'Weaponry: Pike in AW fight 4 ranks deep and Long Spear fights three ranks deep. In MW, pike is 3 ranks and LSp is 2 1/2 ranks. MW also has Halberds and Handguns as well as Gunpowder Artillery, not found in AW'. Is the rationale here that the pikes themselves became shorter in later years, or that you're not trying as hard in MW to encourage (as) deep formations for pike blocks?

[It's more of a function and use of weaponry situation. The usual phalangite tactics with close order, trained and to some extent, uparmored foot were not practical for unarmored, irregulars. Sure they had 'pikes', but used them in less depth than classical warriors.]

'Generals: Generals in AW have five different leadership ratings with a better order giving ability than in MW, which has only four ratings, at a slightly worse ability.' What's the rationale behind this difference?

[Again, the overall quality of drilled regulars as well as the better-organized central commands of the ancient empires allowed for a better command control situation.]

'Special Formations: These are very different in each rules set. In MW, you have Shieldwall and Schiltron. Schiltron is the same as Squares in AW. Shieldwall, while similar to AW's Locked Shields, is different in that Locked shields drift 1" to the right each turn they move. Shieldwalls may not charge or countercharge while units in Locked Shields may, though not in a frenzied state and at only 1/2 speed!' Dumb question: what's the real-life difference between Shieldwall and Locked Shields?

[Shieldwall is expressly a defensive formation. Locked Shields were offensive as well as defensively used.]

'Wedge is more effective in MW than in AW, giving you two ranks vrs. 1 1/2 ranks fighting. Rationale?

[High pommeled saddle, stirrups and kinetic energy of knights vrs. classical cavalry.]

'Arrow Barrages for archers are used in MW but not in AW.' Not knowing what the "arrow barrages" rule really is, this is likely another dumb question ... but, um, why wouldn't "arrow barrages" be allowed in AW?

[We argued this once before last year. I don't feel that they were as effective in classical times. By and large, Arrow Barrage really benefits longbowmen, especially trained ones. They can put down a very heavy rate of aimed fire in a very short time. I just find no justification for this in the classical period.]

'Ranges vary some in both rules sets for missile fire.' Same reason as mounted bow differences -- different (i.e. better in MW) technology?

[More widespread use of the composite bow in later period. Longbow/crossbow advantages, etc.]

'Axes count as a +3 factor in MW and 1 1/2 ranks can fight. In AW, they only have a factor of 2 and fight with front rank only.' Does "axe" mean something different in MW, then? Perhaps moving into the longer poleax-type weapons?

[It is the Viking type two-handed weapon that was feared as much as any weapon on the field of battle. The reputation of the wielders was something that also gave them a psychological advantage over their opponents. I portray this psychological and physical advantage this way in MW.]

'Optional Rules: These vary with MW having Uncontrolled Mounted Charge and the Mounted Break though move not found in AW.' Why isn't breakthrough (if it is what I think it is -- similar to Warrior's idea of breakthrough) in AW? Heavy or scythed chariots seem prime candidates for such a maneuver (for good or ill). And uncontrolled mounted charge ... again, not having MW I don't know exactly what this is, but I presume it's making it even harder to control those impetuous knights. Wouldn't such a rule be applicable to some AW army units as well?

[Again, it's the charge factor that the knights have over all others. With so much power behind their charge, and their desire to kill anything they can hit, these factors are available in MW, but not in AW.]