|
|
Post by greedo on Oct 24, 2019 1:03:13 GMT
I'm always looking for ways to give 1-2 elements of an army a "slight" edge if they are deemed "superior" or "inferior". I know many DBA players frown on this trying to bring in stuff from DBMM/DBM etc. but thought it might add a bit of flavor.
Anyway I'm sure this has been thought of before, but how about this simple house rule:
"Superior troops beat regular or inferior troops on ties"
"Inferior troops lose against regular or superior troops on ties"
Spears vs Spears:
That ties into the same mechanism of fast vs solid, so nothing new to remember, and now your manly awesome Spartan Hoplites can have 6/36 extra chance of recoiling those wussy Athenian Hoplites.
4Ax vs Line of Spears:
And assuming that 4Ax are not changed by any other house rules that have been come up with, you could even have Superior Spanish 4Ax to face off against the Romans. Have to calculate their odds on that one though. 6/36 Recoiling the Spears goes to 10/36, which isn't so bad, although the overlaps will still wipe them out, going from 1/36 recoiling the Spears to 3/36, not great but a slight improvement.
And an easy way to implement:
"You may select up to 1/4 of your army to be superior, but you must also select the same number of elements to be inferior"
Complications:
Well now what do we do about Fast Superior troops taking on Solid Regular troops, and they tie? There'd have to be some priority. I'd say Fast/Solid takes precedence over Superior/Inferior, so in this example, the Solid Regular troops would win against Fast Superior troops on a tie.
|
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Oct 24, 2019 1:44:55 GMT
I like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by martin on Oct 24, 2019 2:37:25 GMT
...whereas I’m one of the ‘stick-in-the-mud’ types who thinks it’s a step on the road to DBAMM.
Many of us choose DBA BECAUSE it isn’t DBMM.
|
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Oct 24, 2019 4:08:59 GMT
...whereas I’m one of the ‘stick-in-the-mud’ types who thinks it’s a step on the road to DBAMM. Many of us choose DBA BECAUSE it isn’t DBMM. Fair enough. I know some people are a bit iffy about the fast solid rules. What do you think of them? Personally I like em. |
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Oct 24, 2019 4:34:29 GMT
As a cute little optional rule, what's not to like? If you prefer things as they are without it, just don't use it. Simples.
Another option is to give those specific armies that did very well, e.g. Mongols, HYW English (until the French spanked them at the end...oh yes they did!), certain Romans, Alexandrian Macedonian, etc., some kind of advantage that other armies don't receive, but at the cost of fighting with slightly fewer elements, say 9 or 10 instead of the usual 12. The advantage(s) could be similar to the 'superior' classification mentioned above, extra PIPs, or something else. The advantage(s) could be specific to the particular army concerned. This way you get extra historical flavour (for a price) that doesn't result in historically mediocre troops and armies being equivalently upgraded.
|
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Oct 24, 2019 16:34:50 GMT
Letting my opponent play with my army often has a significant effect on the armies chances of victory.
|
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Oct 24, 2019 16:40:56 GMT
To completely beat a dead horse...
A great way to do the Superior-Inferior...
Cheap blank 12 sided dice...
Mark the Superior one...
1,1,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,5,6,6
and the Inferior one...
1,1,2,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,6,6
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Oct 24, 2019 19:44:25 GMT
To completely beat a dead horse... A great way to do the Superior-Inferior... Cheap blank 12 sided dice... Mark the Superior one... 1,1,2,3,3,4,4,5,5,5,6,6 and the Inferior one... 1,1,2,2,2,3,3,4,4,5,6,6 Joe Collins I’m actually in favor of this one (made my dice and all), as it only changes the probabilities instead any actual rule. But I was looking for a way to incorporate existing mechanisms such as the fast/solid win on ties. Seemed simple enough though it might be overkill. This would also be simple way to differentiate between African vs Indian elephants that Stevie was suggesting although they wouldn’t flee.. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesdiii on Oct 25, 2019 6:03:23 GMT
I'm always looking for ways to give 1-2 elements of an army a "slight" edge if they are deemed "superior" or "inferior". I know many DBA players frown on this trying to bring in stuff from DBMM/DBM etc. but thought it might add a bit of flavor. Anyway I'm sure this has been thought of before, but how about this simple house rule: "Superior troops beat regular or inferior troops on ties"
"Inferior troops lose against regular or superior troops on ties"I have a whole house rule document, along with DBA Books I-IV variant army lists, based on the DBM books, on the old yahoo DBA groups siite. For my superior inferior troop mod, superior troops added +1 when the die was less than the opponents, while inferior troops were -1 when rolling less than the opponents. So a bit less than 50% of the time the mod would matter. Who could be superior or inferior was based on the DBM army list books, so Spartans could have Sp(S), Italiots had Sp(I).a I also had a points cost list as well. All that said, I like the simplicity of DBA, and would not want the base game to get more complicated. FOr house rules, though, drive on. |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 25, 2019 10:49:52 GMT
This is an interesting concept. It’s when fighting ‘like-with-like’ or ‘against-their-own-kind’ the effect is quite low, about 6 chances in 36 (or 1 in 6) of getting an extra recoil. However, when one side has a ‘quick -kill’, it can be a little toooo powerful. An overlapped Warband column fighting Blades would have 10 chances out 36 of a kill, and 6 chances of being killed, which is the same as the current Warband chances are at the moment when not overlapped. Bad news for the Blades! Still, suppose you could say that superior v ordinary/inferior troops just recoils them on an equal score, and not quick-kills them. But I think that having 4 superior & 4 inferior might be too much. Perhaps something more modest, say 2 & 2, would be better. (See fanaticus.boards.net/post/5419/ ) By the way, those receiving rear-support should only be classed as superior if BOTH ranks are superior. Otherwise players will be tempted to cheat and have superior elements in front and other elements behind in order to get more superior elements in the battleline. Personally, I prefer superior troops to re-roll (once only) a roll of ‘1’, and inferior troops to re-roll (once only) a roll of ‘6’. It doesn’t make superior troops more powerful, but it does make them more dependable, so they rarely let you down. P.S.Jamesdiii, you should put your “House Rule Document” in the Fanaticus Wiki “Rule Variants” section (see fanaticus-dba.fandom.com/wiki/DBA_Rules_Variants ) so we can all see it. I for one would love to give it a read...if only to see what ideas I can pinch!  (See fanaticus.boards.net/post/26086/ for help in adding stuff to the Wiki) Some Helpful Downloads can be found here: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
And here is the latest Jan 2019 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2019_1st_Quarter
|
|
|
|
Post by redrob on Oct 27, 2019 9:30:31 GMT
It could get very messy indeed though. Who arbitrates as to which elements are 'superior' One of the sillier aspects of DBA is the rock/paper/scisors combat results and perhaps that's why it is played.
For my part I would argue with some force (and relatively little evidence) that in a stand -up-fight Romans should mince every other form of foot on an element to element basis (flanks and bad terrain not withstanding)
Pet opinions (and much petulance) would become the norm. Well I have read A, B,and C in the original Uratu Cuneform and 'it specifically says that .....
What limits might one put on numbers of elements which might be superior? What might the quid pro quo be for inferior elements? Could one have a superior horde?
|
|
|
|
Post by somecallmetim on Oct 27, 2019 10:08:37 GMT
Lol I like that. A “ superior horde”. The best of the great unwashed! What figures would you use for that? A nicer looking peasant?
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 27, 2019 10:49:09 GMT
Well Redrob, in DBA Romans Blades already DO mince every other form of foot element... ...so I wonder why it took them 200 years to conquer the entire Iberian Peninsula, and took three major wars to crush the Samnites, three wars to crush the Illyrians, three wars to crush Macedonia, three wars to crush Mithridates, and of course the three major wars to finally defeat and destroy Carthage, when Julius Caesar managed to subdue all the Gallic tribes in just one single 8 year campaign? Perhaps the Romans were not quite as powerful as DBA would have us believe.  As for the limits on how many superior-inferior elements to have, Greedo has already suggested say 4 & 4 (although I prefer a maximum of 2 & 2...see my link in my previous post). Telling which element is which shouldn’t be much of a problem, with careful painting and basing. We already have situations where we have to ask “is that mounted 3 figure base on the wing of your Warbands in your barbarian army an element of Cavalry or an element of Knights?”. And if players want a ‘superior’ Horde, why not? I imagine that rebelling slaves in Spartacus’ army, facing the prospect of being crucified if they lose the battle, would be inclined to fight with a bit more determination than they would normally. (After all, DBMM has superior Hordes, and nobody complains) “I’m Spartacus! No, he’s Spartacus. No, I’m Spartacus...and so’s my wife...” Some Helpful Downloads can be found here: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
And here is the latest Jan 2019 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2019_1st_Quarter
|
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Oct 27, 2019 17:30:36 GMT
This was definitely intended not for tournament play since I could see lots of holes in it. And I would agree with Stevie. Perhaps 2 /12 elements would be enough.
But I’m imagining a bbdba game with Athenians Or Spartans and having 36 elements of spear... having a bit of variation might make the battle line a bit more Interesting.
Another wrinkle you could do is the first superior element lost counts as 2, just like double ranked troops, so that people don’t abuse things too much
|
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Oct 27, 2019 17:51:54 GMT
Guess there are games that do simulate war in a wider sense but I dont think I would like to play it.
Not just battles but other considerations.
Super rich Rome bribing its enemies allies or being able to support multiple field armies.
Access to better technology, weapons, ships or better food.
Light horse armies refusing a stand up fight but happily burning your crops and murdering your womenfolk and children back in your lands, not just your camp.
I like a good scrap even really enjoy my orcs and goblins doing the dirty on me and fighting each other rather than the enemy I also like uneven fights at times but dont think I would have the will to play a political, supply and battles type of game.
|
|
