|
Post by sheffmark on Nov 16, 2017 16:43:27 GMT
Just had it confirmed that start time for this is 10.00 but you should be able to get in slightly earlier.
There will also be a proper Bring and Buy, (none of this 'Hire a table for £5 for half an hour' rubbish!)
Tim's e-mail for any further info or to register for the competition is: Tim.Kohler@naturalengland.org.uk
Cheers
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Nov 13, 2017 10:05:31 GMT
The opening stages of the Condotta v Mongols Attila manages to dispatch the two pike needed before Alexandra jumped the Warband from behind! Think this is what you call a 'stalemate'
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Nov 13, 2017 9:38:57 GMT
The 15mm HoTT competition is going ahead at Recon this year on the 2nd Dec at Pudsey Civic Hall. Hopefully I've attached the application form below, but if I've messed it up, here are the salient points: The entry fee is £4.50. Cheques payable to “Wakefield and Ossett Wargamers" Rules: Hordes of the Things 2nd Edition (plus amended movement for shooters – 2” and Warband – 3”) Army Composition is to the standard rules in HoTT (24 Army Points), but no more than 12 AP may be elements over 2AP each Anyone without an army can borrow one from the Wakefield club, just contact Tim below. To register please send you army list and payment to Tim Kohler, 19 School Lane, Ryhill, Wakefield, WF4 2DW Tel: 07827 280 405 Need to check start time but I think it's 10.00 am. ReconHOTTentry2017.doc (17.5 KB)
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Nov 12, 2017 15:17:22 GMT
Thanks again to Martin for organising this tournament and the rest of the players for a fun time, well worth the trip down from Sheffield.
I'd also particularly like to thank my die, without whom none of this would have been possible, as most of my opponents will testify.
In terms of knowing or not knowing the current leader board I must admit I quite liked the uncertainty. Going into the last games people don't know where they are so presumably continue to play their best and go for the win. If people know what result they need there may be a temptation to change your style of play for the last game. E.g if someone just needs a draw and plays for it, they then deny their opponent the chance of a win.
Also this could lead to a situation of someone being able to influence the overall result if they wanted to, so I for one would vote to keep it.
Finally if anyone can explain how you post pics up here, I'll try and put some up.
Thanks
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Nov 4, 2017 14:26:47 GMT
Has Simon booked in? His post above seems to imply he's coming but he's not on the list?
Looking forward to it.
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Nov 2, 2017 9:38:20 GMT
For preliminary 'sticking' I have been going the super glue/baking soda route. I then beef things up with two part epoxy. Not always pretty as I tend to do a number of figures at a time, but it works well enough. As to painting, I have quite a few Mountain/Republican/Classical/Vedic Indians, Normans, Undead, Han/Three Kingdom, Early Armenians, Greeks, and some others to shade/varnish and possibly do some work on the bases. Along with Sarmations, MIR, Franks, Feudal archers and crossbowa, Sassanids, Greeks, Successors, more Indians (fleshing out the options), and some Huns being painted. Wow, how big is your painting surface?
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Nov 2, 2017 9:32:36 GMT
I've seen the discussion about changing base depths before. I presume the only difference this makes is that it may break a group up when you recoil?
As a matter of clarification in 'Recoiling or Being Pushed Back' it says "A recoiling foot element always moves it's own base depth or 1/2 BW if this is less than it's base depth"
Are people playing it that you have the choice of recoiling your actual base depth, i.e. 15mm if you're on a smaller base, (assuming 15mm figures) or do you have to recoil the 1/2 BW?
If the later and you're on 15mm deep bases I can see how a group could break up.
But are there any other issues?
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Oct 31, 2017 14:36:26 GMT
I couldn't find anything in the rules that would stop this, (first paragraph of Distant Shooting says "can" not 'must' shoot). Well sheffmark, I can only tell you what the rules say. (But be warned…I have been known to take the rules too literally… ) Page 8 paragraph 4, Sequence of Play, says:- “3) Any Artillery, War Wagon or Bow elements of both sides that are eligible to do so, must shoot once each…” If this be true, then the War Wagon in your example must shoot at their one-and-only target, the enemy Bow. As shooters must shoot back at those shooting at them (page 10 paragraph 4), the Bows must target the WWg. And as the Bow is closest, it will be the ‘primary shooter’, and only the Bow combat outcome counts. Therefore, the Art can only shoot at the same WWg as a support shooter, if it cannot find another target. (Does everyone see where I’m going with this?…) Thanks Stevie
I had a suspicion that troops who could shoot had to, but the first bit of the Distant Shooting section made me think it must have been in a previous version of the rules.
Cheers Mark
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Oct 31, 2017 10:35:42 GMT
Whilst on the subject of shooting, I played a couple of games last night which involved war wagons and art for both sides.
Unless I'm missing something;
1. I hadn't realised that Art v Art is an automatic kill for someone unless it's a draw. This seems a bit strange to have such destructive counter battery fire?
2. My opponent had Art going to shoot at a War Wagon. He then advanced a bow up to support. When it came to shooting he declared that the Art would shoot supported by the bow. I said the bow was the primary shooter as it was closest. He then decided that in that case the bow wouldn't shoot, but we would resolve the Art v War Wagon first, as it was his bound he could choose the order of shooting, then if the War Wagon wasn't killed it could shoot. The only target for the War Wagon was the said bow, the Art being out of range.
I couldn't find anything in the rules that would stop this, (first paragraph of Distant Shooting says "can" not 'must' shoot.
As it happened the War Wagon was destroyed
I presume this is all ok within the rules or have I missed something?
If the War Wagon wasn't destroyed and it fired at the bow, I presume the bow would not fire back, but just treat it as a defensive role with no return fire?
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Oct 26, 2017 7:52:25 GMT
Thanks
Just put grapes on the shopping list!
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Oct 24, 2017 16:50:07 GMT
Just had a look and there seems to be a number of reductions on a wide range of figures, though not all figures for a specific army, which seems a bit strange, but some good bargains on offer, including some inf packs at £1.90 and Elephants for £2.50. There's also some (smaller) reductions on their DBA army packs.
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Oct 24, 2017 16:22:33 GMT
Excellent!
May have a go myself.
Did you bend the two complete lengths or cut them to form the corners? Cheers
Mark
P.S Could you post the link to the Roman marching camp please?
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Oct 16, 2017 8:04:19 GMT
As everybody knows I hate DBA3.0, but enjoyed my only game, I won but it was very close at 4:3. Bakewell is really worth going to and the local shops are good. It is very near Chatsworth and the Dales if you want to go for a few days. David Constable P.S. - Went to confess my sins today in the abbey. "As everybody knows I hate DBA3.0, but enjoyed my only game" Poor Dave, you can actually hear his torment in this simple statement can't you?!!
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Oct 16, 2017 8:02:25 GMT
Simon, I don't know how avidly you have recorded the statistics, but I wonder how the choice of armies used (own v opponents) distributed itself throughout the table, and how players did with their own army pair? Paul And I both used our own armies only twice, although with different results (I won two from two with my own pair, using the Mountain Indians both times). I have always felt that I did worse with my own pair at Alton, although my opponents there have always had more time to think about the choice. Here I suspect that the unfamiliarity of the Mountain Indians, combined with the marked difference which resulted from substituting the 2 x HCh which are almost always used in the Classicals, with 2 x LCh, and which possibly went unnoticed by my opponents, was a decisive factor. Did anyone have an even more extreme distribution, as was one of our concerns for the format? Personally I thought that the format worked very well. Scott Scott I used my Palmyran/Sassanid match up three times in the day. Twice my opponents chose the Palmyran and sportingly Phil Steele chose Sassanid "because he fancied playing with them" In the two trial games prior to the competition the Palmyran seemed the stronger of the two, so I changed two fast bow for two Ps to even it up a bit. Even with this change the Palmyran won all three encounters. The pip drain of having 2 Hd and an Elephant for the Sassanids, plus having to get in against the 2 remaining Palmyran Bows or be shot up meant that most of the problems lay with the Sassanids, which they generally didn't manage to overcome. Another fun day gaming though and great to see some new players attending. Thanks again to Mrs Simon for the great brownies and flapjack. Mark
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Aug 21, 2017 13:53:42 GMT
Maybe it's a daft question but since I have never taken part in a tournament., I was wondering on what restrictions (if any) are imposed on troop choices by organisers? Are allies allowed? I do understand that some if not all organisers do insist using the same list of troops for each and every game in the tournament or do some allow otherwise? Organisers differ in their approach, but in the UK......normally allies are allowed. At the Portsmouth events, which are defined geographically and historically (eg 'The Western Mediterranean area, 300-201 BC') the ally must fit the time period. Also the organiser may insist it fits geographically, too. Restrictions are usually posted in advance, to allow players to work it out themselves before arriving unprepared at the venue (!). ie a 'fixed list' as per macbeth's post above. And all tournaments (that I can recall) insist on the same army composition for the whole tournament (apart from the x/y or x//y options in the lists). Otherwise certain lists, with multiple choices, would give players too much flex to adjust their army to the opponent, and no flex for the 'limited options' armies. The mounted/dismounted conundrum is bubbling away....I think at Britcon it may have been 'stay mounted or stay on foot' for the day. Wasn't there.... The requirement to use the same army for the whole tournament used to be specified in the lists intro paragraphs (in v2.2 and before). I don't have my v3 book with me to check. Hope this helps? Re Britcon Yes it was stay mounted or stay on foot. However this caused some debate on the day. I think the arguments roughly are: If it's historical why disallow it? To which the answer is, on some occasions it can provide players with an unfair advantage.
The thing I dislike about it is that it could encourage players to start searching the army lists for competition winning army lists, as without this flexibility you're at a disadvantage if more people adopt it. This may undermine the thing I really like about the majority of the current DBA scene in the UK, which is most people treat it as fun not serious competition.
Interestingly, I think the decision to ban dismounting at Britcon was because people had come up against an army in a previous competition which had Camels which could dismount as spear and camels which could dismount as bow, once you started the game and saw what you were up against. (Seem to remember this army won, though it did have an excellent general behind it as well!)
There are of course the other tournaments where you don't necessarily play with your own army, either using someone else's most of the time, e.g. Tarrington, or the armies are provided for you, e.g. The Northern Cup.
|
|