Amendment for Sp (special case)

What about 'other Greek' hoplites recoil on a tie/draw with Spartiates?  :- less decisive than giving + or - 1's, but influential, nonetheless.

Martin

Thucydides should know. He often mentions the prowess of the Spartans on land. His work seems to indicate that the proportion of the Spartan army that were Spartiates depended on the distance of the battle from Sparta. They did manage to bring up ~4500 at Mantinea in 418 BC and added Sciritae, Tegeans, Neodamodeis and others. But they gave Brasidas nothing more than best wishes for his northern campaign. So in DBA, you could vary the number of full citizen elements depending on the battle site. This gives campaign games an extra facet.
Thucydides account of Pylos/Sphacteria is also quite a good read. The 420 hoplites (180 Spartans) and 200 helots didn't do that badly against 800 Athenian hoplites, 800 archers and an unknown number of Messenian slingers considering they were on half rations for some time beforehand and were initially surprised. The Athenian hoplites did not advance to face them as their light troops were doing the job. Their retreat to their fortified position on the northern tip had them in a position to hold for some time until outflanked or starved. Indeed they held off the initial Athenian attacks. Still, this was more a large skirmish than a pitched land battle, though strategically and politically, its influence was enormous. Actually, reading this account again makes me think of how to wargame the entire encounter, including the attacks on Pylos and the naval components, not to mention the political intrigue.

The Thebans at Platea did fight well and they bloodied but couldn't break the Plateans and Thespians in front of them in front of them and the Plateans were singled out for valour after the battle. In the end, after a tactical draw with the Athenians and allies, they conducted an orderly retreat to their city and were besieged. Of course, in the next century, when they had the benefit of a brilliant commander, they broke the Spartans who were already on the decline as their societal model was unsustainable.

I might try out a few of the ideas as an exercice with say a 10 element phalanx on each side with three elements of Spartiates on the right flank and see how they turn out. I'll keep the group informed of the outcome.

Jim

Your desire to replicate historical battles is admirable but DBA is ill suited to that use. This is not to say DBX is ill suited only that DBA with its rigid 12 element armies and troop types which must span 3000 years of history isn't the screwdriver your looking for - and no wonder its purpose is to be a tournament in which armies from a vast historical and geographic range can compete on equal terms.

Having studied this problem intensly as part of moving DBA 3.0 in a more simulation direction and also trying to create a medieval version of DBX, I eventually concluded it was the inflexiable troop types that were causing all the problems. DBX basic mechanics (esp the DBA 3.0 ones) work great: PIPs, Groups, individual moves, sequence of play etc. But the troop types constantly find us trying to bang a square peg into a round hole. Hence the decision in Triumph to make more troop types or make "Spear" into "Blades" or the DBMM attempt to use the Grading system to essentially create more troop types. This has lead to massive increase in complexity as we try to bandaid over the fundmental problem. Better to go back to basics hence:

Spartan hoplites:

Heavy Foot (HF) CF +4 (so mount four figures on the base); MA: 2BW (so mount on "skinny" base - 20mm in 25mm)
Drive Off Mounted (and Foot?) (Recoil opponent on Equals)
Shieldwall (side support from Spear)
Pursue Foot (if you feel this is suitable)?
Cry Havoc v. HF (Destroy on Equals)?

Another example (to compare)
English Yeoman:

Medium Foot (MF) +3; MA: 2BW; Loose Order (ignore Bad and Rough Going Movement & CF penalties)
Longbows +1 v. Mounted; Shoot out to 3BW
w/Stakes: Cry Havoc v. Knights (Destroy on Equals)
Retinue (get Side Support from Blades)

By these methods you should be able to create any historical troop type using the basic building blocks (it has the added advantage of being much easier for new players to digest). Has worked great for A Game of Fire and Ice.

TomT

I am not sure I agree with the statement that DBA is inherently flawed as a system for historical battles.

If you want to replicate a given historical battle, of course you do away with the 12 element army. The rules even suggest doing so on p. 14.

Then you can use house rules to add the kind of flavour that you want. We have discussed quite a few ideas (good ideas, IMHO) as to how that can be done in the concrete case at hand.

I see no problem. At least, no problem that is not also there with (most) other sets of rules.

I agree with much of what you say. I do own your rules (A Game of Fire and Ice) and I like your thought process on these matters. I think the following profile, given your suggestions might feel right (baring any experience ratings of any kind):

"Heavy Foot (HF) CF +4 (so mount four figures on the base); MA: 2BW (so mount on "skinny" base - 20mm in 25mm)
Yes
Drive Off Mounted (and Foot? I think keeping it at mounted is fine) (Recoil opponent on Equals)

Shieldwall (side support from Spear) Yes

Pursue Foot (if you feel this is suitable)?
I do think that this would be valuable in representing less drilled elements (Citizen Hoplites vs Sparta, etc.), but that "pursuit nature" seems to be a part of the "phalanx experience" that I have researched thus far. Opinions and specifics do change as time, and research, flies by
Cry Havoc v. HF (Destroy on Equals)?" I think the Cry Havoc attribute would treat superior elements very well. This would give them that combat edge that grading is trying to do, but without the extra thought, or math, so it actually seems a rather elegant way to enhance the destructive capabilities on an element.

Big battles always interest me the most. I find they also take "special rules" and such better since you have more than just 12 elements.  I tend to go all out with a project. All of my DBA armies are built for BBDBA. I enjoy the 36 elements even more than the base game.

I think I am going to run with these ideas sometime this week and turn my Romans and Auxilia into Greeks for some playtesting The Gauls just won't do. 

As a fun side note, auto correct wants to turn"Hoplites" into "Shoplifters"...