Warfare 2011

grahambriggs · Post by **grahambriggs** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 4:50 pm

philqw78 wrote:
shall wrote:Looking forward to Warfare - I'll be along and umpiring.
Could they not find anybody that knew the rules Si?

Be thankful. Terry was the alternative.

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 6:05 pm

grahambriggs wrote:
philqw78 wrote:Could they not find anybody that knew the rules Si?
Be thankful. Terry was the alternative.

Was his daughter not available to look after him this time? Sad when you get old like that.

shall · Post by **shall** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 10:09 pm

Rarely has my umpiring been inhibited by knowledge.

You can always agree to roll a dice if you think it gives a better decision - then I can get on with my own game.

And think of me - I do have to call on Terry if I need a ruling

S

TimChild · Post by **TimChild** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 11:06 pm

philqw78 wrote:Re the rule on allies. Does this mean anything using a Hun ally in the Roman period must be dated 433 to 453 and use Attilla as the Ally general ???????

This wasn't the intention, and I will be taking a view on any such lists submitted. Likewise minor allies that don't get a main list of their own. The point was to keep the tone of the lists within the Classical "theatre".

Ask nicely and offer a suitable bribe.

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Tue Sep 13, 2011 11:50 pm

shall wrote:Rarely has my umpiring been inhibited by knowledge.

Its your lack of inhibition that scares me.

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Wed Sep 14, 2011 6:25 am

TimChild wrote:
philqw78 wrote:Re the rule on allies. Does this mean anything using a Hun ally in the Roman period must be dated 433 to 453 and use Attilla as the Ally general ???????
This wasn't the intention, and I will be taking a view on any such lists submitted. Likewise minor allies that don't get a main list of their own. The point was to keep the tone of the lists within the Classical "theatre".

Ask nicely and offer a suitable bribe.

Tim, in the case of the Huns can you make an official and published decision please. I can think of at least 1 army off hand where this could make a difference to the army, and could cause a surprise to an opponent and thus, potential bad feeling.

davesaunders23 · Post by **davesaunders23** » Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:01 pm

is it okay to pay for an entry now whilst not knowing which period of 15mm FOG you want to enter? still practicing. not that that helps much...

can't decide on romans or byzantines.

dave

TimChild · Post by **TimChild** » Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:18 pm

davesaunders23 wrote:is it okay to pay for an entry now whilst not knowing which period of 15mm FOG you want to enter? still practicing. not that that helps much...

can't decide on romans or byzantines.

dave

I don't know, because I haven't tried out the online payment system myself?! It would always have been OK with cheques...

shall · Post by **shall** » Mon Sep 19, 2011 11:47 am

Ok I have decided and am going to give the 15mm AM early period a go. Managed 3rd with numidians at Roll Call - think I'll tr something with a bit more punch this time.

Looking forward to seeing everyone there.

S

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Tue Oct 04, 2011 2:58 pm

I've asked this in a PM but everyone must want to know.

Can Late Libyan Allies be used?

They only exist as allies and, I believe, only to these 4 of the armies above listed, Kyrenean Greek, Late Dynastic Egyptian, Early Carthaginian and Syracusan.

davesaunders23 · Post by **davesaunders23** » Tue Oct 04, 2011 3:11 pm

nikgaukroger wrote:
TimChild wrote:
philqw78 wrote:Re the rule on allies. Does this mean anything using a Hun ally in the Roman period must be dated 433 to 453 and use Attilla as the Ally general ???????
This wasn't the intention, and I will be taking a view on any such lists submitted. Likewise minor allies that don't get a main list of their own. The point was to keep the tone of the lists within the Classical "theatre".

Ask nicely and offer a suitable bribe.

Tim, in the case of the Huns can you make an official and published decision please. I can think of at least 1 army off hand where this could make a difference to the army, and could cause a surprise to an opponent and thus, potential bad feeling.

i'm still confused by this...
dave.

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Tue Oct 04, 2011 3:18 pm

davesaunders23 wrote:i'm still confused by this...
dave.

It doesn't really make any difference to Hun allies, as Attilla is not specified as Inspired/Field/TC. So a Hun ally would be legal just by following the Western Hun list. It does make a difference for minor armies, like the Late Libyans, who only exist as allies to other nations.

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Tue Oct 04, 2011 4:33 pm

philqw78 wrote:
davesaunders23 wrote:i'm still confused by this...
dave.
It doesn't really make any difference to Hun allies, as Attilla is not specified as Inspired/Field/TC. So a Hun ally would be legal just by following the Western Hun list. It does make a difference for minor armies, like the Late Libyans, who only exist as allies to other nations.

Makes a difference to the armies they are possibly allied with if the Huns are only allowed in the Attila dates - in some cases it can mean they are not available, in others what troops the main army has available.

TimChild · Post by **TimChild** » Tue Oct 04, 2011 10:49 pm

philqw78 wrote:I've asked this in a PM but everyone must want to know.

Can Late Libyan Allies be used?

They only exist as allies and, I believe, only to these 4 of the armies above listed, Kyrenean Greek, Late Dynastic Egyptian, Early Carthaginian and Syracusan.

We have changed the rules on the WAR website to cover the Huns and Arabs - see http://www.wargamesassociationreading.c ... .-2509.pdf.

However, I think my ruling, since we're now only 6 weeks away and I have started to receive lists, is no more changes to what's published there. So, Phil, no Late Libyan allies.

Tim Child

TimChild · Post by **TimChild** » Mon Oct 17, 2011 10:21 pm

Just a reminder to everyone who is coming to Warfare, that I do need your lists by the 31st October please. That's three weeks ahead of the event, I know, but I do have over 100 to do normally, between DBMM and FOG, so need plenty of time!

Cheers,

Tim Child

davidandlynda · Post by **davidandlynda** » Tue Oct 18, 2011 7:46 pm

Just sending ours Tim
David

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Tue Oct 18, 2011 8:04 pm

TimChild wrote:Just a reminder to everyone who is coming to Warfare, that I do need your lists by the 31st October please. That's three weeks ahead of the event, I know, but I do have over 100 to do normally, between DBMM and FOG, so need plenty of time!

Cheers,

Tim Child

You could have asked for somebody to volunteer to help...

TimChild · Post by **TimChild** » Tue Oct 18, 2011 10:46 pm

nikgaukroger wrote:
TimChild wrote:Just a reminder to everyone who is coming to Warfare, that I do need your lists by the 31st October please. That's three weeks ahead of the event, I know, but I do have over 100 to do normally, between DBMM and FOG, so need plenty of time!

Cheers,

Tim Child

You could have asked for somebody to volunteer to help...

I could, but I enjoy it and FOG lists are pretty easy (compared to DBx!)

I have a volunteer from within WAR to help with the DBMM list-checking this year, so I am at least experimenting with this weird theory that life is easier if you delegate.

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Wed Oct 19, 2011 9:27 am

TimChild wrote: I could, but I enjoy it and FOG lists are pretty easy (compared to DBx!)

Well, Phil wasn't involved so what do you expect

TimChild · Post by **TimChild** » Mon Oct 24, 2011 10:53 pm

Just a reminder, these are due by 31 October - 7 days to deadline.

Cheers,

Tim Child

Warfare 2011

Warfare 2011 lists

Re: Warfare 2011 lists

Re: Warfare 2011 lists

Re: Warfare 2011 lists

Warfare 2011 lists