|
Post by sicadi on Sept 22, 2019 9:18:23 GMT
I think possibly trying to put lipstick on a pig... It’s still a 🐷
Some horribly complicated stuff going on here and breaks a basic principle of DBA. Command and control is decided by a die roll and best laid plans go down the drain at times. Having guaranteed pip(s) just not right for DBA.
I know we are talking house rules here, but larger playing area, free pip(s), running from and not dying from shooting.... How much more to try and make LH work in the fashion we perceive they did?
It’s broken and needs a more radical rethink or we continue using it “tiptoeing” round the edges trying to snipe a flank or hiding at the rear safe from bows
Not trying to rubbish people’s efforts here and apologies if it comes across that way
I have been playing war games from around 30 years. Played WRG 7th, DBA, DBM, DBMM, WAB AND FoG and not one of these systems gave a satisfactory game when using a LH heavy army against a largely heavy foot army, so I don’t think this is just a DBA issue.
Craig
|
|
|
Post by sicadi on Sept 21, 2019 11:04:22 GMT
"... The problem I foresee is a troop type with a low combat factor having trouble killing anything which it self tends to flee when beaten. With the side edges not acting as “the edge of the world “ the fleeing LH might end up going round in circles (and yes I know it kind of did) unable to kill anything itself. ..." LH need to gang up on unsupported targets, like wolves picking off isolated prey rather than attacking the main herd. Then they will have their share of kills.
Creating these isolated targets - where none are offered by the enemy - is the domain of the LH General.
Yes fully aware of the hard flanking options. Fairly easy to avoid with terrain, table edge and the like. Still think LH are a broken troop type (why are we having this conversation otherwise) FWIW (not much really) I like the option I mentioned earlier with doing away with the LH troop type. Not as radical as it sounds.... Make them Cv fast. CF 3 v everything. No need to re-base so no need to worry on that count. The fast bit means they still move 4bw, but keep the option as current for 2nd/3rd March moves. Also being fast recoil on ties v other mounted. (This may give unwanted results v Kn possibly so may need to lose the QK v Kn) They still flee v Sp, Ax and Pk when doubled but now pick up v Bd & Wb. I like the idea that they could QK Bd on ties (a nod to Crassus and his legions in the desert against the Parthians). CF 3 makes them slightly more survivable v shooting but still vulnerable. I see a possible problem v Ps as Cv do QK where LH don’t in DBA 3. All conjecture and discussion, but DBA does lend itself wonderfully to these house rule tweaks. Just hope in future there is a 3.1 version that fixes the problems we perceive. Just need a consensus on what the problems are and then another on what the fixes are and this will be difficult to say the least! Craig
|
|
|
Post by sicadi on Sept 20, 2019 20:22:22 GMT
I agree to a point. LH used to flee in DBM as well. Not sure what it does in DBMM?
The problem I foresee is a troop type with a low combat factor having trouble killing anything which it self tends to flee when beaten. With the side edges not acting as “the edge of the world “ the fleeing LH might end up going round in circles (and yes I know it kind of did) unable to kill anything itself. As they say a quick game is a good game. Perceive it may not be that quick. DBM For pacifists if you like🙂
But all said LH ain’t got much of a chance v Bw even if they manage to get in contact. I’ve said earlier I personally really struggle with them. They are broken and just don’t work in DBM for me
Maybe Bw use factor as if shooting at foot, fast moving elusive target, but leave the current outcomes Along with a forward deployment zone and free move to contact foot, it might help but not really thought too hard of possible knock on effects
Poor Genghis, the world tour needs to go on hold!
Craig
|
|
|
Post by sicadi on Sept 20, 2019 16:01:17 GMT
Hi all I definitely struggle with LH. I’ve found the potential extra couple of moves just send them to their maker sooner They have a tendency to melt in front of any shooting, so I thought maybe fleeing instead of dying would be better. But then they don’t flee off side edges giving games the potential to last forever so maybe not... Allowing extra pips may help, but why not allow deployment anywhere on your own side of the board? May allow the LH to get the jump early, but still low starting factors still gonna make it tough. This would work better for the attacker I think. Smaller board size does not help either. Another possibility - allow LH to contact enemy foot for no pips. (must be a single up to 4 base width move) May simulate better horse archers as their shooting is factored in. Think Parthians shooting up Romans in the desert. All in all LH heavy armies are a tough gig. Can see why some apparently wanted Cv/LH merged in play testing as riders are in HotT. Genghis would have died sitting on his ass in Mongolia had he tried world conquest playing DBA for sure! Craig
|
|
|
Post by sicadi on Aug 31, 2019 14:43:31 GMT
Concussion is a popular theme across a number of sports of late, and rightly so. Arrows bouncing off any head protection from close range must have knocked ‘em senseless! Joe Collins extra pip to move into contact house rule looks a good shout. Medieval equivalent of being in a tank - great until it gets hit! Craig
|
|
|
Post by sicadi on Aug 31, 2019 9:34:46 GMT
Fascinating stuff. Must watch for anyone interested in DBA. Will change perceptions for sure Craig
|
|
|
Post by sicadi on Aug 14, 2019 22:33:26 GMT
Love allies, love littoral landings, love cheese especially with a glass of port or two, love fun cos it’s an escape Allies not so great when you deploy them badly and or roll low pips Nothing is a given with DBA. I have a times felt I’ve played a perfect game and lost 4-0. Played other like a complete novice and won at a canter All part of the attraction for me For those who think Littoral landings are bad watch Tony Aguilars Sea Peoples vs NKE. Absolute gold in my book and why wouldn’t you want this rule? Craig
|
|
|
Post by sicadi on Aug 14, 2019 21:31:50 GMT
I’ll be there whatever the date Martin. Is Easter significant for the church hall then? Think I’ll bring a pair of Littoral armies ‘cos it sounds like fun 😀 Craig
|
|
|
Post by sicadi on Aug 14, 2019 20:40:08 GMT
Goodness me have the fun police finished! I would ask why can’t Steppe armies flank March? Forest armies ambush in the woods? It’s about having fun after you’ve spent your hard earned on toy soldiers, not to mention hours painting and basing them. It’s not realistic for sure but if you get it wrong set ‘em up again and have another go. Smile always 😀. Reality sucks believe me Craig
|
|
|
Post by sicadi on Aug 13, 2019 8:00:36 GMT
Hi Paul I too was amazed at that price. I thought it was gonna do twice or more. Perhaps having it finish on a Monday afternoon didn’t help it. I always think Saturday afternoon/ early evening or Sunday afternoons will be the prime times. Really unlucky mate and I feel gutted for you Craig
|
|
|
Post by sicadi on Jun 19, 2019 9:05:10 GMT
Got to agree Tony. Your YouTube videos got me back to wargamig after 10 years away. Keep ‘em coming! Well done mate
|
|
|
Post by sicadi on Jun 12, 2019 20:46:34 GMT
Why use an 8 Cb when you get a + 1 vs other foot, but lose the equivalent of 2 elements if it’s lost? Easy -- 'cause they just look so darn cool. Eric Donaldson's Communal Italians shown above. You're not alone in seeing the dilemma of the risk in using them, however. Many long threads already on this very topic. Stevie, a regular contributor on this site, does have a suggested remedy for 8Bw / 8Cb / 8Lb elements you may want to try: Simply give them an add'l +1 in CC against Sp, Bd and supported Pk, unless in BG. Helps offset their dear cost if lost. I couldn’t agree more that they look so good and that’s why I painted my own as 8 Cb not 4Cb I have figures to do a Maurikian Byzantine and I can assure you they will be 6 Cv. Just a shame they seem to suffer more for looking good than they gain. I guess I was just trying to stick up for the small guys (or big in this case) Craig
|
|
|
Post by sicadi on Jun 12, 2019 14:25:16 GMT
Persian Sparabara (8Bw) were about 10 ranks deep - about half the depth of a Roman blade. Why should they be so unwieldy? I have never been a fan of the DBE meme. It should reflect particularly deep formations (eg Thebans at Leuctra), hence the double loss count for the first one, and difficulty maneuvering. I can't see how a DBE is a decent model for a combined arms formation like 8Cb is supposed to represent. I think you make an excellent point and I agree with you. Craig
|
|
|
Post by sicadi on Jun 12, 2019 12:31:21 GMT
Hello everyone I returned to DBA around 18 months ago and reckon I must have played 200+ games (including 6 competitions) I certainly have not played against any double based elements (not even aware they have been used in any of the competitions) and have only used them myself with my Communal Italians (8 Cb). I raised this point earlier this year in an other thread that this seems to be an anomaly. The problem appears to be the penalty for losing a double based element in too risky and therefore they just don’t get used. I believe this is down to play balance. Why use an 8 Cb when you get a + 1 vs other foot, but lose the equivalent of 2 elements if it’s lost? Less risky so let’s go with a 4Cb instead. Using the Communal Italians I found them quite unwieldy due to the bigger base size and would imagine this gets worse for 6 Cv and 6 Kn. I think a possible solution to get folks using these guys would be to put them in with El, Hd etc for movement, ie +1 PIP Possibly this gives a better play balance to offset the small combat bonus against certain troop types Interested if anyone has thoughts? Craig
|
|
|
Post by sicadi on Jun 9, 2019 17:38:58 GMT
Martin For the 6 Pk army have you considered II/18f Queen Olympias’ army? Have Alexander’s mother in her litter (Bd General that won’t recoil) to guard 1 flank, El & Kn supporting the other flank and 2 fast Ax plus a Ps for rough / difficult. I think your figures were Xyston yesterday?? and they do Antigonos on a litter (you’d need to lose the “big lad” and replace with something more “elegant “). 6 pikes are really hard to use as you said. If you could cherrypick 6 additional elements what would be best? Craig
|
|