A Roundup of Thoughts and Observations (long)

[AlanCutner]

1. Is there any practical difference between troops listed as 'core' and 'optional'? Core troops don't always have a non-zero minimum so is it allowable not to have them? We assumed 'core' and 'optional' were merely descriptive.

2. If both sides have a general with opposing BG's, when declaring if a general is fighting in the front line who declares first? We assumed the active player, but is that right?

[rbodleyscott]

1. Is there any practical difference between troops listed as 'core' and 'optional'? Core troops don't always have a non-zero minimum so is it allowable not to have them? We assumed 'core' and 'optional' were merely descriptive.

They are. Mostly allied contingent only include core troops. The core section is to help those who want to field absolutely typical armies.

2. If both sides have a general with opposing BG's, when declaring if a general is fighting in the front line who declares first? We assumed the active player, but is that right?

Feel free to fight a duel over it. It really isn't that big an issue. All the rules require is that it is declared before dice are thrown. I usually declare mine and ask my opponent if he wishes his general (if present) to fight in the front rank too. There is no real need for brinkmanship on this.

[shall]

LAYOUR LOGIC IS

CORE = frequently represented in their armies
COMPULSORY = CORE starting with nmber other than 0

CORE + COMPULSORY = TYPICAL

CAMPIGM SPECIFIC = onyl seedn once but in an important part of history
NON-CORE = troops seen at various times but less frequently

Desigend to inform and encourage use of more typical and normal optional troops

Si