mattadami
Munifex
Don’t mess with Cilician Armenians apparently. :|
Posts: 30 
|
Post by mattadami on Apr 18, 2018 15:31:44 GMT
I just have a few questions that I want to throw out here concerning the DBA meta.
1.) Which would say is the Best DBA army? (Early Vikings, Aztecs, Gauls, Cilician Armenians, Etc.)
2.) Which is Better Fast or Solid?
3.) Which is the best, Spears or Blades (Fast or Solid) or Spear or Pike (Fast or Solid) or Warband (Fast or Solid)?
4.) What is the most “Well Rounded” army or Troop type?
Then I have one question that if someone could answer, that would be great.
When an Element suffers a ranged attack, does the defending element get to add its rear support and side supports bonuses?
cheers,
~Matt
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Apr 18, 2018 16:01:10 GMT
1. My greatest success has been with Alexandrian Macedonians. Though I have also won tournaments with Late Romans.
2. Depends on terrain.
3. "Solid" Blade is the best troop type.
4. Late Imperial Rome
To answer your question.
No.
Rear and Side support is only for close combat.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Apr 18, 2018 16:17:57 GMT
I just have a few questions that I want to throw out here concerning the DBA meta. 1.) Which would say is the Best DBA army? (Early Vikings, Aztecs, Gauls, Cilician Armenians, Etc.) cheers, ~Matt TBH whatever my opponent is playing. I love my ancient British but I just don't play em well, Romans, any dudes with knights seem to particularly slaughter me. |
|
|
|
Post by Tony Aguilar on Apr 18, 2018 20:17:04 GMT
Depends.
You should play lots of games and come up with your own conclusions and see what you like.
The troop types are well balanced.
Most armies are competitive, as long as they have a mix of troop types.
I would not want 8 to 12 of any ONE element.
|
|
mattadami
Munifex
Don’t mess with Cilician Armenians apparently. :|
Posts: 30
|
Post by mattadami on Apr 18, 2018 20:58:16 GMT
Early Vikings seems pretty good, 1x 4Bd, 10x 3Bd, and 1x 4Bd or 3Wb.
Thoughts?
~Matt
|
|
|
|
Post by arnopov on Apr 18, 2018 22:01:16 GMT
1) Tamils (with Hindu Ally)
2) Fast
3) Fast Blades
4) For elements: El, or good dismounters (Kn//Bd/Sp or Cm//Bw/Sp or Cv//Bw)
For armies: low aggression, and a lot of flexibility, either through a good mix, or dismounting
But that's just opinions, very hard to substantiate anything in DBA, nowhere near enough data points.
|
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Apr 18, 2018 22:02:20 GMT
In general Blades are the most feared element type. Someone composed a mathematical analysis of best troop types and 6Blade won. Fast are extra scary. As you may know in DBX game theory +4 v. +4 is the last match up where a 6-1 can kill an opponent - Blades at +5 break this limit and so are extra powerful (and Destory Cav on double, give side support, Destroy Knights on Equals...)
My son's high school science project was to analyze play balance in DBA3.0 - armies with at least 1/2 Blades won out after a mass of test games (holding other factors equal).
Still overall balance is decent in 3.0 (and much better than Blades in HOTT [where Knights don't Shock Blades] or 2.2 w/Ps support). Side support (Retinue/Shieldwall) has helped.
So play what you like - its much nicer to lose with some romantic army - since you can just blame it on the troops.
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by arnopov on Apr 18, 2018 22:05:15 GMT
Early Vikings seems pretty good, 1x 4Bd, 10x 3Bd, and 1x 4Bd or 3Wb. Thoughts? ~Matt No chance. (unless in a themed competition) Way too aggressive, and with no answers to Kn or El. |
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Apr 21, 2018 19:11:28 GMT
Matt,
I would suggest collect an army that you would enjoy even if it losses.
Find one that fits your style of game; aggressive, cunning or cautious.
Stick with the army as you will eventually learn how to counter an opponent’s tactics and adapt to fighting in a variety of terrain.
Select an army that has a good selection of allies; these may supply the needed troop types to help you win a battle.
|
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Apr 22, 2018 20:18:04 GMT
Also, DBA is much more fun if played with historical match-ups. Most of them work very well. The only one that I have experienced to be extremely one-sided is Teutonic Orders vs. Prussians.
|
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Apr 25, 2018 15:52:21 GMT
Terrain is the answer to Kn and El. Killed on Equals (Cry Havoc) adds a bit of spice too.
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by mthrguth on Apr 25, 2018 17:15:40 GMT
The term 'Meta-game' was originally used to describe elements of a game outside of the rules. Now it is often used to mean advantages accruing in a game associated with selecting certain options.
An example of the meta-game might include something as simple as dice chicanery.
Event size is an important meta-game element. In a short tournament (3 rounds is very typical in the HMGS), an army that is terrain dependent with low aggression may run off a string of defending and placing terrain 3 times. Longer events may favor more balanced armies. Fast blade armies are great until they face an all knight army on a ping pong table. Also, in the UK in larger events draws are more common than in the USA. With 3 rounds odds are still that the winner will be 3-0 and not 2-0-1.
Board size. Will you play on a 2x2board, or a more cavalry friendly 30 inch board?
Theme is critical. Which armies can you choose from? Which enemies will you face?
Victory conditions are critical. Is the event strict W-L? Or, is it points based with potential extra victory points for enemy generals or camps?
Within the rules, New things:
Double based elements: Risk versus reward. A one pip difference in combat factor can double your chances
Allies: risk of pip starvation (sorry, I said pip) versus potential increases in combat power. Can radically change the nature of some armies.
Dismounting: It seems to me that there are more armies with dismountable elements than in previous editions. An advantage over mirror armies that cannot dismount in many cases.
Aggression/Terrain. See my article on the odds of getting terrain in all 4 quadrants.
Artillery. Minor change, ? impact against elephant armies?
Skirmishers versus bow fire: underappreciated rule change. IMO.
Change in minus factor for infantry in bad going fighting cavalry NOT in bad going.
And the old:
Total army strength points, subtotal versus infantry and cavalry. A decent starting point, since quick kills are hard to value, but used for decades as a screening tool. The more factors you have, the better off you are. If you are weak in the infantry factors, then blade armies will give you a headache.
Eextra pip for elephant movement, now an old change.
So, to me these are the elements that define the DBA metagame, in the sense that this is what I consider before actually getting to the battlefield and doing stupid things or not knowing the actual rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by macbeth on Apr 25, 2018 22:32:35 GMT
My element rating system as detailed in the Magister Militum Per Capitoline Territorialis thread in the Tournaments section gives my relative ranking of different elements. I don't plan to re-write it here, but it does go through all the factors I took into consideration at the time.
The primary driver was calculating the odds that any given element type could destroy all other element types AND the odds that they could be destroyed by each and every other element type. This was also adjusted by the relative maximum frequencies of element types in an army (eg you can find an army of twelve 3Bd but you will find no more than two Art in any army).
I won't say it is perfect, but I prefer to have a GOOD system that is backed up by mathematics over striving for a PERFECT system guided by anecdotal issues over the relative power of a given troop type (cases currently in point, 3Bd and 4Ax).
Cheers
|
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Apr 26, 2018 16:12:17 GMT
Macbeth:
I like your rating system and used it when I deconstructed and redesigned DBX. I think you had 6Blade as the top dog (an element for which Mike is very familiar).
Years ago I rated HOTT troop types by using a market based system (since HOTT has not lists its an open market). I added up the types used in tournaments and then also added up the types used in the top three armies. It assumed that in an open market informed consumers would pick the best element types to stock their armies and then this was validated by looking at what elements types appeared in the winning armies. It takes a pretty big sample though to make this work.
I'll review it again when I get a chance - but do you rate Fast versions higher than non-Fast?
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by macbeth on Apr 27, 2018 5:16:08 GMT
Tom,
I have rated fast troops slightly below their solid compatriot.
If I remember correctly the top element according to my system is 6Kn, followed by CP/CWg/Lit then El. I think 3/4Kn come in next followed by 4Bd then 6Bd
I think my formula was a base value plus the weighted odds of killing all elements less the weighted odds of being killed. The next step was to reduce the value of elements that recoiled on a tie by 10% and increase the value of elements that do not recoil by 10%
I saw that this effect can alter the overall likelihood of being killed (more chance of recoil = greater chance of overlap OR more chance of dying when the gate is shut - not recoiling = no dying unless doubled even if the gate is shut). I then mitigated this by applying the movement rates to the score so fast foot get a bonus at that point.
Cheers
|
|
