|
|
Post by nangwaya on Apr 26, 2018 13:09:09 GMT
I don't know about the rivers you use, but mine are certainly not perfectly straight.
I am finding that when I have a wide group, it invariably means that when contacting the river, only part of the group contacts it, thus breaking up the group and causing lots of interesting decisions on how to cross the river.
Has anyone experienced this as well? |
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Apr 26, 2018 17:08:21 GMT
I don't know about the rivers you use, but mine are certainly not perfectly straight.
I am finding that when I have a wide group, it invariably means that when contacting the river, only part of the group will contacts it, thus breaking up the group and causing lots of interesting decisions on how to cross the river.
Has anyone experienced this as well? I love using rivers as their placement has produced some of the best games played in the Merovingian campaign. We have reached turn four (550 AD) and have played 19 battles with most having ‘wet’ features on the board. We use Stevie’s Random Terrain Generator and this has produced some interesting battlefields. I recommend its use. Crossing rivers while facing an enemy is quite a challenge as most of the armies lack any supporting firepower (bowmen or artillery). Patience and grim determination with a dose of luck (pips) are needed to gain ground on the opposite bank or turn the enemy from their position with skirmishers. |
|
|
|
Post by nangwaya on Apr 27, 2018 0:26:33 GMT
Thanks for mentioning Stevie's Random Terrain Generator and providing the link.
I used it this evening, and will continue to do so.
It also inspired me to randomly roll for the options when deciding which elements to pick in fielding an army, just to change things up.
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Apr 27, 2018 12:14:22 GMT
Using other options will prove helpful toward learning an army’s strengths and weaknesses.
This is also historically accurate as the composition of an army should reflect the changes in circumstances. Lacking standard troops alternative solutions may be called up to fill the ranks; a general levy might be (7Hd) or (3Ax) as an example.
|
|
|
|
Post by nangwaya on Apr 27, 2018 13:09:24 GMT
Using other options will prove helpful toward learning an army’s strengths and weaknesses.
This is also historically accurate as the composition of an army should reflect the changes in circumstances. Lacking standard troops alternative solutions may be called up to fill the ranks; a general levy might be (7Hd) or (3Ax) as an example.
I have been planning on doing a campaign of the Assyrian invasion of Egypt under Ashurbanipal, and having the compositions of the armies changing from battle to battle, is one of the things I have been looking into.
I was thinking of having the losing side be forced to use another optional element for the next battle, and perhaps more than one element if the defeat was substantial.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 27, 2018 14:54:03 GMT
I’m glad you like the “Random Terrain Generator” Nangwaya. Note that it is possible to ‘manipulate’ the chart in order to increase the chances of getting a particular terrain type. Indeed, players are encouraged to do this. For example, say a player defending a Forest Region desperately wants a marsh to draw the enemy into a trap. (See page 12 paragraph 9 about pursuing into marshes and gullies). The chart shows 1 chance in 6 of forest getting a marsh, and with three optional rolls, that’s about a 50% chance. But if the defender takes 2 compulsory woods, and then rolls and gets another wood, that’s the maximum of 3 reached. Any further rolls of ‘2’ or ‘3’ can’t be another 4th wood, and there are no alternatives, so he can choose a marsh. Likewise, if Arable chooses a BUA, any roll of ‘6’ can’t be another BUA, as only one is allowed, so gets to choose. As for rivers, I found that because DBA has no in-built time limit, I often just sit on the river edge rolling and re-rolling my PIP dice over-and-over until I get a ‘6’ in order to maximise the number of elements I can wade across. This annoyed the hell out of my mates, so I created the “Time Of Day Display” so that battles will end at nightfall giving victory to the defender if they still possess their camp (the invader’s invasion has been halted if they don’t pull their finger out and actually attack!). It can be found in the link at the bottom of this post. For losing or routed armies, I like the idea that their opponent chooses the defeated army’s composition. This represents the scrapping together of remnants and the hasty raising of low quality troops to rebuild the army. A bit too harsh for some players…but it does simulate things like the Persians having a large army of rubbish at Issus and Gaugamela following their rout at Granicus by Alex the Great (and is much easier than trying to work out which elements were lost during the pursuit, or deserted and simply went home, or were hopelessly scattered). Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, such as the “Quick Reference Sheets” from the Society of Ancients,
and the new “Army List Corrections” file: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
And this is the latest January 2018 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2018
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Apr 27, 2018 21:28:26 GMT
Using other options will prove helpful toward learning an army’s strengths and weaknesses.
This is also historically accurate as the composition of an army should reflect the changes in circumstances. Lacking standard troops alternative solutions may be called up to fill the ranks; a general levy might be (7Hd) or (3Ax) as an example.
I have been planning on doing a campaign of the Assyrian invasion of Egypt under Ashurbanipal, and having the compositions of the armies changing from battle to battle, is one of the things I have been looking into.
I was thinking of having the losing side be forced to use another optional element for the next battle, and perhaps more than one element if the defeat was substantial.
Those are some good ideas. It will be interesting to read how you resolve the later revolts by the Egyptians during the Assyrian occupation. |
|
|
|
Post by nangwaya on Apr 28, 2018 15:09:52 GMT
For losing or routed armies, I like the idea that their opponent chooses the defeated army’s composition. This represents the scrapping together of remnants and the hasty raising of low quality troops to rebuild the army. A bit too harsh for some players…but it does simulate things like the Persians having a large army of rubbish at Issus and Gaugamela following their rout at Granicus by Alex the Great (and is much easier than trying to work out which elements were lost during the pursuit, or deserted and simply went home, or were hopelessly scattered).
I like the idea that the opponent gets to choose as well. |
|
|
|
Post by nangwaya on Apr 28, 2018 15:17:37 GMT
It will be interesting to read how you resolve the later revolts by the Egyptians during the Assyrian occupation. I probably won't be ready until autumn, so I have tons of time to continue researching. I find it important to try and get information from sources other than the Assyrian writings, as they tend to be a bit biased of what actually occurred  I have also been reading "The Solo Wargaming Guide" by William Silvester, and also going over your campaign posts on your site, to get ideas on how to manages things besides the battles. |
|
