|
Post by phippsy on Oct 26, 2016 11:32:59 GMT
Hi Martin, I was probably looking at this more for the tournament orientation and get to meet some of the guys involved, rather than specifically competing etc....as would be first tournament and only really engaging in SOA after many years away from war gaming. That said if anyone going may have a spare 15mm army (sounds a bit odd....but free cups of tea say), then would like an opportunity to learn on the job....otherwise happy to observe. Thanks peter.
|
|
|
Post by phippsy on Oct 25, 2016 21:29:30 GMT
I will be down and looking forwards to it. To get an understanding of tournament play and check full 3.0 understanding. Only have 28mm armies though so may need the odd investment in 15mm for the future....
|
|
|
Post by phippsy on Oct 21, 2016 15:18:59 GMT
I was interested to ascertain if any who play DBA also include various troop modifications like those in DBM. For example when two Psiloi elements meet in combat they have the same +2 factors against each other with all other influences similar or one not upslope of another. The combat factors and outcomes are regardless of whether or not one Ps is a Persian levy and the other a high quality Cretan archer say.....do players modify to reflect that one may be a 'superior' type and the other 'inferior'.....or is the point of DBA to avoid such additional intricacies? Thanks Phippsy.
|
|
|
Post by phippsy on Oct 17, 2016 16:20:15 GMT
Martin indeed. My original observation related to the DBA 3.0. But the tactics of Warband ibwas interested in understanding stand in the original post by me. Your comments were very useful. Thanks Phippsy...
|
|
|
Post by phippsy on Oct 17, 2016 8:42:07 GMT
Maybe there are none......
I ran two games at the weekend both Gallic v Camillian Roman. Gauls invading.
The Gauls had 2 x Cav, 8 x 4Wb, 1 LCh and 1 Ps. Terrain arable with good going plough and a few gentle hills.
Romans had a single line of heavy foot with Cav, Ps and aux on flanks
First set up the Gaul Wb took centre table and went straight at the Roman centre in double rows with a 4 element front. Both sets of Cav had a fight over a hill on the Gaul left, and the Ps and LCh balanced out with the Roman and Italian 3 Aux on the right flank. One Roman Ps blocked a double rank Wb. So only a 3 wide Wb front hit the Roman line. They did not punch through straight away, which then allowed the heavy foot to lap around and the end of the Gauls was very quick. No Gaul quick kills.
I thought this through and second time deployed with two Gaul Warband Groups both 2x2 facing the end Roman heavy foot elements at each end. The lone Gaul Ps was on the in side flank on one Group. I split the Gaul cavalry and one of the Roman Ps was caught in the open and destroyed. When the Warband hit the Roman line. There was no Roman outside overlapping owing to the Gaul Cav and LCh protecting, the Roman heavy foot could not lap outside as in front contact only, and was blocked on inside overlaps by the lone Ps element. The outcome was quick Roman heavy foot kills on the outside, the Warband flooded through and then ate the Romans up from the outside in.
The second tactic seemed to work better - are there other formations or splits that seem to be more effective with Warband? Generally is it better to have extended the Gaul line to say 8 element with single depth to cut down overlaps, maintain the quick kill opportunity but with less probability per die roll.....any tips or advice?
|
|
|
Post by phippsy on Oct 16, 2016 18:34:53 GMT
Joe - really appreciated and makes complete sense. Thanks Phippsy...
|
|
|
Post by phippsy on Oct 16, 2016 18:31:12 GMT
Hi Martin and thanks. I will look up the Staines guys.
With best rgds
Peter
|
|
|
Post by phippsy on Oct 16, 2016 12:28:45 GMT
Hi - any players or clubs around in this part of Surrey? Thanks Peter
|
|
|
Post by phippsy on Oct 16, 2016 6:38:26 GMT
As a relatively new DBA3.0 player I am looking for a few clarifications on threat zones. These are;
1. When an element (or group?) wants to or moves into an enemy threat zone does it have to in fact end up parallel to the enemy's front - lined up or not lined up but still parallel? The descriptions around Figure 7 on page 18 suggest this, and that one cannot leave a disrupting Psiloi at an angle in a threat zone in front of a line of spears say, and;
2. On the same figure under 7a point 6 I understand that the element can move out of the threat zone 'straight backwards, this makes sense. What if though an element approaches an enemy element from say the rear flank and stops within 1 base width. This puts the enemy in a threat zone. But in that enemy's turn how can that element move out of the threat zone 'straight backwards'? Straight backwards would be towards the element producing the Threat Zone? Clearly a good tactic.
I have been playing this that the affected element can move directly away from the front of the element producing the threat zone, ie on a line perpendicular to the attacking element. The element moving out of the Threat Zone can end up in any orientation and distance under the normal rule constraints - is this correct?
Thanks - Phippsy
|
|