|
Post by natholeon on Mar 29, 2018 7:07:51 GMT
Hi everyone Since Tony has said it will take a bit of time for him to get around to updating DBA RRR for 3.0, I thought I'd have a go myself, and let the community comment on it and my (possibly wayward) thinking. The impetus for this is pulling out some 30 Years War figures to turn into Imperialist and Swedish armies for the 30 Years War, but I also have some Book 4 Great Italian Wars and Samurai armies that might benefit from having a few elements of shot added for variety. So I've gone with Tony's original revisions - adding Pistols, Shot and Dragoons and changing Psiloi into Skirmishers. Pistols are the only mounted that can come in Fast and Solid flavours, and this has enabled me to tackle the Pistols that represent Finnish, French or Royalist horse. So Fast Pistols move quicker than Solid Pistols (duh!) and can kill their chunkier brothers in a tie. However, they don't get rear support like the heavy boys. I'm hoping that this will represent the deeper caracoling reiters vs the ga pa style gallopers. I know Tony originally looked at cavalry as representing caracoling cavalry, but I think taking advantage of the differentiated troops in 3.0 makes sense. It also means that Cavalry can equate to the DBR classification of Sipahi. I've boosted artillery range to 6BW. The thinking is that this is really the range where it will be effective as opposed to its maximum reach, but I'm open to the idea that it might be 8BW. My biggest worry would be what that would mean in game terms. I'd hate to see battles decided by long range artillery duels. This hasn't been playtested as such. I've still got to paint my armies, but I was hoping the community might like to try out a game or two with the QRS and see how it goes. Cheers Nathan DBARRR QRS PDF.pdf (538.63 KB)
|
|
|
Post by mellis1644 on Mar 29, 2018 16:15:23 GMT
Thanks. That's useful and the bigger work is making the lists work - but you can do that on a case by case basis.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Aguilar on Mar 29, 2018 18:54:58 GMT
Normally I would say this would add confusion, but our Renaissance addition to 3.0 WILL NOT be called DBA-RRR 3.0. Of course, I'm not sure now even more than ever when it will happen. I have to finish my Turks FIRST (with Renaissance additions) and doing my Youtube videos for continued DBA 3.0 exposure has definitely affected my available time. When we worked on RRR, we did not have a fractured community and the rules were more available (not as hard to get a hold of.) I feel like right now it is more important for us (our group) to continue to show interest in the core rules, instead of spreading ourselves thin. Oh yeah, and somebody do something about how busy it is at work!
|
|
|
Post by natholeon on Mar 29, 2018 19:28:51 GMT
Thanks. That's useful and the bigger work is making the lists work - but you can do that on a case by case basis. That's what I thought too. I'm not exactly flush with time either, so this is just a stop gap - I'm not planning on doing a comprehensive series of lists, just playing with those I'll be using myself. I'll be posting my Swedish and Imperialist 30YW lists when I've done a bit of playtesting.
|
|
|
Post by natholeon on Mar 29, 2018 19:33:41 GMT
Normally I would say this would add confusion, but our Renaissance addition to 3.0 WILL NOT be called DBA-RRR 3.0. Oh. How about DBA/R FADBAG ext 3.0 ed? That has a ring to it
|
|
|
Post by natholeon on Mar 29, 2018 19:35:46 GMT
Oh yeah, and somebody do something about how busy it is at work! If only we could find a way to get you paid for making DBA videos, painting toy soldiers and writing rules extensions fulltime. Hang on, that sounds like my dream job too!
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Mar 29, 2018 19:46:21 GMT
Hi everyone Since Tony has said it will take a bit of time for him to get around to updating DBA RRR for 3.0, I thought I'd have a go myself, and let the community comment on it and my (possibly wayward) thinking. The impetus for this is pulling out some 30 Years War figures to turn into Imperialist and Swedish armies for the 30 Years War, but I also have some Book 4 Great Italian Wars and Samurai armies that might benefit from having a few elements of shot added for variety. So I've gone with Tony's original revisions - adding Pistols, Shot and Dragoons and changing Psiloi into Skirmishers. Pistols are the only mounted that can come in Fast and Solid flavours, and this has enabled me to tackle the Pistols that represent Finnish, French or Royalist horse. So Fast Pistols move quicker than Solid Pistols (duh!) and can kill their chunkier brothers in a tie. However, they don't get rear support like the heavy boys. I'm hoping that this will represent the deeper caracoling reiters vs the ga pa style gallopers. I know Tony originally looked at cavalry as representing caracoling cavalry, but I think taking advantage of the differentiated troops in 3.0 makes sense. It also means that Cavalry can equate to the DBR classification of Sipahi. I've boosted artillery range to 6BW. The thinking is that this is really the range where it will be effective as opposed to its maximum reach, but I'm open to the idea that it might be 8BW. My biggest worry would be what that would mean in game terms. I'd hate to see battles decided by long range artillery duels. This hasn't been playtested as such. I've still got to paint my armies, but I was hoping the community might like to try out a game or two with the QRS and see how it goes. Cheers Nathan This might be too much of a change from the previous RRR but I wonder if there is a way of treating Pike and Shot regiments such as in the so-called English Civil wars as single combined units of pike and shot rather than separate pike and shot elements. An 8Bw equivalent perhaps? Regards Simon
|
|
|
Post by Tony Aguilar on Mar 29, 2018 19:47:42 GMT
Oh yeah, and somebody do something about how busy it is at work! If only we could find a way to get you paid for making DBA videos, painting toy soldiers and writing rules extensions fulltime. Hang on, that sounds like my dream job too! Hey, I got first dibs since I've already got the experience in those areas. I'm just glad to be defined by my hobby, not what actually pays the bills.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Aguilar on Mar 29, 2018 19:49:26 GMT
Simon,
Your suggestion is definitely a possibility we are considering which is one of the reasons that the next iteration will not be called "RRR" anything.
|
|
|
Post by martini on Mar 29, 2018 20:56:06 GMT
This is a great start. I have some beautifully painted Polish Hussars and this will stimulate me to finishing the Poles and getting some Russians and Turks to be 'the bad guys'.
Steve
|
|
|
Post by Cromwell on Mar 30, 2018 7:22:58 GMT
This sounds interesting!
I would like to see combined Pike/shot units enabled in the rules if possible.
|
|
|
Post by Cromwell on Mar 30, 2018 7:24:58 GMT
Oh yeah, and somebody do something about how busy it is at work! Tony, you must realise by now, that work is the curse of the wargaming classes!
|
|
|
Post by martin on Mar 30, 2018 9:32:48 GMT
This sounds interesting! I would like to see combined Pike/shot units enabled in the rules if possible. Me too. Martin
|
|
|
Post by mthrguth on Mar 30, 2018 12:07:25 GMT
Balance problem in earlier version. Shooting elements destroyed pike too easily for pike to be useful, and pike too slow to be useful. May be historical though. Suggest everyone read Turner's Pallas Armata. He served in the TYW in Europe and is the most accessible English source for an opinion on tactics. Sadly, he chronicles the steady decline in use of pike during the period so that pike and shot became shot and cavalry period.
Building block of European armies up to and including ECW is a large block of infantry.
Suggest 'Tercio' style infantry units of 3 types. First is the 'Kiel'; to consist of 3 elements of pike. Second is the Tercio, one element of shot and two elements of pike. third is the later Regiment of 2 elements of shot and one of pike.
Means slightly bigger armies are needed.
More shot elements in a unit allow the unit to survive a hit; one shot element; and still continue firing. More pike would mean better hand to hand factor.
An alternative would be to require massive rebasing so that you could have a tiny center stand of pikes, say 20mm across, and two wings of shot on bases also 20mm across instead of 40mm. This would make a pike and shot unit of 60mm across, shot, pike, shot.
Finally, as the trend over the 16th to the 17th century is for units to become more rectangular and less square you could have units of 3 regular DBA elements. One formation would be 2 shot units side by side with a supporting pike behind the two shot in the shape of a T. Or you could have 2 pike bac
It is a pain to have to reread Turner's Pallas Armata to find one reference, namely, his description of the vaunted Swedish T brigade. Turns out that it fell out of use rapidly, and second that it was understood as a way to provide shelter for the shot who could fire and retire behind the pike.
|
|
|
Post by paulhannah on Mar 30, 2018 16:19:46 GMT
As we respectfully and patiently wait for any update that Tony may produce, Eric Donaldson & I also created a no-frills transliteration of Tony's Renaissance rules for our own personal use. It was just so we could enjoy seeing our several Renaissance armies in action, but with many of the DBA-3 conventions we so enjoy. Here are a few pics of some of our games. (That's Eric on the right.) We're playing a scenario game he created for the Battle of Kahlenberg, 1683, between the Later Ottomans and Later Imperialists with Polish allies. The armies are 15mm, but we based them on 25mm bases and played on a 3-foot square board. Here's a close-up of Eric's fabulous Polish Winged Hussars. And his Imperialist Shot and Pistol elements... But, as I say, our goal was simply a stop-gap transliteration of Tony's rules so we could push some of our fave armies until (or if) Tony has the time to update his Renaissance rules.
|
|