|
|
Post by sonic on Jan 22, 2017 19:01:13 GMT
I have just posted a page on my web site concerning my current take on rules. It may be out of date in most respects, so any feedback will be much appreciated - whether here or on the site itself is acceptable, although on here may give me a better indication of where I am wrong! www.ianhughesma.com/2017/01/22/whod-be-a-wargamer/ |
|
|
|
Post by scottrussell on Jan 23, 2017 10:11:01 GMT
Ian,
It is a question of what you are looking for. If you want to know only what an historical general knew, then you are probably better using some sort of interactive computer program. If you think the hobby is about researching, sourcing, buying and painting model figures and then using them to compete with friends in a social setting, then you are probably better with conventional wargaming as generally understood on this forum. That will require a number of compromises in the rules to make the game playable, and you will just have to accept that. Incidentally, your criticism of the "buttocks of death" rule has to some extent been addressed in DBA version 3.0, but there will be other issues with which you could perfectly reasonably take issue. As I say, it is about compromise between realism and playability.
Scott
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Jan 24, 2017 12:52:14 GMT
I have just posted a page on my web site concerning my current take on rules. It may be out of date in most respects, so any feedback will be much appreciated - whether here or on the site itself is acceptable, although on here may give me a better indication of where I am wrong! www.ianhughesma.com/2017/01/22/whod-be-a-wargamer/
The “buttocks of death” was one of the many geometric ploys that evolved with the older version (2.2) of DBA. These developments and the board edge to board edge deployment of armies turned me away from ancients, such that I sold all my collection with the exception of the Late Roman and Sassanid.
When DBA 3 reached a play test phase I downloaded a copy from the DBA Yahoo group and pleased with what I saw developing began collecting again; this in advance of any revised army lists.
Those variables you mentioned in your blog post, the weather, terrain and the abilities of the commanders are present in DBMM. Although DBA 3 is a simpler version it does appeal to a different and wider market. Players wishing to add variables which reflect historical situations develop them and some have posted these to the House Rules section at the Forum.
I am pleased to read more battle reports of historical pairings than the bizarre confrontation between a medieval and biblical opponent as an example. I would like to see scenarios of battles that develop as a three part series with an initial skirmish, a battle and pursuit. The Carthaginian cavalry fight before Trebbia and Cannae were crucial to goading the Romans to action in the former and incapacitating a key commander in the latter.
|
|
|
|
Post by sonic on Jan 25, 2017 7:56:48 GMT
Ian, It is a question of what you are looking for. If you want to know only what an historical general knew, then you are probably better using some sort of interactive computer program. If you think the hobby is about researching, sourcing, buying and painting model figures and then using them to compete with friends in a social setting, then you are probably better with conventional wargaming as generally understood on this forum. That will require a number of compromises in the rules to make the game playable, and you will just have to accept that. Incidentally, your criticism of the "buttocks of death" rule has to some extent been addressed in DBA version 3.0, but there will be other issues with which you could perfectly reasonably take issue. As I say, it is about compromise between realism and playability. Scott Thanks for the reply Scott. I agree that at the moment I'm reduced to using computer games like Rome Total War and restricting myself to 'historical' views (i.e. not 'flying' everywhere to see everything). But that doesn't use my thousands of figures (no, I'm not exaggerating!) and my converted cellar to their optimum. I know that whatever rules I use they will not fulfil all of my requirements, as these are personal and difficult to reproduce - especially when rule-writing for rules that will probably be used in competition-gaming. I just want something that is near, not perfect. As to the "buttocks of death" being partially addressed, that is one of the reasons I am on this site! Cheers Ian |
|
|
|
Post by sonic on Jan 25, 2017 8:16:35 GMT
The “buttocks of death” was one of the many geometric ploys that evolved with the older version (2.2) of DBA. These developments and the board edge to board edge deployment of armies turned me away from ancients, such that I sold all my collection with the exception of the Late Roman and Sassanid.
When DBA 3 reached a play test phase I downloaded a copy from the DBA Yahoo group and pleased with what I saw developing began collecting again; this in advance of any revised army lists.
Those variables you mentioned in your blog post, the weather, terrain and the abilities of the commanders are present in DBMM. Although DBA 3 is a simpler version it does appeal to a different and wider market. Players wishing to add variables which reflect historical situations develop them and some have posted these to the House Rules section at the Forum.
I am pleased to read more battle reports of historical pairings than the bizarre confrontation between a medieval and biblical opponent as an example. I would like to see scenarios of battles that develop as a three part series with an initial skirmish, a battle and pursuit. The Carthaginian cavalry fight before Trebbia and Cannae were crucial to goading the Romans to action in the former and incapacitating a key commander in the latter.
Hi Timurilank. As I've just replied to Scott, one of the reasons I'm on here is that I like what I see in DBA 3 - especially the attempt to do away with the "buttocks of death"! I too was turned away from ancients for a very long time thanks to the 'geometric ploys' being used by gamers. I suppose in reality part of my aversion wasn't just the rules, it was the attitude of wargamers who would use such a ridiculous ploy without a second thought, whereas I thought it was unjustified on historical grounds. Maybe it was my grounding in 'history' rather than 'gaming'? Unlike you, I didn't sell any of my armies: which in itself is a problem, as the number I can now field in DBA 3 is ridiculously high - or it will be when I've refurbished them to my satisfaction! Like you I'm a little bit wary of 'un-historical' games, as I think the question of "how would an Early Imperial Roman army fare against a Battle of Agincourt English army" a little redundant and one that can not be answered by a wargame! But then maybe we are the weird ones? Also like you I would like to see a series of encounters leading to a major battle, echoing the evolution of a 'campaign', rather than simply one-off battles with 'equal points'. But for that you need a willing opponent and I am struggling to find one in South Yorkshire in England. (I know, there are several clubs within an hour's drive, but past experience has made me wary of clubs - maybe because my 'home' club in Burnley in the 1980s and 1990s was exceptional. Since then I've moved around a lot and have struggled to find the same experience.) I've tried doing this solo with a small set of guidelines I worked out for myself, but for some reason I'm always beaten by the remote player! A bit disheartening to say the least!! Keep those armies coming, as I'm using the photos of them to keep my enthusiasm high and keep myself painting and basing! Ian |
|
|
|
Post by scottrussell on Jan 25, 2017 22:19:58 GMT
Perhaps you should try to grab the last place in the Northern Cup (see tournaments). You might at least meet some local players.
Scott
|
|
|
|
Post by sonic on Jan 27, 2017 19:03:49 GMT
Perhaps you should try to grab the last place in the Northern Cup (see tournaments). You might at least meet some local players. Scott Maybe, but if can't beat a 'remote' opponent of my own devising, what chance have I got against a homo sapiens?  |
|
|
|
Post by scottrussell on Jan 27, 2017 19:14:59 GMT
Well on current form, you could certainly beat me.
Scott
|
|
|
|
Post by martin on Jan 27, 2017 19:20:30 GMT
Perhaps you should try to grab the last place in the Northern Cup (see tournaments). You might at least meet some local players. Scott Maybe, but if can't beat a 'remote' opponent of my own devising, what chance have I got against a homo sapiens? We humans do dafter things than any compooter would manage. Far more scope for catching us out. Scott- Welsh Open tomorrow?? Martin |
|
|
|
Post by scottrussell on Jan 29, 2017 13:02:37 GMT
Scott- Welsh Open tomorrow?? Martin Alas yes. With predictable results. Scott |
|
|
|
Post by martin on Jan 29, 2017 15:02:50 GMT
Scott- Welsh Open tomorrow?? Martin Alas yes. With predictable results. Scott V3 predictable?? Not that I've noticed  . You just need a tad more luck next time, Scott (and I need a LOT more, and a cunning plan...). See you at the Mercian? M |
|
.