|
Post by Commiades on Nov 1, 2016 21:21:07 GMT
Great looking hoplites, shields are cool ! Thanks, those are VVV decals, with a lot of Micro Sol solution on them to avoid wrinkles.
|
|
|
Post by Commiades on Oct 30, 2016 20:53:24 GMT
Thanks, clearly my search skills were defective yesterday!
|
|
|
Post by Commiades on Oct 30, 2016 20:52:49 GMT
Great stuff. I've started reading the books and look forward to when you get back to this.
|
|
|
Post by Commiades on Oct 30, 2016 7:52:23 GMT
Thanks, I think I got lost between the old and new Fanaticus sites, and because I wasn't very active on Fanaticus for about a year a while back. I may have to start reading the Witcher series.
|
|
|
Post by Commiades on Oct 30, 2016 0:41:47 GMT
An interesting series of games. Looking at the index of your blog, I see you mention adapting the Witcher game. Which game is this? Is it a commercially available game?
|
|
|
Post by Commiades on Oct 30, 2016 0:10:56 GMT
Great reports. The knights of the Tervingi seemed to have given them an edge the Caledonians lacked.
|
|
|
Post by Commiades on Oct 29, 2016 17:42:39 GMT
Thanks. I think many gamers are familiar with bigger rule system, so BBDBA isn't such a big adjustment, but to date I've only played DBA. I found your blog posts on BBDBA in 3.0 helpful.
The Goblins have been used a lot to represent armies I don't have - their behemoths are handy. They've done Classical Indians, Samanids and Ghaznavids. I figured the Carthaginians might meet a Successor opponent, so why not try the kitchen sink one!
|
|
|
Post by Commiades on Oct 29, 2016 10:26:06 GMT
Got the hoplites of a Campanian army finished: More pictures here: link
|
|
|
Post by Commiades on Oct 29, 2016 9:36:42 GMT
A couple of BBDBA reports: More BBDBAI got to try out my Carthaginians as a BBDBA army.
|
|
|
Post by Commiades on Oct 23, 2016 4:29:40 GMT
I had my second BBDBA battle last Friday: linkNo pictures, but my newly painted Gauls took on Early Imperial Romans; they slaughtered one command of Romans, but fell apart against the other two. I've still got a lot to learn about BBDBA, and I hope to get another practice battle before I go to Christchurch in a couple weeks time.
|
|
|
Post by Commiades on Oct 23, 2016 3:46:02 GMT
Got my last lot of Gallic figures finished. These are four elements of cavalry. I also finished a Marian Roman mounted command element and I added a freshly decapitated corpse to the element of one of the Gallic headhunters. More pictures here: link
|
|
|
Post by Commiades on Oct 22, 2016 2:48:14 GMT
That's why Augustus made such a big deal of closing the doors of the temple of Janus. It just about never happened.
|
|
|
Post by Commiades on Oct 22, 2016 2:45:41 GMT
Got my armies packed today (confirmed they'd fit in the box). Pretty much decided on the ancient army; still tossing up on the medieval one.
|
|
|
Post by Commiades on Oct 20, 2016 9:42:58 GMT
In versions 2.0 and 2.2, the II/11 Gallic 400BC to 50BC army list had aggression factor of 3 until 225BC, then an aggression factor of 0. The II/33 Polybian Roman 275BC to 105BC army list had an aggression factor of 1 before 202BC, then an aggression factor of 4. The Polybian Roman army list seems to cover from the aftermath of the Pyrrhic War until the reforms of Marius. It is not for me to speak for the authors, but I do get the impression that Rome was a bit less into invading until very late in the Second Punic War. In fact, Hannibal invaded Roman territory in Italy. I think that an aggression factor of 1 means that they did a bit of invading, but not as much as that a state with a higher aggression factor did. I would be interested to hear whether the aggression factors had been altered in version 3. The aggression factor has changed in 3.0. It's always 3, which is more reasonable. The Romans had a political system built around annual warfare; they found someone to fight each year. The fact that some of the people they attacked tried to take the war to them and failed doesn't make them less aggressive; it just shows that their aggression provoked a reaction -- the Tarantines asking Pyrrhus for help, and the Carthaginians trying to preempt another Roman grab of their possessions, as they'd done of Sardinia and Corsica.
|
|
|
Post by Commiades on Oct 19, 2016 20:39:55 GMT
Mark, the Gauls have two aggression values, the higher earlier and the lower later, from memory its zero after Telemon. Sorry, misread what you'd said. I was talking about the Polybians; you're right about the Gauls. I guess the concept of non-aggressive Poybians used to rile me and clouded my reading!
|
|