|
Post by primuspilus on Feb 19, 2017 14:03:58 GMT
20mm bases are easier for many newer more active poses for minis. In addition, it radically helps with teaching newer players if most recoils for foot are the same. I haven't found the recoil issue to really count much in games at all.
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Feb 12, 2017 23:56:29 GMT
I confess I've never really liked the rear support rule applying only to handful of elements. Also, I haven't found Wb as done in DBA to be that evocative of the trooptype when they stood their ground and fought.
Interesting approach though, classifying as Wb... I have often thought hoplites could be similarly represented as Wb as well... Hoplite vs hoplite would be very interesting!
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Feb 12, 2017 15:35:21 GMT
Hi Chris,
Indeed, you make a good point, though the additional rules are hardly much of a complexity to basically address the issue.
That said, the previous comment staying that the Bd is 5 vs foot precisely to account for the deeper lines and pila seems equally effective. In that case I suggest taking the Allied Legions as Ax(S)...
By the way, you will find Ax(S) get vapourised by enemy heavy foot pretty quickly. That also allows Hannibal's veteran African infantry to win against the flanks historically, if the Ax are placed wide.
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Feb 12, 2017 2:28:10 GMT
Not sure if it's a houserule or a variant army list.
Overall I suspect you might find more success treating them as Bd, but with rear support of +1, and base CF of 4/2. The trouble with warband is that for Bd as Wb against Carthaginian army Spanish and Gauls, the fighting can be over really fast.
With Bd as 4/2, with +1 rear support works quite well for Punic Wars, if you also give the Spanish Ax(S) a +1 in CC in GGo vs Bd, Sp and supported Pk. In addition, you then aren't forced to shoehorn the Italian Allied legions into Ax(S), so these can also be regular Bd (4/2).
With this approach, you get the durability of the Roman system, along with the vulnerability to flank attacks. By the way, apply the +1 for rear support even in bad going.
As a side note on topic, for Kardakes for Alexander vs Darius III, I use a front element of Ax(S) with a rear element of Ax(F) contiguous behind. They fight and move as a permanent double-based element, taking one PIP to maneuver. But when one element is killed, the remaining element reverts to type. This creates the large infantry force Darius used to bolster his lines, and forces the Phalanx to literally wade through these masses. The two element count as one for winning and losing. Simple attrition without actual "attrition" .
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Feb 4, 2017 15:33:42 GMT
Question: does recoiling into shooting range trigger shooting where none existed before? If not, then why would close combat be triggered by an outcome move? If it would, then Kn pursuit of Kn would trigger endless combat in the same bound until one of them died, no?
So no, there would be no close combat as a result of the outcome move. Conforming will happen after combat resolution.
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Feb 1, 2017 17:51:41 GMT
I think LH and Ps would have been better represented in their ambush and sweeping role if they could end subsequent moves in contact with enemy.
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Feb 1, 2017 17:40:22 GMT
Hard to beat Classical Indians without an artillery piece. Their Ellies make a great screen against HI (by getting stuck in and tying them down for a few bounds) while the Indian dance-y, charge-y and shoot-y elements work their way in elsewhere...
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Jan 22, 2017 16:34:31 GMT
So now I am thinking about the shenanigans involved when a group in line abreast approaches an enemy group in line abreast, but at on offset angle... In order to still have a playable game, this makes for interesting interpretations of what it means to "move toward" an enemy element. Clearly it does not require lining up parallel with that enemy, or groups would be heavily restricted in their ability to advance to battle. Once can therefore use this example to extrapolate out to what does and does not make sense in moving in TZs.
Elements in the advancing group could easily begin their move in one TZ, and while remaining in the TZ, enter a second one...
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Jan 20, 2017 15:15:20 GMT
Well, for a new challenge, play with a BUA, a river and a waterway... The way real DBA-men play...
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Jan 20, 2017 14:16:09 GMT
Macbeth, can you indicate where the element point thread you mention is located. Better yet, any chance you could share via PM? I used it a few times back during playtesting, and was quite impressed with it. It creates nice cost factors for campaigns, for instance.
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Jan 20, 2017 13:43:15 GMT
Within the last week we have knocked out another seven games of DBA 3.0. This last week's theme has been BUAs - Forts and Cities. It was pretty much an Open format, but armies had to be able to be of a terrain type that had a BUA AND the defender HAD to use a BUA. New totals as of yesterday. DBA 2.2: 393 games DBA 2.2+: 586 games DBA 3.0: 268 games Tony, I'd be curious to see how you find BUAs playing out. We love them! We just fought a battle in which the BUA was a Marian Roman marching fort, and the Romans were obviously very keen to kick the Barbarians out and retake it. And of course, the Gauls had lots of friends show up to support their beleaguered cousins inside the fort.... A superb battle. We also find the rules for "cities" (which we interpret as small, walled, defended settlements of perhaps a few thousand at most) very engaging. We play on the larger board, but do adjust the deployment distances a bit, so that the BUA can be a tiny bit more central. We suggest a max of 8BW instead of 6BW from battlefield edges. Curious to get your thoughts...
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Oct 25, 2016 21:29:31 GMT
Some ideas for "Classical Gas"... (ok, get to it boys, there is a whole buffet of one-liners waiting for you, I know...)
- Solid Bow and Solid Auxilia receive +1 to a losing score in close combat in good going vs Bd, Sp or supported Pk.
[makes 8Bw, 4Ax and 4Bw survive a tad longer against the HI onslaught. Many didn't simply melt away at first sight of enemy armoured foot, and this allows both Persians and Carthaginians to try to live up to their fearsome reputations at least for a bound or two...]
- Fast Bd move only 2 BW in RGo and BGo, not 3
[they are already pretty buff, these dudes...]
- If Cv or LH are in close combat in good going against enemy Sp or Pk, and their score is tied with the enemy, and both scores are even, then the enemy Sp or Pk is destroyed.
[high anxiety die-rolling for the Alexandrians and Athenians. In our view, this accounts for Cv and LH missile fire quite nicely. It's a low probability event, but since Cv and LH are all but immune to Sp and Pk, it makes the hoplites/pikemen less lazy when faced by unopposed enemy horse...]
These are kind of fun ... We find they work quite nicely. Especially the Cv/LH "not-so-quick" kill...
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Oct 25, 2016 21:14:21 GMT
... and I took the original question to mean "is there some mechanism in the rules I do not understand yet that accounts for troop quality....". As opposed to a defacto introduction to house rules.
I do believe that the element mix between armies can definitely represent troop quality, (for instance Solid vs Fast, or Kn vs Cv, can be interpreted in some cases in this way I suppose) however, due to the complex different interactions, quality is not a static thing, and sometimes your superiority in one situation turns out to be a hindrance in another. For instance an army of Kn, Bd and Cv vs an army of Ps and Ax can be considered as differing quality in open ground, with terrain as the great equaliser.
That said, it is quite common for players to use a few house rues for historical games or campaigns, in order to focus more on the aspects that interest them. You can even run a themed tournament with such rules, which allows otherwise uncompetitive armies to perform more historically, and be viable, for example. For instance, although not in any way necessary to the game, allowing solid Auxilia to survive against Bd a bit better can give one a slightly improved Punic Wars battle...
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Oct 22, 2016 19:02:39 GMT
Some players allow veterans to reroll any '2' and inferior must reroll a '5'. We like having each player nominate one veteran and one levy. Maintains balance, and adds flavour.
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Oct 17, 2016 1:13:03 GMT
Why not the Elephant as well, Joe?
|
|