|
Post by BrianNZ on May 19, 2018 10:38:25 GMT
Yes I tend to agree, the group must be 'entirely of Psiloi' as stated in the Rule Book bottom of page 8, so it becomes two groups. Thanks for the comments.
|
|
|
Post by BrianNZ on May 18, 2018 1:50:39 GMT
A group of Psiloi can move in line through Bad Going. If this group of Psiloi was part of a larger group of non Psiloi could the non Psiloi elements of the group Group move past a Wood with the Psiloi elements moving through the Woods for 1 pip ? Question: is this one group move or two group moves ?
|
|
|
Post by BrianNZ on May 18, 2018 0:40:57 GMT
I like the idea of 8 Pike and was in favour of it when it was discussed in the Rules Forum before v3 was published. I have always thought that troop types requiring rear support were 'handicapped' by loosing front line bases in armies of only 12 bases.
Here is my idea, the 8 Pike Combat factors are: 3 v Psiloi, 5 v other Foot, 4 v Lt Horse, Camels & Cavalry, 5 v Knights,Elephants & Scythed Chariots Flank Support as per Spears. ie +1 if Solid Pike supported by Solid Pike, Solid Blades or Spears against Foot other than Psiloi.
Count as first element lost as per other Double Elements.
|
|
|
Post by BrianNZ on Dec 15, 2017 8:25:08 GMT
Friend of mine playing Thebans was asking why the Double elements don't get the +1 v Knights, Elephants & Sythed Chariots as Pike in two ranks.
My explanations were not good enough so would some of you experts please explain so I can pass on to him something creditable.
Thanks Brian
|
|
|
Post by BrianNZ on Sept 10, 2017 8:36:00 GMT
Big Battle DBA Tournament – Sunday:
The following format will be used for the Big Battle DBA Tournament. As this is the first time Big Battle DBA has been offered at Conquest we expect player numbers to be low. Keith there was a Big Battle Tournament last year, I have a Medal to prove it I played the Ozzies, Greg & Mark, and Greg Wells.
|
|
|
Post by BrianNZ on Aug 31, 2017 1:40:37 GMT
i rather think there is. How probable is it that the manoeuvre could be effected in reality, especially by war band, without affecting the morale of the front half of the mob? Scott Hence my suggestion re the Toward 3.1 as I agree, seems improbable to me, the rear ranks ( all types allowed in DBA ) should be classed as being in melee or 'close combat'.
|
|
|
Post by BrianNZ on Aug 29, 2017 22:54:24 GMT
On re reading the rules with my glasses on I 'see' "Close Combat occurs when an element moves into, or remains in, both front edge and front corner-to-corner contact with an enemy element...." Elements giving rear support therefore do not qualify for the definition of 'close combat' so can retire as per the TZ rules.
Maybe a question for the Toward 3.1 Thread ?
Thanks for all the replies.
|
|
|
Post by BrianNZ on Aug 27, 2017 20:51:34 GMT
Yes the front Warband element was in close combat but had lost its flank guard due to following up a recoil.The Warband was now out flanked on both sides and next move would see the gate closed causing the loss of two elements. The option to retire the Rear Support Element looked a wise move at the time. Thanks for your replies.
|
|
|
Post by BrianNZ on Aug 27, 2017 10:10:43 GMT
Well that is detailed Stevie.Well done.
When I run BBDBA events a Command's loss points = 1 point per element lost in combat + 1 point if the General was lost in combat + 1 point if a double based element was lost in combat. This means the loss value for a 12 element command (with no Scythed Chariots) can be 12 or 13 or 14 depending on what was lost in combat. Basically the same applies in DBA where a game is lost on 4 'element points' but if the last element lost was the General then the DBA army would have lost 5 'element points'.
|
|
|
Post by BrianNZ on Aug 27, 2017 9:45:09 GMT
The events I organise in NZ require that a player must define the list, the list year if there are options, and if an ally is being used the ally are prior to the event. Then on the day the element selection used in the first game to be maintained throughout. Elements that can dismount may do so at the start of each game, or during the game, where allowed by the lists. I can vouch for this system that Keith uses, it's simple and it works. I also use it when organising DBA events.
|
|
|
Post by BrianNZ on Aug 27, 2017 9:37:25 GMT
Does an element giving rear support count as being in 'close combat' so therefore can't retire ?
Situation developed today where a group of warband was about to be flanked, I thought that casualties could be minimised if the supporting rear rank retired straight back out of harm's way.
Thanks
|
|
|
Post by BrianNZ on Jul 9, 2017 8:49:41 GMT
An example is Pike (Fast). Its an odd duck historically but great for tournament armies - I'm not proposing we get rid of it in DBA 3.0. I'm just suggesting for historical battles troops who "fit" (or rather are jammed into) this troop type are better represented by Spear Fast (or Medium Foot w/Spear - even better). TomT I played two games of 25mm Big Battle DBA v3 today, my LIR v Picts. The first game saw my Romans smashed with ease by the Picts. Second game saw the Picts despatched back over the wall with heavy casualties to the Romans, but no commands lost. The Fast Pike are soooo much more effective than Warbands. The Auxilia have to hide in the Bad Going.
|
|
|
Post by BrianNZ on Jul 7, 2017 3:56:22 GMT
On a different tack, I would very much like to see Pike & Warband changed so that Two Elements are not required to give them their punch. Solid Pike & Warband should be 8 Figures on a 40x30 base and count as 1 Element. Fast Pike & Warband should be 6 Figures on a 40x40 base and count as 1 Element. Brian, how would you adjust an army like, say, Alexandrian Macedonian. You would need to add three elements, and what would they be? You surely wouldn't want 6 double Pk blocks, right? They are not double elements. They are single elements that function as they do now in two ranks. Pike & Warband armies are weakened ( Warband especially ) because to get the punch that they need the army's frontage is greatly reduced.
|
|
|
Post by BrianNZ on Jul 4, 2017 4:35:25 GMT
On a different tack, I would very much like to see Pike & Warband changed so that Two Elements are not required to give them their punch.
Solid Pike & Warband should be 8 Figures on a 40x30 base and count as 1 Element.
Fast Pike & Warband should be 6 Figures on a 40x40 base and count as 1 Element.
|
|
|
Post by BrianNZ on Jul 2, 2017 9:17:59 GMT
Played a 25mm Big Battle game today at my local Wargames Club, EIR v LIR. I deployed Blade Auxilia Blade Auxilia Blade and counted the Auxilia +1 for Flank Support when adjacent a Blade. Worked well, the Auxilia were pushed about but stood in the line, none were doubled and destroyed ( bit of luck there ). As a simple fix within the rules would work for solid Auxilia imo.
|
|