|
Post by goragrad on Feb 4, 2018 7:08:12 GMT
Very nice village.
Armenians appear to have gotten better at using their terrain.
Or as usual my lack of actual DBA gaming experience is not letting me interpret the photos and read between the lines of the reports.
Much as I like Romans, good to see the Armenians do well.
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Feb 4, 2018 8:03:56 GMT
Very nice village. Armenians appear to have gotten better at using their terrain. Or as usual my lack of actual DBA gaming experience is not letting me interpret the photos and read between the lines of the reports. Much as I like Romans, good to see the Armenians do well. Using the same ‘homeland’ terrain for all three games will generate a campaign feel to the evening. Rome, whose homeland terrain is arable, must make do with hilly topography if it becomes the defender. Therefore, the placement of the terrain then becomes a ritual of precise measurement to ensure sufficient deployment of the army, no matter which of the four base edges the opponent chooses.
|
|
|
Post by martin on Feb 4, 2018 8:54:46 GMT
Yep, a particularly impressive BUA. Were you playing it as a 'city', 'fort' or 'hamlet', Robert?
Great battle reports.
Martin
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Feb 4, 2018 9:14:18 GMT
Yep, a particularly impressive BUA. Were you playing it as a 'city', 'fort' or 'hamlet', Robert? Great battle reports. Martin The BUA was deemed a city and occupied by Rome with a unit of auxilia.
Unfortunately for Rome, Armenia was content to leave them there and take the battle to the other side of the field. This kept the auxilia out of command distance for the game.
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Feb 6, 2018 8:05:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by goragrad on Feb 7, 2018 7:23:38 GMT
Another good report.
|
|
|
Post by vodnik on Feb 7, 2018 8:21:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Feb 10, 2018 8:25:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Feb 13, 2018 8:34:35 GMT
Historical Matchup – Later Imperial Rome vs. the Hun This is a classic contest between Rome and the Hun.
Using an army of light horse archers, whether they be Scythian, Parthian or Hsuing-Nu and gain a victory against an army with a balance mix of troops can be difficult.
We use the larger board (80cm x 80cm) with mid-sized terrain pieces which can offer advantages to either side if placed well. dbagora.blogspot.nl/2018/02/later-imperial-roman-vs-hun.html
|
|
|
Post by goragrad on Feb 14, 2018 4:47:45 GMT
Considering that nearly every opponent has defeated the LIR in at least 2 of the three engagements (and at least one in all three) and often by these lopsided scores it is a wonder the Western Empire lasted as long as it did or that the East survived.
Even the Armenians who were demolished by the Early Sassanids won 2 of 3.
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Feb 14, 2018 7:23:18 GMT
Considering that nearly every opponent has defeated the LIR in at least 2 of the three engagements (and at least one in all three) and often by these lopsided scores it is a wonder the Western Empire lasted as long as it did or that the East survived. Even the Armenians who were demolished by the Early Sassanids won 2 of 3. I would describe the ‘Migration to Kingdom’ project an extensive barbarian training programme. This will serve well as the project moves into its next phase with the barbarians fighting among themselves; the Franks, Visigoths, Lombards, Frisians, Saxons, Thuringian, Slavs, Bavarians, and Bretons (Armorica).
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Feb 21, 2018 8:11:24 GMT
Historical Matchup – Later Imperial Rome vs. Sassanid. The Sassanid list is divided into three periods of which the ‘b’ sub-list is used for this meeting. The elephant and levy constitute one-fourth of the army strength creating a challenge for the Sassanid player.
Rome is the invader and both sides will make use of arable terrain. dbagora.blogspot.nl/2018/02/historical-match-up-later-imperial-rome.html
|
|
|
Post by goragrad on Feb 23, 2018 11:57:12 GMT
So did the pip drain of HD and EL have an impact?
Rome seems to done better here that in the previous series of engagements - even in their loss they eliminated more elements than they lost (throwaway HD...).
Or is it that a CV heavy opponent is better matched by the LIR than the WB or KN heavy opponents in the previous engagements?
At any rate, interesting as always.
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Feb 23, 2018 14:45:17 GMT
So did the pip drain of HD and EL have an impact? Rome seems to done better here that in the previous series of engagements - even in their loss they eliminated more elements than they lost (throwaway HD...). Or is it that a CV heavy opponent is better matched by the LIR than the WB or KN heavy opponents in the previous engagements? At any rate, interesting as always. The problem for the Sassanid was not so much a pip-drain as a question of priority. After the third or fourth turn, troops that could not reinforce a combat were repositioned to cover an exposed flank. In the last battle the timely move by Asavaran cavalry prevented a Roman unit of blade from turning the elephant to threaten the Sassanid battle line with possible recoil.
I would say these two are evenly matched.
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Feb 27, 2018 8:57:43 GMT
Historical Matchup – Late Imperial Rome vs. Patrician Roman The Britannic field army led by Constantine III cross the channel to meet a Patrician army sent by Honorius.
dbagora.blogspot.nl/2018/02/later-imperial-roman-vs-patrician-rome.html
This is the last match for the Late Imperial period. This weekend will mark the start of a campaign series set in the Dark Ages.
|
|