 | | Re: Possible April Brikwars (was Re: The meeting was fun) —Timothy D. Freshly
|
| | | "John Kornhaus" <jkornhaus@xperts.com> wrote in message news:020320011121166...rts.com... (...) want. (...) to (...) battle (...) A medieval campaign would present different strategic challenges as well. I was just reading an article in National (...) (24 years ago, 2-Mar-01, to lugnet.org.us.richlug)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Possible April Brikwars (was Re: The meeting was fun) —Rich Schoonover
|
| | | | I like the Castle idea. There could be defenders in the castle and intervening reinforcements outside the castle. There could be many ways to play the game. The middle ages would be a great way to play and it would be a good first game. Did you want (...) (24 years ago, 2-Mar-01, to lugnet.org.us.richlug)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Possible April Brikwars (was Re: The meeting was fun) —Timothy D. Freshly
|
| | | | I could bring my castle again, although it may not be the best for Brikwars (no, I'm not talking about durability either!). I may be wrong, but I was thinking that a more wide open keep might be best, both for access and maneuverability (ours, not (...) (24 years ago, 2-Mar-01, to lugnet.org.us.richlug)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Possible April Brikwars (was Re: The meeting was fun) —Rich Schoonover
|
| | | | I agree on the castle bit. A more open defensive position may be better. I bought some troops today for middle ages type combat. I need to get some guns to upgrade them to musket troops if I want to play civil war or napoleonic campaigns. Who is (...) (24 years ago, 2-Mar-01, to lugnet.org.us.richlug)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | I'm in (was Re: Possible April Brikwars...) —Timothy D. Freshly
|
| | | | "Rich Schoonover" <rwschoonover@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:003301c0a370$e0...ink.net... (...) I (...) [snip] Count me in. Tim (24 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.org.us.richlug)
|
| | | | |
