From: Perry Gray

I was comparing AW and MW last night. I think that there is scope for some cross-over. One rule which applies to both (in my mind) is the "warband rule". Patrician Roman and European armies with barbarian infantry could benefit from this rule. I suppose that some could argue for extending the rule to later armies such as Viking, Scots Isles/Highland and similar infantry heavy armies. I think that this is a case of troop behavior rather than period specific characteristics.

[Ed. We toyed with this idea, and even tried it out, but decided to leave it to the province of the Ancient rules.]

Other optional rules might be in order to cover nuances not featured in other rules. You have done so for several cases to date (British Napoleonic infantry fire better, Mongols with LB).

I appreciate that you do not want to start making basic changes to the rules; however, I still think that you 1 to 8 range for stands is unbalanced. Since you allow troops to fight in a maximum of three ranks, then the maximum size should be a multiple of 3 (9 or 12). I realise that a minimum of 1 allows generals to act independently (and understrength units too). Pike units will have uneven ranks (3 + 3 + 2) as will Roman, Byzantine and other units with a third rank of archers. It offends my sense of uniformity.

[Ed. This can be easily rectified. If anyone wishes to use 9 stand units, fine. A 12 stand unit would be catastrophic, however. One real way we keep down unwieldy unit size is by the -1 morale loss for each stand lost. I am convinced that a commander could not control more than 650-700 men (and that with difficulty) during the Medieval period.]

If generals can not alter their classification (referring to my question on Mongols re: could they be purchased as SI), then can they at least act as if part of the unit?

[Ed. Certainly. A general may join any unit he wishes.]

Players could argue that a Mongol general attached to an SC unit would "retreat" slower than the unit and therefore could be more easily caught by pursuing cavalry. This makes the general more vulnerable. If the rules state that the general moves as part of the unit, then his factors should be the same for taking casualties. It would also simplify calculating factors for shooting and melee.

[Ed. I can't go with that. He was much more heavily armored on a bigger horse.]

On the subject of markers, will the rules include samples that can be copied?

[Ed. Email me and I'll send you an attached version of the full color markers Jeff, Dave and Lyle used in their Liegnitz game.]

We have been using special ones to indicate shieldwall, wedge, special formation, arrow barrage, low on ammo, etc in addition to order markers. The extra markers are visual reminders for formations and unit status. I even have a dummy marker so that orders are not confused (we tried using obvious fakes for units without orders but sometimes errors were made and unit s did things that the players had not "ordered"). Since Foundry will be publishing separate army lists, I think that this provides an opportunity to embellish the lists with additional information. I would lean towards tactical advice and identification of historic enemies rather than a potted history. [Ed. That is exactly what we have done.]

You have done much of this work to date. Additional material could include historical deployments (ie Crusader armies formed in two lines so that the knights could charge through the infantry) to guide new gamers. You could also recommend reference books and articles beyond the traditional Osprey, WRG and Montvert series. There are plenty of easily accessed references available as detailed guides. Some of the information would apply to two or more armies (ie all Crusader armies or Mongol or Byzantine).

If you have special interests, I certainly would be willing to do the research. I have had a long interest in researching the doctrine of the armies that I use.

[Ed. Thanks, Perry, always glad for the help. That goes for anyone else…Paul Georgian…who have special interests in certain armies. We have already gotten input from Dennis Leventhal, Dave Perry and Kevin Boylan on armies.]

For example, I could argue that Nikephorian Byzantine armies could also use "Crusader Order" as the cavalry often charged out of defensive infantry formations or retired into them. This is described in several manuals. [Ed. Yes, and Alexius did just that at Durazzo, so it's now officially in the notes at the end of the list.]

Paul and I have both read "Sowing the Dragon's Teeth" which covers several manuals and provides historical information about the Byzantine army on campaign.

Well, we played another MW game last night. This time it was 15mm Nikephorian Byzantine and Norman armies at 400 points. The table was limited to 6 x 4, which did limit the playing area, especially after the river went down on one flank. Despite these changes, there was still much to resolve after three hours. No units had been broken, routed or destroyed. The four cavalry melees had been reduced to slow slogging matches with each player having less than a 50% chance to inflict a hit unless the random dice were extreme (i.e. 1 and 5 or 6).

The Norman commander realised that he had made one major error. He committed both of his generals to melee so that neither could issue orders. How do you resolve this dilemma when other units could easily do something? In his case, he had a cavalry unit that was 1/2 inch away from the flank of a Byzantine unit locked in melee. Another cavalry unit was 1 1/2 inches from a Byzantine unit that sat there shooting with one element each turn. Both were what I would call tempting targets, but as neither Norman unit was fanatic, they could not charge without orders.

[Ed. Use the Uncontrolled Mounted Charge rule. All lance-armed cavalry are required to move toward and charge the nearest enemy, attempting to become frenzied in the process. This rule handles situations such as this.]

Questions 1. Does a unit form a line or a column when it changes facing at 90 degrees to its original position when DEPLOYING? For example, a 4 element/stand unit in two ranks changes facing 90 degrees. Is it now a column of 4 or can it retain its frontage of 2 elements/stands?

[Ed. It becomes a column of 4. If trained, it could reform in 2 x 2]

2. A bow-armed unit is the target of a "FF" [Feigned Flight or Fire and Flee] order. If it returns fire on the charging unit, can it move afterwards?

[If it has Move orders it can move.]

3. Can a unit with pavises form a shieldwall?

[No. A pavise is not a shield. It offers protection from missiles only and is much better than a shield for this.]

4. A unit with pavises emplaces its pavises on a DEPLOY order, can the unit pick them up and move again? If so, what is the movement rate? Under what circumstances does the unit count pavise for shooting and melee?

[You don't have to emplace pavises. They are carried just like a shield. Troops are not hindered for moving with them.]

5. A unit with stakes emplaces its stakes on a DEPLOY order, can the unit pick them up and move again? If so, what is the movement rate?

[Yes, at normal movement rates, it didn't take much effort to yank them out, only to emplace them.]

[Stakes do, pavises do not. Remember, obstacles now count as light terrain for movement delay and disorder].

7. Archers, particularly SI, have very low probabilities at ranges other than CLOSE. Is it possible to have a 1/10 chance to hit just as in melee units have a 1/10 chance to hit?

[All of the research from playtesters has shown that historically. Skirmsihers were usless until fairly close in. they were a nuisance and screened your own troops, but were not effective at producing casualties. They were always overrated in WRG 7th].

[I can see maybe allowing a maximum of 9 stands, but 12 is a bit much].

9. Troops fighting in wedge look very odd when in two lines deep. Is there a better way to represent a wedge without splitting elements/stands? Possibly a marker similar to those for shieldwall and other formations. (Notwithstanding your suggestion that they be separated slightly to indicate the formation of the wedge).

[Yes, that is an excellent idea. I have used ^ shaped cardboard painted green].

10. Please clarify that LB can fire from up to three ranks even if part of a mixed unit. For example, behind Burgundian pikemen or pavisiers.

[If they are the third rank, they canstill fire.]

11. What orders can be given to units in combat? Can they retire/retreat to avoid an obvious negative melee outcome? (Similar to break-off move with opponent able to pursue).

[Yes, they can be ordered to Retreat. They also can be ordered to Deploy to face 90 degrees or 180 degrees.]

12. When a general is with a unit must he give orders to that unit? (WRG rules had a "follow-me" option.)

[Yes, it takes time away from his other order giving to worry about getting a unit he is with moving as well.]

13. Please clarify what happens when units are given orders if beyond the Engagement Range. Can they move in the Strategic Movement Phase and then continue in the Tactical Movement Phase?

[No. If they are given order markers, they may not move in the Strategic Movement Phase.]

14. Have you considered an index and annotating sections so that players can cross reference related information? Currently, one must look in several places to determine how to perform a charge and follow-on sequences.

[That's a nice job for someone to take on. Any volunteers?]

From: Milton Soong: Medieval Warfare After Action Report

Our group ran through our first Medieval Battle game. It's a small (8 -9 units per side) affair using 25mm figs. Everyone had a good time. Some observations:

RULES MESSED UP:

Being our first game, the following rules were either forgotten or mis-played:

• In 2nd or subsequent round of combat, one additional stand on either side may now join the combat. [Ed. As well as any eligible stands behind these].
• Target of a charge only test morale if inf charged by cav in open, or anyone charged by higher armor class.
• Routs and pursuits happen immediately after combat.
• If you roll for frenzy, you don't count ANY morale modifiers, just a straight roll.

I also have the following questions to the designer:

1) Does the number of orders allowed a general ever go down as units in that command are lost? We were making the observation that "oh, now that you lost a unit, you can give ALL your units orders this turn..." I would think the number of permissible orders should go down as the command takes losses.

[Ed. No, the general is still as good or as bad as he ever was, he just makes his job easier to command a dwindling army, though he'll probably lose the game with their strategy!]

2) Elephants disorder cav on your own side, right? (Assuming they are non-Indian of course) That how we played it.

[Ed. Yes, if someone is foolish enough to put his cavalry there, he deserves the problems he'll have.]

3) Can the elephant caused Disorder be rallied? or is it one of those general condition that once the cav leaves the presence of the elephant the disorder just magically go away? If it is just a general condition, is it additive to other types of disorder? (i.e. If I am a cav in an elephant's presence, AND then I suffer an adverse combat, am I now Fragmented?) [Ed. Yes. You must move the cavalry out of the disorder range AND issue them with a Recover order to get them back to normal.]

4) Lining up for melee: We have many instances where a 4 stand wide unit charges and contacts another 4 stands unit, but they aren't colliding head on, so only 1 or 2 stands are touching: (example, use non-proportional fonts) We only adjust so individual "stands" are lined up, not to line up the whole "unit" right? So only two elements will actually fight.

[Three will fight]

5) The only way to expand your units frontage is to play a "deploy" order right?

[right]

Will run a bigger battle on the 8/21 Cupertino Mini-convention.

The 25mm Mongol vs. Ottoman game went well here's some writeup:

We had three commands per side, with about 4 to 5 units per command. We had three players on the Ottoman side (Rob, Lewis, and myself), and two players pushing the Mongols (Jeff and Mike).

Just to simplify the game for the new players. All C-in-C have 3 commands per turn, and other sub generals have 2 commands each.

Due to the table size, we dispensed with strategic movement (even though technically they would of applied for the first turn). Rules Questions:

Pursuit/followup: If one side routs from melee, how far does the other side follow up? I can't seem to find that in the rules.

[Ed. A pursuit is the same as a charge move. Roll d6 and add the appropriate number of inches to your score.]

Elephants: Do they count as "shielded" or not? How about their armor class?

[Ed. Elephants always count shielded. They are the same as Heavy for armor (they are at the bottom of the armor class list on the QRS)]

Disorder due to elephants: If a non-arab non-Indian Cav unit enters within 1/3 engagement range of an elephant, it becomes disordered. Let's say he then leaves the "zone of disorder". He didn't issue a recover order so the disorder stays. Say he then enters the Zone of disorder AGAIN, is he now fragmented? (we played it so it's just disordered).

[Ed. You played it right, he is not double-disordered. He remains disordered until out of 1/3 engagement range, then may recover]

If a unit is charged by opponent at a weird angle, who does the "spoinging" to line up the two units?

[Ed. Split the difference re: angles. If one unit is defending, however, the attacker must conform to his original line]

Looks like tactical move is sequential. I go, you go. So there's no simultaneous move of any kind during tactical move phase right? (other than the charge related order which is carried out simultaneously)

[Right]

Comments: General comments are favorable, everyone mentioned that they liked the simplicity of the system, and that it's fast moving (we finished our game in exactly 3 hr.)

Some specific comment:

Many people comment that 1st round melee is decisive (good), but if either unit survives till subsequent rounds, then neither side does much damage, and the melee drags out for a long time. We think subsequent rounds of melee should be more deadly so units will break quicker.

[Ed. This is unhistorical, however. Once units got "into it", they were locked until a morale failure or another unit caught someone on the flank or rear. It makes you plan ahead. An infantry or cavalry slog can last all game without intervention or morale failure].

Have photos and all that. Will write up a brief report when the pics are developed...

From: John Douglas

A couple more issues came up this weekend during AW. aabbccdd aabbccdd g g -

Each letter represents one element. Gallic cav in column charged a line of velites which withdrew through a line of 4 units of legionaires with move orders. The cavs charge brought them into contact with unit 'b' . This Roman line is four separate units touching each other corner to corner and edge to edge. Each unit is four elements, two wide and two deep. After the intial contact round in which there was no casualties the Roman player insisted that not only would the rest of unit 'b' be eligible for overlap but unit 'c' element in corner to corner contact was eligible as well. I felt unit 'b' was the only one eligible for overlap. Who is correct?

[Your opponent. So long as the units are touching, they count as overlaps (in MW, I have an example of this). Hint: did you have to contact the legionnaires? Remember, you only have to move 1/2 your allowed charge move. Sure, you will be disordered, but you can save your cavalry. Also, his velites should have taken a morale test for being charged by mounted in the open.]

If he is correct, wouldn't my initial charge which contacted 'b' and also put me in corner to corner contact with 'c' mean that I had to fight both units in the first round?

[No. We only allow the corner to corner fight when a unit is trying to get a flank attack in and can't quite get behind the flank enough. Instead of not allowing him to attack, we allow him to fight as if hitting the enemy on the corner, or edge of his unit.]

I was curious about uncovering a unit. If my Gallic cav were infantry charging would Roman 'b ' be eligible for a countercharge even though velites retired through them

[Yes.]

(My Warhammer gut says no)? If yes, would Roman 'b' be disordered by the interpenetration of the velites while they countercharged?

[He certainly would be].

I hope my examples and questions are clear. We are loving this game more and more. When is RW due out?

[It'll be a while!]

I have a few questions on your intent for elephants in AW/MW.

1) Is the penalty for cav each turn cumulative per turn,i.e. if a cav stays long enough near an elephant they will rout away?

[No, they will only be disordered.]

2)If not cumulative, what happens to a cav that is already disordered when and elephant moves into range? no additional penalty? fragmented?

[It cannot be disordered more than once by the smell of the elephants].

3) When cav tries to recover near an elephant what do we do?

[It cannot Recover from this disorder. Just being near the elephant automatically causes it to become "re-disordered".]

4) Elephants count as 4 figs for casualties. In all other cases they count as one fig on the stand. Is this correct?

[Yes, they get one die per stand for fighting purposes. Some are allowed additional missile fire dice,however (see the army lists for these)].

5) Suggestion. Has it been considered to force a morale check on cav when charged by an elephant or a morale check to charge an elephant for cav or both?

[No, if anyone wants to charge elepahants with cavalry, they have my blessing…and they will probably need a prayer as well to have any chance at winning unless they are hitting the elephant in the flank or rear.]

I got another gamer here in Reno really excited about AW. One guy at a time, right? Thank you for your help. [That's great, John! Thank you.]