|
|
Post by stevie on Jun 26, 2018 8:19:24 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Jun 26, 2018 8:45:33 GMT
The rules state that a River is not any going for movement. There are three types of going, shown in capital letters at top of page 6: GOOD, ROUGH, and BAD. A river is none of these "For movement, a river is neither good nor other going..." There is no explicit statement for what river is in combat. It just has certain effects. Elements partly in a river, even paltry, cannot shoot. There is no penalty for elements both in river fighting. There is a penalty for element in river fighting element on bank, except if paltry river. Fleers are destroyed if entering. There is no other name for a river. Fair enough Bob...I’ll go along with that. So three different types of going plus rivers (in other words, four different types of terrain, all with different effects). “A difference that makes no difference is no difference...” (Mr Spock of the Starship Enterprise)  However, I think you may be missing one important point... ...can troops in a river claim side and rear support or not? I think they should, otherwise it's impossible for pikes and spears to fight their way across any type of river (like the ancient historians said the Macedonians did at the battles of Granicus and Issus) when faced by side-supported spearmen or blades. This would make DBA 3 rivers as unplayable as they were in DBA 2 & 2.2. (It's bad enough that Auxiliaries are so weak that Hannibal ends up losing the battle of Cannae...let's not rob Alexander the Great of two of his famous victories as well!)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
Bob and Stevie,
Rivers are linear terrain features which include waterway and roads (page 6).
At what distance an element may cross is found on page 9, Crossing A River.
A score of 1 or 2; the river is paltry, easily banked and troops pass through as good going.
A score of 3 or 4 slows crossing (1BW) and its banks aid defence.
A score of 5 or 6, as above, but troops cross as a single element or column one element wide.
Of the three types of river, the last two listed restrict movement similar to rough going terrain and it is for this reason we do not allow rear support or flank support for those troops fighting in or from a river.
Nonetheless, troops fighting behind a river line are not impossible to beat, but do prepare yourself for a longer game. We use the larger (80cm x 80cm or 20BW x 20BW) board which allows a river with a maximum length of 30BW can be placed; ideal for the attacker.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Jun 26, 2018 9:33:32 GMT
So Timurilank me old matey... ...it’s better to have your troops actually IN the river standing waist deep in cold water when facing Kn than it is to defend the river bank. And Alexander can’t directly cross the River Granicus or the River Issus to defeat the Persians (and all the ancient historians all lied when they said he did...after all, DBA can’t be wrong can it, so the ancient historians must be wrong). As it goes, I don’t think that DBA is wrong in this case...it’s some people’s interpretation of the river rules that is wrong. If Phil Barker had said “For movement and close combat, a river is neither good nor other going..”, I would agree with you. But he didn’t. If he had left out the first two words and said “A river is neither good nor other going..”, again I would agree with you. But he didn’t. No, he said “ For movement, a river is neither good nor other going..” He quite deliberately separated movement from close combat, and the problem is players are ignoring this separation and trying to apply this movement rule to close combat, even though Phil Barker specifically says you shouldn’t do this. So please people, play by the rules as they are written, and stop adding things that are not there. 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 primuspilus on Jun 26, 2018 10:24:33 GMT
No, no,no the Granicus was paltry at the time!  But you could address the river confusion by applying the support rules instead to elements that are neither in bad nor rough going, instead of "if both are in good going". |
|
|
|
Post by Simon on Jun 26, 2018 10:29:32 GMT
Not convinced how effective pike support would be if you are up to your thighs in a fast current and holding an 18 ft pole! Wasn't the Macedonian phalanx beaten back at Issus and didn't boy wonder Alex charge in and cause confusion with his Companions at Granicus? Simon |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Jun 26, 2018 11:45:06 GMT
No, no,no the Granicus was paltry at the time! But you could address the river confusion by applying the support rules instead to elements that are neither in bad nor rough going, instead of "if both are in good going". I’m afraid that doesn’t work...if rivers are not good going, that will also apply to paltry rivers as well, so still no support. Anyway, no need to change anything, just use the rules, all the rules, as they are currently written. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Not convinced how effective pike support would be if you are up to your thighs in a fast current and holding an 18 ft pole! Wasn't the Macedonian phalanx beaten back at Issus and didn't boy wonder Alex charge in and cause confusion with his Companions at Granicus? Yes, it may seem difficult for us 2,300 years after the event to conceive certain things about ancient warfare... ...but the ancient historians said it happened. So were they wrong? Or does the fault lie not with the ancient historians but with us for not knowing how things actually worked back then? If a river does NOT count as good going, and you are facing side-supported spears with the river bank bonus:-CF 3 v CF 6 has 3 chances out of 36 of recoiling the defenders, 3 chances of rolling equal, 21 chances being recoiled, and 9 chances out of 36 of the attackers being destroyed…and that’s not counting all the overlaps caused by so many recoils. Oh, and even if you do get lucky and manage to recoil the defenders, many troops won’t pursue, so you’ll still be in the river next bound. So, on average, for each pike that recoils their opponent and pursues across the river, three of them will be destroyed. On the other hand, if rivers DO count as good going:-CF 6 v CF 6 means a hard fight, which might go either way without some intervention from other forces, such as Alexander’s Companions charging the defending spears in the flank. Now I ask you, which of these two scenarios best fits with what the ancient historians said happened at these battles? I think that Phil Barker was fully aware of this, which is why wrote the river rules in the way that he did. Rivers affect movement...they do not affect close combat. 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 primuspilus on Jun 26, 2018 15:27:21 GMT
I am not disagreeing with you, Stevie. If, however, you write the support rules to apply UNLESS the elements are in Bad or Rough going, then you eliminate the requirement to state that rivers are "not bad or rough going for movement purposes", and now you can ignore what rivers are or are not, and just use them accordingly.
|
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Jun 26, 2018 16:14:38 GMT
I'll try to get the FAQ committee interested in this question (oh the pain).
Always remember that Phil likes to give you the exceptions and lets the reader try and figure out what the main rule is - sometimes in vain.
Pike are crap in DBA and this ruling will make them crappier so I lean to giving them a break - but either way they lose.
Historically the are a bulldozer and effective if moving forward so lets let em bulldoze. Not as great if stopped as enemies can infiltrate into the pike mass.
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by bob on Jun 26, 2018 18:40:09 GMT
I hate to use references external to the DBA 3 rules, but suggest the following. In DBA 2, Phil wrote "It (river) is neither good nor bad going, but troops crossing it are often penalised in other ways." In DBA 3 he writes, "For movement, a river is neither good nor other going; instead the elements crossing it are restricted by conditions that are constant along its whole length and for the whole game. "
An explicit change from a river is neither good nor bad going, to for MOVEMENT, a river is neither good nor other (bad or rough) going. This leads me to believe that he meant to exclude close combat from the aspects of river impact. He does explicitly now include distant shooting limits for river. Thus, I am left thinking that a river is good going for close combat.
Moreover, note this text: "Those chosen must include BAD or ROUGH GOING (as defined below) or a River or Waterway, " Notice that a River is not included among those classed as Bad or Rough going.
|
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Jun 27, 2018 15:13:11 GMT
I'm with Bob (so far).
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Jun 27, 2018 16:49:43 GMT
Me too.
Spot on Bob.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Jun 28, 2018 10:59:41 GMT
Oh, here is something I found tucked-away in one of my many DBA folders. (I’m a collector of good ideas and interesting DBA stuff)It’s from the “DBA 3 Rules Clarifications for the ALTON MATCHED PAIRS, 23rd of April 2016”. This document follows the then FAQ almost word-for-word, but this bit might interest you:- * Flank and rear support IS permitted whilst in rivers, unless any part of the elements are in rough or bad going. It just goes to show that others have come across and resolved this issue some two years ago already. 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
|
|
