P: Charging Through Skirmishers (rule) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 17:34:14 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9003 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] The debate on the list about charging through skirmishers and using them to screen other units has prompted a similar, no less heated, debate in the Studio on the same subject. Much has been the gnashing of teeth, as Nigel has argued to be allowed to charge his chariots through their accompanying chariot runners, while hardened Warhammer players like Tuomas and Alessio have argued against making skirmishers even more useful than they already are. However, out of this debate has come the following rule that allows you to charge through skirmishers, while at the same time not allowing them to get out of hand. Here it is. Please feel free to use it in your games, as we will in ours from now on, but *please* show the rule to your opponent at the start of the battle if you want to avoid getting into an argument! Jervis Johnson --------------------------------------------------------------------- SKIRMISHER SCREENS Troops that are in skirmish formation can be used to *screen* friendly units that are within 2" of the skirmishers. A single unit of skirmishers can screen any number of friendly units, just as long as all the screened units have a model within 2" of a model from the unit in skirmih formation. A unit that is screened by a unit in skirmish formation counts as being in soft cover if it is shot at by a unit that draws a line of sight through the skirmish screen. If a unit being screened declares a charge, then the skirmish screen may 'flee' out of the way. The screening unit makes its move in the Declare Charges segment of the movement phase rather than the compulsory move segment, before the chargers are moved or charge reactions are made, and they *are* therefore allowed to attempt to rally in the ensuing 'rally fleeing troops' segment of the movement phase. This aside they are treated in the same manner as any other fleeing unit. --------------------------------------------------------------------- From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Mon Jan 25 14:17:57 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall [192.160.145.217]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id OAA93730 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:17:57 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id OAA26823 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:17:57 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma026492; Mon, 25 Jan 99 14:15:36 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id NAA21584 for whancients-list; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 13:16:38 -0700 (MST) Received: from hpamgaaa.compuserve.com (ah-img-1.compuserve.com [149.174.217.154]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id NAA21580 for ; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 13:16:37 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hpamgaaa.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.0) id OAA23380 for whancients@warpzone.com; Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:58:10 -0500 (EST) Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 14:57:40 -0500 From: Jervis Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] How To Order AoA To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199901251458_MC2-67EC-62F8@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id NAA21581 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by orion.starlink.com id NAA21584 X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Steve Miller and others have asked how to get hold of AoA, so I'm sending the list a copy of the information sheet I've put together about the book. Unfortunately this is still going to leave you guys in the States and Australia stuck with having to try and sort out bank drafts or whatever i= f you want to order the book direct from us, as we still can't take credit cards (I know, I know, charmingly archaic isn't it?!? : )). On the other hand I now have some good contacts with some North American and Australia= n distributors, so I would imagine that copies of the rules will be heading across the Atlantic very soon and should be available in the colonies within a week or ten days, rather than it taking ages like it did for the main rules. Anyway, here's that information sheet (please feel free to copy it and repost it anywhere or to anyone!): ARMIES OF ANTIQUITY Armies of Antiquity is the first supplement for Warhammer Ancient Battles. The forty-eight page book contains army lists which cover all of the most famous armies of the ancient world, from the chariot armies of ancient Egypt through to armies of Crusading Knights. What's In It? Armies of Antiquity includes: =B7 New rules to use in your Warhammer Ancient Battles games =B7 Twenty-two new army lists =B7 Seven 'Tribal Variations' for the Barbarian army list in Warhammer Ancient Battles =B7 A Praetorian Guard variation for the Roman army list in Warhammer Anc= ient Battles Which Armies Are Covered? Armies of Antiquity includes lists for all of the following armies: Sumerian, Egyptian, Hittite, Trojan Wars, Assyrian, Persian, Ancient Gree= k, Alexander & his Successors, Ancient Indian, Republican Roman, Cathaginian= , Late Roman, Cataphract, Byzantine, The Nomad Hordes, The Saracens, Saxon, Viking, Norman, Crusader, Ancient Chinese, and Samurai. Why'd You Do It? When we first published Warhammer Ancient Battles we always knew that we'= d need to produce army lists. However, we hadn't anticipated just how quick= ly the rules would take off, and just how vocal the demand for new lists wou= ld be. Our original plan had been to produce army books that covered a specific period of history, each with their own set of army lists, but it soon became apparent that this wouldn't satisfy the demand from players w= ho wanted a list for their favourite army right now. Enter Nigel Stillman, w= ho suggested we put together a set of 'short' army lists for the most popula= r armies. Thus Armies Of Antiquity was born. What Are The Lists Like? Each list covers two pages, and includes a short introduction, points values, profiles, equipment for the troops in the army, and details of th= e army's composition. In addition each army has special rules for appropria= te unique troops, weapons or tactics that it used. We've done our best to ensure that each army list has its own character and style, so that no tw= o armies will fight in the same way when they are used, while at the same time are flexible enough for you to create an army that suits your own tastes and style of play. How Do I Get It? Armies Of Antiquity is available in specialised wargames stores everywher= e (if your local store doesn't have it, why not get them to contact us at t= he address below and ask for our trade terms). Alternatively, you can order Armies Of Antiquity directly from us for 7.50 UK pounds plus postage and packing (1.00 UK pound in the UK, 2.00 UK pounds for the rest of Europe, and 3.00 UK pounds anywhere else in the world). Orders should be sent to Warhammer Historical Wargames Ltd, PO Box 5226, Nottingham, NG7 2WT. Sorr= y, but we can't take credit card orders at the present time. If you have any other questions, please fell free to write to us at the address above, or email us at jervisj@games-workshop.co.uk. From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Jan 26 08:40:42 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall [192.160.145.217]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id IAA15981 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 08:40:42 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id IAA03685 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 08:40:38 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma003426; Tue, 26 Jan 99 08:39:12 -0600 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id HAA17614 for whancients-list; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 07:46:37 -0700 (MST) Received: from arl-img-1.compuserve.com (arl-img-1.compuserve.com [149.174.217.131]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id HAA17610 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 07:46:36 -0700 (MST) Received: (from root@localhost) by arl-img-1.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.17) id JAA17754 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:27:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 09:27:27 -0500 From: Jervis Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Hypaspist Light Armour To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199901260927_MC2-6809-4E05@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id HAA17611 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] What can I say, other than oooops! Sorry, the Hypaspists should be allowed the option of having light armour, but they can't in the AoA list. The reason for the ommision is that I tend to go along with the idea that the Hypaspists (along with most of the rest of Alexanders Macedonian infantry) were trained *either* to fight in a phalanx with a pike (in which case they'd count as a 'Royal Guard' phalanx), or to oprate as light infantry, in which case they'd give up their armour and pike and are covered by the Hypaspist entry in the list. However, there are plenty of people that think that they operated as a sort of hybrid 'light phalanx', and I really should have remembered to include such an option in the list. As a house rule, allow the Hypasists to replace their javelins with a thrusting spear and light armour at a cost of +3 points. Jervis Johnson Warhammer Historical Wargames Ltd From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Thu Jan 28 12:23:51 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall [192.160.145.217]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id MAA70532 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 12:23:50 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id MAA18106 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 12:23:49 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma017926; Thu, 28 Jan 99 12:22:15 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id LAA04487 for whancients-list; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 11:05:42 -0700 (MST) Received: from hil-img-7.compuserve.com (hil-img-7.compuserve.com [149.174.177.137]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id LAA04483 for ; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 11:05:40 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hil-img-7.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.17) id MAA27096; Thu, 28 Jan 1999 12:46:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 12:45:05 -0500 From: Jervis Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] 40K Colonial Ammendments (long!) To: WAB Mailing List , "Michael W Cannon" Message-ID: <199901281245_MC2-685B-E07C@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id LAA04484 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by orion.starlink.com id LAA04487 X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] OK guys, here are my ammendments to the 40K rules. Unless they say otherwise the new 40K rulesapply. Note that the new rules are rather different to both Warhammer and the old 40K rules, so these ammendments will only work (and make sense!) if you have both. Also, these are playte= st notes, not complete rules - if you run into something not covered, make i= t up on the spot! Jervis Johnson WARHAMMER COLONIAL=20 Amendments to 40K for 19th Century colonial warfare. FORMATIONS Troops move and fight in formations, and different formations have different effects on a units ability to move, fire and fight in close combat. Regular troops have been extensively drilled and trained and can assume a variety of precision formations. Irregulars are not professional soldiers at all; they can be hastily mustered civilians or warrior nomads= , but in either case they are not trained to move in exact formations. Regular troops may be in column, line, square or in open order. Any regul= ar unit can change its formation in the movement phase at the cost of half o= f it's movement. Units may not change formation in the assault phase. The unit may make the change either at the beginning or the end of its move. If it changes at the beginning of its move, then its movement rate is bas= ed on its new formation; if it changes at the end, then its movement rate is based on its original formation.=20 Irregulars must be in a warband if there are ten or more of them in the unit, or skirmish formation if less than ten. A unit reduced to less than 10 models must adopt skirmish formation in its next movement phase. Note that irregulars have no control over what formation they use; small units spread out, while large units 'mob up'. Artillery may be limbered or unlimbered. In both cases the gun crew are treated as being in open order.=20 The units in a formation must be arranged according to the following descriptions of the specific formations: Line: One or two figures deep and as wide as desired. All bases touching. Column: Two to four figures wide, and more figures wide than deep. All bases touching. Square: Four lines forming a hollow box and facing outwards. All bases touching. Open Order: All models must be within 1-2" of another model in the formation. Note that models must be at least 1" apart.=20 Warband: A rough square, roughly as many figures wide as deep. Figures ma= y be touching or up to =BD" apart. Skirmish: Figures may be must be =BD" to 1" apart. No models may be touching. FORMED UNITS Units in line, column, or square are called formed units. This has a numb= er of effects of the way that they work in the game.=20 The following rules apply to formed units: 1. Units in column add +3" to their move in the movement phase only.=20 2. Units in square subtract 3" from their move in the movement phase and may not charge in the assault phase. 3. Formed units move following the rules for movement in Warhammer (i.e. they must travel ahead, changing direction by wheeling, etc).=20 4. Formed units must choose the lowest dice roll when moving through difficult terrain. 5. Formed units must use the shooting fire arcs from Warhammer (i.e. 45 degree). 6. Formed units block the LOS for friendly models in the same manner as enemy units. 7. The front two ranks of a formed unit may fire (i.e. the front rank doesn't block the LOS for models from the same unit). 8. Formed units may deliver a volley instead of shooting normally (see below). 9. Formed units that fail a morale check become shaken before they fall back (see below). VOLLEY FIRE Formed units are allowed to deliver a volley. Volley fire is not all tha= t accurate, but can halt an enemy attack by its morale effect. You must declare if a unit will volley fire or shoot normally ('fire at will') before it shoots. Unless you say otherwise it is assumed a unit wi= ll fire normally. Volley fire is limited to a single shot and a maximum rang= e of 12", regardless of the rate of fire of the weapon being used. Halve the number of hits scored with volley fire, rounding fractions up, then roll to wound and save normally. Units that take any casualties from volley fire must take a morale check, rather than only if they take 25% casualties. In addition the moral check is taken with a -1 modifier for every two casualties inflicted by the volley. CHARGE REACTIONS A unit charged by an enemy may make a charge reaction. You may not make charge reactions against units in open order or skirmish formation, as it is assumed that they will use cover and guile to 'be on you' before you c= an react. A unit that can make a charge reaction may either: Stand Fire Stand: Follow the normal rules. Fire: As fire, but the unit may shoot at the unit that declared the charg= e. The shooting attack is made using all the normal rules. Note that units with slow firing weapons (see below) must be loaded in order to choose th= is option. All other weapons shoot as if they were stationary. An attacking unit that suffers 25% casualties must pass a morale check before making i= ts charge, and can only carry on with the charge if the moral check is passe= d. SHAKEN UNITS Large units are steadier than smaller units and more likely to hold their ground. To represent this a unit with ten or more models that fails a morale check becomes shaken rather than falling back. A shaken unit may not advance towards the enemy and may not charge. If it fails a second morale check before it rallies then it falls back. A shake= n unit may decide to voluntarily fall back, in which case it falls back one move and then reverts to shaken status. A unit rallies from being shaken in the same manner as it regroups from falling back. GOING TO GROUND Units in open order or skirmish formation may 'go to ground' instead of moving normally. A unit that goes to ground can only move D6", but counts as being in cover with a 5+ saving throw. SNIPING Units in open order or skirmish formation may 'snipe' instead of shooting normally. A unit that snipes may not move at all, but may shoot at up to double its normal range. However, only half the models in the unit may shoot (rounding fractions up), it being assumed that the other half are aiming carefully, adjusting the sights on their rifles, and so on. A unit may go to ground and snipe in the same turn. =20 BASIC WEAPON TYPES Name Rng Str AP Notes Magazine 24" 3 5 Rapid Fire Breach-Loader 24" 3 5 Single Shot Muzzle Loader 24" 3 5 Slow Fire Flintlock 12" 3 6 Slow Fire, smoothbore Gatling Gun 36" 4 5 Machine Gun Cannon G48" 5 5 Blast Bayonet CC user - +1 initiative Shield CC - - +1 save Webley 6" 3 5 Pistol Single Shot: May fire once up to 12" if any models moved, or once up to maximum range if the unit was stationary. (As an aside, regular troops armed with magazine rifles during this period were not normally allowed t= o use the magazines until the enemy were very close. Instead they had to lo= ad single bullets directly into the chamber, effectively converting their magazine rifle into a single-shot weapon. This was done because it was feared that troops would waste all of their ammunition by firing away 'in= to the brown', and then have none left when the enemy charged. Whether they would have wasted their ammo or not is subject to conjecture, but it is rather nicely represented by the fact that magazine rifles only real advantage over a single shot rifle comes into effect at close range!) Slow Firing: These weapons take some time to reload. To represent this, only every other model can shoot when the unit fires, it being assumed th= at the other models are reloading at the time. Alternatively, units that fir= e a volley may shoot with all models in the unit, if this is preferred, but forfeit their next shot while they reload. Smoothbore: This weapon has no rifling, making it very inaccurate at anything other than point blank range. To represent this any shots fired over 6" range will only hit on a roll of 6+, no matter what the BS of the firer. Machine Gun: The machine guns of this period were very effective at mowin= g down troops in a the dense formations used, but prone to jamming. To represent his, the following shooting rules are used; Instead of rolling = to hit, simply roll a D6 if the target unit is in range. The number rolled i= s the number of hits scored. If desired you can carry on firing with the machine gun, by rolling the D6 again, and adding the number rolled to the number of hits scored. However, if the second dice roll matches the first dice roll, no hits are scored and the gun jams. Assuming the gun doesn't jam, you may roll a third time, but this time the gun will jam if the new dice roll matches either of the previous dice rolls. Assuming that the gu= n doesn't jam you may roll again, and so on, until you jam the machine gun automatically on the seventh attempt! Here's an example of how this works. Cpl Smith opens up with his gatling gun on a warband of Zulus 24" away. H= e rolls a '2', scoring two hits on the enemy unit. This is clearly not good enough, so he keeps cranking away, and rolls a second D6. This time he scores a '4', inflicting another four hits making six in total. Still not satisfied he carries on shooting and rolls a third D6. However this time = he rolls another '2', which jams the machine gun. Roll a D6 to see what has happened to a jammed machine gun: 1-2 =3D Broken, can't be used for the r= est of the battle; 3-4 =3D badly jammed, may not shoot next turn; 5-6 =3D min= or jam, may shoot normally next turn. IMPORTANT: Machine guns are much less effective against troops in an open formation. To represent this each rol= l of the dice will only score one hit on a unit in open order or skirmish formation, instead of the number rolled on the dice. However, the number = on the dice is still used for jams. For example, Cpl Smith above would have score two hits if the zulus had been in skirmish formation before jamming the gatling gun. Pistol: May 'rapid fire'. In addition, may be used in close combat, in which case opponent's do not receive an armour save. Models armed with sword and pistol gain +1 attack for additional cc weapon, and opponent's receive no save. CHARACTERISTIC SUMMERY WS BS S T W I A L= d Sv =20 British Infantry 3 3 3 3 1 3 1= =20 8 6+ Equipment: Rifle and bayonet =20 Zulu 3 1 3 3 1 3 1 8= =20 6+ Equipment: Rifle, or spear (=3DCC weapon) and shield =20 Boar 2 4 3 3 1 3 1 7= =20 - Equipment: Rifle Afghan 3 2 3 3 1 3 1 7= =20 - Equipment: Jezzail, or sword (=3DCC weapon) and shield =20 'Leader' +1 +1 +1 +1 += 1 +1 From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Feb 2 14:53:08 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id OAA09115 for ; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 14:53:08 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id OAA10676 for ; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 14:53:08 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma010637; Tue, 2 Feb 99 14:51:33 -0600 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id OAA04890 for whancients-list; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 14:01:49 -0700 (MST) Received: from arl-img-11.compuserve.com (arl-img-11.compuserve.com [149.174.217.141]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id OAA04886 for ; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 14:01:47 -0700 (MST) Received: (from root@localhost) by arl-img-11.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.17) id PAA01473 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 2 Feb 1999 15:40:23 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 15:40:01 -0500 From: Jervis Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Detachment Rules (was Hooray for Phil/French Crossbows) To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199902021540_MC2-68F7-1644@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id OAA04887 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9003 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] I've been interested in discussion between Tony and Steve about the detachment rules in the Empire/Skaven lists. Recently Tuomas has been working on a varient version of the Empire detachment rule, that allows the main unit and any detachments to make charge reactions if *any* of the units are charged. This includes a special countercharge reaction that allows the unit to make a charge move, as long as the charge is made against the unit that caused the charge reaction in the first place (I hope that makes sense!). The countercharge option is evil, as it usually hits the attacker in the flank. The result is that if the units are set up in a sensible formation then an attacker has to attack all of the component units at the same time, or end up being double or triple teamed. Even if used without the counter-charge option the rule makes having detachments of missile troops a very useful option for a close combat unit. Jervis From JervisJ@games-workshop.co.uk Mon Mar 1 06:04:02 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id GAA79465 for ; Mon, 1 Mar 1999 06:04:01 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id GAA15265 for ; Mon, 1 Mar 1999 06:04:01 -0600 Received: from carlton.innotts.co.uk(195.89.181.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma015249; Mon, 1 Mar 99 06:03:29 -0600 Received: from gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk (mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk [195.89.181.242]) by carlton.innotts.co.uk (8.9.0/8.9.0+RBL+Shub-Inter+ORBS) with ESMTP id MAA27444 for ; Mon, 1 Mar 1999 12:03:38 GMT Received: by GWMAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) id ; Mon, 1 Mar 1999 12:02:21 -0000 Message-ID: <2146350959CED211A51300A0C949BD9001401D@GWMAIL> From: Jervis Johnson To: Anthony Edwards Subject: RE: Armies of Antiquity Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 12:02:18 -0000 X-Priority: 3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1457.3) Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Thanks for the email, and apologies for the delay getting back to you (I've been out of the office for a week). Unfortunately the gift voucher is subject to the joint absent-mindedness of myself, the Perry's and Wargames Foundry! However, I'll chase them up again this week and see if they've been sent out yet... Jervis > ---------- > From: Anthony Edwards > Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 1999 0:05 > To: jervisj@games-workshop.co.uk > Subject: Armies of Antiquity > > Jervis, > > My copy of Armies of Antiquity arrived last week. I just wanted > to say thanks. I would have done so earlier but I was out sick > for a few days. Despite whatever comments you may have heard > about it, I really liked the book. It really filled the quick-army > list nook well. > > A quick question about the Foundry gift voucher for a runner-up prize > - > is that something they keep on record there or was I subject to your > infamous absentmindedness? > > Thanks again, > > Tony > -- > Anthony L. Edwards > Tripos, Inc. > mailto:aedwards@tripos.com > > A fool and his money are soon ... Hey! Where's my wallet? > From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue May 25 14:08:12 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id OAA84473 for ; Tue, 25 May 1999 14:08:07 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id OAA16860 for ; Tue, 25 May 1999 14:07:02 -0500 Received: from orion.starlink.com(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma016849; Tue, 25 May 99 14:06:39 -0500 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id LAA06653 for whancients-list; Tue, 25 May 1999 11:42:36 -0700 (MST) Received: from mail1-gui.server.ntli.net (mail1-gui.server.ntli.net [194.168.222.13]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id LAA06649 for ; Tue, 25 May 1999 11:42:35 -0700 (MST) Received: from diamond.co.uk ([194.168.80.95]) by mail1-gui.server.ntli.net (Post.Office MTA v3.1 release PO203a ID# 0-33929U70000L2S50) with ESMTP id AAA615 for ; Tue, 25 May 1999 19:31:22 +0100 Message-ID: <374AEC9F.5ECA6C75@diamond.co.uk> Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 19:32:00 +0100 From: Jervis Johnson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: WAB Mailing List Subject: [WAB] More On Errata (and a new address) References: <004601bea6cf$f72c76c0$ab0fecd0@jjonaspc2.verant.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9003 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Hi Guys, Yup, that's right, Liz has retired from writing all of my WAB messages and told me to do it myself : ) Seriously though, I've got a new (hopefully cheaper) home email address, which is: jervis.johnson@diamond.co.uk or you can reach me at my work address: jervisj@games-owrkshop.co.uk Thanks for the continued feedback on the errata sheet. Here are some answera to some of the questions that have come up: Expanded Errata/Missing Optional Rules: I haven't put the rules for skirmisher screens or confident and edgy troops on the errata sheet as they are not really errata. If they prove popular enough I'll include them in a future supplement (probably the WAB Annual I mentioned in the last message) as new rules players can use if they wish. Byzantine Artillery: This is in the allies section because it's fairly rare, and the 25% limit keeps a player from taking an outlandish amount. This said, instead of Allies the catagory should really be called 'Special Troops'. Samurai: I take the point on the Samurai being too good. I can't remember if I've mentioned it before, but one rule I've thought of applying to the Samurai list is to say that they may not have a rank bonus. This would reflect the rather loose and anarchic way the armies fought, and serve to 'reel them back in' quite well too. I must admit I'd forgotten all about this rule, but assuming I don't hear to many screams of protest from you guys, I'll add it in to the errata sheet as follows: P44, Samurai: Units in a Samurai army do not receive a rank bonus. This reflects the loose formations they fought in and their emphasis on heroic 'single combat'. Partizan: I'll be at Partizan, but probably only for the morning session. Why not say that we'll try to meet up in the bar to talk over all things WAB at a certain time, say 11.30 or so? That's all for now, Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Sun Jun 6 18:11:33 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id SAA80782 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 1999 18:11:33 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id SAA26228 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 1999 18:10:29 -0500 Received: from orion.starlink.com(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma026218; Sun, 6 Jun 99 18:09:50 -0500 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id PAA24303 for whancients-list; Sun, 6 Jun 1999 15:41:35 -0700 (MST) Received: from mail1-gui.server.ntli.net (mail1-gui.server.ntli.net [194.168.222.13]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id PAA24297 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 1999 15:41:33 -0700 (MST) Received: from diamond.co.uk ([194.168.80.190]) by mail1-gui.server.ntli.net (Post.Office MTA v3.1 release PO203a ID# 0-33929U70000L2S50) with ESMTP id AAA11839 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 1999 23:30:08 +0100 Message-ID: <375AE9F8.A5209CC@diamond.co.uk> Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 22:36:56 +0100 From: Jervis Johnson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: WAB Mailing List Subject: [WAB] Levy BS, & Target Priority References: <004101beade5$e4868610$ab0fecd0@jjonaspc2.verant.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Well that will teach me to go to the seaside for a few days (he says, having worked through 250+ messages on his return!). I've read with interest the discussions on levy troops BS, and have to say that I by far prefer the option of simply giving them a BS of 2 over the other options I've seen. And if they were really dreadful troops that had very little impact, I'd even go for giving them a BS of 1! This said, I should note that in WAB we've *deliberately* over-emphasised (sp?) the effect of missile fire, compared to its historical effect in the ancient period. The reason for doing this is simple; it gives missile armies a chance of winning without adding in complex rules to reflect the morale effect of missile fire. Basically, in WAB missile casualties also reflect the fact that heavy missile fire can degrade the effectivness of a unit *without* causing heavy casualties. So, when a unit is wiped out by missile fire (a very rare event in real life), you could instead imagine that what has happened is that the missile fire has driven the unit off, or stopped in operating as a cohesive force. With regard rules for target priority (i.e shooting at the closest target), I must say that bitter experience of players abusing the target priority rules in the 2nd edition of 40K (that's the version previous to the current edition) has made me very wary of such rules. In my experience such rules lead to players moving their units in a very 'gamey' fashion. If you feel that units have to much leeway in who they can fire at, a simpler solution is to reduce their fire arc from 45 degrees to 22.5 degrees, or even straight ahead. This makes it much harder to mass fire on a single target, but avoids fiddly rules that can be exploited. Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Sun Jun 6 18:11:33 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id SAA81937 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 1999 18:11:33 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id SAA26227 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 1999 18:10:29 -0500 Received: from orion.starlink.com(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma026219; Sun, 6 Jun 99 18:09:50 -0500 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id PAA24391 for whancients-list; Sun, 6 Jun 1999 15:43:19 -0700 (MST) Received: from mail1-gui.server.ntli.net (mail1-gui.server.ntli.net [194.168.222.13]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id PAA24387 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 1999 15:43:17 -0700 (MST) Received: from diamond.co.uk ([194.168.80.190]) by mail1-gui.server.ntli.net (Post.Office MTA v3.1 release PO203a ID# 0-33929U70000L2S50) with ESMTP id AAA12059 for ; Sun, 6 Jun 1999 23:31:54 +0100 Message-ID: <375AF639.C9F65B14@diamond.co.uk> Date: Sun, 06 Jun 1999 23:29:13 +0100 From: Jervis Johnson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: WAB Mailing List Subject: [WAB] Tournaments, Scenarios & Army Effectivness Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] One thing I'd like to bring up with regards 'army effectivness', is the huge effect the scenario can have on this. For example, recently there has been quite lot of discussion about how effective missile armed armies are in WAB (see my other message for more on this). However, little has been said about how much the standard WAB scenario effects this. In a nutshell, it seems to me that instead of fiddeling round with the *army lists*, perhaps we should be looking at the *scenario*. For example, if you're having a lot of trouble with missile armed opponenents, as a simple fix try randomising the distance the two armies have to set up apart (14+2D6" should be about right), or try playing the 'Suprise Attack' scenario from WAB as opposed to the more normal Pitched Battle or Meeting Engagement. In other words, look at a changing the scenario rather than the list. (Funningly enough, I took a similar (though opposite) approach when trying to 'crock' powerful attacking armies in the Warhammer fantasy tournaments I run, when I added in the army break point rule that's in AoA to the standard tournament scenario, in order to give armies that relied on missile fire a chance of winning!) Another good reason for varying the scenario's ou play is that is discourages the use of 'optimised' armies, designed to be good at one type of game. Basically, if you keep on fighting a straight line up and fight battle, you will find that there are certain combinations of troops that do rather better than other combinations. On the other hand, if you tend to play a varied selection of sceanrios, you'll quickly find that what is just great for a pitched battle is not as good when you're trying to make an opposed river crossing before night falls! The problem with this approach is that it's harder to just 'set up and play' anything other than a pitched battle, and, far more importantly, most players like 'even contest' scenarios where both sides set up the same way, and where any special rules apply equally to both sides. This being the case, I think that as a group we should try to come up with six different 'even contest' scenarios, which are varied enough so that an army optimised for any one will do badly in at least half the others. If we can come up with six such set-ups, then I can just start telling players to pick one randomly before they start playing. If we take as a given that Pitched Battle and Suprise Attack are two of the scenarios, that just leaves four more scenarios to come up with... Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Mon Jun 7 14:04:50 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id OAA07695 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 1999 14:04:49 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id OAA21178 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 1999 14:03:46 -0500 Received: from orion.starlink.com(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma021125; Mon, 7 Jun 99 14:02:46 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id LAA05465 for whancients-list; Mon, 7 Jun 1999 11:42:25 -0700 (MST) Received: from mail1-gui.server.ntli.net (mail1-gui.server.ntli.net [194.168.222.13]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id LAA05461 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 1999 11:42:22 -0700 (MST) Received: from diamond.co.uk ([212.250.111.205]) by mail1-gui.server.ntli.net (Post.Office MTA v3.1 release PO203a ID# 0-33929U70000L2S50) with ESMTP id AAA16988 for ; Mon, 7 Jun 1999 19:30:32 +0100 Message-ID: <375BEDB1.399E8069@diamond.co.uk> Date: Mon, 07 Jun 1999 17:05:05 +0100 From: Jervis Johnson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: WAB Mailing List Subject: [WAB] Quotes (long and slightly off-topic) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] I thought you guys might be interested in a collection of quotes I put together a few years ago. They are almost all to do with wargaming, with a couple of exceptions. I don't agree with the statements made in all of these quotes, but in very case they caused a reaction, be it irritation or admiration. Suffice to say that in my eyes Charles Grant and Donald Featherstone are *still* unsurpassed in their understanding of what this hobby is *really* all about... "...most boys collect model soldiers but only a small proportion stay with the hobby as they grow older. This perceptive minority have passed over a threshold that leads to many hours of pleasure and satisfaction..." Donald Featherstone, Battles With Model Soldiers "... the participants were at pains to point out that they were not just grown men playing with toy soldiers..." Unknown reporter, Central TV Local News, October 1st 1994. "... To line [figures] up and fire toy guns at them would be far too damaging, besides seeming rather childish (he is already a little touchy about letting his friends know he plays with 'toy soldiers'!)." Donald Featherstone, Battles With Model Soldiers. "... only the rarest of individuals continue to regard the wargamer as a psychopath or retarded child." Charles Grant, The Ancient Wargame. "As all wargames articles need a historical intro to give a spurious veneer of respectability and research, here's mine..." C. A. Jackson, A Queen And A Camel - Who Could Ask For Anything More?, Miniature Wargames October 1994. "These rules are designed for fun, and consequently may not provide a realistic representation of future warfare." M.A. Kay, Fast Play Science Fiction Skirmish Rules, Miniature Wargames May 1994. "... The Trolls... well they're outrageous... which as I've said before I dislike." Steve Blease, Miniature Warriors (review column), Role Player Independent December 1993. "So where does this leave the gamer who wants to indulge in what might be termed 'serious' (though I would prefer, 'adult') F&SF gaming..." John Treadaway, Fantasy Facts (review column), Practical Wargamer March/April 1992. "When my mind drifts back now, it is images rather than coherent narrative which present themselves to me: mist rising from horse lines in the thin wind of a morning by the Danube; long marches, the men ankle-deep in mud behind creaking wagons, as the beech and ash woods of Germany enfold us; a hill-top in northern Spain, when snow fell below us in the valleys but we lay on dry, iron-hard ground under the stars; grizzled centurions lashing at the transport horses, yelling at legionaries to put their shoulder to the wheel that was spinning as if in mockery of their efforts; a boy with blood oozing from his mouth as I rested his dying head on my arm and watched his leg kick; my horse flinching from a bush which parted to reveal a painted warrior, himself gibbering with terror; the sigh of the wind coming off a silent sea; the tinkle of bells across desert sands. Army life is a mere collection of moments." Allan Massie, Tiberius. "I am not going to recount the battle. It was like all battles, only worse than most. Truth to tell, accounts of battles rarely make sense. No, that is not true; they make too much sense. Historians give them a shape they don't possess." Allan Massie, Caeser. "Besides, it does away with the delicious little incidents that stick in one's memory, like the time I was defending a castle against Slim Mumford. My representative figure was standing on top of one of the towers when a big rock from a catapult dropped right on its head, killing it instantly, and causing the castle to surrender. I once lost a Thirty Years War battle on account of the same reason; we were using bouncing cannon balls, and I was standing behind three lines of my troops minding my own business when a cannon ball bounced over them and took my head off. Not to mention another occasion when I was assassinated by my second-in-command who did not like the way I was handling the army!" Tony Bath, Rules Forum, Slingshot Magazine month? year? "I cannot take pleasure in writing or playing with a set [of rules] that does not simulate the mental processes of generalship... Formal scales are an important means with which to tie the game to reality." Phil Barker, Rules Forum, Slingshot Magazine month? year? "Any fool can make a complicated game - it takes imagination and reason to make a simple one, and long days and nights." Archie Cass, quoted by Terrance Wise, Athena Wargames Rules for the Ancient Period (480BC-AD61). "... At the outset, of course, I could have simply set out the basic rules of "Battle", loads of tables of ranges, speeds, effectiveness and so on, and laid it down more or less arbitrarily that this is done in such a manner, that is done this way, etc., but I feel that the battlegamer is keen to know just what the reasoning is behind a particular rule, and for my part, I prefer as I go along, to explain just how I came to some conclusion governing some facet of firepower or tactics. It does, I hope, add a measure of realism as well as encouraging the player to do his own research into the finer points of the military art." Charles Grant, Battle! Practical Wargaming. "If a body including a general receives 2 CPF from secondary shooting and hand to hand combat combined, and its hand to hand random factor dice score -5 and +1 or +2, the general is killed." Phil Barker, War Games Rules 3000 BC to 1485 AD, 7th Edition. "... Briefly, the Battle game - and quite definitely the operative word is "game" - is simply an extension of many other games which have come down through history, the sort of game I mean being those like chess and draughts, where two players set out to defeat each other by skill and guile, not unmixed in many cases with a little luck here and there." Charles Grant, Battle! Practical Wargaming. "Whatever scales are chosen by a rules writer, they are extremely artificial, and a good deal of conniving has to go on to make them work. The fact that a wargames figure may stand 25 feet tall (if ground scale is 1mm = 1 foot) illustrates precisely how tenuous is all discussion about ground and figure scales for wargames... It is another misfortune of wargaming that figure bases are always too deep to allow accuracy in such representations. Thus we are left with realism in tatters and can only say - if the ground and figure scales look right on the tabletop, feel right when used, and give realistic results, then their artificiality is unimportant.' Terrance Wise, Athena Wargames Rules for the Ancient Period (480BC-AD61). "The relationship of movement on the wargames table to ground-scale is a facet of the hobby which gives rise to considerable argument, and it is possible to become bogged-down and frustrated by a host of relatively unimportant details if the wargamer delves too deeply into this rather complicated aspect of wargaming. If it is to be acknowledged that the game is the thing, to be played for enjoyment and relaxation and not as a form of military exercise or training, then the campaigner with model soldiers will be well advised to confine himself to a simple set of rules with a reasonable resemblance to the period in which he is fighting. However, if he has the sort of mind that likes to explore far afield and look in to all corners, he will probably, at some time or another in his wargaming career, find himself embroiled in obtuse calculations that seemingly do little to enhance enjoyment of the game. Certainly the author, in more than fifteen years of wargaming, has never consciously considered other than the simplest aspects of movement and the ground-scale, yet has consistently enjoyed in every period of military history campaigns which have provided realistic resemblance to the tactics and manner of fighting of those periods." Donald Featherstone, Battles With Model Soldiers. "...consider the 'Three S's' of campaiging with model soldiers. 1. SOLDIERS 2. SCENARY 3. SITUATIONS [RULES]" Donald Featherstone, Battles With Model Soldiers "...the basic question of why be a wargamer is a most difficult one to answer... There are all sorts of contributory factors... [Of which] by no means the least important [is] the aesthetic appreciation of colour and panoply and the stirring spectacle of a formed bodies of soldiers, whether this be in actual form or in miniature." Charles Grant, The Ancient Wargame. "[Wargaming] leads to many hours of pleasure and satisfaction as [the wargamer applies] skill and research to turn out colourful and realistic model soldiers and to use them intelligently in a highly competitive and fascinating hobby..." Donald Featherstone, Battles With Model Soldiers "It is assumed, incidentally, that the enthusiast will wish to employ figures rather than he should content himself with coloured blocks, counters or such similar monstrosities." Charles Grant, The Ancient Wargame. "I remember when demonstrating my Seven Years Wars rules at the very first wargame convention held in this country... how impressed [Donald Featherstone] was by his first sight of the figures... in substantial units of over 50 figures each, the infantry, that is. This size of unit does help, I think, a plethora of tiny units tending to make a game look sort of 'bitty'... to me there is nothing like the appearance of, say two or three 50 figure Greek hoplite units in line, or the same number of grenadier units of this size in a Seven Years War army... This is really where the wargame [exercises] its maximum appeal, with the precise movement of bodies of troops on a good-sized playing area - it does contain a strong element of the aesthetic, if I may be so bold." Charles Grant, On Matters Military, Battle magazine, August 1977. "Little Wars is the game of kings - for players in an inferior social position. It can be played by boys of every age from twelve to a hundred and fifty - and even latter if the limbs remain sufficiently supple - by girls of the better sort, and by a few rare and gifted women." H. G. Wells, Little Wars. From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Jun 29 08:32:25 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id IAA03007 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 1999 08:32:25 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id IAA08308 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 1999 08:32:24 -0500 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma008259; Tue, 29 Jun 99 08:31:58 -0500 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id FAA18857 for whancients-list; Tue, 29 Jun 1999 05:56:46 -0700 (MST) Received: from mail1-gui.server.ntli.net (mail1-gui.server.ntli.net [194.168.222.13]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id FAA18853 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 1999 05:56:45 -0700 (MST) Received: from diamond.co.uk ([194.168.80.67]) by mail1-gui.server.ntli.net (Post.Office MTA v3.1 release PO203a ID# 0-33929U70000L2S50) with ESMTP id AAA584 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 1999 13:44:52 +0100 Message-ID: <3778BB76.7482B37E@diamond.co.uk> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 13:26:30 +0100 From: Jervis Johnson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: WAB Mailing List Subject: Re: [WAB] AoA Assyrian list questions References: <19990624020155.19479.qmail@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Don asked: > 1) In the section or listing for the Hvy Infantry it says: "Half the unit > may have swords, lt. armor and bows, the other half may have swords, lt. > armor, thrusting spears...". Then it goes on, "Models in a unit can have > different weapon combinations." Does this mean they CAN have it at my > option or do they HAVE to split the unit with different weapons? I would say > it is at my discretion, right? I can have all spears _OR_ bows if I choose. Answer: Strictly by the list (and by history) you should have a mix of models in a unit. However, I really doubt that anybody would have a problem with you fielding a unit where all of the models are armed with the same weapon combinations, but had half of them 'counting as' being armed with a different set of weapons. > 2) These above guys are all considered to be based on 20mm bases, right? We > play line troops are 20mm, lt. infantry and skirmishers are 25mm. So 20mm > for these bowmen too? Answer: Yes. > 3) In the area for Armored Archers & Slingers... It says: "Slingers may fire > even if not in skirmish formation." Does this mean EVERYONE in that section > is considered Lt. infantry? I would assume so from reading this but no where > does it say they are Lt. Infantry. That would mean for someone like me, I'd > have to have two separate archer types painted up, 20mm and 25mm dudes. It > ain't a problem but I just want to know now before I go ahead with these > guys. Answer: The troops are _not_ considered to be light infantry. From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Jun 29 08:32:26 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id IAA03471 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 1999 08:32:25 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id IAA08307 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 1999 08:32:24 -0500 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma008262; Tue, 29 Jun 99 08:32:02 -0500 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id FAA18872 for whancients-list; Tue, 29 Jun 1999 05:57:01 -0700 (MST) Received: from mail1-gui.server.ntli.net (mail1-gui.server.ntli.net [194.168.222.13]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id FAA18866 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 1999 05:56:59 -0700 (MST) Received: from diamond.co.uk ([194.168.80.67]) by mail1-gui.server.ntli.net (Post.Office MTA v3.1 release PO203a ID# 0-33929U70000L2S50) with ESMTP id AAA606 for ; Tue, 29 Jun 1999 13:45:08 +0100 Message-ID: <3778BE89.7E6D1808@diamond.co.uk> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 13:39:37 +0100 From: Jervis Johnson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: WAB Mailing List Subject: Re: [WAB] Fall back in good order -Reply References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Phil wrote the following reply, and I couldn't have said it better myself! Jervis Phil Yates wrote: > > [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] > > The guiding rule here is that 'things happen when they happen'. That > means that since FBIGO happens at the end of the flee move, that's > when it happens. Since troops who have fled off table have fled off table, > and cannot come back, they may rally in some other mythical place, but > they can't come back. > > Phil > > >>> "chris morris" Jun 28, 1999 8:14 > am >>> > what happens if you fall back in good order but roll enough movement to > take you over the table edge? do you reform at the table edge or leave the > table? From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Wed Jul 7 12:01:32 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id MAA50155 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 1999 12:01:31 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id MAA18514 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 1999 12:01:31 -0500 Received: from orion.starlink.com(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma018457; Wed, 7 Jul 99 12:00:50 -0500 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id JAA00566 for whancients-list; Wed, 7 Jul 1999 09:45:59 -0700 (MST) Received: from gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk (mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk [195.182.168.60]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id JAA00562 for ; Wed, 7 Jul 1999 09:45:57 -0700 (MST) Received: by GWMAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Wed, 7 Jul 1999 17:41:25 +0100 Message-ID: <2146350959CED211A51300A0C949BD90350DB8@GWMAIL> From: Jervis Johnson To: whancients@warpzone.com Subject: RE: [WAB] more on hvy chariots Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 17:41:22 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] > >Heavy Chariot Automatic Hits: Only chariot models that can fight cause > >automatic hits. They are bonus hits in addition to the normal hits the > >chariot scores. > > I need for you to just clarify this please... I'll draw up a situation and > > you tell me if I've got this straight, okay? > > 1) Indian hvy chariots charge Alex pikemen. The pikemen get to attack > first > because of their pikes. Then it is the chariots turn to attack and add > their > impact hits. > > or... 2) Indian hvy chariots attack Alex pikemen. The hvy chariots do > their > impact hits, then the pikes go next followed by the regular Indians in the > > hvy chariots. > > From what you have said above plus the re-read from the WAB rule book I'd > say it was number one but I think we have been playing it wrong before. We > > had been playing that that impact hits superceded all 'normal' combat. > Which > of this is true? > > Thanks. > > Don > In Warhammer 5th edition chariot hits take place 'at the start of the combat phase', and precede all other attacks. However, this isn't what is implied in the WAB rules, which are based on the 4th edition WH rulebook when things were a bit more wooly. With my rules lawyers hat on, I'd say that, strictely by the WAB rulebook, a chariots automatic hits occur at the same time the chariot would normally fight, i.e. they are bonus hits that add onto those inflicted by the crew. This works well for heavy chariots, I think, as I have the feeling that they'd rumble at a trot into the enemy line and crush opponents under their wheels. On the other hand the WH 5th version works better for scythed chariots, which will smash into the enemy at a gallop... So, as a general rule automatic hits take place at the same time as the chariot crew fight, but as a house rule let scythed chariots inflict their hits at the start of the combat phase before *anything* else happens. Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Fri Jul 9 08:54:05 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id IAA14737 for ; Fri, 9 Jul 1999 08:54:04 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id IAA29877 for ; Fri, 9 Jul 1999 08:54:04 -0500 Received: from orion.starlink.com(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma029736; Fri, 9 Jul 99 08:53:07 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id GAA27142 for whancients-list; Fri, 9 Jul 1999 06:37:00 -0700 (MST) Received: from gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk (mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk [195.182.168.60]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id GAA27136 for ; Fri, 9 Jul 1999 06:36:59 -0700 (MST) Received: by GWMAIL with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Fri, 9 Jul 1999 14:32:23 +0100 Message-ID: <2146350959CED211A51300A0C949BD903621EB@GWMAIL> From: Jervis Johnson To: whancients@warpzone.com Subject: [WAB] Levies & Bowfire Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 14:32:22 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9003 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Before I start, the following notes are really just me thinking out loud, and should not, under any circumstances be taken as official rules stuff. In particular, I'd appreciate if they were kept off your web sites, as they could cause all kinds of confusion. Basically, I've been thinking over a couple of the topics raised recently, and have some suggestions to make. Levies -------- The discussion on levies has given me a strange feeling of deje vu, mainly becuase we talked about similar things *waaaay* back in the WH 2-4th edition days. In the 3rd edition of the rules, characters had a Ld value and a bonus, say Ld 9+2. The bonus bit was what was added to other units Ld value if the character joined them. So An Ork Hero leading a unit of Goblins would bump their ld from 5 to 7, rather than from 5 to 9. The system got dumped in the 4th edition of the game because it was fiddly to use, and also because in games it seemed to have little real effect, and I must say I don't particularly like the idea of bringing it back into WAB for similar reasons. On the other hand I handicaping levy troops in some way sounds reasonable, as these guys really *should* be horribly unreliable. The best way I've seen suggested of sorting this out is to add a 'Levy' category of troop, and apply special rules to them. These are the rules I think could work: 1. Levy troops may not 'Fall Back In Good Order'. 2. Levy troops must always use their own Ld value for any tests, and do not benefit from the higher Ld value of attached characters, or generals that are within 12". Characters that are part of a levy use the levies Ld value instead of their own. 3. Non levy troops do not have to take panic tests if a unit of levies breaks within 12", or is fleeing within 4" at the start of the turn. Archery --------- Moving along from levies, and onto bowfire. I must say that I'm starting to come round to the idea that archery is probably a bit too effective in WAB. Actually, when we were playtesting the rules, most bows had a +1 save modifier (i.e they increased a targets save!), but we dropped this in the end as it made little difference in the games *we* played. I've emphasised the word we, because I think that our games are rather different to most of the games I read about on the list. For a start they tend to be scenarios with very specific objectives, played on large tables with quite small forces, which tended to make missile troop less useful as they had to move around a lot. And secondly we don't have all that many missile armed troops! Anyway, as I said, based on what I've been hearing, it seems that my initial inclination to tone down the effect of missile weapons for the ancient period had more going for it than I realised. *However*, the other reason for dropping the +1 save mod was that it just didn't 'feel' right - you simply don't get save mods that make armour better in Warhammer. Because of this I'm loath to bring it back, and have instead been considering all together more radical solution, which is to drop the strength of *all* bows and javelins to 2. This would not apply to Medieval Crossbows and Longbows, or to heavy throwing spears like the pilum, which I think should stay as they are, and probably shouldn't apply to slings. Now before I cause total panic, please remember these are just *ideas* (although I rather like them!). What do you guys think? Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Wed Jul 21 08:35:05 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id IAA67169 for ; Wed, 21 Jul 1999 08:35:04 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id IAA10541 for ; Wed, 21 Jul 1999 08:35:04 -0500 Received: from orion.starlink.com(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma010460; Wed, 21 Jul 99 08:34:12 -0500 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id GAA00617 for whancients-list; Wed, 21 Jul 1999 06:18:18 -0700 (MST) Received: from gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk (mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk [195.182.168.60]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id GAA00613 for ; Wed, 21 Jul 1999 06:18:17 -0700 (MST) Received: by mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Wed, 21 Jul 1999 14:13:19 +0100 Message-ID: <2146350959CED211A51300A0C949BD903B9989@mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk> From: Jervis Johnson To: whancients@warpzone.com Subject: [WAB] More On Levies Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 14:13:17 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Thanks for the feedback on the levies and bowfire post. Based on what I've read I'm going to knock the Strength 2 bows idea on the head (but I've been liking the stuff I've been seeing on slings, etc), and try out the following version of the Levies rule in my next game. Before I write up the rule, however, I'll just say, once again, that this isn't an official change to the game, just something that I'll be trying out in my own games. Personally I don't think you can ever get a perfect set of wargame rules, and there's always something I want to tweak after I've played a game. To me this is part of what makes wargaming such a fun hobby - with wargame rules you can get in there and monkey about with the game mechanics in a way you can't with, say, a computer game. So, when I play a game I'm almost always trying out a new house rule or two. Not all of the house rules work, and many are cast aside never to be used again, but a few stick and end up becoming part of the core rules to the game, and with these, at some time or another they end up getting published and then become part of the 'official' (gosh, how I hate that word!) cannon of the rules. Until then, however, they should be looked upon as nothing more than ideas and house rules, to be used or cast aside in the same manner as any other house rule. Or in other words, it ain't official until you see it in print! Now, back to those levies... Levy Rules -------------- 1. Levy troops may not 'Fall Back In Good Order'. 2. Levy troops must always use their own Ld value for any tests, and do not benefit from the higher Ld value of attached characters, or generals that are within 12". Characters that are part of a levy use the levies Ld value instead of their own. (A harsh rule, I know, but to be honest I can't see levies being inspired by the presence of a leader). 3. Levy troops may not have a BS of higher than 2. Count any with a BS of 3+ as having a BS of 2 instead. 4. Levies fear all enemy units unless they outnumber them by 2-1 or more. Who Are Levies? --------------------- All of which begs the question, which troops count as levies? Here's my starting list... what do you guys think? Persian Levy Infantry Levy Phalanx Infantry, Light Infantry & Skirmishers (Alexander & Successors list) Indian Militia Longbowmen and Swordsmen Republican Levy Light Infantry (there some arguments against including these, but saves confusian to include them) Late Roman Limitanei Cataphract list Levy Spearmen, City Militia, Levy Archers Nomad horde Human Shields Samurai list Peasants That's all for now.... Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Wed Aug 4 08:14:38 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id IAA13329 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 1999 08:14:38 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id IAA17030 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 1999 08:12:33 -0500 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma016951; Wed, 4 Aug 99 08:11:02 -0500 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id FAA21056 for whancients-list; Wed, 4 Aug 1999 05:44:21 -0700 (MST) Received: from gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk (mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk [195.182.168.60]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id FAA21052 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 1999 05:44:19 -0700 (MST) Received: by mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Wed, 4 Aug 1999 13:38:51 +0100 Message-ID: <2146350959CED211A51300A0C949BD9044514A@mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk> From: Jervis Johnson To: whancients@warpzone.com Subject: RE: [WAB] Question about darts... Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 13:38:48 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Clay is quite right, you can't throw darts when you charge, though you can use them as a missile weapon if you are charged yourself (i.e. you can stand and fire, or fire and flee). During playtesting we tried out several variants of the rules for 'additional light throwing weapons' like javelins and darts, which gave an advantage to charging troops that were armed with them (generally they got to re-roll missed hits). However we found that this was just too much of an advantage over troops that didn't have such weapons, and so decided to leave them as they are in Warhammer (fantasy), where they are treated as missile weapons and that's that! Sometimes it's hard to come up with a rule that gives a *minor* advantage to troops armed with a minor secondary weapon, much as the designer might like to be able to do so. So, rather than create a situation where darts became some kind of a super weapon, we erred on the side of down-playing their effect in the game. Jervis From JervisJ@games-workshop.co.uk Tue Oct 12 07:11:20 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id HAA13444 for ; Tue, 12 Oct 1999 07:11:20 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id HAA00496 for ; Tue, 12 Oct 1999 07:10:14 -0500 Received: from nodnsquery(195.182.168.60) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V5.0) id xma000471; Tue, 12 Oct 99 07:10:09 -0500 Received: by mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Tue, 12 Oct 1999 13:03:17 +0100 Message-ID: <2146350959CED211A51300A0C949BD9068E20D@mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk> From: Jervis Johnson To: Anthony Edwards Subject: RE: I've got a personal question for you Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 13:03:14 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 9013 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Hello Anthony, Thanks for the email, and apologies for the late reply - I've had flu and missed a few (more) days off work. An interesting question; I think I feel about mailing lists in pretty much the same way as any other member. They can be fun and interesting or irritating and frustrating by equal measure! The bottom line is that I get the same out of them as any other member. Probably the most difficult thing about mailing lists from the point of view of being a designer is that you can't just particiapte and join in the discusions, and people tend to take anything you say far too seriously. I must admit I've often considerd creating a new email address for myself and joining a list under an alias, just so that I can join in with things 'normally'. I've never done this because it would be a bit dishonest, but it's still a very tempting idea. The other problem I find about being a member of a list for a game I've designed is that I could comment on just about *everything* that comes up. When I first joined the 40K mailing list, this is just waht I did, and I soon found that I was devoting almost all my time and energy to the list rather than other things like my work. This was a valuable lesson, and now I restrict myself from joining in unless I have the time to do it. I also tend to try and restrict myself to answering questions where I *know* the answer, or to sending in ideas to be discussed by the list. Thanks again for an interesting question. Jervis > ---------- > From: Anthony Edwards > Sent: Tuesday, October 5, 1999 18:41 > To: Jervis Johnson > Subject: I've got a personal question for you > > Jervis, > > Don & I were talking about something entirely different, > but he asked the question below. How DO you feel about > the warhammer ancients mailing list? Being the neo-celebrity > sort, I can guarantee if you actually get the time to read > this & the luxury of being able to respond, it WILL NOT > go past Don & I. Are we annoying, something to do, a resource > for ideas, or just cheap & dirty market surveys. > > Just curious. > > And, btw, you did miss a really good discussion from > Phil Yates about the cost of light cavalry. You might > find the digests of that one worth reading. > > > A big fan, > > Tony > > -------- Original Message -------- > From: "Donald Effinger" > Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: [WAB] Don's request to Jervis > To: aedwards > > [boring irrelevant stuff snipped...] > > Hahahahahaha... you mean it isn't entertaining for everyone? I wonder how > JJ > views the list? Is is with a distain, entertainment, testing site or > annoyance? He seems to appear at odd times and is invisible at others. I > know he looks down at the NG's for sure and also the other lists even > though > he claims publically he likes the 40k one. I doubt it. > > Don > > ______________________________________________________ > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > From errors-333285-158-aedwards=tripos.com@onelist.com Fri Oct 22 09:28:00 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id JAA69711 for ; Fri, 22 Oct 1999 09:27:59 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id JAA24713 for ; Fri, 22 Oct 1999 09:28:13 -0500 Received: from nodnsquery(209.207.164.227) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V5.0) id xma024581; Fri, 22 Oct 99 09:27:19 -0500 Received: (qmail 28119 invoked by alias); 22 Oct 1999 14:28:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 28112 invoked from network); 22 Oct 1999 14:28:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (209.207.164.241) by pop1.onelist.com with QMQP; 22 Oct 1999 14:28:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk) (195.182.168.60) by mta2.onelist.com with SMTP; 22 Oct 1999 14:33:02 -0000 Received: by mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:18:50 +0100 Message-ID: <2146350959CED211A51300A0C949BD907057F5@mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk> From: Jervis Johnson To: WABlist@onelist.com, WAB Mailing List Date: Fri, 22 Oct 1999 15:18:49 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Mailing-List: list WABlist@onelist.com; contact WABlist-owner@onelist.com Delivered-To: mailing list WABlist@onelist.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Reply-to: WABlist@onelist.com Subject: [WABlist] Points Costs & Army List Philosophy Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Mozilla-Status: 8003 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 From: Jervis Johnson The debate on points costs has really been very interesting. More than anything I think it shows that there are 'more than one way to skin a cat'. Basically, the way you approach points values will be reflected in the army list you write. As I see writing army lists as more of an art than a science, and as something that should to an extent reflect the nature of the writer, I think it's a *good* thing to encourage a number of approaches to writing army lists (and therefore applying points values), as this will allow the list writier greater freedom to show his own unique perspective on an army. Of course there are limits; most importantly whatever points values that are used need to create armies that are pretty much balanced, or at least as balanced as such a subjective issue ever can be. However this still allows a lot of flexability from list to list, because as has already been mentioned, the points value a model is 'worth' is not just based on its stat line but also the 'shape' of the army of which it is a part. To go slightly off topic to illustrate th point, I've been doing a lot of work on the Space Wolves list for 40K recently, and have greatly reduced the cost of the Wolf Guard models in the list. More or less identical equivalents in the Space Marine list cost more, but the reduced cost for the Space Wolves characters is balanced out by a far more restrictive range of choices in their army list. *However*, I didn't have to construct the list this way, and indeed one of my playtesters has argued very strongly for a list that was nothing more than a minor varient of the Space Marine list. Since I'm the guy writing the list I got my way, but this doesn't change the fact that *either* method would have been equally valid, and equally as balanced (assuming I havn't cocked up of course, which is by no means unknown : (). So, in a fine example of fence-sitting, I'm saying that I can see both sides of this argument, and would be happy to see lists designed using either method for WAB. On a similar and related subject, I'm also quite happy for their to be lists around that allow players to create rather ahistorical armies, like a Roman army with a lot of elephants in it, for example. I've said this before, but I'll say it again; I've got nothing intrinsically against lists that allow this amount of flexability, and in fact I personally think it is rather a good thing. This is *not* to say that I think all other list writers should adopt such an approach, just that as long as a list is balanced I, personally, see nothing wrong with letting players have a free hand. Or to put it another way, if someone wants to collect a Roman army made up of all of the models that they think look cool, and which bears no resemblance to any actual Roman armies that took the field, then this doesn't bother me all that much. It's not what *I'd* choose to do, but hey, its a free world. Also, I have to say that if Trajan had turned around and said "I've had this great idea, get me 100 Elephants and a 1,000 camels for my army before we invade Dacia..." I can't see any earthly reason why he'd have been refused. Who knows, perhaps one day we'll find Trajan's Column II and find out that he did... Of course there is an important caveat to the above, and that's keeping the game balanced and fun. If a player maxing out on a troop type unbalances the game then this is a problem that needs to be fixed. However, that is quite a seperate issue as to whether fielding ahistorical armies, even grossly ahistorical ones, is wrong per se. Unfortunately the two things tended to end up being linked together, as player will often use an opponent's 'unrealistic army composition' as an excuse for their own defeat. Let's face it, none of us like to lose, and i know that I can be *very* creative in looking for a reason other than my own incompatence to explain a defeat ; ). So, I'd say that criticising a list *just* because it allows a player to field ahistorical armies is wrong, but that criticising a list because it allows a player to field unfair armies is perfectly justifiable. Now, time to get back to work on my Hollywood Ancient Battles list, so that I can have Xena, Julius Caeser *and* chartiots in my Roman army! Jervis --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ---------------------------- GRAB THE GATOR! FREE SOFTWARE DOES ALL THE TYPING FOR YOU! Tired of filling out forms and remembering passwords? Gator fills in forms and passwords with just one click! Comes with $50 in free coupons! Click Here ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Community email addresses: Post message: WABlist@onelist.com Subscribe: WABlist-subscribe@onelist.com Unsubscribe: WABlist-unsubscribe@onelist.com List owner: WABlist-owner@onelist.com Shortcut URL to this page: http://www.onelist.com/community/WABlist From sentto-333285-1028-aedwards=tripos.com@onelist.com Thu Nov 11 09:13:16 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id JAA43753 for ; Thu, 11 Nov 1999 09:13:16 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id JAA25011 for ; Thu, 11 Nov 1999 09:13:55 -0600 Received: from pop4.onelist.com(209.207.164.237) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V5.0) id xma024902; Thu, 11 Nov 99 09:13:28 -0600 Received: (qmail 1500 invoked by alias); 11 Nov 1999 15:13:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 1458 invoked from network); 11 Nov 1999 15:13:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (209.207.164.239) by pop4.onelist.com with QMQP; 11 Nov 1999 15:13:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk) (195.182.168.60) by mta1.onelist.com with SMTP; 11 Nov 1999 15:13:24 -0000 Received: by mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Thu, 11 Nov 1999 15:04:16 -0000 Message-ID: <2146350959CED211A51300A0C949BD907E9DEC@mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk> From: Jervis Johnson To: WABlist@onelist.com Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 15:04:13 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Mailing-List: list WABlist@onelist.com; contact WABlist-owner@onelist.com Delivered-To: mailing list WABlist@onelist.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Reply-to: WABlist@onelist.com Subject: [WABlist] WAB & AoA Errata Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 From: Jervis Johnson As promised, here is the official errata sheet for WAB & AoA. Hopefully I haven't missed anything off, but if I have I'm sure you guys will remind me : ). Jervis ERRATA SHEET FOR WARHAMMER ANCIENT BATTLES & ARMIES OF ANTIQUITY This sheet includes all of the important errata for Warhammer Ancient Battles (WAB) and Armies of Antiquity (AoA). Some minor corrections have been left out of this sheet, on the basis that the correction will cause far more confusion than it resolves - or, to put it another way, the cure would be worse than the illness! Please note that these corrections can only be used for battles where both players knew about them before the battle began. Jervis Johnson, 11/11/99 Warhammer Ancient Battles Rerolls: A number of rules allow a unit to reroll a dice roll. Unless stated otherwise a reroll may be used every time the dice roll is failed, rather than once per battle. However, a single dice roll may not be rerolled more than once, and the result of the second roll must be accepted. P18, Charges: Charging units should be moved one at a time. If one unit's move blocks another unit from making a charge, then that other unit counts as having made a failed charge. Note that a unit whose charge is blocked may not redirect their charge against another unit, or 'swing round' to hit the flank or rear of the unit it was going to charge. P20, Marching: The only manoeuvre a marching unit can carry out is a wheel. It may not change formation, turn or reform. P26, Light Armour Save: Light armour provides a 6+ infantry save and a 5+ cavalry save, not 5+ and 4+ saves respectively as shown on the chart. P29, Which Models May Fight: Models may fight an opponent if they are touching diagonally (i.e. models can fight if the corners of their bases are in contact). P55, Shooting Through Skirmishers: Note that the 'gaps' between models that are in skirmish formation don't block the line of sight of an enemy unit. If you want to block fire from enemy units then you need to form your skirmishers into a 'cloud' several lines deep, so that models in the rear rows block the gaps in the front rows. P55, Skirmishers in Hand To Hand Combat: All the models from a charging unit that is in skirmish formation must contact the facing that a 'formed' unit would contact. Place any skirmishers that are left over behind the ones in the front rank. P57, Chariots: Unless a rule states otherwise then chariots are effected by psychology in the same way as cavalry. For example, if an enemy unit causes fear in cavalry then it causes fear in chariots as well. Leaders, standard bearers and musicians replace crew models, and thus you can possibly have several in a single chariot if desired. P58, Chariot Squadrons: Unengaged chariot models move into an ongoing combat in the same manner as skirmishers. Also note that excess wounds caused on engaged chariots 'carry on' to other chariots in the same squadron. P125, Roman Army List: Increase the cost of elephants to 125 points plus 8 per crew. P129, Barbarian Army List: Delete the Warrior On Foot line in the chariot entry. It is not needed and is not used (the warriors attacks are included in the chariot's characteristics). Armies Of Antiquity Inside front cover: 'Gousalves' should be amended to 'Gonsalves'. Inside front cover: The Battle of Cremona is attributed to 'Tacticus' instead of 'Tacitus'. P8, Trojan War: The general and any heroes must ride in chariots, bought at additional cost from the Chariotry section of the list. P13, Achaemenid Persians Spara Bearers: Change the second and forth 'bullets' as follows: A unit that remains stationary in the movement phase may set up a spara barrier. A spara barrier is knocked down if the unit moves or at the end of the first round of combat that it fights (whether it wins or loses). Also, note that a spara barrier counts as an obstacle, so units fighting across them or defending behind them may not use their rank bonus in the first round of combat. P14, Achaemenid Persians Allies: The Persian army may include allied troops from the Ancient Greek army list as part of their Special Troops allocation. P14, Ancient Greek: The army general may be upgraded to a Spartan army general at a cost of +25 pts. Spartan army generals are drilled and stubborn. Elephants, scythed and heavy chariots may charge the front of a phalanx, light chariots may not. P16, Alexander & His Successors: Unengaged models in a wedge may only use their attacks against an enemy unit that was charged by the wedge. Hypaspists may be given light armour at +2 pts per model. Elephants, scythed and heavy chariots may charge the front of a phalanx, light chariots may not. Also, please note that the rules for the Macedonian phalanx are meant to be different to those of the Ancient Greek phalanx. The change represents the professionalism of Macendonian and Successor phalangites compared to the citizen militia that made up a typical Ancient Greek phalanx. P18, Ancient Indian: The Indian Longbow was a long and rather unwieldy weapon. Because of this models armed with longbows do not get to shoot twice if mounted in a chariot or riding an elephant. Indian swordsmen may replace their double-handed swords with throwing spears and javelins at no additional cost. P25, Late Roman: The Comitatense option for Late Roman Heavy cavalry is in fact unlimited and the 0-1 restriction should be ignored. Heavy cavalry may replace their shield for a large shield for +1 point. In addition the Special Rule for Heavy Cavalry should read "Cataphracts use the special rules in the Cataphract army list." rather than the sentence that is actually printed there. Also, please note that if you are using the Craig Davey option then the army may include units of stubborn/drilled Guard or units of Guards using the increased profile, not both. P30, Nomadic Hordes: A unit that uses feigned flight and flees off the table is lost and may not return later in the battle. P34, Saxons: The single unit of Huscarls can have a leader, standard and so on, and these can be allocated out to units of Fryd along with other models. If the Fryd have their own such models, then leaders work normally (+1 attack each if in contact with the enemy), but there is no additional bonus for having multiple standards and musicians. P40, Crusaders: Please note that Knights and Sergeants are mounted on warhorses, even though the characteristic line for the warhorse was missed out. See the entries for the army general or army battle standard for the warhorses characteristics. P45, Samurai: Increase the cost of Samurai cavalry to 35 points and Samurai infantry to 20 points. Wakato should have a Ld value of 5. P46, Cavalry Counter-Charges: Light chariots may counter-charge, but elephants, heavy chariots and scythed chariots may not. P46, Falling Back In Good Order: In circumstances where a unit would normally break automatically (if beaten in combat by charging Norman Knights for example), then a unit will automatically fall back in good order instead. Units that move off the table while falling back in good order are lost and may not return. P46, Characters in Chariots and on Elephants: A character whose armour save is worse (after modification for shield bearers etc.) than that of the his mount may use the mount's saving throw instead. All his other characteristics remain the same, even if lower than those of the mount. P46, Elephant Howdahs: The lists make no mention of which elephants have howdahs. To resolve this, if the Elephant model (as sold) has a howdah treat the model as having one in game terms. If no howdah is on the model it does not gain this bonus. Converted howdahs are fine if you've got some historical basis for giving the elephant a howdah. P47, Ancient Britons: In section 4 replace the third 'bullet point' (the one that starts 'The player controlling...') with the following: * To represent the trick of the warriors in the chariot dismounting to fight on foot, the formation counts as having a rank bonus of +1 if there are 8-11 models in the unit, and +2 if there are 12 or more models in the unit. --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ---------------------------- GRAB THE GATOR! FREE SOFTWARE DOES ALL THE TYPING FOR YOU! Tired of filling out forms and remembering passwords? Gator fills in forms and passwords with just one click! Comes with $50 in free coupons! Click Here ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Community email addresses: Post message: WABlist@onelist.com Subscribe: WABlist-subscribe@onelist.com Unsubscribe: WABlist-unsubscribe@onelist.com List owner: WABlist-owner@onelist.com Shortcut URL to this page: http://www.onelist.com/community/WABlist From sentto-333285-1234-aedwards=tripos.com@onelist.com Mon Nov 15 03:54:51 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id DAA94166 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 1999 03:54:50 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id DAA11558 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 1999 03:58:13 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.207.164.229) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V5.0) id xma011522; Mon, 15 Nov 99 03:57:48 -0600 Received: (qmail 9544 invoked by alias); 15 Nov 1999 09:57:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 9515 invoked from network); 15 Nov 1999 09:57:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (209.207.164.241) by pop1.onelist.com with QMQP; 15 Nov 1999 09:57:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk) (195.182.168.60) by mta2.onelist.com with SMTP; 15 Nov 1999 10:03:17 -0000 Received: by mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:48:25 -0000 Message-ID: <2146350959CED211A51300A0C949BD90805F6A@mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk> From: Jervis Johnson To: WABlist@onelist.com Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 09:48:22 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Mailing-List: list WABlist@onelist.com; contact WABlist-owner@onelist.com Delivered-To: mailing list WABlist@onelist.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Reply-to: WABlist@onelist.com Subject: [WABlist] WAB Errata Questions Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 From: Jervis Johnson A few questions have arisen over the errata I sent out (though less than I thought would turn up!). I'll deal with the points raised below. First of all, the 'old' errata sheet from May was really a first draft, and shouldn't be used anymore. The feedback I received about it was extremely useful, however, and helped me putting togehter this final version. The main changes from the previous version are the removal of any new rules, and also the removal of some bits of errata that simply caused confusion without improving the game. The points cost of longbows is a good example of this; the points cost of longbows is actually about a point out in the lists in AoA (I goofed!). However correcting it does little other than cause confusion, so I've left it off the errata sheet. Note that this doesn't mean that players working out their own variant army lists should not use the correct value, just that I decided in this case the cure was worse than the disease! The other issue that has been discused is the increased cost of Samurai infantry and cavalry. The reason that I did this was because feedback and evidence from games has shown that Samurai armies clearly have an advantage compared to other armies. One method of dealing with this would be to come up with new rules that 'crock them', but as already mentioned I decided not to add rules on the errata sheet. This meant I needed to adjust the points values of some of the troops in the army to reflect their true value, which is what I've done. Jervis --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ---------------------------- GET WHAT YOU DESERVE! A NextCard Platinum VISA: Get an APR as low as 9.9 Fixed & NO annual fee! Apply online today! Click Here ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Community email addresses: Post message: WABlist@onelist.com Subscribe: WABlist-subscribe@onelist.com Unsubscribe: WABlist-unsubscribe@onelist.com List owner: WABlist-owner@onelist.com Shortcut URL to this page: http://www.onelist.com/community/WABlist From sentto-333285-2234-aedwards=tripos.com@onelist.com Fri Dec 3 06:06:17 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id GAA88793 for ; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 06:06:16 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id GAA01379 for ; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 06:06:15 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.207.164.209) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V5.0) id xma001365; Fri, 3 Dec 99 06:05:49 -0600 Received: (qmail 8596 invoked by alias); 3 Dec 1999 12:05:34 -0000 Received: (qmail 8590 invoked from network); 3 Dec 1999 12:05:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (209.207.164.241) by pop2.onelist.com with QMQP; 3 Dec 1999 12:05:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gwmail.games-workshop.co.uk) (195.182.168.60) by mta2.onelist.com with SMTP; 3 Dec 1999 12:11:10 -0000 Received: by mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id ; Fri, 3 Dec 1999 12:05:27 -0000 Message-ID: <2146350959CED211A51300A0C949BD908CDE06@mailserver.games-workshop.co.uk> From: Jervis Johnson To: WABlist@onelist.com Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 12:05:24 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Mailing-List: list WABlist@onelist.com; contact WABlist-owner@onelist.com Delivered-To: mailing list WABlist@onelist.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Reply-to: WABlist@onelist.com Subject: [WABlist] Trojans / Bronze Age Lists Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 From: Jervis Johnson A few days ago Laurence Baldwin asked if the new Chariot Wars lists made the North European Bronze Age list that had appeared in WI out of date. I asked Nigel and he gave me the following reply. SOME FURTHER THOUGHTS ON EUROPEAN BRONZE AGE ARMY LISTS N.R.Stillman Its brilliant to see how much interest has been stirred up by the European Bronze Age army list. Another obscure period is coming out of the darkness! The Nordic Bronze Age list covers the Middle Bronze Age but probably does not go as far as it could to cover the Later Bronze Age as well. The Chariot Wars Trojan list could be used as the basis of a Later Bronze Age European army. Really, the regions deserve seperate lists in order to characterise the cultures. As a temporary measure to allow for Late Bronze Age European warriors armed with javelins, slashing swords and armour (Urnfield culture) in the Nordic Bronze Age list, simply include these options for the warriors, or include the 'Sea-Peoples' or 'later type' spearman as described in the Trojan list. This list entry would be labelled 'Urnfield Warriors'. I actually considered this in an early draft of the Nordic list and then decided not to include it for brevity, together with other variant cultural troop types. In my opinion the long spear may have lingered on as a Nordic regional tradition, while the throwing spear/javelin became the Central European/Aegean tradition. In Greece, one tradition replaced the other, and this pattern was probably repeated elsewhere. Of course, with the migratory inclinations of warrior warbands and trade or capture of prestige weapons, overlap would be considerable, probably even within the same warband. Within the North European region the Urnfield type warriors perhaps made greatest impact in Britain and the West. A thorough study of weapon finds from different regions would probably sort it all out. The long thrusting spears described in the Nordic Bronze age list and depicted on foundry models are correct and correspond to such evidence as artefacts and Scandinavian rock art. These carvings show many examples warriors using very long spears in both hands, with their shields slung on their backs. The v-notch characteristic of the round shields was perhaps originally intended to rest the spear or to catch the spearhead of an opponent as a way of parrying his thrust. Later it became a decorative rather than functional feature. Spearheads of this period tend to be long and heavy, and sometimes have butt-spikes and are very much like early Mycenaean examples. The Foundry Nordic Bronze Age range includes a wide variation of figures, some corresponding to Urnfield warrior chiefs. This is not because Foundry are confused, but was deliberately planned in order to provide just the kind of variation within a range to allow imaginative and informed player to find the figures needed to adapt variant armies from the range. Their research is always thorough and they then form their own opinions and follow them. Also, they have to address the problems of manufacture and have actually assisted conversions in that it is easier for someone to cut down a long spear to make a short spear than the other way around. It is the same with army lists. Figures and lists are the hardware of the hobby. It is the research and flexibility of the player that enables them to be put together in different ways to make different armies. The Bronze Age in Europe lasted from circa 3000 BC to circa 600 BC and is represented by various cultures which flourished in different parts of Europe. In my opinion, the following phases of warfare can be identified (overlapping dates are deliberate and all dates apply new chronology): * Late Neolithic/Early Bronze Age, c.3000-c.2000 BC. Examples: Beaker Culture, Kurgan Culture. Archery, using Neolithic longbows continued to play a significant part in warfare. Warriors used stone battle axes and these were gradually replaced by bronze battle axes of various types and sizes, including the dagger-halberds of Ireland. Kurgan cultures may have introduced chariots into warfare. This phase corresponds to the Old and Middle-Kingdom Egyptian style army. * Middle Bronze Age, c.2500 BC Ò c.1200 BC. Examples: Wessex Culture, Nordic Bronze Age, Unetice culture, Minoan, Early Mycenaean. Archery becomes less important (but in Middle east, selfbow is replaced by composite bow and remains imnportant). Tanged and later, socketed spearheads appear. Thrusting spears of varying lengths are used. Battle axes fade out. Daggers, rapiers and finally swords appear. Horses and chariots appear. Shields and various forms of body armour appear. This phase would correspond to the Sumerian, Akkadian, and Minoan (large shields used in conjunction with long spears). * Late Bronze Age, c.1300 BC Ò 700 BC Examples: Urnfield Culture, Villanovan Culture, Nuragic Culture, beginning of Hallstatt Culture, Later Mycenaean Culture, Sea-Peoples. Rise of horse drawn chariots (zenith of chariot age in Middle East). Long thrusting spears and big shields are replaced by short throwing spears, javelins, long slashing swords (carps-tongue swords in Western Europe) and small round shields (v-notch types) and bucklers. Body armour of sheet bronze appears. Corresponds to Mycenaean, Sea Peoples, Hittite, Hyksos, Canaanite, Hurrian, New Kingdom Egyptian armies (throwing spears already in use, and battle-axes continue in use) and Shang Dynasty (bows, halberds, chariots) in China. * Early Iron Age, c.800 BC Ò c.500 BC. Chariots become heavier and decline in use (except in Britain). Cavalry appears and becomes better. Infantry use short thrusting and throwing spears and may sometimes use javelins in addition. Armour is used by wealthier warriors. Battle-axe no longer in use. Slings and javelins may have become more important infantry missile weapons than the bow (except in Middle East) Mixed spearman/archer formations in Middle East. This phase would correspond to Assyrian, Urartian, Lydian, Phrygian, Neo-Hittite, Celtic, Etruscan, Archaic Hoplite, Persian? The Trojan List covers the Middle (Minoan/Early Mycenaean) and Late (Later Mycenaean/Sea-Peoples) phases in the Aegean region. The Nordic Bronze age mainly focuses on the Middle phase in North West Europe. Add the option of short spears/javelins to the warriors to cover the later phase. There would certainly be centuries of overlap between fighting styles in Europe and there were probably decades of overlap in fighting styles in the Aegean region. Contingents following variant regional traditions might occur in the same army. Of course it will be nice to write updated Bronze age European lists in due course. --------------------------- ONElist Sponsor ---------------------------- GRAB THE GATOR! FREE SOFTWARE DOES ALL THE TYPING FOR YOU! Tired of filling out forms and remembering passwords? Gator fills in forms and passwords with just one click! Comes with $50 in free coupons! Click Here ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Community email addresses: Post message: WABlist@onelist.com Subscribe: WABlist-subscribe@onelist.com Unsubscribe: WABlist-unsubscribe@onelist.com List owner: WABlist-owner@onelist.com Shortcut URL to this page: http://www.onelist.com/community/WABlist From sentto-3783804-1078-1006795620-aedwards=tripos.com@returns.groups.yahoo.com Mon Nov 26 11:27:39 2001 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via ESMTP id LAA76722 for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 11:27:38 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (8.8.8+Sun) id LAA21397 for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 11:27:38 -0600 (CST) Received: from n25.groups.yahoo.com(216.115.96.75) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V5.5) id xma021381; Mon, 26 Nov 01 11:27:01 -0600 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-3783804-1078-1006795620-aedwards=tripos.com@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [10.1.1.222] by n25.groups.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 26 Nov 2001 17:26:28 -0000 X-Sender: JervisJ@games-workshop.co.uk X-Apparently-To: WABPunicWG@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_0_1); 26 Nov 2001 17:26:59 -0000 Received: (qmail 7272 invoked from network); 26 Nov 2001 17:26:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (216.115.97.171) by m4.grp.snv.yahoo.com with QMQP; 26 Nov 2001 17:26:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mailsrv1.games-workshop.co.uk) (195.182.168.60) by mta3.grp.snv.yahoo.com with SMTP; 26 Nov 2001 17:26:59 -0000 Received: by MAILSRV1 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 26 Nov 2001 17:29:07 -0000 Message-ID: To: "'WABPunicWG@yahoogroups.com'" X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) From: Jervis Johnson X-Yahoo-Profile: jervisjuk MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: list WABPunicWG@yahoogroups.com; contact WABPunicWG-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list WABPunicWG@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 17:29:03 -0000 Reply-To: WABPunicWG@yahoogroups.com Subject: [WABPunicWG] Polybius would approve Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 8003 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 I've attached an extensive quote from Polybius (see after my sig - it's much more interesting than my waffle!), and judging from what he says he'd probably quite approve of the ReRoman rules as they are at the moment (either version!). Although you've all read this before, I think its worth reading it again, as it is without question the primary primary source for the type of battles being discussed. My own take having rear the quote again is that it looks like the ReRomans are working OK, but that Phalanx need to be much less easy to manoeuvre than is currently the case, and much more vulnerable to flank attacks. Basically, there need to be rules that make a player fell "gee wizz, my phalanx is tough but just keeps on getting hit in the flank... I wish I had some troops like those legionaries to use..." Anyway, read the quote and you'll see what I mean. Best regards, Jervis Johnson Head Fanatic Visit the Fanatic website at http://www.games-workshop.com/fanatic/ The Histories, Book XVIII, Chapters 28-32: In my sixth book I made a promise, still unfulfilled, of taking a fitting opportunity of drawing a comparison between the arms of the Romans and Macedonians, and their respective system of tactics, and pointing out how they differ for better or worse from each other. I will now endeavor by a reference to actual facts to fulfil that promise. For since in former times the Macedonian tactics proved themselves by experience capable of conquering those of Asia and Greece; while the Roman tactics sufficed to conquer the nations of Africa and all those of Western Europe; and since in our own day there have been numerous opportunities of comparing the men as well as their tactics, it will be, I think, a useful and worthy task to investigate their differences, and discover why it is that the Romans conquer and carry off the palm from their enemies in the operations of war: that we may not put it all down to Fortune, and congratulate them on their good luck, as the thoughtless of mankind do; but, from a knowledge of the true causes, may give their leaders the tribute of praise and admiration which they deserve. Now as to the battles which the Romans fought with Hannibal and the defeats which they sustained in them, I need say no more. It was not owing to their arms or their tactics, but to the skill and genius of Hannibal that they met with those defeats: and that I made quite clear in my account of the battles themselves. And my contention is supported by two facts. First, by the conclusion of the war: for as soon as the Romans got a general of ability comparable with that of Hannibal, victory was not long in following their banners. Secondly, Hannibal himself, being dissatisfied with the original arms of his men, and having immediately after his first victory furnished his troops with the arms of the Romans, continued to employ them thenceforth to the end. Pyrrhus, again, availed himself not only of the arms, but also of the troops of Italy, placing a maniple of Italians and a company of his own phalanx alternately, in his battles against the Romans. Yet even this did not enable him to win; the battles were somehow or another always indecisive. It was necessary to speak first on these points, to anticipate any instances which might seem to make against my theory. I will now return to my comparison. Many considerations may easily convince us that, if only the phalanx has its proper formation and strength, nothing can resist it face to face or withstand its charge. For as a man in close order of battle occupies a space of three feet; and as the length of the sarissae are sixteen cubits according to the original design, which has been reduced in practice to fourteen; and as of these fourteen four must be deducted, to allow for the weight in front; it follows clearly that each hoplite will have ten cubits of his sarissa projecting beyond his body, when he lowers it with both hands, as he advances against the enemy: hence, too, though the men of the second, third, and fourth rank will have their sarissae projecting farther beyond the front rank than the men of the fifth, yet even these last will have two cubits of their sarissae beyond the front rank; if only the phalanx is properly formed and the men close up properly both flank and rear, like the description in Homer: So buckler pressed on buckler; helm on helm; And man on man; and waving horse-hair plumes In polished head-piece mingled, as they swayed In order: in such serried rank they stood. [Iliad, 13.131] And if my description is true and exact, it is clear that in front of each man of the front rank there will be five sarissae projecting to distances varying by a descending scale of two cubits. With this point in our minds, it will not be difficult to imagine what the appearance and strength of the whole phalanx is likely to be, when, with lowered sarissae, it advances to the charge sixteen deep. Of these sixteen ranks, all above the fifth are unable to reach with their sarissae far enough to take actual part in the fighting. They, therefore, do not lower them, but hold them with the points inclined upwards over the shoulders of the ranks in front of them, to shield the heads of the whole phalanx; for the sarissae are so closely serried, that they repel missiles which have carried over the front ranks and might fall upon the heads of those in the rear. These rear ranks, however, during an advance, press forward those in front by the weight of their bodies; and thus make the charge very forcible, and at the same time render it impossible for the front ranks to face about. Such is the arrangement, general and detailed of the phalanx. It remains now to compare with it the peculiarities and distinctive features of the Roman arms and tactics. Now, a Roman soldier in full armor also requires a space of three square feet. But as their method of fighting admits of individual motion for each man---because he defends his body with a shield, which he moves about to any point from which a blow is coming, and because he uses his sword both for cutting and stabbing---it is evident that each man must have a clear space, and an interval of at least three feet both on flank and rear if he is to do his duty with any effect. The result of this will be that each Roman soldier will face two of the front rank of a phalanx, so that he has to encounter and fight against ten spears, which one man cannot find time even to cut away, when once the two lines are engaged, nor force his way through easily---seeing that the Roman front ranks are not supported by the rear ranks, either by way of adding weight to their charge, or vigor to the use of their swords. Therefore, it may readily be understood that, as I said before, it is impossible to confront a charge of the phalanx, so long as it retains its proper formation and strength. Why is it then that the Romans conquer? And what is it that brings disaster on those who employ the phalanx? Why, just because war is full of uncertainties both as to time and place; whereas there is but one time and one kind of ground in which a phalanx can fully work. If, then, there were anything to compel the enemy to accommodate himself to the time and place of the phalanx, when about to fight a general engagement, it would be but natural to expect that those who employed the phalanx would always carry off the victory. But if the enemy finds it possible, and even easy, to avoid its attack, what becomes of its formidable character? Again, no one denies that for its employment it is indispensable to have a country flat, bare, and without such impediments as ditches, cavities, depressions, steep banks, or beds of rivers: for all such obstacles are sufficient to hinder and dislocate this particular formation. And that it is, I may say, impossible, or at any rate exceedingly rare to find a piece of country of twenty stades, or sometimes of even greater extent, without any such obstacles, every one will also admit. However, let us suppose that such a district has been found. If the enemy decline to come down into it, but traverse the country sacking the towns and territories of the allies, what use will the phalanx be? For if it remains on the ground suited to itself, it will not only fail to benefit its friends, but will be incapable even of preserving itself; for the carriage of provisions will be easily stopped by the enemy, seeing that they are in undisputed possession of the country: while if it quits its proper ground, from the wish to strike a blow, it will be an easy prey to the enemy. Nay, if a general does descend into the plain, and yet does not risk his whole army upon one charge of the phalanx or upon one chance, but maneuvers for a time to avoid coming to close quarters in the engagement, it is easy to learn what will be the result from what the Romans are now actually doing. For no speculation is any longer required to test the accuracy of what I am now saying: that can be done by referring to accomplished facts. The Romans do not, then, attempt to extend their front to equal that of a phalanx, and then charge directly upon it with their whole force: but some of their divisions are kept in reserve, while others join battle with the enemy at close quarters. Now, whether the phalanx in its charge drives its opponents from their ground, or is itself driven back, in either case its peculiar order is dislocated; for whether in following the retiring, or flying from the advancing enemy, they quit the rest of their forces: and when this takes place, the enemy's reserves can occupy the space thus left, and the ground which the phalanx had just before been holding, and so no longer charge them face to face, but fall upon them on their flank and rear. If, then, it is easy to take precautions against the opportunities and peculiar advantages of the phalanx, but impossible to do so in the case of its disadvantages, must it not follow that in practice the difference between these two systems is enormous? Of course, those generals who employ the phalanx must march over ground of every description, must pitch camps, occupy points of advantage, besiege, and be besieged, and meet with unexpected appearances of the enemy: for all these are part and parcel of war, and have an important and sometimes decisive influence on the ultimate victory. And in all these cases the Macedonian phalanx is difficult, and sometimes impossible, to handle, because the men cannot act either in squads or separately. The Roman order on the other hand is flexible: for every Roman, once armed and on the field, is equally well-equipped for every place, time, or appearance of the enemy. He is, moreover, quite ready and needs to make no change, whether he is required to fight in the main body, or in a detachment, or in a single maniple, or even by himself. Therefore, as the individual members of the Roman force are so much more serviceable, their plans are also much more often attended by success than those of others. I thought it necessary to discuss this subject at some length, because at the actual time of the occurrence many Greeks supposed when the Macedonians were beaten that it was incredible; and many will afterwards be at a loss to account for the inferiority of the phalanx to the Roman system of arming. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Universal Inkjet Refill Kit $29.95 Refill any ink cartridge for less! Includes black and color ink. http://us.click.yahoo.com/bAmslD/MkNDAA/ySSFAA/IMSolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: WABPunicWG-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Thu May 20 13:02:17 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id NAA43888 for ; Thu, 20 May 1999 13:02:16 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id NAA21589 for ; Thu, 20 May 1999 13:01:06 -0500 Received: from orion.starlink.com(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma021524; Thu, 20 May 99 13:00:34 -0500 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id KAA28762 for whancients-list; Thu, 20 May 1999 10:24:38 -0700 (MST) Received: from hpdmgaaa.compuserve.com (dh-img-1.compuserve.com [149.174.206.131]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id KAA28758 for ; Thu, 20 May 1999 10:24:36 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hpdmgaaa.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.4) id NAA26586 for whancients@warpzone.com; Thu, 20 May 1999 13:24:02 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 20 May 1999 13:22:31 -0400 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Errata Feedback To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199905201323_MC2-766B-6F42@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id KAA28759 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Thanks for the feedback on the errata. Based on the response, I'm going to add the large shield option in for the Late Roman cavalry, and give Indian swordsmen the option of replacing their dh sword with a throwing spear and javelins at no extra cost (it was a throwing spear, wasn't it?!?). With regard to Don's plea for an explanation on the Egyptian Marines special rule, I can't see anything confusing about it. Can Don explain where there is a problem? With regard whether the cheaper version of the indian lonbow is allowed to shoot twice, I'd have to say no, as it is still a long weapon, it's just that this option assumes that it didn't have the power of a 'proper' longbow. And following that, I feel that I owe Vince some explanation as to why I have been so harsh on his beloved Indians. Basically, one of my aims when writing WAB was to try and avoid the situation where 'exotic' armies and troop types ended up being the best thing to take. This is why I've done so much to try and reel back in the elephants, heavy chariots and the longbowmen in his Indian army. To my mind an interesting and exotic army like the Indians or (for example) Khymer should be an army you field because you love it, rather than because its a game-winning juggernaut. This isn't to say that the army should be impossible to win with, just that it should require real skill and flair to use well. Now I know that some players will find this hard to swallow, in that they feel all armies should end up with an equal chance of winning. All I can say is that I don't really go along with this, and think that there should be a range of armies to choose from, some of which require more skill to use than others. To go slightly off-topic, in the new edition of 40K the Dark Eldar are just such an army; they are very fragile, and will loose quickly in the hands of a player who doesn't know how to use them. Initially they did very poorly, and were bottom of the heap on the game win/loss records we keep (though even then they were winning about 33 percent of the games recorded). Now however, as players learn their tricks, they are slowly working their way up the scale, and are starting to nudge at a 50/50 record. While on the subject of win/loss records, actually tracking results of games in this way has done much to dispell the myths surrounding super armies for 40K and Warhammer. For example, the 40k database has shown that the difference between the army with the best record compared to the army with the worst record is about 14-16 percent, with the best army at any time having a win ratio of about 57 to 58 percent, and the lowest having a ratio of about 42-43 percent. The hard data we've collected on Warhammer from tournaments and so on shows the same pattern, with the win/lose ratio for even the oldest army lists being over 40 percent. In other words there is really not all that much difference between armies, and I would expect much the same to apply to the WAB army lists. Hope that helps, Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Mon Feb 15 06:14:51 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id GAA67071 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 1999 06:14:50 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id GAA02706 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 1999 06:14:50 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma006148; Sun, 14 Feb 99 13:51:19 -0600 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id NAA12759 for whancients-list; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 13:07:54 -0700 (MST) Received: from arl-img-12.compuserve.com (arl-img-12.compuserve.com [149.174.217.142]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id NAA12755 for ; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 13:07:53 -0700 (MST) Received: (from root@localhost) by arl-img-12.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.17) id OAA23560 for whancients@warpzone.com; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 14:41:59 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1999 14:41:26 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Some Notes & Comments To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199902141441_MC2-6A72-B35B@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id NAA12756 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Well, I've been rather busy this week, and have only just been able to catch up on the stuff that had built up from the WAB list. There are a number of interesting issues raised on a number of different subjects. I've added my 2 cents worth on these different threads below: Off Top Posts: I like to see them too - keep them coming I say! The 2-1 Rule: Just a quick point; please note that you need to outnumber an opponent by _more_ than 2-1 to get 'overwhelming odds'. A small point, I know, but it can make a big difference. Ferocious Charges: The overwhelming odds rule does apply to these, so rather than breaking the unit will fall back and rally. Chariots & Elephants: Chariots are effected by elephants in the same way as cavalry. Spara Bearers: I have to admit that a Spara barricade negating a unit's rank bonus was something I'd missed until I read RJM's report. After some thought I've decided that this should be OK, as long as everybody remembers that the Persians lose their rank bonus as well (i.e. *neither* side gets a rank bonus!). While on the subject of Persian units, as noted in a number of posts, the first and second rank can fire at full effect if the unit remains stationary, and any other ranks fire at half effect. Now, I must get my own Persian army ready in time for Rob Broom's 'Club Challenge' tournament in April... Jervis Johnson From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Mon Feb 15 06:24:18 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id GAA66290 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 1999 06:14:49 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id GAA02697 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 1999 06:14:49 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma007220; Sun, 14 Feb 99 13:54:10 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id NAA12784 for whancients-list; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 13:08:24 -0700 (MST) Received: from hil-img-1.compuserve.com (hil-img-1.compuserve.com [149.174.177.131]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id NAA12780 for ; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 13:08:23 -0700 (MST) Received: (from root@localhost) by hil-img-1.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.17) id OAA17383; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 14:42:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1999 14:41:30 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] New Ideas - Confident & Edgy Troops (long) To: WAB Mailing List , Mike Marshall , Matt Keefe , Conrad , "Michael W Cannon" , Rob Broom Message-ID: <199902141441_MC2-6A72-B35D@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id NAA12781 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] I agree with those that like the 'Falling Back in Good Order' rule and the associated 2-1 rule. One of the things that I've been mulling over with regard to the WAB rules is the way that panic tests and break tests don't take into account the situation that the unit taking the test is in at the time. Actually, that's not quite true, in that the fact that the unit has to take a test at all reflects its current situation to some extent, for example that it's lost a round of combat, or has been charged to the flank while engage to the front. However, once triggered, the tests are very all or nothing affairs, where you either flee or hold. This can create some odd results, most noticbly where a unit in a plainly quite safe position will run off, or on the other hand where a horribly battered unit keeps on fighting just as easily as a fresh one. The new rules in AoA address this to an extent, by limiting the effect of skirmishers on formed units, and allowing units that outnumber their opponent by over 2-1 to 'fall back in good' instead of fleeing if they fail a break test. However, I still have a feeling that there is more that could and should be done. What I would like to achieve is something where when the position and state of a unit on the tabeletop is *visibly* either good or bad, then this effects its reaction to events around it. On the other hand I want to avoid coming up with a long list of modifiers or complex special rules which would slow down or otherwise muddy the clean mechanics used in Warhammer. Anyway, as I said I've been pondering this for a while, and so below is my first stab at dealing with this thorny problem. The new rules build on the foundation laid in AoA with the 'falling back in good order' rule, by adding in the concept of 'Confident' and 'Edgy' psychological states for units in your army. Being confident or edgy modifies the way a unit responds to or takes a panic or break test, and does something to mitigate the 'all or nothing' nature of these tests. I hope that the effect of these rules will be to reward good play. In particular, the 'edgy' rule makes flanking the enemy *much* more dangerous than it is as the moment, while the 'confident' rule should make reserves and forming up in a neat battleline more useful. Please note that these rules haven't been tested yet - you're in at the ground floor here guys! Please give them a try if you like the look of them, and if you can email me with any comments, I'd appreciate it! By the way, for those of you that haven't got AoA yet, a unit that can fall back in good order flees normally, but then rallies automatically at the end of the move. It can be pursued, but if caught it's not wiped out; instead the pursuers count as charging in the next combat phase. Units that fall back in good order may not charge in their next turn, but otherwise can shoot or move normally. OK, here are the new rules... CONFIDENT & EDGY UNITS --------------------------------------------- Sometimes the circumstances that effect a unit will make it more confident than would normally be the case, while at other times units, or even the whole army, can decide that things are going against them, which will make them edgy and prone to panic. To represent this there is a chance for a unit to be either *confident* or *edgy*. It is possible for a unit to be both confident and edgy at the same time, in which case both sets of special rules will apply! Sometimes the situation a unit is in will change over the course of a turn or a phase, so that a unit that starts off confident ends up edgy. In the case of a dispute it is always the player whose turn is in progress that decides what order things happen during his turn (i.e. what order to take break tests, fight close combats, move units, etc.). Confident Units ----------------------- Units are confident if *any* of the following circumstances apply: a) They are at full strength and no unit in the army has been broken in close combat other than skirmishers. OR b) They have secure flanks and rear support (ooo-er missus!). See below for a definition of these. OR c) The army general is with the unit. OR d) They won a round of combat this player turn. IMPORTANT: Units in skirmish formation can never be confident. A confident unit will fall back in good order as described in AoA if it fails a panic test. Note that confident units that break suffer the normal penalties. Flanks & Rear Support: I'm not going to write legalistic definitions of these, as it'll just encourage some players to get round the letter of the rules as opposed to their spirit. So, a flank is secure if it is covered by friendly units or terrain in such a way that the enemy can't possibly get at it. Rear support means that if an enemy should charge the unit in flank or rear, there is another friendly unit in a position that it could charge that enemy in its' next turn. Edgy Units -------------------- If *any* of the following circumstances apply then a unit is deemed to be edgy. a) The unit has suffered 50% or more casualties. OR b) The unit is more than 12" from any other friendly units (friendly units that are fleeing don't count!). OR c) The army general has been killed (this doesn't apply until the turn after he has been killed). OR d) There is an enemy unit (other than skirmishers) in a position from which it could declare a flank or rear charge on the unit. OR e) The army has lost 50% or more of it's starting number of models An edgy unit takes all Ld tests on 3D6 instead of 2D6. A Note For Absent Minded Players Like Me ----------------------------------------------------------------- These rules are quite easy to forget, especially in the heat of battle. It's therefore up to you to remember which of your units are confident, and its up to you to spot which enemy units are edgy. If you forget to do this at the time you can't back-track when you spot the mistake later on - it's assumed that the troops weren't quite as confoident or edgy as one might have thought! From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Mon Feb 15 06:14:52 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id GAA68746 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 1999 06:14:51 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id GAA02705 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 1999 06:14:51 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma006147; Sun, 14 Feb 99 13:51:19 -0600 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id NAA12746 for whancients-list; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 13:07:48 -0700 (MST) Received: from hpamgaab.compuserve.com (ah-img-2.compuserve.com [149.174.217.153]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id NAA12742 for ; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 13:07:47 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hpamgaab.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.0) id OAA25394 for whancients@warpzone.com; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 14:42:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1999 14:41:34 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] AOA errors/unclear items. - answers To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199902141441_MC2-6A72-B35F@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id NAA12743 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] I've done my best to answer RJM's questions below: > 1) Elephants: The rules account for Howdahs, but NO LIST in the AOA book lists them! Which armies historically had Howdahs and what would the point costs be?? A: Woops - I forgot about that! In this case you'll have to let history and the model you are using be your guide (i.e if the model comes with a Howdah, then it counts as having a Howdah). No quickly scrath-built howdahs please! Having a howdah or not doesn't change a units points value. 2) Chariot Generals: Most of the classic chariot armies (Trojan, Persian, Eygptian) whos generals usually rode into battle in chariots, are now easier to wound then the chariot drivers!! Under the test lists the Generals (all have base toughness of only 3) would have a +1 to Toughness when riding a chariot. The crews still retain this +1 toughness. Is this intended or an error?? The hitite general starts with T-4 so is not affected. A: This is intended. Basically, generals who I think should be good at hth fighting already have a high toughness and attacks, while those that I see as being more skilled and shooting etc don't. Thus Hittite and Trojan generals will be more likely to get stuck in, while Egyptian and Persian generals will be more likely to stand off. 3) Massed archery: The test lists did show which armies were allowed massed archery, but this stipulation has been dropped in AOA. Are we to assume that all mixed formation units are now allowed to use massed archery?? This would make sense.< A: All units can make use of massed archery if any models are equipped with bows. Jervis Johnson From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Mon Feb 15 06:14:58 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id GAA68805 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 1999 06:14:53 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id GAA02729 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 1999 06:14:53 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma014402; Sun, 14 Feb 99 14:27:26 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id NAA13828 for whancients-list; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 13:35:53 -0700 (MST) Received: from hpamgaaa.compuserve.com (ah-img-1.compuserve.com [149.174.217.154]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id NAA13824 for ; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 13:35:51 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hpamgaaa.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.0) id PAA21145; Sun, 14 Feb 1999 15:09:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1999 15:08:59 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] WHW News To: Rob Broom , Mike Marshall , WAB Mailing List , "Michael W Cannon" , Matt Keefe , Conrad , Thomas Whitten Message-ID: <199902141509_MC2-6A70-F21B@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id NAA13825 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Hello to all, Following recent messages on the WAB mailing list asking 'what's happening next?', I thought you all might be interested in the following message I sent to Steve Neate, editor of Slingshot, about our 'work in progress'. The Open Day I refer to is an event I'm hoping to hold at the end of the year. Since I wrote this message John Lambshead has been in touch, and it looks like that we *may* be anle to get his book out this year if we can get it edited and illustrated in time... Jervis -------------Forwarded Message----------------- From: Jervis Johnson, To: Steve Neate, INTERNET:editor@soa.org.uk Date: 02/02/99 22:23 RE: WHW News Hello Steve, In my excitment about the 'WHW & Friends Open Day', I quite forgot to include any news about things we're working on at the moment. None of this information is secret, so please feel free to forward it or copy it wherever or whenever you wish. Anyway, here goes... Nigel Stillmen's 'Chariot Warfare' supplement for WAB is in production at the moment. This is very much a labour of love on Nigel's part, and is shaping up to be a very intersting book. The core of the book are a set of army lists for the main armies of the Biblical period (Sumerian through to Assyrian), each presented in the rather lengthier format used for the lists in the WAB rules, rather than the short '2 page' format we've used in Armies of Antiquity. Each list is backed up by a short introduction that puts the army in its historical context, and is backed up with painting, modelling and army collecting tips. Nigel is very taken with the new chronology, and has been doing a lot of work over the last 3 or 4 years converting timelines over. Just today he was showing me the 'military history' timeline he has worked out for the book, and which is basically the distilled version of all the work he's been doing. It really is very exciting stuff, and I'm hoping to be able to convince Nigel that a sneak preview might make a good Slingshot article. Whatever the outcome of this, we're hoping to get the book through production in March or April in time for a summer release. Following Nigel's book we'll be starting production work on the 'Age Of The Vikings' supplement. This is being written by Stephen and Duncan Patten of Gripping Beast, and is shaping up into another interesting project. The Pattens are concentrating on the period of the Viking raids in Britain (roughly 750ish through to 1066). The book includes four main lists (Vikings, Saxons, Celts and Normans), again written in the long style of the WAB rules, with a historical context, etc., for each army. The Celtic and Saxon lists include a number of choices and options that allow a player to make them more 'specific'; for example, some of the entries in the Celtic list is can only be used if you have a Welsh army, others only if you have an Irish army, and so on. In the Saxon list you can take a 'generic' type of Fryd unit, but can also include Fryd from specific counties that have special options or rules. However, all of the specific Fryd you use must come from adjacent counties, so you couldn't include a Cornish Fryd in an army with a Northumbrian one for example. Possibly most exciting of all, John Blanche, GW's art director, is going to be doing the cover and some internal art for this book. John is best known for his fantasy work, but in earlier days did quite a lot of historical work as weel (including some art for Slingshot he tells me). That's probably all we'll manage to get out this year. However, John Lambshead is writing a supplement on the fall of the Western Roman Empire. The early work I've seen so far has some very interesting scenarios, and lots of useful stuff about running campaigns and small scale skirmish games. In the States, Allen Curtis is working on a Punic Wars supplement, which will probably be the most dedicated and 'focused' of the all of the WAB supplements, concentrating as it does on two armies in a well documentated war. As an aside, one of the things we've tried to ensure with all of the supplements is that each author is left with a fairly free hand to choose what they put in the book and the format they decide to use, and, as I hope you can tell from these brief notes, this is resulting in an interestingly eclectic set of books, that address a wide variety of different historical and game themes. For my own part I've started work on 'Battles Of Antiquity', which is basically a selection of scenarios and army list varients for use with the armies in the WAB book and AoA. I've been rather taken with the 2 page format we developed for AoA, and have managed to come up with a similar 2 page format for the scenarios. The idea is for the scenario's to be playable with any two armies, but for them to include varients for the army lists based on the two armies that actually fought. I'm going to try and make sure that we cover quite a lot of smaller actions and skirmishes, as well as the larger battles that were not simply a straight-forward 'line up and fight' pitched battle, as I think that WAB's ability to change scale and cope with all kinds of odd special rules like this is one of it's main strengths. Anyway, the first scenario has worked out well and fits into the allocated two pages, so now it's just a case of picking twenty more! Following on from this there has been some loose talk of doing a 'Campaigns Of Antiquity' supplement, providing a selection of camapign ideas and rules based on an advanced version of the campign rules from the rulebook which we've come up with. That's pretty much it for the ancient period, at least at present. However, we've also got a set of English Civil War rules that are pretty well advanced, and we've also being playing some games using the new 40K rules as a basis for 19th Century colonial games. Ricks WW2 version of the 40K rules are now on a back burner while he concentrates on a project for GW, but Andy Chambers and myself have been thinking of trying out some WW2 games using a modified version of my Epic game system with 20mm models. Well, what I thought was going to be a quick follow-up has turned into a fairly lengthy tome, so I think I'll end here. It's late now and I've had a long day, so I hope the message makes sense. If not don't hesitate to get in touch and I'll be happy to fill in any bits that are unclear! Jervis Johnson From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Thu Feb 18 11:50:37 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id LAA18205 for ; Thu, 18 Feb 1999 11:50:37 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id LAA25575 for ; Thu, 18 Feb 1999 11:50:37 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma025462; Thu, 18 Feb 99 11:50:10 -0600 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id KAA03527 for whancients-list; Thu, 18 Feb 1999 10:34:12 -0700 (MST) Received: from arl-img-11.compuserve.com (arl-img-11.compuserve.com [149.174.217.141]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id KAA03523 for ; Thu, 18 Feb 1999 10:34:10 -0700 (MST) Received: (from root@localhost) by arl-img-11.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id MAA01822 for whancients@warpzone.com; Thu, 18 Feb 1999 12:33:39 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 12:33:30 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: RE: [WAB] Late Roman hvy cav To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199902181233_MC2-6AF0-826@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id KAA03524 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Message text written by WAB Mailing List >---------- From: JAK1616@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 1999 8:33 PM To: whancients@warpzone.com Subject: [WAB] Late Roman hvy cav [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] I recieved my long awaited copy of AoA today! I excitedley turned to the Late Roman list and discovered,to my dismay,that while I could buy unlimited units of Guard cav&Cataphracts,the LR list only allows me 1 Comitatensian hvy cav unit.PLEEEZE tell me it's just a typo. Jak I have been treating that one as a typo. Any other interp. makes no sense. Martin< Martin is right, it is indeed a typo. Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Thu Feb 18 11:50:10 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id LAA79691 for ; Thu, 18 Feb 1999 11:50:10 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id LAA25538 for ; Thu, 18 Feb 1999 11:50:09 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma025400; Thu, 18 Feb 99 11:48:40 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id KAA03551 for whancients-list; Thu, 18 Feb 1999 10:34:33 -0700 (MST) Received: from dub-img-11.compuserve.com (dub-img-11.compuserve.com [149.174.206.141]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id KAA03544 for ; Thu, 18 Feb 1999 10:34:32 -0700 (MST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dub-img-11.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id MAA29700 for whancients@warpzone.com; Thu, 18 Feb 1999 12:34:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 12:33:33 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Those Pesky Indians To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199902181233_MC2-6AF0-828@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id KAA03546 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Just a quick note following up the posts about the Indian army. One of the changes I've made in the Indian lists in AoA (as opposed to the ones on the net) is to change the army's Ld down to a base of '5' (i.e. the same Ld values as a Barbarian army has). Indian cavalry and infantry are subject to Warband rule 1, which means that they add their rank bonus to their ld, but aren't impetuous and don't get the Warband's ferocious charge. Latly, especially for Don, here are some new rules that apply whenever elephants are used in a game. I've designed them to limit the effectiveness of elephants as a front line anti-infantry unit, so that they will tend to operate on the flanks or be used as an anti-cavalry screen (whioch from my reading is what happened to them against armies that knew how to deal with them). This is a first draft, so comments and feedback are welcomed! 1. ELEPHANTS Elephants were generally only effective against enemy troops that were not used to them. With familiarity came, if not contempt, then at least an ability to deal with the large creatures in a business like manner. To represent this, you should roll a D6 on the following table at the start of any battle that includes elephants. Important note: An army that includes elephants itself always counts as being 'used to the beasts!'. D6 Result 1 Never met them before! 2-3 May be this will get rid of them... 4-6 Used to the beasts! Never Met Them Before!: The standard rules in WAB apply. May be this will get rid of them...: Armies that hadn't yet learnt how to deal with elephants tended to come up with all kinds of weird ways of defeating them. Probably the most notable example of this was the (alleged) use of flaming pigs by the Roman's in a bid to scare off the elephant's in Phyrus's army. To relfect such tactics, an army that rolls this result on the table is allowed to use such a 'scare tactic' once per battle. The scare tactic is announced at the start of the turn when charges would normally be declared (it doesn't make any actual game difference as to what the tactic is, but in the interests of fun it is highly recommended that the player invents his own, suitably outlandish tactic, before roll any dice!). At the time that the tactic is used 3D6 are rolled. Any and all elephants within that many inches of an enemy model that is a) on foot (i.e. not cavalry, chariots etc) and b) not in a unit enagaged in combat, must pass a ld test or stampede. An army that uses a scare tactic may move and shoot normally during the same turn, but may not declare any charges or make any march moves (basically, the army stands around and watches to see what effect the scare tactic had!). Used to the Beasts: The army has faced elephants several times and now has a pretty good idea of how to deal with them. Once per battle the army may use a 'scare tactic' as described above. In addition all skirmisher infantry, all light infantry, and all drilled infantry in the army are considered to be 'used to' elephants. Lastly infantry that are in skirmish formation can only be hit by an elephant on a roll of 6 (they've learnt to atack the beast from the sides). Note that the crew will still hit any attacking skirmishers normally. Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Feb 23 16:11:58 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id QAA32568 for ; Tue, 23 Feb 1999 16:11:58 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id QAA19426 for ; Tue, 23 Feb 1999 16:11:58 -0600 Received: from mx4.smtp.psi.net(38.8.138.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma019412; Tue, 23 Feb 99 16:11:48 -0600 Received: from [209.63.71.2] (helo=orion.starlink.com) by mx4.smtp.psi.net with esmtp (Exim 1.90 #1) for aedwards@elara.tripos.com id 10FJtj-00042a-00; Tue, 23 Feb 1999 10:37:23 -0500 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id IAA10316 for whancients-list; Tue, 23 Feb 1999 08:17:25 -0700 (MST) Received: from hil-img-3.compuserve.com (hil-img-3.compuserve.com [149.174.177.133]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id IAA10312 for ; Tue, 23 Feb 1999 08:17:24 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hil-img-3.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id KAA26586 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 23 Feb 1999 10:16:44 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 10:16:25 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: RE: [WAB] Falling Back in Good Order To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199902231016_MC2-6B83-70BC@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id IAA10313 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] John asked: >The second option in the Falling Back in Good Order Rule states: Drilled troops, units in skirmish formation, and cavalry that lose a combat but pass their break test may fall back in good order if they wish, instead of remaining in the combat. I apologize for wordsmithing (it's the former WRG player in me), but does this mean: "All of the above (drilled troops, skirmishers and cavalry) must lose a combat and pass a break test in order to FBIGO." A WRG rules lawyer might look at this and suggest that the skirmishers and drilled troops may fall back PRIOR to the combat. It's the comma . Another question is whether troops who WIN a combat may be permitted to FBIGO. < All of the units can fall back in good order if they pass the break test. Troops that win a combat may *not* fall back in go order; assume they are too excited and eager to vanquish the foe in order to get them to leave. Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Thu Feb 25 09:06:22 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id JAA51490 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 09:06:20 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id JAA17033 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 09:06:19 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma016958; Thu, 25 Feb 99 09:05:20 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id HAA04118 for whancients-list; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 07:56:25 -0700 (MST) Received: from hpamgaab.compuserve.com (ah-img-2.compuserve.com [149.174.217.153]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id HAA04113 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 07:56:23 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hpamgaab.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.0) id JAA18219; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 09:55:54 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 09:52:59 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Ways To Play (was Table Quarters...) To: WAB Mailing List , Jervis Johnson Message-ID: <199902250954_MC2-6BD3-187C@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id HAA04115 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Hi Guys, I've been watching the thread develop on table quarters and VPs with some interest. Personally, I don't have a problem with the rule; in encourages aggressive play and penalises players that hide in a corner and shoot, both of which are good things for WAB as a *game*. It also rewards the player who is able to 'keep his eye on the ball', as it were. In the heat of battle it's very easy to forget the objective and just go for pounding the hell out of the opposition (I should know, I do it all the time... ; )). However, a good general will always keep in mind his objective, which in this case includes 'taking and holding territory'. All of which leads me neatly to *objectives* and *scenarios*. One thing I've noticed with Warhammer players is that they tend to stick fairly rigidly to play the 'line up and fight' scenarios presented in the book, sometimes venturing off to try out the other scenarios that are there, but 9 out of 10 games will be a pitched battle or a meeting engagement. There is nothing wrong with this, but it should be kept in mind that these are 'generic' scenarios, and are in many ways rather abstract, in that they are designed to give a good *game* first and foremost. The downside to this is tha,t if you're not careful, playing the same scenario all the time can lead to very stylised form of play, where the use and effectiveness of certain units can become very important, and where unit choice and the 'shape' of an army can become very abstract. In effect it tends to emphasise the game mechanics and aspects of WAB as a game, at the expense of its 'role-playing' and 'game as story' aspects. We noticed the same trend in the 2nd edition of 40K, which basically had one way of setting up (with minor variations), and which led to extremely sylised forms of play, much to the detriment of the game. Therefore in the new edition of the game you are pretty much forced to randomly generate the mission you will play, and the game is all the better for it. This approach isn't quite as suitable for WAB, as many ancient battles were indeed 'pitched battles' or meeting enagagments. *However*, the majority of battles were *not*, and so I highly recommend that you don't just play straight 'line up and fight' battles all of the time. Use the other scenarios too, or pick an interesting historical battle and use it as the basis for the set up, victory conditions and special rules that apply to a game, or just make a scenario up! Speaking personally, the design team very rarely plays games using the standard scenarios at all, and we rarely use points values either. Instead one of us will come up with a scenario and some objectives for each side, and then we'll set to, and decide by concensus who has 'won' at the end of the game. Funningly enough most of the formal, competative style games we've played using the Meeting Engagement rules have come out of a campaign we've been running based on the campaign system in the book (which is actually quite an interesting way of limiting access to special troops types, by the way). Clearly this style of gaming works best with a regular gaming group, but don't most of us play most of our games against regular opponents? (Oh no, this is bound to lead to jokes about 'irregular' opponents, 'impetuous' opponents....) To sum up, you don't have to use the scenarios and objectives given in the WAB rules. They are there as examples and guidelines, and to provide a comon ground for use in tournaments or at clubs where players don't know each other. Amongst a regular gaming group they should be seen as a tool, that can be discarded or changed as the players in the group see fit. *However*, if you do decide to play with them, see them for what they are; a set of limitations that provide for a rather abstract but quite 'fair' game. And remember that if you keep on playing games with them, then you can expect to see stylised 'standard openings and tactics' developing which will serve to emphasise the nature of WAB as a *game*, and which may have no historical precedent as real life generals couldn't count on knowing in advance what sort of a battle they would fight. Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Thu Feb 25 09:12:26 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id JAA85869 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 09:12:25 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id JAA17341 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 09:12:24 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma017288; Thu, 25 Feb 99 09:11:31 -0600 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id HAA04138 for whancients-list; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 07:57:03 -0700 (MST) Received: from hpamgaab.compuserve.com (ah-img-2.compuserve.com [149.174.217.153]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id HAA04133 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 07:57:01 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hpamgaab.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.0) id JAA18192; Thu, 25 Feb 1999 09:55:53 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 09:53:07 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] BS4 - Points Values To: WAB Mailing List , Matt Keefe , Rob Broom Message-ID: <199902250954_MC2-6BD3-187F@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id HAA04135 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] I've just checked my points value chart following discussions on bows and such like, and spotted a rather, erm, silly mistake. Basically I've got the longbow in there at the same points value as a (composite) bow. This has a 'ripple effect' on crossbows, which also need to go up to keep their 'differential' correct over troops armed with a longbow. Doh!!! So, the points value for all troops armed with longbows and crossbows (or their equivalents) should go up by +1 point. Sorry! Fortunately this doesn't effect many lists in AoA (which is probably why it happened in the first place): Skirmishers armed with staff slings or crossbow go up by +1 pt in the Alexander, Late Roman, Byzantine and Norman lists; longbowmen and skirmishers go up by +1 pt in the Indian list; crossbowmen go up by +1 point in the Norman, Crusader and Ancient Chinese lists; and Samurai armed with longbows go up by +1 pt in the Samurai list. Finally, add +1 point per crewman with a longbow to the value of each chariot or elephant in an Indian army. Jervis PS. You can't spring these points value changes on an opponent at the start of or during a battle! Make sure you tell them well in advance (at least a day or two), or stick to the values in the book. From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Mon Mar 1 04:30:00 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id EAA74422 for ; Mon, 1 Mar 1999 04:30:00 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id EAA11700 for ; Mon, 1 Mar 1999 04:29:59 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma002547; Sun, 28 Feb 99 10:03:22 -0600 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id IAA23824 for whancients-list; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 08:52:58 -0700 (MST) Received: from arl-img-11.compuserve.com (arl-img-11.compuserve.com [149.174.217.141]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id IAA23820 for ; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 08:52:57 -0700 (MST) Received: (from root@localhost) by arl-img-11.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id KAA10222 for whancients@warpzone.com; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 10:52:26 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 10:51:39 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] WAB rule clarification To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199902281051_MC2-6C26-8603@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id IAA23821 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Don asked: >I have a question for anyone to jump in (preferably Jervis)... In WAB on page 24 the To Hit mod for shooting for moving does not apply to models riding in chariots. AoA special rules for the Egyptians on page 4 states: Egyptian charioteers may ignore the -1 mod to shoot on the move. Why bother to print this special rule if WAB already already allows you to do this? Am I missing something? < This is what I tend to call 'belt & braces' rules writing. Basically, if you want people to remember something it's woorth repeating it! Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Mon Mar 1 04:29:59 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id EAA70033 for ; Mon, 1 Mar 1999 04:29:58 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id EAA11706 for ; Mon, 1 Mar 1999 04:29:57 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma003460; Sun, 28 Feb 99 10:05:43 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id IAA23810 for whancients-list; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 08:52:49 -0700 (MST) Received: from arl-img-9.compuserve.com (arl-img-9.compuserve.com [149.174.217.139]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id IAA23806 for ; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 08:52:48 -0700 (MST) Received: (from root@localhost) by arl-img-9.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id KAA15431 for whancients@warpzone.com; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 10:52:13 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 10:51:45 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Rules clarifications needed. To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199902281052_MC2-6C26-8605@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id IAA23807 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] RJM asked the following questions, and I've done my best to answer them! >1)If a character is leading a unit (say 8 cav) and all the troops are killed in several turns of combat with only the character left. The character has passed all leadership test to this point, but now flees on the next turn due to rank bonus etc. can he rally, or do you still consider him as part of a unit with less then 5 models? The list already covered the fact that he can not rally if say 2 other models were left, that he could not. But on his own?< A: If left on his own and he is an 'indpendent character' (i.e one purchased on his own rather than as part of a unit), then he can rally. Assume that if there is anybody left then he'll get caught up in the rout, but if on his own he thinks 'heh, I'd better go and join *those* guys over there..." >2) Chariot squadrons are allowed to have a leader, standard, & musician. But must they be 1 in each chariot? If so you would lose one fast. The rules state that they are the last 3 troops to go with the leader last of all. does this mean all 3 could be in 1 chariot if it consists of at least 3 crew and a driver? That is my interpretation.< A: I'd say you could choose, either puting them all in the same chariot or spreading them out if your prefer. >3) In a senerio were a 3 chariot squadron charges a unit and only 1 model reaches. A) Chariot 1 is destroyed in the combat with 1 extra wound done then it can take. Does the extra wound get applied to the next unengaged chariot. This is not adressed in WAB but in WHFB Egyptian undead army, the extra hits do not pass on unless the other chariots are physically in the combat. I would agree with this as chariots act as indepdent models that have to stay in a coherancy range.< A: In the games we play we just carry the hits on, as you would do for any other unit. Uisng the Khemrian chariot rule from WD is OK, but this would be a house rule rather than a game rule. > B) Related issue. the sole chariot wins combat, do the other 2 chariots then form up on the enemy and maybe even flank it and lose their impact hits, or do they charge in on your next turn?< The other chariots form up on the unit, moving into the combat in the same manner as unengaged skrimishers. >4) Skirmish charge, This has been brought up before but never desively answered. If a unit of 12 skirmishers charge a unit 5 models wide and all can reach. Can the extra models engage the flanks of the target unit if those models were individually in a charge arc that would let them hit that flank. (This would happen when the skirmishers started at a 45% angle to the unit being charged. I would not allow a flank bonus in this case though.< A: No, you must contact the facing that a 'formed' unit would contact, and rack up any skirmishers that are left over behind the ones on that facing. This is something of an abstraction, but doing anything else makes skrimishers too useful against formed units. >5) Hope this e-mails right. xxxx ch cv X is unit of Samuri xxxx ch cv cv is unit of samuri cav which charged chariots this turn xxxx ch cv ch is Assyrian chariot which charged x in last turn xxxx cv S is Assyrian spearman which charged X last turn ssssG cv G is Assyrian general who lost his chariot last turn ssss ssss The situation: All units took some damage, but unit X was wiped out to a man. Question 1) Are the General and unit S now considered free, or are they part of the still continuing battle vs the Samuri cv. and would reposition to stay in the combat?< >2) If X was not wiped out but ran instead. Would unit S be able to chase them down or still be stuck in combat with cv. ? One answer will cover both questions.< A: They are now 'free' (conjuring up images of 'Are You being Served' ; )). Basically, if you are part of a multiple combat, but the unit you are fighting is wiped out or flees, then you are free to pursue or whatever. Jervis Johnson From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Mon Mar 1 04:29:53 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id EAA74773 for ; Mon, 1 Mar 1999 04:29:52 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id EAA11673 for ; Mon, 1 Mar 1999 04:29:51 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma003461; Sun, 28 Feb 99 10:05:45 -0600 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id IAA23837 for whancients-list; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 08:53:01 -0700 (MST) Received: from dub-img-6.compuserve.com (dub-img-6.compuserve.com [149.174.206.136]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id IAA23831 for ; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 08:52:59 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by dub-img-6.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id KAA08294 for whancients@warpzone.com; Sun, 28 Feb 1999 10:52:28 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 10:51:57 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] WAB Errata To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199902281052_MC2-6C26-860B@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id IAA23833 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] A couple of notes and comments on Matt's *extremely* useful errata sheet: Indian Longbowmen cost _9_ points now, not 7. With regard the Huscarls, I'd recommend using the following (it's more in line with the rules and acts as a clarification rather than a change): The single unit of Huscarls can have a leader, standard and so on, and these can be allocated out to units of Fryd along with other models. If the Fryd have their own such models, then they get 'bumped' to a rear rank, but will move forward again as soon as there is space for them in the front rank (the Saxon player choosing who comes forward if there's a choice). Leaders work normally (+1 attack each if in contact with the enemy), but there is no additional bonus for having multiple standards and musicians. There's another typo on the inside front cover; as well as getting Conrad's name wrong we Roman historican that described the street fighting at Cremona was Tacitus, rather than Tacticus. There is a reference to a 'recurved' bow in the Pict barbarian tribal variation. It should read composite bow. Finally, I'd add this to the intro: "The bulk of the errata were caused by the author forgetting to add +1 point to the cost of models that have longbows, which in turn meant that the points for crossbow armed models are one point to low. What can I say other than 'Doh!'..." There are more, I'm sure, but that's all I can remember at present! Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Mar 2 17:16:45 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id RAA50261 for ; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 17:16:45 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id RAA12906 for ; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 17:16:43 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma012821; Tue, 2 Mar 99 17:15:10 -0600 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id QAA17090 for whancients-list; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 16:02:34 -0700 (MST) Received: from hil-img-5.compuserve.com (hil-img-5.compuserve.com [149.174.177.135]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id QAA17081 for ; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 16:02:32 -0700 (MST) Received: (from root@localhost) by hil-img-5.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id SAA21689 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 18:02:01 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 18:01:24 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] British chariots - rules query To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199903021801_MC2-6C74-2A72@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id QAA17084 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Will asked the following questions about chariots: > The Barbarian army list gives seperate stat lines for the Chariot and the dismounted Warrior. So, I assume that (before AoA at least...see below) you could dismount the Warrior from the chariot... No provision for buying more figures for transport in the chariots is provided in the list, so I assume you can't do that...< A: This is correct >The AoA mods to the Barbarian list have a special rule for British chariots. The Warrior in the chariot is allowed to take all of the attacks against the Chariot onto himself, simulating the "trick" of dismounting the warrior to fight while the chariot waited a short distance away. Question one: Should this replace the rule in the book allowing the Warriors to dismount from their chariots and move seperately?< A: Yes >The AoA mods also say that all of the Warriors in the chariot unit must use this tactic or none. If there are 8-11 models in the unit, they get a +1 rank bonus. +2 if there are 12+ models in the unit. Question two: Doesn't this seem to be a nearly useless rule? Certainly the British can field this many chariots, but what unit exists that is big enough to possibly allow 12, or even 8, chariot models (480mm or 320mm frontage!) to contact it at once?< A: Contact with the enemy is not the issue, just the number of chariot models in the unit. Basically, if the unit uses the 'dismount the warriors' trick then it counts as having a rank bonus if there are enough models in the unit. > Jervis recently made a few comments that basically treat units of chariots a lot like units of skirmishers (e.g. any additional wounds transfer to the next chariot, etc.). Skirmishers have to rank up if they can't get into contact with the face of the unit that their unit charged. Question three: Are chariot units subject to the same restriction?< A: Yes Jervis Johnson From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Mar 2 17:21:11 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id RAA38971 for ; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 17:21:11 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id RAA13130 for ; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 17:21:10 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma013079; Tue, 2 Mar 99 17:20:29 -0600 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id QAA17074 for whancients-list; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 16:02:23 -0700 (MST) Received: from dub-img-12.compuserve.com (dub-img-12.compuserve.com [149.174.206.142]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id QAA17069 for ; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 16:02:22 -0700 (MST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dub-img-12.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id SAA10766 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 2 Mar 1999 18:01:50 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 18:01:29 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] The curse of officialdom To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199903021801_MC2-6C74-2A75@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id QAA17070 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] There have been a few posts recently asking me to 'officiophy' (that's a new word I've just invented!) some aspect or another of the rules, for example letting Barbarians in skirmish formation ignore the Warband leadership rules, or allowing characters to dismount. Before this gets out of hand I'd like to make a plea for players to decide if they want to use house rules like this *themselves*, rather than carrying on the 'games designer as law-maker' syndrome that has been such a bane for historical and fantasy wargaming in the past. Basically, if you're playing against a regular opponent you should use any house rules and changes you see fit, while if you're playing in a club or tournament, well the standard rules will work just fine without such ammendments for those games, though you might not find them as much fun. Jervis Johnson PS. As an aside, the reason I decide to make all Barbarians, including skirmishers, subject to the Warband Leadership rules was that there are quite a few examples of lightly armed barbarians getting foolishly carried away nd leaving cover to attack formed enemy troops. Alexander The Great's defeat of the Tribellian (sp?) tribe just before he headed off to Persia is a classic example of this kind of thing, with the Trebellians - made up on the whole of what would be 'Mountain Tribesmen'and/or 'Skirmishers' under the WAB rules - foolishly getting drawn from a nice defensive position to be slaughtered by Alexander's army. That, however, is simply the reason that I decided to change the rule, and I'm sure there are plenty of good reasons to take a different point of view - so, if you prefer the older version, or a new one of your own devising, please use it. I won't mind! From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Thu Mar 11 10:22:38 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id KAA17146 for ; Thu, 11 Mar 1999 10:22:38 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id KAA05203 for ; Thu, 11 Mar 1999 10:22:36 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma005048; Thu, 11 Mar 99 10:21:43 -0600 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id JAA10584 for whancients-list; Thu, 11 Mar 1999 09:08:27 -0700 (MST) Received: from arl-img-5.compuserve.com (arl-img-5.compuserve.com [149.174.217.135]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id JAA10580 for ; Thu, 11 Mar 1999 09:08:26 -0700 (MST) Received: (from root@localhost) by arl-img-5.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id LAA19578 for whancients@warpzone.com; Thu, 11 Mar 1999 11:07:51 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 11 Mar 1999 11:07:26 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Shamans & Persian Allies To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199903111107_MC2-6D9A-6C4F@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id JAA10581 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Just a couple of quick 'rules answers'. If a Shamn is with a unit then he causes fear but the rest of the unit doesn't. This means a unit charged by the Shaman must take a fear test, and if they fail they will only hit *him* on a 6. If a unit wishes to charge and would contact the shaman, they must pass a Ld test in order to do so (try not to be beardy about this guys - what it means is that if you charge the front of a unit that includes a Shaman then you should normally need to take a Ld test). With regard those Persian allies, it looks like they disappeared off into DTP limbo when my Word files were converted into Quark files for editing and lay-out (it can happen sometimes when using Quark). Unfortunately the final version of my Word files are at work, so I can't check them just yet, but as I remember I left the allies pretty much unchanged from the internet version of the list. I'll try and remember to post the correct version from the office tomorrow. Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Sun Mar 14 15:01:21 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id PAA65585 for ; Sun, 14 Mar 1999 15:01:21 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id PAA09708 for ; Sun, 14 Mar 1999 15:01:20 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma009703; Sun, 14 Mar 99 15:00:43 -0600 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id NAA15559 for whancients-list; Sun, 14 Mar 1999 13:48:29 -0700 (MST) Received: from arl-img-8.compuserve.com (arl-img-8.compuserve.com [149.174.217.138]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id NAA15555 for ; Sun, 14 Mar 1999 13:48:28 -0700 (MST) Received: (from root@localhost) by arl-img-8.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id PAA01205 for whancients@warpzone.com; Sun, 14 Mar 1999 15:47:48 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 15:47:17 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Overlaps To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199903141547_MC2-6DF8-3BAF@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id NAA15556 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] An interesting thread, I must say. All the way through the development of WAB one of the things we experimeted with the most during playtesting was stuff addressing the old 'frontage vs depth' question. In the end the answer we found the most elegant and playable was simply to allow models to fight if diagonal coners touch; in effect this means that a wider unit will get an extra model or two into thefight, and more if it can fight in more than one rank. The only place where the question of if a model can fight 'diagonally' has ever been addressed in is the Warhammer Fantasy rules, where there is a diagram that shows that models *can't* fight diagonally (or at least there was in the 4th edition). We did have a *differen*t diagram in WAB that showed that models *could* fight diagonally, but in the interests of consitancy this was dropped from the final book. Whatever, I'd recommend players allow models to fight diagonally, as it makes the issue of width vs depth much more interesting, and actually is *literally* what the rules say you can do (you must touch to fight, and a model does youch on the diagonal). This said, I'll think you'll find that at the end of the day the size of a unit is determined more by the models you have available than any other issue. Jervis PS. Although no one has said it yet, the new 'falling back in good order' rules make bigger units more attractive, as they are both more likely to break an enemy, and not be broken themselves. From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Mar 16 08:24:32 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id IAA40738 for ; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 08:24:32 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id IAA04218 for ; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 08:24:31 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma004181; Tue, 16 Mar 99 08:23:49 -0600 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id GAA08080 for whancients-list; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 06:56:45 -0700 (MST) Received: from arl-img-4.compuserve.com (arl-img-4.compuserve.com [149.174.217.134]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id GAA08073 for ; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 06:56:43 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by arl-img-4.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id IAA24549 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 08:56:12 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 08:55:57 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Depth vs Frontage To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199903160856_MC2-6E29-2CAD@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id GAA08075 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] The on-going debate on this subject has encouraged me to go back to my history books and have a look at some of the formations that 'real-life' ancient units fought in.On the whole what evidence there is shows that 'heavy' units tended to form up into units that had roughly twice as many files as ranks. Occasionally the depth would be increased, so that the formation had as many ranks as files. Here are some examples: The basic infantry unit of the Macedonian phalanx was the Syntagma, which was made up of 256 men that would normally fight in 32 files of 8 ranks, though this was quite often doubled up into a 16 by 16 formation. Greek Cavalry fought in square shaped formation that was 16 files wide by 8 ranks deep. Republican Romans fought in centuries of 60 or so men, and usually formed to fight 10 wide by 6 ranks deep. Imperial Roman centuries generally consisted of 80 men, formed 10 files wide by 8 ranks deep. The points is that ancient *units* tended to fight in rather square shaped formations, while ancient *armies* tended to fight in long thing lines made up of these blocky units arrayed side by side. It's therefore rather dangerous to assume that forcing units to adopt a long thin formation is more 'realistic' in some way. The other point I'd make is that the weapons used by troops seems to have had very little effect on the number of ranks they fought in; this is because even the very longest pike could only be used over the heads of 4 or 5 ranks of troops in front, and therefore all of the really 'deep' ancient formations clearly worked on a psychological rather than a physical level. (BTW, the formation used by Greek cavalry does rather imply that I've ben rather harsh in denying cavalry a rank bonus. I'm not actually bothered about this at all, as it stops cavalry dominating the game too much, but it's interesting to note that cavalry actually fought in rather 'square-shaped' formations too, rather than in thin lines). All this said, it does seem to have been rare for a unit to *fight* in a formation that was deeper than it was wide. One way of addressing this would be to say that units that adopt a formation that has more ranks than files is treated as a march column. As march column's don't get a rank bonus, this would save such deep formations for battle-field maneouvering rather than fighting, as seems to have been the case, and would keep a lid on some of the more ahistorical formations that players use. A unit of twenty models could therefore deploy 5 files wide and 4 ranks deep if it wanted a rank bonus, but not vice versa. Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Mar 16 08:21:33 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id IAA40420 for ; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 08:21:32 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id IAA04035 for ; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 08:21:32 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma003954; Tue, 16 Mar 99 08:20:36 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id GAA08093 for whancients-list; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 06:57:09 -0700 (MST) Received: from hil-img-7.compuserve.com (hil-img-7.compuserve.com [149.174.177.137]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id GAA08089 for ; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 06:57:07 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hil-img-7.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id IAA02766 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 16 Mar 1999 08:56:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 08:56:01 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Updated Elepant Rules To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199903160856_MC2-6E29-2CAE@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id GAA08090 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] I've gone over the elephant rules to incorporate some of the ideas brought up on the list. What I've tried to do is keep the elephants quirky and unpredictable, as all I have read about them makes me think that that is what they were. Basically, a general that included elephants in his army could never be sure how they would act; sometimes they would win him the battle almost single-handed, while at other times they could lose him the battle single-handed. To my mind any elephant rules should reflect this 'two-edged sword' aspect. The problem has been that so far elephants have either been too predictably good or too predictably bad. Hopefully these ammendments will make it so that they are good or bad about equally! All this said, there does appear to have been two grades of elephant used in ancient battles; Firstly there were what I'll call 'war elephants', for want of a better term, that were fully trained for the rigours of battle and appear to have been quite reliable (for an elephant at least). However, elephants of this type were both rare and extremely expensive, and because of this on a number of occassions ancient generals used only partially trained elephants in there battles instead. The most notable example of the use of the second kind were the Cartheginian elephants at Zama, which were poorly trained and quickly ran away. I've therefore added a rule that allows players to pick what grade of elephant they want to use - cheap and cheerful or expensive and reliable. One last note, I've been doing a bit of reading about the ratio of elephants to men in ancient armies, and am coming to the conclusion that I've been much too leniant in the number of player may take, even in the AoA lists where I applied much more stringent limitations. At the Hydaspes, for example, Porus had @ 100 elephants, 300 chariots, 4000 cavalry and 30000 infantry. If we ignore the chariots that's one elephant per 340 other troops. At the Battle of Raphia (famous for the number of elephants employed by both sides), Ptolemy had roughly one elephant per 1,000 men (!), while Antiochus had roughly one elephant per 700 men. All in all then there is a powerful argument for limiting elephants to a maximum of 1 in an army, or may be 1-2 for the Indians. These numbers could be doubled up if the cheaper, unreliable grade of elephant is used. 1. ELEPHANTS The elephants included in the army lists are assumed to be well trained and (fairly) reliable war elephants. A player may choose to take poorly trained elephants if he prefers, but they are much more liable to panic (see the scare tactics rules below). Halve the total points cost (i.e. including crew and upgrades) of a poorly trained elephant, rounding fractions up. Elephants were generally only effective against enemy troops that were not used to them. With familiarity came, if not contempt, then at least an ability to deal with the large creatures in a business like manner. To represent this, you should roll a D6 on the following table at the start of any battle that includes elephants. Important note: An army that includes elephants itself always counts as being 'used to the beasts!'. D6 Result 1-2 Never met them before! 3-4 May be this will get rid of them... 5-6 Used to the beasts! Designers Note: Players fighting a scenario or campaign may want to choose the result rather than rolling it randomly to reflect the historical situation or what has happened in the campaign. For example, if you were refighting the battle of Heraclea the Romans would use the 'Never Met The Before!' result, as they hadn't. In a campaign you could use 'Never Met Them Before' in the 1st battle, May Be This Will Get Rid Of Them, for the second, and Used To The Beasts from then on. Never Met Them Before!: The standard rules in WAB apply. In addition, to reflect the 'fear of the unknown', all infantry in the army are subject to terror of the elephants until a unit in the army manages to fight one round of combat against an elephant without being broken or falling back in good order. May be this will get rid of them...: Armies that hadn't yet learnt how to deal with elephants tended to come up with all kinds of weird ways of defeating them. Probably the most notable example of this was the (alleged) use of flaming pigs by the Roman's in a bid to scare off the elephant's in Phyrrus's army. To reflect such tactics, an army that rolls this result on the table is allowed to use such a 'scare tactic' once per battle. The scare tactic is announced at the start of the turn when charges would normally be declared (it doesn't make any actual game difference as to what the tactic is, but in the interests of fun it is highly recommended that the player invents his own, suitably outlandish tactic, before roll any dice!). At the time that the tactic is used 3D6 are rolled. Any and all poorly trained elephants within that many inches of an enemy standard bearer or musician who is on foot must pass a ld test or stampede (note that mounted standard bearers and musicians can't be used for scare tactics). An army that uses a scare tactic may move and shoot normally during the same turn, but may not declare any charges or make any march moves (basically, the army stands around and watches to see what effect the scare tactic had!). If the test causes at least one elephant to stampede then the 'fear of the unknown' rule does not apply any longer; if the scare tactic fails to stampede an elephant (or is not tried), then the fear of the unkown rule is used as described above. Used to the Beasts: The army has faced elephants several times and now has a pretty good idea of how to deal with them. Once per battle the army may use a 'scare tactic' as described above. In addition all skirmisher infantry, all light infantry, and all drilled infantry in the army are considered to be 'used to' elephants. Lastly, infantry that are in skirmish formation can only be hit by an elephant on a roll of 6, and may ignore it's saving throw if they score a wound (they've learnt to atack the beast from the sides and to attack it's vulnerable spots). Note that the crew will still hit any attacking skirmishers normally. In addition the 'fear of the unknown' rules are not used if this result was rolled. Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Mar 23 11:24:01 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id LAA71051 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 11:24:01 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id LAA02556 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 11:24:02 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma002489; Tue, 23 Mar 99 11:23:07 -0600 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id KAA04570 for whancients-list; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 10:04:08 -0700 (MST) Received: from hil-img-2.compuserve.com (hil-img-2.compuserve.com [149.174.177.132]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id KAA04566 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 10:04:07 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hil-img-2.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id MAA11281 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 12:03:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 12:03:03 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] RJM's Elephant Worries To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199903231203_MC2-6F13-3F47@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id KAA04567 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] I think RJM has a good point about elephant's causing terror make them a bit too effective again. Therefore, for the time being, why not try saying that instead of causing terror, they count as having a fearsome charge against units that are 'fearing the unkown', as per the Norman's in AoA. I was chatting to Matt Keefe at Triples over the weekend, and he suggested that Elephants could make units that are nearby 'edgy', which is something that I'll be considering for the Mk IV version of the elephant rules. I'm not so sure about Robert's other worries with regard counting units that are deeper than they are wide as a march column, and the effect this will have on players who have armies based up for DBM. Basically, if he has his models based up for DBM, then he'll need to come up with a few abstractions anyway, and I'm sure it would be easy to come up with an extra house rule or two that would cover the fact that he can't actually form the units up in a legal 'battle' formation. Off the top of my head, he could stand a strip of figures sideways (looks yucky, I know, but it works), or he could simply tell an opponent that while the unit is formed up in a 4 wide by 5 deep formation, it's really 5 wide by 4 deep. This second example is something we often end up doing ourselves, as both Rick and the twins armies include quite a few figures on four figure wide bases, which stops them forming a legal march column under the WAB rules. To get round this we just say 'this unit is really formed three models wide', and carry on with the game! Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Mar 23 11:20:01 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id LAA71054 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 11:20:00 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id LAA02258 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 11:20:02 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma002236; Tue, 23 Mar 99 11:20:00 -0600 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id KAA04593 for whancients-list; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 10:04:16 -0700 (MST) Received: from arl-img-12.compuserve.com (arl-img-12.compuserve.com [149.174.217.142]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id KAA04586 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 10:04:13 -0700 (MST) Received: (from root@localhost) by arl-img-12.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id MAA06235 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 12:03:41 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 12:03:07 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Overlap Rules To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199903231203_MC2-6F13-3F4D@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id KAA04590 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Thanks to Tom for reprinting the old over-lap rules from Wargames Illustrated. I must admit I'd forgotten they had been published! However I should point out that we (i.e. the Perry's, Rick and myself) actually gave up on this rule, as it was fiddly and caused problems, and instead use the 'models in diagonal contact with an enemy model may fight' variant I described recently. All of which is not to say that you shouldn't use the two model overlap rule if you like it, just to say that we tried it for a while and ended up rejecting it. Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Mar 23 11:19:01 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id LAA67214 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 11:19:01 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id LAA02169 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 11:19:02 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma002041; Tue, 23 Mar 99 11:18:24 -0600 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id KAA04565 for whancients-list; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 10:04:03 -0700 (MST) Received: from hpamgaab.compuserve.com (ah-img-2.compuserve.com [149.174.217.153]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id KAA04559 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 10:04:02 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hpamgaab.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.1) id MAA22893 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 12:03:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 12:03:09 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Question for Jervis To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199903231203_MC2-6F13-3F50@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id KAA04562 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Bish asked the following question: >A question for Jervis: When playing a game last night we came across a problem with the AoA list. The Greeks and Macedonians both use 'phalanxes' but the Macedonian List leaves off the final phalanx special rule ("The only formation change allowed to a phalanx is an about face..."). Is this intentional? Why are the phalanx rules different? Bish < The rules are correct as they stand. The change represents the fact that the phalangites that make up the 'phalanx' used in the Macedonian list are professional warriors, capable of much more complex manoeuvering than the citizen militia that make up a Greek phalanx. Before people rush in, I *know* this is a simplification (for example, mercenary Greek hoplites should probably use the Macedonian phalanx rule rather than the Greek one), but given the lack of space in the lists in AoA for this kind of detail, I think it's acceptable. In any case, it helps makes he two lists really rather different, and underlines the evolution in Greek military tactics introduced by Philip II and Alexander. Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Mar 23 11:17:01 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id LAA70532 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 11:17:00 -0600 (CST) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id LAA01982 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 11:17:01 -0600 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma001941; Tue, 23 Mar 99 11:16:33 -0600 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id KAA04620 for whancients-list; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 10:04:28 -0700 (MST) Received: from hpamgaab.compuserve.com (ah-img-2.compuserve.com [149.174.217.153]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id KAA04616 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 10:04:27 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hpamgaab.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.1) id MAA23292 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 23 Mar 1999 12:03:56 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 23 Mar 1999 12:03:17 -0500 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Wedgies To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199903231203_MC2-6F13-3F57@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id KAA04617 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] As it's caused some debate, I'll go back to Jeff's orginal question of wedges and answer it below. Before I do, however, I thought I'd explain why the wedge rule is the way it is. Basically, in AoA there simply isn't enough room to put in a rule along the lines of the wedge rule in the Bretonnian army list; you need space for diagrams and such-like which I wasn't going to be able to provide. The wedge rule in AoA is therefore sort of stop-gap, which I would imagine would be expanded on or modified in a 'proper' army book covering this period. Even the simplified rule in AoA can cause problems (as seen here), and if you can't resolves these, I recommend simply not using the rule. Now, onto the questions... >I have been having a hard time figuring out how to play the wedge rules for Alexandrian cavalry. Since I play Brettonians in WFB and they have different rules for the "lance" formation maybe that's what is screwing me up. The rule states that all figures in the wedge can fight, and for every two figures that "arent in base contact" one extra enemy figure gets to fight, which is basically all of the wedge except the front guy . So the issue is, who is in base contact with the wedge- since normally only the figure on the apex will contact the enemy, and do these "extra enemy figures" get added on even if enough base contacted enemy are eliminated... so here's my question with an example of how I've been playing this... (Veteran Roman Cohort, Lt./Lg.shield +4 save, 11 Rnf + ldr, Mus, Stnd, 328 pts.) 0000000 0000000 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ (Macedonian Shock Cavalry wedge, Lt./shield 4+ save, 7 Rnf + Ldr, Mus, Stnd, 315 pts.) << Snip Rest Of Text >> A: Basically what you do is work out the combat normally (i.e. work out who is in base contact and therefore allowed to fight using the normal Warhammer rules). Then to this number add the rest of the models in the wedge, and for every two models in the wedge that this allows to fight, add one figure from the unit being attacked (assuming they have this many figures that aren't fight available). In a nutshell, work things out normally first, then add the extra models in, then roll those dice! Based on Jeffs example, and assuming that the cavalry man at the apex of the wedge is fighting two legionaries, and that you are *not* using any overlap rules, then the Macedonians will fight with the one model in contact plus unengaged nine models from the wedge, for a total of ten models, while the Romans will fight with two models in contact, plus two models from the rear ranks as they are armed with pila, plus one extra model for every *two* extra models that the Macedonians fought with ,giving another four (as the ninth model is not an 'extra two' and therefore doesn't add another Roman), giving a total of eight models. Note that the extra Roman models don't allow 2nd rank models to fight. If you get more complex situations (i.e. multiple combats against wedges), simply stick to the principle of working things out normally and then adding in extra models to each side if they've got them spare, and you really shouldn't go to far wrong. Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Apr 6 11:57:40 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id LAA95197 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 11:57:40 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id LAA03785 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 11:57:35 -0500 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma003761; Tue, 6 Apr 99 11:56:58 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id JAA06203 for whancients-list; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 09:28:55 -0700 (MST) Received: from hil-img-6.compuserve.com (hil-img-6.compuserve.com [149.174.177.136]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id JAA06198 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 09:28:53 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hil-img-6.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id MAA15330 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 12:28:22 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 12:25:12 -0400 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Break These Please To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199904061225_MC2-70C1-CAD7@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id JAA06199 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Below is an updated version of the 'characters in chariots' rule from AoA, along with a new rule for chariot runners. Both will be appearing in Nigel Stillman's 'Chariot Wars' book. I was just hoping to get you guys to see if you can spot any problems or anomolies with them as they are writen at present. Thanks in advance... Characters In Chariots: --------------------------------- New rules apply to characters riding in chariots. The cost of the chariot is not included in the character's entry in the army list, and instead it is bought from a later entry in the same list. The points spent on a chariot for a character count against the number of points that may be spent on characters in the army. The character replaces one of the crew in the chariot, though for the sake of simplicity the characteristics of the character and the chariot are left unchanged, and each is attacked separately. Roll to hit normally for missile fire, but then roll again for each hit that is scored; on a roll of 1-4 the chariot is hit, and on a roll of 5-6 the character. In hand-to-hand combat an enemy model in base contact with the chariot can choose to either attack it or the character. Work out damage against the character or chariot in the normal manner. Characters mounted in a chariot with a shield-bearer may add +2 to their armour save. In any other circumstances a character in a chariot adds +1 to his armour save. Keep track of wounds inflicted on the character and chariot seperately. The character may dismount and fight on foot if the chariot is destroyed, but only if a suitable model is available to represent him. If no model is available then the character is destroyed along with the chariot. If the character is killed then the chariot may carry on moving and fighting on its own. (Players that want to come up with house rules for characters jumping into and out of chariots should feel free to do so, as there is no good reason that they should not be allowed to do it. Just take care that your chariots don't end up as a form of taxi service that travels around the battlefield mving characters from one fight to another!) Chariot Runners: ------------------------- Chariot runners that are in skirmish formation may move into the gaps between a unit of chariots and still count as being in unit coherency as long as they are within 2" of a chariot model that is itself within 2" of another chariot runner model (see the diagram below). The chariot runners can use this tactic to charge an enemy that is already engaged by the chariots, charging into the gaps between the chariot models. By the same token, chariots are allowed to charge through a unit of chariot runners that is in skirmish formation, even if the gaps between the chariot runner models isn't wide enough to allow the chariots through (it's assumed that the runners have learned to get out of the way when the chariots charge!). They can even use this tactic if the chariot runners are engaged by the enemy; simply push the chariot runner models aside until there is a wide enough gap for the chariot to fit into. Developers Note: These rules replace the rules in Armies of Antiquity which allow chariot runners that are touching a chariot model to fight. >>>>>>> The diagram will be a pretty version of the what appears below. 'Ch' = Chariot, 'R' = chariot runner. Assume there is a 2" gap between each model. Assume all the chariot runners are in a single unit. <<<<<<<<<<<<<< R R R Ch R R Ch R R R R R From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Apr 6 11:58:36 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id LAA92629 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 11:58:35 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id LAA03815 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 11:58:35 -0500 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma003784; Tue, 6 Apr 99 11:57:35 -0500 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id JAA06184 for whancients-list; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 09:28:33 -0700 (MST) Received: from hil-img-6.compuserve.com (hil-img-6.compuserve.com [149.174.177.136]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id JAA06180 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 09:28:31 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hil-img-6.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id MAA15105 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 12:28:00 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 12:25:19 -0400 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: Re: [WAB] diagonal spears. To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199904061225_MC2-70C1-CAD9@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id JAA06181 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] >In a message dated 3/31/99 4:50:13 AM Eastern Standard Time, dough@rockdb.demon.co.uk writes: << So if models are allowed to fight diagonally does this apply to a second rank if they are armed with thrusting spears? Cheers, Doug.... >> Yes, the 2nd rank spearmen would also get to attack if the man directly to their front can attack. RJM< This is correct. Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Apr 6 11:58:36 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id LAA56249 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 11:58:35 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id LAA03813 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 11:58:35 -0500 Received: from unknown(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma003790; Tue, 6 Apr 99 11:57:50 -0500 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id JAA06080 for whancients-list; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 09:26:20 -0700 (MST) Received: from hil-img-5.compuserve.com (hil-img-5.compuserve.com [149.174.177.135]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id JAA06076 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 09:26:19 -0700 (MST) Received: (from root@localhost) by hil-img-5.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id MAA26523 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 12:25:47 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 12:25:21 -0400 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Chariot Counter-charges? To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199904061225_MC2-70C1-CADE@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id JAA06077 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Laurence asked: >The pursuing squadron of Eygptian lt chariots then used their option of contacting the Hittitte General and Standard bearer, who had been lurking nearby, in heavy chariots. We allowed the option of a counter charge, as is our reading of the AoA amendment. As you may already be able to tell this is out first chariot vs chariot bash. The question is "If heavy chariots counter charge, do they get their automatic D3 hits?" The rule says that whilst counter-charging weapons count as if in charge, does this just count as kontos etc, or does the heavy chariot itself count as a 'weapon' in this case.< I intended the rule to apply to chariots as well as 'true' cavalry, so both heavy and light chariots should get to counter-charge, as per the rule in AoA. Under such circumstances the heavy chariots would get their D3 extra hits. As an aside, I'm intrigued by the use of heavy chariots in the Hittite army, as the chariots in the lists in AoA are all light chariots, all be it ones with higher toughness and lower movement rates than the Egyptian version to represent the sturdier construction needed to carry a three man crew. This reason for this covered in more detail in Nigel's book (which should be out in the summer), but in a nutshell, we think that the Hittite three man chariot was a transitional stage that led in time to the 'true' heavy chariots used by the Assyrians. On a more practical level, adopting this approach also means that the chariots in the Egyptian, Hittite and Assyrian armies each peform slightly differently, which makes for more interesting game play. This said, counting Hittite chariots as heavy chariots is an equally valid interpratation of the historical records, though the points values of the models should be increased if you decide to count them as heavy chariots to cover the 'bonus' attacks they recieve. Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue Apr 27 07:04:03 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id HAA21316 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 1999 07:01:22 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id HAA11710 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 1999 07:00:07 -0500 Received: from mx6.smtp.psi.net(38.8.140.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma011698; Tue, 27 Apr 99 06:59:47 -0500 Received: from [209.63.71.2] (helo=orion.starlink.com) by mx6.smtp.psi.net with esmtp (Exim 1.90 #1) for aedwards@elara.tripos.com id 10c6XM-0001Dd-00; Tue, 27 Apr 1999 08:00:28 -0400 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id EAA20722 for whancients-list; Tue, 27 Apr 1999 04:54:37 -0700 (MST) Received: from hil-img-6.compuserve.com (hil-img-6.compuserve.com [149.174.177.136]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id EAA20717 for ; Tue, 27 Apr 1999 04:54:36 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hil-img-6.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id HAA09938 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 27 Apr 1999 07:53:57 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 07:53:18 -0400 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] RULES QUESTIONS To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199904270753_MC2-738A-8032@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id EAA20718 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Robert asked: >[Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] SITUATION: This came up at COld Wars durring the mega battle. Both A & B want to charge X in the same turn. B charges front of X as normal. A wants to charge X in side since front will be taken. The 45 degree mark of X passes through part of unit A but A is more to the front then side. Possilbe answers: 1) B hits front and A is allowed to wheel and face X move forward to touch and pivots into side. 2) B engages as above but A can not charge at all this turn, but can in its next move since the target is already engaged in the front. My group plays as in 1) but Don,s plays as 2). We used 2 as we had decided to use the more conservative approach in any differances between styles.< Answer: I'm not going to answert this question as such (I can't do so - we don't have a formal ruling for such things in the games we play, and would have to reach an answer in the same manner as Rovert and Don did). What I would like to say that Robert was quite right to pick the more conservative approach. I have a rule of thumb that is if a question arises during play, I don't worry to much about the ins and outs of which answer is the most 'historical' or realistic; instead I pick the one that keeps the game closest to its core game rules (i.e the most 'conservative approach'), as experience has taught that this will almost invariably be the fairest answer in the long run. > Secound question: An Alex Maced Cav wedge is engaged with a 3+ cav unit to its front from a prior turn but is now charge in the flank or rear by lightly armored skirmishers as determined by the back rank per the rules. However, the wedge rule as in WAB allows wedge to attack any direction with full unit. In HTH the wedge comander wants to use all his attacks against the skirmish unit in his rear to inflict max casualties to win the battle instead of the heavy save knights to the front. ANSWERS: 1) Wedge fights in any direction in all cases. 2) Wedge must fight models in base to base vs that unit it touches and rest whichever direction they wish. 3) Models in base to base must fight and rest must attack the original unit hit to the front. None of us have had this happen before but we went with option 3 as that is the most conservative and is also how the wedge works in WHFB. This happened twice at CW. I had Don,s Campanions hit in all 4 sides at once and then in the hugh 6 unit HTH in the mega battle.< Answer: Again I agree with the answer given, and for the same reasons. Intrestingly this is also the most logical answer, as the description for the wedge says that the extra attacks represent the wedge breaking tinto the enemy formation. Based on this there should probably be a caeveat (sp?) to the rule that states that the wedge's extra attacks may only used against a enemy unit that the wedge charged. Jervis Opions all?? RJM ----------------------- Internet Header -------------------------------- Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Received: from orion.starlink.com (orion.starlink.com [209.63.71.2]) by hpdmgaaa.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.3) with ESMTP id WAA07704; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 22:39:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id TAA26381 for whancients-list; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 19:32:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from imo12.mx.aol.com (imo12.mx.aol.com [198.81.17.2]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id TAA26377 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 19:32:00 -0700 (MST) From: RMcclo5413@aol.com Received: from RMcclo5413@aol.com (3932) by imo12.mx.aol.com (IMOv20) id 3LWBa27453 for ; Fri, 23 Apr 1999 22:30:36 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 22:29:37 EDT Subject: [WAB] RULES QUESTIONS To: whancients@warpzone.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 216 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) < From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Sat May 1 09:52:18 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id JAA90541 for ; Sat, 1 May 1999 09:52:18 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id JAA17789 for ; Sat, 1 May 1999 09:52:17 -0500 Received: from orion.starlink.com(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma017743; Sat, 1 May 99 09:51:21 -0500 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id HAA20061 for whancients-list; Sat, 1 May 1999 07:45:43 -0700 (MST) Received: from hpamgaab.compuserve.com (ah-img-2.compuserve.com [149.174.217.153]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id HAA20057 for ; Sat, 1 May 1999 07:45:42 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hpamgaab.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.4) id KAA00711 for whancients@warpzone.com; Sat, 1 May 1999 10:45:03 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 1 May 1999 10:44:42 -0400 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Egyptians & Challenges To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199905011045_MC2-7424-5A6E@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id HAA20058 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] To answer Don's questions: If a character is added to a chariot his characteristics and that of the chariot remain the same. Although he replaces one of the crewmen in reality, the effect this would have on the chariot's stats are ignored in order to keep things simple. Egyptian shooting attacks are treated as shooting attacks, so don't effect the result of the close combat unless a) they cause a panic test be inflicting 25% plus casualties, or b) they cause enough casualties to reduce the targets rank bonus. Finally, chalenges are fought using the normal rules, apart from the changes specifically listed in the rules section on challenges. So chargers strike first, unless special weapon rules apply, etc. Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue May 4 16:34:20 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (firewall.tripos.com [172.20.1.2]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id QAA65152 for ; Tue, 4 May 1999 16:34:20 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id QAA28838 for ; Tue, 4 May 1999 16:34:19 -0500 Received: from orion.starlink.com(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma028818; Tue, 4 May 99 16:33:43 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id OAA04886 for whancients-list; Tue, 4 May 1999 14:08:48 -0700 (MST) Received: from arl-img-12.compuserve.com (arl-img-12.compuserve.com [149.174.217.142]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id OAA04882 for ; Tue, 4 May 1999 14:08:46 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by arl-img-12.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id RAA13308 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 4 May 1999 17:08:10 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 17:05:31 -0400 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: Re: [WAB] Asst. Rules Questions To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199905041706_MC2-747C-3A75@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id OAA04883 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Hey, I don't need to answer these questions, because all of Jeff's answers below are correct! Jervis Johnson >[Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] -----. here's my go at it... >1) A battery of 4 Roman Scorpions (bolt-shooters) is being approached by >several enemy formations screened by a skirmish line. How does this work? >(we used C) --------> In the basic rules you can fire at the skirmishers or the unit... you may fire through gaps in a screen but not models. Or if you use the (much better in my opinion) optional skirmisher "screen rule", you may fire at a unit screened by skirmishers within 2" but with a -1 to hit. This option was presented by Jervis awhile back and can be found on the Unofficial site and the Old Sage. >2) Artillery Movement: ---------> artiller moves at the crews speed may not march and may not fire while moving. >3) Rank Bonuses: Do you determine rank bonuses before or after combat is >resolved? --------> the rank bonus is calculated as it was a the "start" of the hand to hand phase. Casualties suffered by stand and shoot reaction reduce rank bonuses as they occur before the hth phase. Battle standards if killed in the hth phase are not used to add points to combat results or able to allow re-rolls. >4) Massed Archery: If I have a formed unit of bowmen standing behind a >skirmish line can they fire over the skirmishers using the 1/2 effectiveness >rule of Masses Archery? It seems wrong to say that they can't but I >couldn't see anything to that effect in the rule book. --------> The convention that most folks apply is from Jervis's comments. Only the actual models/base blocks line of sight. If you can see through a gap of skirmishers/bases then you may shoot through it. Alternatively you may play that all skirmishers block Line of Sight.... I think you will find this really enhances skirmishers effectiveness a bit much. In WAB, most rules interpretaions favor the "power of the model" -- so if it causes an effect or is blocking something then that is the most important criteria. You can decide whether the base blocks LOS or the model. >5) Massed Archery ver 2.0: Can more than one rank of troops armed with >non-bow missile weapons use the MA rule? ------------> Only bowmen have this ability. >6) Do skirmishers have to >skirmish? (not that its a drawback) --------> Yes they skirmishers must skirmish.... they may never test against the General's Ld. No rank bonuses in hth. CAN all Light infantry skirmish? --------> Yes.... but Lt. Infantry units must have a musician to reform from skirmishing... many lt. tropps have better armor/weapons available... plus usually better Ld. Lt. Infantry formed up can have rank bonuses (up to +2). This makes Peltasts very dexterious. Is >there a point difference for troops labled as skirmishers? ------> most SK are cheaper because you have the option of giving them shields or not- most Lt. infantry have shields built in. Many SK are cheaper because their WS is 2 and sometimes their Ld is 5, peltasts and Lt. Infantry are usually WS3, and Ld 7- quite an advantage in hth combat. Or have I just >inhaled too many paint and super-glue fumes lately? -------> Most likely! (Mostly a problem for barbarian list players tho!) ----------------------- Internet Header -------------------------------- Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Received: from orion.starlink.com (orion.starlink.com [209.63.71.2]) by hpamgaab.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.4) with ESMTP id MAA27431; Mon, 3 May 1999 12:40:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id JAA07792 for whancients-list; Mon, 3 May 1999 09:27:17 -0700 (MST) Received: from gremlin.verant.com (gremlin.redeyeinteractive.com [208.236.12.68]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id JAA07788 for ; Mon, 3 May 1999 09:27:16 -0700 (MST) Received: from jjonaspc2 ([208.236.15.171]) by gremlin.verant.com (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with SMTP id JAA20139 for ; Mon, 3 May 1999 09:24:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <001c01be9582$2581c020$ab0fecd0@jjonaspc2.verant.com> From: "Jeff Jonas" To: "WAB Mailing List" Subject: Re: [WAB] Asst. Rules Questions Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 09:29:41 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) < From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue May 18 08:13:29 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (zeule-internal [172.20.5.7]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id IAA37106 for ; Tue, 18 May 1999 08:13:29 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id IAA18480 for ; Tue, 18 May 1999 08:12:23 -0500 Received: from orion.starlink.com(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma018478; Tue, 18 May 99 08:11:44 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id FAA28327 for whancients-list; Tue, 18 May 1999 05:52:52 -0700 (MST) Received: from hpamgaaa.compuserve.com (ah-img-1.compuserve.com [149.174.217.154]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id FAA28323 for ; Tue, 18 May 1999 05:52:51 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hpamgaaa.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.4) id IAA27224 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 18 May 1999 08:52:20 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 08:50:22 -0400 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] A trip back in time To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199905180851_MC2-7626-751D@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id FAA28324 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9003 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Well that will teach me not to check my email for a few days! I've just finished reading through the last week or so's mail, and I've put together the following answers to some of the questions that have come up. I've also been spending some time going over the elephant rules, and coming up with an errata sheet for AoA and WAB, both of which I'll send to the list shortly. First of all though... Warband vs Phalanx: Aaron asked what happened if his Barbarian cavalry failed an impetuosity test and had to charge a phalanx. By the rulebook this is an 'irristable force vs immovable object' rules question, in that one rule says one thing (must charge) and another says the opposite (may not charge). In such circumstances you should roll a D6 to see which answer prevails. Whatever you roll up does _not_ set a precedent, so if the same situation arose again you'd need to roll again. In this case one might imagine that either the sight of all those pikes will force the cavalry to stay away, or that the frothing barbarians chagr eup close to phalanx and then the riders leap off their horses and attack! The important thing is that the _rule_ under such circumstances is to roll off! Shashimono Effect: It was asked if the re-rolls for shashimono may be used once per battle or once per failed break test. As a rule of thumb assume a reroll may be used once per test unless the rules state otherwise. However, please note that you can't reroll a reroll, so, for example, in this case if the army standard was nearby you couldn't use its' reroll as well. Turn - March - Turn: Bill asked if turning stopped a unit from marching. The answer is yes it does, though I can see how the confusion arose. For the record, there are four types of manoeuvre: wheel, turn, change formation and reform. The only manouvre you may carry out while marching is the wheel. Fleeing Nomads: It was asked what happens if fleeing Nomad horse, who rally automatically at the end of their move, exit the table. The answer is that they are gone and cannot return (it's one of the few ways to get rid of them!). Xena vs Joan Of Arc: Clearly Xena could kick Joans butt all over the place. Both I and my six year old son Jack are in complete agreement that Xena is the bestest fighter ever, and could easily duff over that wimp Hercules too if she ever got the chance. Armies Of Antiquity II: The rumour on Portent about AoA II is complete balderdash (where *do* these stories come from?!?). We're putting the finishing touches to Nigel Stillman's 'Chariot Wars' book (it should be out late August at a guess), and have started work on 'The Fall Of The West' by Dr John Lambshead, which covers the fall of the western Roman empire. Hopefully the third book will be the Patten's 'Age of the Vikings' book, followed by a volume on the Punic Wars. Matt Keefe and I have been discussing doing campaign books, and hopefully we'll be able to get together some protytpe scenarios for you all to look at on the WPS web site that Matt is looking after. I'm also quite keen to do a 'WAB Annual', with articles, army lists and any other cool stuff I can find about the game. From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue May 18 08:14:29 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (zeule-internal [172.20.5.7]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id IAA55872 for ; Tue, 18 May 1999 08:14:28 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id IAA18486 for ; Tue, 18 May 1999 08:13:22 -0500 Received: from orion.starlink.com(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma018483; Tue, 18 May 99 08:12:59 -0500 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id FAA28317 for whancients-list; Tue, 18 May 1999 05:52:37 -0700 (MST) Received: from hpamgaaa.compuserve.com (ah-img-1.compuserve.com [149.174.217.154]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id FAA28310 for ; Tue, 18 May 1999 05:52:36 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hpamgaaa.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.4) id IAA26310 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 18 May 1999 08:51:57 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 08:50:26 -0400 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Caeser & Pals & Foes To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199905180851_MC2-7626-7522@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id FAA28311 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] I've been really enjoying the discussions on famous generals, and thought you guys might be interested in the folliwng 'special characters' that we came up with for the Pharsulus campaign we played when developing WAB. There are no points values as it was part of a campaign. JULIUS CAESER Julius Caeser: M4, WS6, BS6, S4, T4, W3, I6, A3, Ld10 Armed with a sword. May have light armour or ride a warhorse. Inspirational: Any unit led by Caeser will exert itself that little bit harder in combat, and may therefore add +1 to its combat results score. Quick Thinking: Caeser *always* gets the first turn of a battle, unless he has been ambushed or in some other way surprised. In addition, Caeser is allowed to redeploy any one unit in his army *after* he has seen his opponent's set-up. The redeployed uniut may be set up anywhere in Caeser's deployment area. Rash: Caeser and any unit he leads become subject to Warband Psychology rule 2. MARC ANTONY Marc Antony: M4, WS7, BS6, S4, T4, W3, I6, A3, Ld9 Armed with a sword. May have light armour or ride a warhorse. Tenacious: A unit led by Marc Antony takes any leadership tests with three dice, and picks which two it will use to decide the result of the test. POMPEY Pompey: M4, WS6, BS6, S4, T4, W3, I6, A2, Ld9 Armed with a sword. May have light armour or ride a warhorse. Great Commander: To represent Pompey's remarkable ability as an army commander if he is included in an army it may set up second, after the opposing army's deployment has been revealed. TITUS ATIUS LABIENUS (leader of Pompey's cavalry at the Battle Of Pharsulus) Titus Labienus: M4, WS6, BS6, S4, T4, W3, I6, A3, Ld9 Armed with a sword. May have light armour or ride a warhorse. Hates Caeser: Titus Labienus and any unit he leads hate Julius Caeser (see the psychology rules). If caeser is leading a unit then they hate that unit as well. If he is leading an army then they hate the entire army! Jervis From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue May 18 08:15:28 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (zeule-internal [172.20.5.7]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id IAA58189 for ; Tue, 18 May 1999 08:15:28 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id IAA18492 for ; Tue, 18 May 1999 08:14:22 -0500 Received: from orion.starlink.com(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma018490; Tue, 18 May 99 08:14:12 -0500 Received: (from root@localhost) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id FAA28332 for whancients-list; Tue, 18 May 1999 05:52:54 -0700 (MST) Received: from hpamgaaa.compuserve.com (ah-img-1.compuserve.com [149.174.217.154]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id FAA28328 for ; Tue, 18 May 1999 05:52:53 -0700 (MST) Received: (from mailgate@localhost) by hpamgaaa.compuserve.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/HP-1.4) id IAA27239; Tue, 18 May 1999 08:52:20 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 08:50:30 -0400 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] WAB Errata Sheet (long) To: WAB Mailing List Cc: Matt Keefe Message-ID: <199905180851_MC2-7626-7526@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id FAA28329 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by orion.starlink.com id FAA28332 X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] Below is the WAB errata sheet. Note that it includes some important ammendments. If you've any comments, suggestions or things you think ned = to be included, let me know! Jervis WARHAMMER ANCIENT BATTLES & ARMIES OF ANTIQUITY ERRATA SHEET -------------------------------------------------------------------------= -- ------------------------------------------------- This sheet includes all of the important errata for Warhammer Ancient Battles (WAB) and Armies of Antiquity (AoA). Some minor corrections have been left out of this sheet, on the basis that the correction will cause far more confusion than it resolves - or, to put it another way, the cure would be worse than the illness! Please note that these corrections can only be used for battles where both players knew about them before the battle began.=20 Jervis Johnson, 18/5/99 Warhammer Ancient Battles ------------------------------------------ Rerolls: A number of rules allow a unit to reroll a dice roll. Unless stated otherwise a reroll may be used every time the dice roll is failed, rather than once per battle. However, a single dice roll may not be rerolled more than once, and the result of the second roll must be accepted. P18, Charges: Charging units should be moved one at a time. If one unit's move blocks another unit from making a charge, then that other unit count= s as having made a failed charge. Note that a unit whose charge is block ma= y not redirect their charge against another unit, or 'swing round' to hit t= he flank or rear of the unit it was going to charge. P20, Marching: The only manoeuvre a marching unit can carry out is a whee= l. It may not change formation, turn or reform.=20 P26, Light Armour Save: Light armour provides a 6+ infantry save and a 5+ cavalry save, not 5+ and 4+ saves respectively as shown on the chart.=20 P29, Which Models May Fight: Models may fight an opponent if they are touching diagonally (i.e. models can fight if the corners of their bases are in contact). P55, Shooting Through Skirmishers: Note that the 'gaps' between models th= at are in skirmish formation don't block the line of sight of an enemy unit. If you want to block fire from enemy units then you need to form your skirmishers into a 'cloud' several lines deep, so that models in the rear rows block the gaps in the front rows. P55, Skirmishers in Hand To Hand Combat: All the models from a charging unit that is in skirmish formation must contact the facing that a 'forme= d' unit would contact. Place up any skirmishers that are left over behind t= he ones in the front rank.=20 P57, Chariots: Unless a rule states otherwise then chariots are effected = by psychology in the same way as cavalry. For example, if an enemy unit caus= es fear in cavalry then it causes fear in chariots as well. Leaders, standar= d bearers and musicians replace crew models, and thus you can possibly have several in a single chariot if desired. P58, Chariot Squadrons: Unengaged chariot models move into an ongoing combat in the same manner as skirmishers. Also note that excess wounds caused on engaged chariots 'carry on' to other chariots in the same squadron. P60, Scythed Chariots vs Drilled Troops: The rules for drilled troops avoiding scythed chariot attacks also apply to troops in skirmish formation. Note that this does not apply to skirmishers fighting elephant= s (in this case the troops need to be in a solid formation and then open a 'lane' for that the elephant is encouraged to move through). P62, Elephants In Hand To Hand Combat: Infantry that are in skirmish formation can only be hit by an elephant on a roll of 6, as the skirmishe= rs will use the extra space they have to attack the beast from the sides and generally try to keep out of its way. Note that the crew will still hit any attacking skirmishers normally. P63, 'Used To' Elephants: Add the following after the second sentence in the first paragraph of this section (i.e. just before the sentence that starts 'Infantry that are used=85') 'In addition, unless playing a special scenario that states otherwise, it is assumed that an army fighting an opponent with elephants has already faced them several times and now has a pretty good idea of how to deal wi= th them. Although not yet fully 'used to elephants', all skirmisher infantry= , all light infantry, and all drilled infantry in the army are considered t= o be 'used to' elephants. ' P125, Roman Army List: Increase the cost of elephants to 125 points plus = 8 per crew. P129, Barbarian Army List: Delete the Warrior On Foot line in the chariot entry. It is not needed and is not used (the warriors attacks are include= d in the chariot's characteristics).=20 Armies Of Antiquity ---------------------------- Inside front cover: 'Gousalves' should be amended to 'Gonsalves'. Inside front cover: The Battle of Cremona is attributed to 'Tacticus' instead of 'Tacitus'. P8, Trojan War: The general and any heroes must ride in chariots, bought = at additional cost from the Chariotry section of the list. P13, Achaemenid Persians Spara Bearers: Change the second and forth 'bullets' as follows: A unit that remains stationary in the movement phas= e may set up a spara barrier. A spara barrier is knocked down if the unit moves or at the end of the first round of combat that it fights (whether = it wins or loses). Also, note that a spara barrier counts as an obstacle, so units fighting across them or defending behind them may not use their ran= k bonus in the first round of combat.=20 P14, Achaemenid Persians Allies: The Persian army may include allied troo= ps from the Ancient Greek army list as part of their Special Troops allocation.=20 P14, Ancient Greek: The army general may be upgraded to a Spartan army general at a cost of +25 pts. Spartan army generals are drilled and stubborn. P16, Alexander & His Successors: Unengaged models in a wedge may only use their attacks against an enemy unit that was charged by the wedge. Hypaspists may be given light armour at +2 pts per model. Also, please no= te that the rules for the Macedonian phalanx are meant to be different to those of the Ancient Greek phalanx. The change represents the professionalism of Macendonian and Successor phalangites compared to the citizen militia that made up a typical Ancient Greek phalanx. P18, Ancient Indian: The Indian Longbow was a long and rather unwieldy weapon, not well suited to being used in confined spaces (like a chariot cab) or precarious locations (like the back of an elephant). To represent this, models armed with longbows do not get to shoot twice if mounted in = a chariot or riding an elephant. P25, Late Roman: The Comitatense option for Late Roman Heavy cavalry is i= n fact unlimited and the 0-1 restriction should be ignored. The Special Rul= e for Heavy Cavalry should read "Cataphracts use the special rules in the Cataphract army list." rather than the sentence that is actually printed there. Also, please note that if you are using the Craig Davey option the= n the army may include units of stubborn/drilled Guard or units of Guards using the increased profile, not both. P30, Nomadic Hordes: A unit that uses feigned flight and flees off the table is lost and may not return later in the battle.=20 P34, Saxons: The single unit of Huscarls can have a leader, standard and = so on, and these can be allocated out to units of Fryd along with other=20 models. If the Fryd have their own such models, then leaders work normall= y (+1 attack each if in contact with the enemy), but there is no additional bonus for having multiple standards and musicians. P40, Crusaders: Please note that Knights and Sergeants are mounted on warhorses, even though the characteristic line for the warhorse was misse= d out. See the entries for the army general or army battle standard for the warhorses characteristics. P45, Samurai: Wakato should have a Ld value of 5. P46, Cavalry Counter-Charges: Light chariots may counter-charge, but heav= y chariots and scythed chariots may not. P46, Falling Back In Good Order: Units with a Ld of less than 5 cannot fa= ll back in good order and follow the normal rules instead. In circumstances where a unit would normally break automatically (if beaten in combat by charging Norman Knights for example), then a unit will automatically fall back in good order instead. Units that move off the table while falling back in good order are lost and may not return. P46, Characters in Chariots and on Elephants: A character whose armour sa= ve is worse (after modification for shield bearers etc.) than that of the hi= s mount may use the mount's saving throw instead. All his other characteristics remain the same, even if lower than those of the mount. P46, Elephant Howdahs: The lists make no mention of which elephants have howdahs. To resolve this, if the Elephant model (as sold) has a howdah treat the model as having one in game terms. If no howdah is on the model it does not gain this bonus. Converted howdahs are fine if you've got som= e historical basis for giving the elephant a howdah. P47, Ancient Britons: In section 4 replace the third 'bullet point' (the one that starts 'The player controlling=85') with the following: =B7 To represent the trick of the warriors in the chariot dismounting to fight on foot, the formation counts as having a rank bonus of +1 if ther= e are 8-11 models in the unit, and +2 if there are 12 or more models in the unit. From owner-whancients@warpzone.com Tue May 18 17:30:48 1999 Received: from gatekeeper.tripos.com (zeule-internal [172.20.5.7]) by tripos.com (980919.SGI.STAND) via SMTP id RAA58807 for ; Tue, 18 May 1999 17:30:48 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from uucp@localhost) by tripos.com (SMI-8.6) id RAA22458 for ; Tue, 18 May 1999 17:29:42 -0500 Received: from orion.starlink.com(209.63.71.2) by gatekeeper.tripos.com via smap (V4.2) id xma022449; Tue, 18 May 99 17:28:49 -0500 Received: by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id PAA22524 for whancients-list; Tue, 18 May 1999 15:06:30 -0700 (MST) Received: from dub-img-9.compuserve.com (dub-img-9.compuserve.com [149.174.206.139]) by orion.starlink.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id PAA22514 for ; Tue, 18 May 1999 15:06:26 -0700 (MST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dub-img-9.compuserve.com (8.8.6/8.8.6/2.18) id SAA21140 for whancients@warpzone.com; Tue, 18 May 1999 18:05:55 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 18:05:44 -0400 From: Liz Johnson <... Subject: [WAB] Elephant Rules Mk III To: WAB Mailing List Message-ID: <199905181805_MC2-7638-77EB@compuserve.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by orion.starlink.com id PAA22521 Sender: owner-whancients@warpzone.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: whancients@warpzone.com (WAB Mailing List) Status: O X-Mozilla-Status: 9001 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 [Warhammer Ancient Battles Mailing List] If you've seen the errata sheet I sent, then you know that I've made a couple of important changes to the way that elephants work in the game. In addition to those rules, below is an option that players can use if they wish, which allows them to include cheaper but far more unreliable elepahtns in their armies. As ever, let me know what you think... Jervis RAMPAGING PACHYDERMS There appear to have been two grades of elephant used in ancient battles; Firstly there were what I'll call 'war elephants', for want of a better term, that were fully trained for the rigours of battle and appear to have been quite reliable (for an elephant at least). However, elephants of this type were both rare and extremely expensive, and because of this on a number of occassions ancient generals used only partially trained elephants in there battles instead. The most notable example of the use of the second kind were the Cartheginian elephants at Zama, which were poorly trained and quickly ran away. I've therefore come up with these rules that allows players to pick what grade of elephant they want to use - cheap and cheerful or expensive and reliable. POORLY TRAINED ELEPHANTS The elephants included in the army lists are assumed to be well trained and (fairly) reliable war elephants. A player may choose to take poorly trained elephants if he prefers, but they are much more liable to panic. Halve the total points cost (i.e. including crew and upgrades) of a poorly trained elephant, rounding fractions up. Poorly trained elephants were prone to panic, and this was often explopited by an opponent. To reflect such tactics, if your oppoent has included poorly trained elephants in his army then you are allowed to use a 'scare tactic' once per battle. The scare tactic is announced at the start of the turn when charges would normally be declared (it doesn't make any actual game difference as to what the tactic is, but in the interests of fun it is highly recommended that the player invents his own, suitably outlandish tactic, before roll any dice!). At the time that the tactic is used 3D6 are rolled. Any and all poorly trained elephants within that many inches of an enemy standard bearer or musician who is on foot must pass a ld test or stampede (note that mounted standard bearers and musicians can't be used for scare tactics). An army that uses a scare tactic may move and shoot normally during the same turn, but may not declare any charges or make any march moves (basically, the army stands around and watches to see what effect the scare tactic had!). Jervis