| Shardik | 29 Oct 2009 1:42 a.m. PST |
Anyone used to play this back in the day? I had a copy and played one or two solo games. Some interesting concepts, notably separating the impact and melee phases of close combat, something now being done in FoG (to my amusement, some fans hailed this as being a FoG innovation) |
| platypus01au | 29 Oct 2009 3:59 a.m. PST |
Yep! Still have a copy. The QRS (s) are a bit tatty but. And I agree. I bought FoG, read it, then pulled out my old copy of AW and thought exactly the same thing. Not that I'm saying the FoG people copied the ideas, just that not everything is new ;-) Still, it was an old school game, figure removal and all that. But it had some ideas that would still be called modern today. I recon you could print it and sell it today no problems. Oh yes, and it had a Middle Earth section at the back with optional rules. That's why I bought the set. Played using Minifigs 25mm Middle Earth miniatures. G^is,
JohnG |
aecurtis  | 29 Oct 2009 4:45 a.m. PST |
Yes, both "Ancient Warfare" and "Sword and Spear", both written by Arnold Hendricks. Allen |
 Bobgnar  | 29 Oct 2009 5:42 a.m. PST |
Arnold was a very innovative guy in the 1970's. His articles on WRG 2 or 3 battles in the original Courier were very interesting. Part of the Chronicles of Maximus Gluteus. He wrote some good WW2 (known as "modern" then) rules and a naval game too, if I remember correctly. What happened to Arnold |
| Austin Rob | 29 Oct 2009 8:01 a.m. PST |
It was the first ancients miniatures that I played. For that reason, I could never really get into WRG, I think. Maybe that is why I like FOG? The most interesting thing I remember is dicing for movement distance for all moves, not just for charging or pursuing or whatever. And why not? We randomize all the combat outcomes, why not movement, which is just as important and almost as unpredictable. Many happy memories of large free-for-all battles. Rob |
| TKindred | 29 Oct 2009 8:53 a.m. PST |
The most interesting thing I remember is dicing for movement distance for all moves, not just for charging or pursuing or whatever. And why not? We randomize all the combat outcomes, why not movement, which is just as important and almost as unpredictable. I have often thought that dicing for movement is a better method than adding modifiers for different types of terrain. You roll 1D6 or 1D10, etc, per unit, and that gives you the maximum move for that turn. You never have to move that far, but it keeps things simple and anything that keeps the game rolling without lots of modifiers is, to my mind, a good thing. |
 Editor in Chief Bill  | 29 Oct 2009 8:56 a.m. PST |
What happened to Arnold He became a successful computer game designer. link |
| aecurtis | 29 Oct 2009 9:10 a.m. PST |
It would be interesting to see these revived. Hmmm hmm hmmmm hmmmm… Allen |
| RockyRusso | 29 Oct 2009 10:56 a.m. PST |
Hi Back in the day, we were friends. Lots of late night geeky conversations at conventions. nice guy. Rocky |
| Rudysnelson | 30 Oct 2009 5:51 a.m. PST |
I only have a copy of the army lists. |
| Delbruck | 30 Oct 2009 8:17 a.m. PST |
Although Ancient Warfare had seperate impact and melee phases like FoG, it was a very different game. Pre written orders, simulateous movement (based on dice) and multiple movement phases per turn. One could use the mechanics to pull off some "gamey" manuevres. In addition, it was initially playtested mostly with traditional Roman/Greek/Barbarian armies. Armies with lots of bows tended to be too powerful. Having said that, there were many interesting concepts in the rules. A new version was planned, but never published. |
| lapatrie88 | 02 Nov 2009 10:48 a.m. PST |
This is where we started with minitures gaming in high school, before we could eve afford to buy miniatures. A copy of the rules and the army lists (perhaps also cutting edge at the time?) are still in a box near my bookshelf. The written orders was the slowest part of the process for us. Dicing for movement and the impact combat worked well for us. However, because of the impact bonus for multiple ranks our formations evolved into an array of columns one stand wide, which we would hurl at each other. Epaminondas to the power of eight. We were working on some house rules to restrict this, but some of us got jobs and started thinking about Napoleonics…. |
| Austin Rob | 03 Nov 2009 8:26 a.m. PST |
However, because of the impact bonus for multiple ranks our formations evolved into an array of columns one stand wide, which we would hurl at each other. Same thing here. One guy even tried to form a square with most of the stands on one side and creep around the battlefield with no flanks. |
